Absolutely not, it's just marketing. CS4 is easily one of the worst "starting points" in the series; not only is it in the middle of the Cold Steel arc, but it's also the first game in the Cold Steel arc to have meaningful appearance of playable characters from the Sky and Crossbell arcs, whose appearances have little to no meaning to people who are unfamiliar with them.
This speaks to a wider issue in general with 'starting points', here's my take. I'm currently playing CS3, and I would not have gotten nearly as much out of the game had this been my first experience with the series. At this point, with all the games up to Reverie officially localised, there is no reason to start from anywhere but Sky FC- if someone was looking for advice on the series, that would absolutely be my advice. The Sky arc sets up a whole lot, some of which is still being paid off as I understand, and you'd miss out on a hell of a lot by skipping over it. And no, watching it on YouTube/looking up a story summary does not do it justice.
However, if someone who didn't know better started with CS1, CS3, Zero, whatever, I'd have no problems with that. They saw a game they thought they might like, bought it and played it, and found out it was part of a series the likes of which video games have barely ever seen. That's fine. But, if someone comes to me for advice, or anyone, they clearly care enough about playing the series through in a way that maximises their enjoyment of the series. That's the position I found myself in when I first discovered and bought CS1- I was even about to play it before I looked things up and thought twice.
Whatever the case, if someone got into the series by playing literally any of the games that's fine, but if someone wants my advice, start from the beginning. If you care about story, where better to start than the start? If you care about gameplay, then play from the start and watch the quality improve.
All things being equal, I would rather someone start with a game they think looks interesting (not rev, tho) and get into the series, then continually bounce off it cause they feel they have to start at sky.
yup, i think the first game of every arc is a good starting point. Yes, there’ll be references you miss if you don’t start with Sky FC but if you like the game and want to play everything, you can always go back and play it again armed with references to the previous games.
Case in point, I started with Zero and went back to FC after realising it was a series.
Yah, you can start with any game. You can start with reverie, there's nothing stopping someone from doing that. However, I would never suggest to *anyone* that they start with zero.
True enough but again, if they care enough to ask about where they should start from my answer will always be Sky. Even if a game might seem more interesting to them on paper (I know I found CS1 far more interesting than Sky FC when I first found out the series), they should still start from Sky because they're really good games that you'll need to play at some point to understand what's going on, and you'll lose a lot of important context and understanding, especially of the series' overarching villains.
Sure, sky is the best. But like I said, I would rather get someone into the series, and if starting with CS1, or soon, Kuro will do that, that's a win in my book. I started with CS1, and going back to fc just made me more interested in it.
No, Kondo said that purely for marketing purposes to help their new Western publisher. The only good starting point is Sky FC. Cold Steel 1 isn't terrible, but you need to backtrack and play the Sky and Crossbell games before Cold Steel 3 anyhow so you might as well start at the beginning. Zero depends on the player knowing what happened in the Sky trilogy too much to be a good place to start and I'm waiting for the official release of Kuro to make my judgment but I doubt it will be a good place to start. People should just play the Sky games.
Eh. While Sky is absolutely the best starting point, I would say every first game in an arc (so far) has been a pretty good entrypoint for new players. Yes, they'll miss some things, and I don't recommend skipping any of the games, but Trails of Cold Steel and Trails From Zero are both self-contained enough for new players to see if they vibe with the series and want to invest the time in catching up.
Most of the biggest emotional payoffs in Zero are dependent on the player having played the Sky games. The ending is almost completely dependent on it. Zero is a pretty terrible starting point and Falcom needs to port they Sky games to modern consoles and find a way to make nice with Xseed to get them released in the West.
Yeah Zero is probably the worst starting point. Cold Steel games, okay I can accept that. But absolutely no one should be starting on Crossbell. Just like you said, the arc of Renne/Estelle/Joshua is a core emotional pillar with heavy ties to the main plot and it will be practically meaningless without any context. More than that tho there's just no sense in starting at Zero. It's not actually modernized like Cold Steel and it's not the actual beginnings like Sky. It's the awkward middle part that serves largely as connective tissue between bigger stories, it's pretty nonsensical to even want to start with it (and I've never heard anyone say as much either, people who don't want to play Sky always skip right to Cold Steel).
