So with KH3 almost here (9 days!!), I've been wondering how the critical reception for this game is going to look. On one hand, Nomura and the team look to have really knocked it out of the park but looking at general ERA comments and the like, I've seen quite a few concerns raised over accessibility and approachibility. A lot of people are intrigued with the Disney stuff but the actual game's story is a culmination of almost a dozen games stretched between multiple platforms. I think it's important to note that Square has made multiple concessions to alleviate this what with KH3's recap bundled with the game and a massive collection of all the games + supplementary material released on the PS4. I think it's unreasonable to expect the average joe to play through all of these games but reviewers should be a different thing right? Well, I don't know. At the end of the day, gaming journalists are people too and have lives. It's unreasonable to expect anyone to go through around 8 games just to get up to speed with a newer entry. But it begs the question, is it reasonable or unreasonable for someone unfamiliar with a long-standing franchise to come to their own conclusion on the story despite the years of build up? Does a game's narrative need to stand on its own two feet despite serving as the conclusion of something in the making for 17 years? It's almost a given that KH3's main criticisms from critics will stem from the nature of the story it is trying to tell needing a lot of background information from games people may not have played.
A game like MGS4 did really well despite being a direct sequel to MGS2 and involving MGS3 stuff in its plot though I feel what really elevated it above the sum of its parts is the cinematic presentation, gameplay improvements and it being a technical marvel at the time. Not saying KH3 isn't any of these, but it places its story at the forefront which is why I don't understand people who say they play these games for the gameplay only. There's nothing wrong with doing this as KH has great gameplay, but the story isn't something you can shelve. It permeates every aspect of the experience.
Some highly anticipated entries in long-standing franchises like Metal Gear have released this gen to absolute critical acclaim, but looking at their stories, they're relatively standalone and I know that many people's exposure to these franchises for the first time is through these games.
This is just something I've been wondering for a while, I look forward to reading all of your insight on this as I think it's a discussion worth having.
A game like MGS4 did really well despite being a direct sequel to MGS2 and involving MGS3 stuff in its plot though I feel what really elevated it above the sum of its parts is the cinematic presentation, gameplay improvements and it being a technical marvel at the time. Not saying KH3 isn't any of these, but it places its story at the forefront which is why I don't understand people who say they play these games for the gameplay only. There's nothing wrong with doing this as KH has great gameplay, but the story isn't something you can shelve. It permeates every aspect of the experience.
Some highly anticipated entries in long-standing franchises like Metal Gear have released this gen to absolute critical acclaim, but looking at their stories, they're relatively standalone and I know that many people's exposure to these franchises for the first time is through these games.
This is just something I've been wondering for a while, I look forward to reading all of your insight on this as I think it's a discussion worth having.
