As a console gamer, my introduction into the series was with Cold Steel. I played Cold Steel 1 and 2 then doubled back to Trails From Zero which, at the time, just landed on the Playstation. The path I intended to take was: Cold Steel 1, Cold Steel 2, Trails from Zero, Trails to Azure, Cold Steel 3, Cold Steel 4, then Trails to Reverie. I didn't think I'd play any of the Sky games since they weren't on console. But after being introduced to Estelle and Joshua, I felt I simply had to see where it all began. So I got a Steam Deck and picked up the Liberl Arc and I'm so glad I did. I'm currently playing Azure and looking forward to completing the Cold Steel arc before moving on to Reverie then Calvard.
In the real world we learn the lore (history) in a disjointed way where you could be in your 40s and learn of some obscure link between historical figures or events, etc. Any Trails game is a good starting point if the person playing is comfortable with things they're not going to be able to explain or understand and simply accept it as part of the world they're partaking in. When I was a little kid, I'd hear all kinds of words, terms, names of organizations, etc and really didn't grasp any of it. Go into the game as a little kid and just enjoy it. The reward for comprehending the world of trails will always be there, even if you play the games out of order. I remember I really wanted to play CS1 but everyone said to play Sky games first, which wasn't appealing to me so it took me about 10 years of wanting to play CS and telling myself I couldn't until I got around to Sky.. well, eventually I played CS and loved it, then went into Sky and loved those games too. My experience could've been enhanced in theory if I played it chronologically, but by not jumping into a game that I was actually interested in playing for 10 years could've led to a scenario where I simply decided to not play Tails games. So many new people are faced with this 50/50 scenario: play a game that looks cool to them vs play the games everyone's telling them to play that are 20 years old and don't interest them. It's a no brainer that this advice leads to more people never getting into Trails than it does "steering them right".
I loved your explanation here. As someone who started with CS, I completely get where you are coming from. What made starting with CS 1 and 2 so cool for me was hearing so much about Crossbell. I found that little city/state so fascinating and it made me want to play the duology even more. I'm currently playing Azure and the events hinted at in Cold Steel 2 are now playing out.
I agree that, ideally starting with Sky (Bestelle/Josh were MVP but my true crush was Loewe no contest) is the most logical thing to do yeah... yet Kiseki games became popular because a lot of people started with Cold Steel games (i would say the 3rd one at that since there's a lot of NISA bias these days), heck a lot of "Trails fans" are Cold Steel fans now, so i'm afraid starting with Kuro/Daybreak wouldn't change a damn thing from what already happened some years ago, the damage is done, it's the same situation as saying to new Fate fans to not start with any animes or FGO but with the OG Visual Novel instead, and you already knows what would happen. I mean you already have people spouting nonsense like "Rean should be the decisive and main protagonist of Kiseki games like Adol is for YS games" even after "5 freaking games in a row!" which starred him as a main protagonist, and then you have those same dudes getting offended when some people says "Rean was indeed a self-insert", and that's coming from someone who also loves Rean and looks forward to his role in Kai no Kiseki (his japanese voice actor is also Banagher Links from Gundam Unicorn and Amakusa Shirou from Fate/Apocrypha, how could i not love the guy), it's fanbase in other hand... certainly not one i would have a good time with (Rean fanbase and victim complex, name a better duo), but yeah i'll stop here, not going any further into that silly territory. And for any Rean stans i would end up "offending", kindly get over yourselves for once, reminder that Kiseki/Trails series is first and foremost about the full continent of Zemuria and all of it's characters living in it.
In a perfect world obviously the best thing is to play every single Trails game in order and then jump into Daybreak. But lets be honest it's just not realistic to demand that of newcomers. Espacially since many of those games look and are very dated by modern standards. Even though they are great games. They are also very long and is a HUGE time commitment and if you try to play every game in the series in a row then you will probaly just be burned out before you even get to the new game. So the smart thing is probably just jump Into daybreak and then go back and play the other games later if you enjoyed the game. Or start with Cold steel but even that is a huge time commitment.
yeah, as someone who got burned out by CS3/4 and its bullshit writing, Kuro feels like a breath of fresh air, it still uses some of the "formulaic" falcom approach, but it so much better and less noticeable compared to cs. Also Van is the best protagonist since Kevin.
no. daybreak is alot like Reverie in that large parts of it are a rehash of a previous game. if you did not like the majority of the last three games, I dont see how Daybreak would change your opinion. Its still just more trails. and if you especially hated Reverie....I wouldnt waste your time in Daybreak.