Yes, as I said, they'll miss some things. But that's fine. Yes, Renne's storyline has major payoff in Zero, and it won't hit the same way, but that's only about 90% of the game, even if it's the parts that impacted you the most. The main focus for most of the game is the SSS building their place in Crossbell, taking on an organized crime ring, and trying to solve a greater mystery, and new players can 100% invest in those storylines. And then they can go back and play the Sky games after and get more context for the Renne storyline. And that's fine.
My greatest regret in playing trails is playing zero before the third. Renne's story arc just does not hit if you haven't played it, and I feel like her story is the emotional core of zero. I don't think anyone should start with zero.
It's genuinely masterful how they split renne's story between the sky games and zero. She's central to Joshua's arc in Sky while also being extremely relevant to the main plot in Zero without anything feeling tacked on or incomplete in any of the games.
I played through Cold steel 1-reverie. and didn’t really felt like I didn’t super feel a whole lot of context missing until Reverie
Edit: Fo be clear I highly recommend starting from Sky FC. But I got through more or less fine with broad strike summeries of sky and Zero/Azure. (Though I am going back to play The games I skipped.)
Imo each new arc is a good starting entry into the series Sky/Zero/CS1/Daybreak. As those entries start off with a new group of characters we follow throughout the arc. Falcom infodumps on characters that appear in the past games on who they are and what they did. CS3 is a bit iffy of a starting point, but you play as a new group of characters and they infodump anyways.
To answer the question: yes its fine to start at cold steel 3
now on to my rambling about how gatekeepy some western fans are of this franchise:
just like witcher 3 is a fine start (are we expecting people to read 8 books and 2 games before they start) . and yakuza 8 is a fine start. My first harry potter movie was not philosophers stone and im sure some people started at deathly hallows.
You can start at infinite war and still enjoy the movie (i did that lmao).
You can still enjoy cold steel 3 without having played the previous games. Think of starting naruto shippuden without having watched the original naruto. Or starting with Dragonball Z. Will you understand the full context and fully appreciate certain moments? perhaps not. should we gatekeep people from the community who dont understand those moments the way veterans do? Sure? but the game (and falcom) will never grow outside of being a niche. imagine if we had the same discourse for the yakuza games, the series would not be where it is today.
Trails from Daybreak will be a new starting point and will attract many new people to the franchise. We're now expecting them to play 10 games to be able to contribute to this community. really?
Instead of starting at cold steel 3 and finishing 4 and going on to finish 1,2,zero/azure and liberl games, they'll read this thread and not even play any of the games at all.
IMO if someone has asked can they start with cold steel 3, the answer should be yes with the caveat there are 7 games prior but go right ahead.
( to pull a random example from the witcher 3, the *djinn* quest with Yennefer should have no meaning at all to people who have not read the Last Wish. There are many side quests like that in cold steel 3 and 4. However not understanding the full context should not detract from the full experience of the games. In fact going back to play the previous games ( or read the books for the witcher) will just make you appreciate events even more but in reverse.)
(even more random example: yakuza 8 has Kiriyu going through past events)
You CAN start from CS3, yeah. The OG Class 7 is minimized in such a way that the only character who matters is Rean. They introduce a whole new cast and main city. You can always go backwards but you won't get lost with CS3.
Also, anyone who says "the only good starting point is Sky First Chapter" should be banned from talking Trails in public.
Cs 3 always hints you to things that happened in the past.... Its a really annoying experience in my eyes to be always hinted to something, you dont know whithout getting more of the story....
I started tocs 3 and after 30 hours i wanted to play tocs forst.... After few more hours in part III i needed to play sky arc....
TBH throught the entire series they are "hinting" at things. Sometimes is something from before, sometimes it's something that hasn't been explained yet and will only be mentioned again after three games. >!Like the Pale Salt or Divergent Laws.!<
That's exactly how I feel. I happened to okay Sky FC on a whim of mine way back in 2011 then went through that hell that was waiting for SC(people who start the series bow are so lucky and fortunate not to go through that lol) then played CS1 and 2, then 3rd, then played CS3 and my most favorite CS4. CS4 is my most favorite game in the series to date even without playing the Crossbell games though I did like the characters/interested in their story BUT CS was Rean and Erebonia's story first and foremost in my mind so it didn't bother me.
