Not sure if my review comes off too text-heavy, but I aim to cover this game in detail.
I dig into its history—because this isn’t just any JRPG. Its pedigree stretches back to 1984 on the PC-88.
I was trying to figure out whether it was a complete experience on its own. @missingno@fedia.io clarified that it’s a remake of the first game in a trilogy. I was concerned it was being released episodically and I’ve been burned on incomplete episodic releases too many times.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 1 day ago
naticus@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Sorta. It’s so loosely connected to the Dragon Slayer and contains almost no reference back to anyone before Trails actually started in 2004. Yes, I know, these are the origins, but saying “it’s not just any JRPG” makes it sound like the preceding series would be relevant to Trails too. I would say that the only games that you’ll ever see meaningful references to would be the Gagharv trilogy, but even then, not canon to Trails.
I think the more impressive thing is that Falcom has been making RPGs since before “JRPG” was a used term. Before Dragon Warrior/Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy ever took the stage.
Either way, loving the remake, it’s truly one of the most faithful remakes of any games I’ve ever seen, regardless of genre. It’s insane that at a glance I recognize literally every area compared to the original.
atomicpoet@lemmy.world 1 day ago
No, Trails is not canon with Dragon Slayer. More like that’s its lineage. Which is pretty damn cool.
emb@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The game it’s a remake of was a very full experience. The original and its sequel were know as FC (first chapter) and SC, I think mostly in retrospect.
Vague spoilers for the story arc
While the original Trails in the Sky was very full, it does end on a cliffhanger that sets up directly for the sequel.
Katana314@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Falcom seems to be doing okay, but if they suddenly go bankrupt, you could just play the original SC on Steam to finish the story.