@@taliefer16 kek how is Kuro a rehash of Hajimari? You either lying or never played both of these games. Kuro's pacing, combat and writing are completely different from Hajimari, it's a self-contained story with no routes and bloated cast of characters. Van doesn't give friendship speeches and saves Crossbell for hundreds of time like Lloyd in his route, Van doesn't cry about wanting to off himself for 5 games only to find some resolution in the last game like Rean in his route. I guess only C route left, which is somewhat similar but on smaller scale, I guess you could say that spriggans are picnic squad but on steroids, but that's it.
Im gonna make a brutally honest hot take but I didnt enjoy Sky 1 and 2 (good ending though), and dread starting 3. should I go back to Cold Steel 3 and 4? Or Start with Daybreak?
Just read up on Sky third. Third is a traditional dungeon crawler game, like if you remember the last bit of CS 2, its that but more. If you liked Sky 1 and 2 its pretty good however.
Sky 1 and 2 are my least favorite of the 7 games I've played. I actually loved Sky 3 though. Since you're asking about CS 3 and 4, does that mean you've already played CS 1 and 2? It's difficult to give an opinion without more information.
@@BlueGrovyle Yeah rest assured I already played CS 1 and 2. I really shouldve continued with 3 and 4 and go back to the earlier series if I ever wanted to.
@@GrandRobo have you considered playing the Crossbell games? Before CS3 is pretty much the optimal time to play them timeline-wise. I think that whether you should give Sky 3 a chance before anything else, though, depends on what you disliked about Sky 1 and 2. Sky 3 is very different in terms of the gameplay loop-dungeon crawling, no sidequests, almost no NPCs, disjointed storytelling, 5 optional minigames, fast travel (!!!)-so I wouldn't discount it on the basis of being "another Sky game" or anything like that. If you feel that you're ready to move forward in the CS arc, I can only say so much since I've yet to play CS3 onward myself, but be aware that there is a _lot_ of foreshadowing in Sky 3 for the Crossbell and CS games, and that the events of the Crossbell games may be referenced more directly point-forward. Happy gaming, and I hope that you'll be able to enjoy the rest of what Trails has to offer you, in whatever order you choose to tackle it.
@@BlueGrovyle I...dont know. I heard crossbell is the best arc in the series, but heard the same thing about every arc anyways so I think im just gonna jump the gun and play cs 3and 4. Ngl CS 2 has such a good endgame story and cliffhanger that I wondered what stopped me from playing CS 3. I might play sky 3 and the crossbell arc in the future if I ever get the itch for it.
I'm of a mixed opinion on this. On the one hand, I understand perfectly why people say you shouldn't start with Zero. There are certain scenes in it that just don't hit as hard if you don't have the context from the Sky trilogy. And they are really hard-hitting scenes if you do have that context. Some of those scenes are the best in the series with that context. A few of them even turned a particular character I had a hard time liking in the Sky trilogy into a character I actually grew to respect a lot. On the other hand, Zero is probably the most "standalone" title in the entire series. Mainly because it is the first game in its arc, and it doesn't have a cliffhanger ending in the same way that Sky FC & Cold Steel 1 do. There is also the bonus of it not leaving too many mysteries unsolved by the end. What mysteries it does have don't feel like they HAVE to be solved either (at least, until you get into Azure, where it becomes more and more obvious that those mysteries are really important). All of this makes it easy for newcomers to jump into. In this regard, if a person was completely new the series, and insisted on only playing one game to decide whether or not they will like them... I'd have to recommend Zero. Yes, they'd miss out on the impact that those hard-hitting scenes can provide. But there aren't enough of those scenes in Zero to really say, "Don't start here!" And it is still possible to re-experience the impact those scenes have if you replay the games. It may not be to the extent it would have been the first time, but it is still impactful enough regardless. Then again, I am a bit biased, as Zero is pretty much my favorite Trails game. XD
i'm glad i played sky first. i played 1 and 2 on my phone with psp emulator and ps4 controller. then i played zero and azure on my phone the same way. cold steel wouldn't have been nearly as good if i hadn't played those first.
really if someone dosent care enough to go start from the start immediately or whatever, they can live with missing some knowledge based popoffs and just go back for it later. (its what i did after picking up CS1 in a sale then "wait theres games before this? huh")
If you have to go through that many hurdles to make the series even slightly enjoyable to experience, then it's probably for the best that I dropped Trails halfway through FC.