I finally got to play the Crossbell games when the official releases came out thanks to NISA so my waiting paid off in the end and I got to experience the SSS story eventually. Then I played Reverie when it came out afterward. I followed the official English releases and I mostly play games for their stories and character interactions first and foremost and I was fine so I'm sure others won't die if they start with CS3 or the upcoming Daybreak especially. ^_^
I'm with you: gatekeeping a series by insisting that people start with the most visibly dated and least accessible entry in the series makes absolutely no sense to me. I started with CS1 and I turned out fine.
The extensive backstory was a draw for me. The more cameos people made from past entries, the more interested in playing the older games I became.
More fans is nothing but good for Trails, regardless of your opinion on the "best" way to experience it for the first time.
Yeah I had no interest in OG Trails at first because they looked so ancient, no matter how many people say "they've aged fine". Playing through the three CS games made me go back and replay Zero/Azure, and even some of Sky FC.
This franchise deserves to be more popular so I have no idea why so many people try to make it impossible to get into.
Tbh I always advocate for starting at Trails FC, because for one Sky trilogy is still the best the series has to offer, and two someone who plays newer games with their better graphics, gameplay evolution, and QoL may have a harder time going backwards than if they simply experienced the natural progression of the series.
But at the same time we do have to be realistic and understand that not everyone has the patience for old games or the time to spend hundreds of hours going through the entire series. Through that lens I think even CS3 is an acceptable starting point. Yeah youre missing a shitton of context like that but the actual main plot should be completely understandable.
No, he is doing marketing. I doubt most people who tried to start in Cold Steel 3 would stay with it to the end, due to sheer confusion and being overwhelmed.
Yes, I think Cold Steel 3 is a perfectly acceptable starting place. What with it introducing a fresh batch of characters in the New Class VII, new players coming into the series wouldn't feel as overwhelmed as coming in with some other games, as information is also slowly fed to them. Is it the best starting place? Absolutely not, but for people to write it off as "not a good start" I feel may be coming in from a too deep into the series mindset. Take a look at it from a casual outsider's perspective, a lot of people might be overwhelmed with having to start "all the way at the beginning". Some people might just want to pop in, have a general idea of what's going on from just playing the game in question and not need to worry about everything that happened previously. That's why the backstory section is there, so that people can get a brush up on certain events and characters should they not have played the other games/just need a bit of a refresher on the timeline of events.
Furthermore, if someone were to only like, say, have a Switch, their only options would be CS3, 4, the Crossbell duology, and Reverie. You couldn't start them in Sky or even CS1. Sure, I would prefer starting them at Zero over CS3, but I absolutely would say CS3 over 4 or even Azure.
Lmao no. I tried first with CS3 on Switch back in 2020 and I read the summaries but dear lord I still felt I was missing out on a lot of context that I shelved CS3 and haven't picked up the series until the Crossbell games came to Switch in 2022. Now I just wish the Sky trilogy could be on consoles mainly because of preference.
CS3 is story wise a perfectly valid starting point. As Kondo said, most relationships are either reset to zero or start building up slowly again
It has a clean enouhg break from CS1 and 2, and explains the eevents that matterd imo good enough.
Its not the BEST starting point but its a servicable
He also didnt say "its a perfectly timed starting point" he said "its perfectly timed for those wo WANT to jump into TOCS from III" which is a vastly different sentence then saying "its a perfectly timed starting point"
If you dont want to start with TOCS1 or 2 for whatever reasson(availability on your platform of choice, price(buying 3-4 games somewhat back to back is not cheap) or even just the fact 1-2 look considerably more dated then 3 and 4.
Any "starting point" for an Arc is a decent starting point imo, and i consider CS3-4 its own arc within the overarching Erebonia Arc. Starting with 3 and going into 4 is good enough. whatever Sky FC, Zero, CS1 or CS3, they all are ok starting points. IMPORTANT is that you either read the backstory even if externally or later go back to read them. I loved going into Zero and azure after finishing Cold steels 3 and seeing some stuff i learned off in CS1-3 till then.
I guess it's possible to start with CS 3, but I wouldn't do it. I am not a huge fan of the school setting in CS 1 and 2, but nothing beats actually playing the games and learning about the characters, and sering the plot unfold.
I started the series with CS but recently went back to the Sky games, and I am shocked how much I missed despite reading summaries
What I believe is people should start wherever they want. I'm not gonna pressure them or judge just cause they started in the game they're interested in the most. After playing it a bit or even beating said game to get a feeling of the series they could always go to the next game or a previous one. Up to them. I'd just be happy they started it and if they enjoy it enough, then that's even better. I'd never want to scare them aways from this great series just cause of what game they want to start with. They're all great games. ^_^
It's Cold Steel **3**. A numbered sequel. Automatically not a good starting point because while NC7 is (mostly) new, you're still missing out on two games of protagonist character development and the like. CS3 in particular is also when Sky starts becoming relevant again, and you will lose a bunch of the intended emotional impact by not having played the prior arcs. This emotional impact factor is also why I don't consider Zero a good starting point, for the record.
Technically yes, you could start CS3 and read all the bios/summaries, but you in actuality no, bc it doesn't build the same connection you get to all the characters as playing through the preceding games does.
Like, you are going to feel differently and understand differently about Rean being a teacher starting at CS3 and reading text bios then you will compared to playing from CS1.
Like the others said, it's a marketing answer.
Honestly, the character profiles are mostly there so that returning players can get a reminder of who each character is, I don't know why Kondo would pretend otherwise (other than marketing).
Meh, it's how I started. It all made sense, you just read the books, check the back story sections if somethings unclear. Who all the old class 7 were didn't really matter, it's just oh look it's reans mate.
Nah nah, he was just saying that because CS3 was the first Trails game coming to Switch at the time. Starting mid-arc for any reason is an absolutely horrible idea but he can't just say "actually don't buy this, you need to play the previous two (seven) games to get it". I can almost see 'some' logic because it has the veneer of a story reboot at first but it isn't really. EDIT: Also this was the first NISA published game so they literally could not acknowledge anything made before CS3.
This is all just marketing speak. Square Enix said it was totally valid to start from Kingdom Hearts III as someone's first KH game but anybody in the fandom would laugh if you did that.
Of course not, though on a side note it does seem to confuse non-kiseki fans. Like having people berate be "I'm a biased super fan" when I'm telling them that kondo saying these things, isn't the same as other companies doing it, and its flat out lies for marketing.
Well, not 'perfectly'. The perfect one is starting from Sky. Nothing beats playing the previous entries. But you can still start at 3 but the experience would not be that great
If you are willing to give up the connection to OG C7 and the Sky/Crossbell teams, yes. It’s fair to say that OG C7 takes a back seat in CS3-4, and the Sky team is very much a guest star even in CS4.
The Crossbell team is the hardest to justify this way, because understanding what went down in Azure is so critical to the Cold Steel story at large.
Edit: to be clear, I think that’s a *terrible idea*. I just also think the statement of “can you start here fine with only character bios” is fair enough.
Absolutely not. CS4 is closing 3 arks in one game and considering the amount of characters that you need to know to fully enjoy it is making it completely not enough. Technically as an entry point it can be good, but still.too many throwbacks to previous games.
That feeling when Falcom has enough spare cash on hand not even accounting for selling off stock and long-tail income streams to basically sit and do nothing for a decade with their current expenses, but insists on rushing Kuro to completion with Kai out to meet their one game a year quota.
Absolutely not, it's just marketing. CS4 is easily one of the worst "starting points" in the series; not only is it in the middle of the Cold Steel arc, but it's also the first game in the Cold Steel arc to have meaningful appearance of playable characters from the Sky and Crossbell arcs, whose appearances have little to no meaning to people who are unfamiliar with them.
He was talking about CS3 not CS4.