@@faidou9954 this is not the lens that people who insist you start at the beginning are looking through. Viewing release order as the objective "best" way to play the games, with no exceptions, is a perspective that hyperfixates on the "overarching narrative" and neglects everything else that makes them video games, like the gameplay mechanics. I started with Cold Steel 1 and loved it, then went back to the beginning with Sky FC and, well, didn't love it. In fact, Sky FC is my least favorite Trails game, and SC is my second least favorite. I like to say it this way: Trails has a very unique and densely packed payoff for those who have found a love for the series, but you have to find the love first. Many long-time fans begin their Trails journey by starting with one game, dropping it, trying another game, enjoying it, then eventually coming back to the first one they played and having a better experience. I think it's worth giving Trails another shot, depending on what you disliked about Sky FC in particular. If Daybreak interests you, maybe give that one a try after it releases next month.
@@faidou9954 Don´t really know what you´re talking about, the Trails games are good even as stand-alone games, but incredible when combined in the overarching plot
I started last year with sky fc because I got a steam deck and I wanted to play from the beginning and steam being the only place to do that, up to cold steel 3 near end of chapter 2 atm
@@genefactor007 I almost quit sky third because it was so jarring jumping from sc to it because it was so different but I feel like playing it mad the zero closure so much better
As soon as I heard Start with Sky FC, I knew that this franchise was never going to be for me. Edit: or at very least getting into it the traditional way.
If you make it to chapter 2 in FC you'll be hooked the entire way through the franchise. Also the voiced mod does wonders for turning the narrative from a novel into a game.
Plenty of western fans didn't do that, as Cold Steel 1 was the most accessible of the localized Trails games for many years. I think it's worth giving one game of the series a try nonetheless, provided that you're here because it appeals to you in some way. (If you're _not_ here for that reason, you're welcome to stop reading now; I'd rather not waste anyone's time.) I bought CS1 and played it, having no context with regard to the larger series at the time, because I saw it during a Steam sale and thought it looked cool. Simple as that. I didn't know of any Trails in the Sky or even Trails of Cold Steel 2 when I started. 3 years and 7 Trails games later, CS1 is now easily one of my favorite games ever, while Sky FC is, well . . . not. My opinion is this: the "purists" who insist that you play in release order because they see it as the objectively "correct" way to play the series either don't realize that they're ultimately driving potential fans away, or they don't care that they are. Don't let their ignorance or arrogance (or both) drive you away. The justification they will give you for playing in release order is meaningless if you don't like the games anyway, so why concern yourself with all of that baggage before giving one of them a chance?
I forced Sky FC and felt it was average in 2011 but didn’t know it was more of a lore based prequel. It took 4 years to release SC and forgot most of FC and didn’t bother playing. Enjoyed CS series more and realise you need to look at Sky as a game building lore…but if it’s not fun, don’t force it…. However Daybreak is by far the best with the best protagonist and mature story, and I feel should be a standalone JRPG so others can enjoy it without worrying about previous entries stopping them or a great entry point and then decide what other games they vibe with to play them or not.
You can but a lot of context will be lost. Having said that, I'm planning to start playing trails the northern war game when it comes out later this month
@@Synthpopper Of course. I was thinking more about the fact that for such long games, it would be nicer to be able to play them on a mobile platform. An hacked vita or a steam deck for example.
It's a mistake to rush Trails, a HUGE mistake. I'm firmly in the camp that the 2.5d games have better stories, characters, and even graphics in their own little niche. I rushed through the Sky trilogy, got to Zero, and just had to take all the time in the world with it and Azure. Then I got to CS and Trails went from a 10/10 series to a 7/10 series.
The overarching story is trails is endless like One Piece so I say start where you want minus 2nd part games like sky 2nd, azure, cs2, or cs4. I started franchise with cs1.
I'm done with trails for now (Xeno is so much better lmao) but if I ever pick the series back up again I won't skip the PSP episodes I have left but the Rean stuff I definitely will skip it all.
Kondo himself tends to say stuff like "this is a great entrypoint for newcomers" I also find it funny how the fans say how amazing this series is yet also say how bad the majority of the games are