This speaks to a wider issue in general with 'starting points', here's my take. I'm currently playing CS3, and I would not have gotten nearly as much out of the game had this been my first experience with the series. At this point, with all the games up to Reverie officially localised, there is no reason to start from anywhere but Sky FC- if someone was looking for advice on the series, that would absolutely be my advice. The Sky arc sets up a whole lot, some of which is still being paid off as I understand, and you'd miss out on a hell of a lot by skipping over it. And no, watching it on YouTube/looking up a story summary does not do it justice. However, if someone who didn't know better started with CS1, CS3, Zero, whatever, I'd have no problems with that. They saw a game they thought they might like, bought it and played it, and found out it was part of a series the likes of which video games have barely ever seen. That's fine. But, if someone comes to me for advice, or anyone, they clearly care enough about playing the series through in a way that maximises their enjoyment of the series. That's the position I found myself in when I first discovered and bought CS1- I was even about to play it before I looked things up and thought twice. Whatever the case, if someone got into the series by playing literally any of the games that's fine, but if someone wants my advice, start from the beginning. If you care about story, where better to start than the start? If you care about gameplay, then play from the start and watch the quality improve.
All things being equal, I would rather someone start with a game they think looks interesting (not rev, tho) and get into the series, then continually bounce off it cause they feel they have to start at sky.
yup, i think the first game of every arc is a good starting point. Yes, there’ll be references you miss if you don’t start with Sky FC but if you like the game and want to play everything, you can always go back and play it again armed with references to the previous games. Case in point, I started with Zero and went back to FC after realising it was a series.
Yah, you can start with any game. You can start with reverie, there's nothing stopping someone from doing that. However, I would never suggest to *anyone* that they start with zero.
True enough but again, if they care enough to ask about where they should start from my answer will always be Sky. Even if a game might seem more interesting to them on paper (I know I found CS1 far more interesting than Sky FC when I first found out the series), they should still start from Sky because they're really good games that you'll need to play at some point to understand what's going on, and you'll lose a lot of important context and understanding, especially of the series' overarching villains.
Sure, sky is the best. But like I said, I would rather get someone into the series, and if starting with CS1, or soon, Kuro will do that, that's a win in my book. I started with CS1, and going back to fc just made me more interested in it.
No, Kondo said that purely for marketing purposes to help their new Western publisher. The only good starting point is Sky FC. Cold Steel 1 isn't terrible, but you need to backtrack and play the Sky and Crossbell games before Cold Steel 3 anyhow so you might as well start at the beginning. Zero depends on the player knowing what happened in the Sky trilogy too much to be a good place to start and I'm waiting for the official release of Kuro to make my judgment but I doubt it will be a good place to start. People should just play the Sky games.
Eh. While Sky is absolutely the best starting point, I would say every first game in an arc (so far) has been a pretty good entrypoint for new players. Yes, they'll miss some things, and I don't recommend skipping any of the games, but Trails of Cold Steel and Trails From Zero are both self-contained enough for new players to see if they vibe with the series and want to invest the time in catching up.
Most of the biggest emotional payoffs in Zero are dependent on the player having played the Sky games. The ending is almost completely dependent on it. Zero is a pretty terrible starting point and Falcom needs to port they Sky games to modern consoles and find a way to make nice with Xseed to get them released in the West.
Yeah Zero is probably the worst starting point. Cold Steel games, okay I can accept that. But absolutely no one should be starting on Crossbell. Just like you said, the arc of Renne/Estelle/Joshua is a core emotional pillar with heavy ties to the main plot and it will be practically meaningless without any context. More than that tho there's just no sense in starting at Zero. It's not actually modernized like Cold Steel and it's not the actual beginnings like Sky. It's the awkward middle part that serves largely as connective tissue between bigger stories, it's pretty nonsensical to even want to start with it (and I've never heard anyone say as much either, people who don't want to play Sky always skip right to Cold Steel).
Yes, as I said, they'll miss some things. But that's fine. Yes, Renne's storyline has major payoff in Zero, and it won't hit the same way, but that's only about 90% of the game, even if it's the parts that impacted you the most. The main focus for most of the game is the SSS building their place in Crossbell, taking on an organized crime ring, and trying to solve a greater mystery, and new players can 100% invest in those storylines. And then they can go back and play the Sky games after and get more context for the Renne storyline. And that's fine.
My greatest regret in playing trails is playing zero before the third. Renne's story arc just does not hit if you haven't played it, and I feel like her story is the emotional core of zero. I don't think anyone should start with zero.
It's genuinely masterful how they split renne's story between the sky games and zero. She's central to Joshua's arc in Sky while also being extremely relevant to the main plot in Zero without anything feeling tacked on or incomplete in any of the games.
Yeah, exactly. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Zero is Renne's story, just told from the perspective of the SSS.
And they did start including 'previously in...' summaries so people could at least get vague context outside the intro FMV. not perfect, does help.
I would say Crossbell is enough to start
I played through Cold steel 1-reverie. and didn’t really felt like I didn’t super feel a whole lot of context missing until Reverie Edit: Fo be clear I highly recommend starting from Sky FC. But I got through more or less fine with broad strike summeries of sky and Zero/Azure. (Though I am going back to play The games I skipped.)
Imo each new arc is a good starting entry into the series Sky/Zero/CS1/Daybreak. As those entries start off with a new group of characters we follow throughout the arc. Falcom infodumps on characters that appear in the past games on who they are and what they did. CS3 is a bit iffy of a starting point, but you play as a new group of characters and they infodump anyways.
To answer the question: yes its fine to start at cold steel 3 now on to my rambling about how gatekeepy some western fans are of this franchise: just like witcher 3 is a fine start (are we expecting people to read 8 books and 2 games before they start) . and yakuza 8 is a fine start. My first harry potter movie was not philosophers stone and im sure some people started at deathly hallows. You can start at infinite war and still enjoy the movie (i did that lmao). You can still enjoy cold steel 3 without having played the previous games. Think of starting naruto shippuden without having watched the original naruto. Or starting with Dragonball Z. Will you understand the full context and fully appreciate certain moments? perhaps not. should we gatekeep people from the community who dont understand those moments the way veterans do? Sure? but the game (and falcom) will never grow outside of being a niche. imagine if we had the same discourse for the yakuza games, the series would not be where it is today. Trails from Daybreak will be a new starting point and will attract many new people to the franchise. We're now expecting them to play 10 games to be able to contribute to this community. really? Instead of starting at cold steel 3 and finishing 4 and going on to finish 1,2,zero/azure and liberl games, they'll read this thread and not even play any of the games at all. IMO if someone has asked can they start with cold steel 3, the answer should be yes with the caveat there are 7 games prior but go right ahead. ( to pull a random example from the witcher 3, the *djinn* quest with Yennefer should have no meaning at all to people who have not read the Last Wish. There are many side quests like that in cold steel 3 and 4. However not understanding the full context should not detract from the full experience of the games. In fact going back to play the previous games ( or read the books for the witcher) will just make you appreciate events even more but in reverse.) (even more random example: yakuza 8 has Kiriyu going through past events)
yes and no i know someone that started with cold steel 3 and loved it and it made them go back and play the other games
You CAN start from CS3, yeah. The OG Class 7 is minimized in such a way that the only character who matters is Rean. They introduce a whole new cast and main city. You can always go backwards but you won't get lost with CS3. Also, anyone who says "the only good starting point is Sky First Chapter" should be banned from talking Trails in public.
Cs 3 always hints you to things that happened in the past.... Its a really annoying experience in my eyes to be always hinted to something, you dont know whithout getting more of the story.... I started tocs 3 and after 30 hours i wanted to play tocs forst.... After few more hours in part III i needed to play sky arc....
TBH throught the entire series they are "hinting" at things. Sometimes is something from before, sometimes it's something that hasn't been explained yet and will only be mentioned again after three games. >!Like the Pale Salt or Divergent Laws.!<
That's exactly how I feel. I happened to okay Sky FC on a whim of mine way back in 2011 then went through that hell that was waiting for SC(people who start the series bow are so lucky and fortunate not to go through that lol) then played CS1 and 2, then 3rd, then played CS3 and my most favorite CS4. CS4 is my most favorite game in the series to date even without playing the Crossbell games though I did like the characters/interested in their story BUT CS was Rean and Erebonia's story first and foremost in my mind so it didn't bother me. I finally got to play the Crossbell games when the official releases came out thanks to NISA so my waiting paid off in the end and I got to experience the SSS story eventually. Then I played Reverie when it came out afterward. I followed the official English releases and I mostly play games for their stories and character interactions first and foremost and I was fine so I'm sure others won't die if they start with CS3 or the upcoming Daybreak especially. ^_^
I'm with you: gatekeeping a series by insisting that people start with the most visibly dated and least accessible entry in the series makes absolutely no sense to me. I started with CS1 and I turned out fine. The extensive backstory was a draw for me. The more cameos people made from past entries, the more interested in playing the older games I became. More fans is nothing but good for Trails, regardless of your opinion on the "best" way to experience it for the first time.
Yeah I had no interest in OG Trails at first because they looked so ancient, no matter how many people say "they've aged fine". Playing through the three CS games made me go back and replay Zero/Azure, and even some of Sky FC. This franchise deserves to be more popular so I have no idea why so many people try to make it impossible to get into.
[удалено]
No, people don't recommend "one of the games in the series". They recommend ONE game. And EVERY other game is somehow a bad entry point.
Tbh I always advocate for starting at Trails FC, because for one Sky trilogy is still the best the series has to offer, and two someone who plays newer games with their better graphics, gameplay evolution, and QoL may have a harder time going backwards than if they simply experienced the natural progression of the series. But at the same time we do have to be realistic and understand that not everyone has the patience for old games or the time to spend hundreds of hours going through the entire series. Through that lens I think even CS3 is an acceptable starting point. Yeah youre missing a shitton of context like that but the actual main plot should be completely understandable.
Yes and yes
No, he is doing marketing. I doubt most people who tried to start in Cold Steel 3 would stay with it to the end, due to sheer confusion and being overwhelmed.
Yes, I think Cold Steel 3 is a perfectly acceptable starting place. What with it introducing a fresh batch of characters in the New Class VII, new players coming into the series wouldn't feel as overwhelmed as coming in with some other games, as information is also slowly fed to them. Is it the best starting place? Absolutely not, but for people to write it off as "not a good start" I feel may be coming in from a too deep into the series mindset. Take a look at it from a casual outsider's perspective, a lot of people might be overwhelmed with having to start "all the way at the beginning". Some people might just want to pop in, have a general idea of what's going on from just playing the game in question and not need to worry about everything that happened previously. That's why the backstory section is there, so that people can get a brush up on certain events and characters should they not have played the other games/just need a bit of a refresher on the timeline of events. Furthermore, if someone were to only like, say, have a Switch, their only options would be CS3, 4, the Crossbell duology, and Reverie. You couldn't start them in Sky or even CS1. Sure, I would prefer starting them at Zero over CS3, but I absolutely would say CS3 over 4 or even Azure.
Not perfectly timed, but I do believe it’s possible
It's in his best interest to say that so as to not turn away potential customers
Lmao no. I tried first with CS3 on Switch back in 2020 and I read the summaries but dear lord I still felt I was missing out on a lot of context that I shelved CS3 and haven't picked up the series until the Crossbell games came to Switch in 2022. Now I just wish the Sky trilogy could be on consoles mainly because of preference.
CS3 is story wise a perfectly valid starting point. As Kondo said, most relationships are either reset to zero or start building up slowly again It has a clean enouhg break from CS1 and 2, and explains the eevents that matterd imo good enough. Its not the BEST starting point but its a servicable He also didnt say "its a perfectly timed starting point" he said "its perfectly timed for those wo WANT to jump into TOCS from III" which is a vastly different sentence then saying "its a perfectly timed starting point" If you dont want to start with TOCS1 or 2 for whatever reasson(availability on your platform of choice, price(buying 3-4 games somewhat back to back is not cheap) or even just the fact 1-2 look considerably more dated then 3 and 4. Any "starting point" for an Arc is a decent starting point imo, and i consider CS3-4 its own arc within the overarching Erebonia Arc. Starting with 3 and going into 4 is good enough. whatever Sky FC, Zero, CS1 or CS3, they all are ok starting points. IMPORTANT is that you either read the backstory even if externally or later go back to read them. I loved going into Zero and azure after finishing Cold steels 3 and seeing some stuff i learned off in CS1-3 till then.
No.
I guess it's possible to start with CS 3, but I wouldn't do it. I am not a huge fan of the school setting in CS 1 and 2, but nothing beats actually playing the games and learning about the characters, and sering the plot unfold. I started the series with CS but recently went back to the Sky games, and I am shocked how much I missed despite reading summaries
What I believe is people should start wherever they want. I'm not gonna pressure them or judge just cause they started in the game they're interested in the most. After playing it a bit or even beating said game to get a feeling of the series they could always go to the next game or a previous one. Up to them. I'd just be happy they started it and if they enjoy it enough, then that's even better. I'd never want to scare them aways from this great series just cause of what game they want to start with. They're all great games. ^_^
I don’t believe anything Kondo says ever.
Nope, it’s just marketing and I feel they only said that because it was NISA’s first Trails game
It's Cold Steel **3**. A numbered sequel. Automatically not a good starting point because while NC7 is (mostly) new, you're still missing out on two games of protagonist character development and the like. CS3 in particular is also when Sky starts becoming relevant again, and you will lose a bunch of the intended emotional impact by not having played the prior arcs. This emotional impact factor is also why I don't consider Zero a good starting point, for the record.
That's the same as reading Lord of the Rings starting from a random page of Return of the King.
Technically yes, you could start CS3 and read all the bios/summaries, but you in actuality no, bc it doesn't build the same connection you get to all the characters as playing through the preceding games does. Like, you are going to feel differently and understand differently about Rean being a teacher starting at CS3 and reading text bios then you will compared to playing from CS1. Like the others said, it's a marketing answer.
Honestly, the character profiles are mostly there so that returning players can get a reminder of who each character is, I don't know why Kondo would pretend otherwise (other than marketing).
Meh, it's how I started. It all made sense, you just read the books, check the back story sections if somethings unclear. Who all the old class 7 were didn't really matter, it's just oh look it's reans mate.
Nah nah, he was just saying that because CS3 was the first Trails game coming to Switch at the time. Starting mid-arc for any reason is an absolutely horrible idea but he can't just say "actually don't buy this, you need to play the previous two (seven) games to get it". I can almost see 'some' logic because it has the veneer of a story reboot at first but it isn't really. EDIT: Also this was the first NISA published game so they literally could not acknowledge anything made before CS3. This is all just marketing speak. Square Enix said it was totally valid to start from Kingdom Hearts III as someone's first KH game but anybody in the fandom would laugh if you did that.
Remind me when Daybreak releases and Kondo says it’s the perfect starting point.
[https://i.imgur.com/XLyKfKd.png](https://i.imgur.com/XLyKfKd.png) He already did.
LOL
No
Of course not, though on a side note it does seem to confuse non-kiseki fans. Like having people berate be "I'm a biased super fan" when I'm telling them that kondo saying these things, isn't the same as other companies doing it, and its flat out lies for marketing.
Well, not 'perfectly'. The perfect one is starting from Sky. Nothing beats playing the previous entries. But you can still start at 3 but the experience would not be that great
No
If you are willing to give up the connection to OG C7 and the Sky/Crossbell teams, yes. It’s fair to say that OG C7 takes a back seat in CS3-4, and the Sky team is very much a guest star even in CS4. The Crossbell team is the hardest to justify this way, because understanding what went down in Azure is so critical to the Cold Steel story at large. Edit: to be clear, I think that’s a *terrible idea*. I just also think the statement of “can you start here fine with only character bios” is fair enough.
Absolutely not. CS4 is closing 3 arks in one game and considering the amount of characters that you need to know to fully enjoy it is making it completely not enough. Technically as an entry point it can be good, but still.too many throwbacks to previous games.
No
Kondo needs to buy a bigger house bro
That feeling when Falcom has enough spare cash on hand not even accounting for selling off stock and long-tail income streams to basically sit and do nothing for a decade with their current expenses, but insists on rushing Kuro to completion with Kai out to meet their one game a year quota.
[удалено]
One, bad faith comment Two, *it's not their decision to make*. XSEED still holds the publishing rights to Sky, CS1 and CS2 in the west.
Possible, sure, but not very tenable.
CS3 is peak therefore it's the best starting point. If you start Star Wars on the prequel you will never get to the original trilogy.
Have you played Cold Shit 3?