Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
4 
Report this post
FC is what introduced me to the series, and still to this day has my fav. Antagonist, and damn if the cliffy at the end didn't make me insta buy SC. However it was SC that made me truely love the series. Visting the places and seeing what happened after a few months, seeing the Characters ineract and develop, Estelle becoming Bestelle, etc., was amazing all around. Finale SC and it's Final dungeon were 10/10. 3rd could've been easily my fav. as well, but i was not fond of it's structure, it still set up future arcs pretty well tough and still to date has the best Gameplay in the Series.
CS1 was really awesome during Field Studies, but during school it was quite meh (especially with bonding), however it was able to introduce Erebonia quite well. Sadly, Gameplay was quite weak, the weakest the Series has to offer. CS2 however is the most dissapointing Trails, from failure to show war, to failing to develop half the cast, to even more bonding locked bs, it's quite a weak Trails game. It's quite a grood rpg, but not a good Trails (imo)
Gameplay: 3rd > SC = FC > CS I = CS II
Simply put, I appreciate the thought and balance between challenge and mechanics more in the Sky games compared to Cold Steel. To me a game so easily broken feels like playing GTA with cheats, fun for a little while but loses its appeal over time.
That being said, the changes in mechanics behind the base system are a clear improvement and with some more investment in gameplay testing a truly engaging turn based system could really shine through.
Story: FC > SC = CS I > CS II
3rd: to be finished
This one is more difficult since if I were to seperate the different story threads the list would be too long for a post. Generally speaking, the more focussed narrative in FC helped really drive character development, which allowed players to develop attachment. This was important for SC and its central theme to work.
Cold Steel I does the same but on a different group. Trista and those associated with Trista are important, with Class VII really more a mechanism for plot progression. Now Class VII does get some development but the characters of the class were not the main stars of CS I, Trista is. This was important for CS II. I won't go into CS II since that would make things even longer.
Things may change with more games under my belt but this is how things stand at this moment for me.
SC>3rd>FC>CS 2 > CS1
SC I really love it has a lot of moments. I especially am a big fan of the second last chapter.
3rd has my favorite boss fights in the series so far. It is a really fantastic game when it comes to gameplay and while it has a different style I do think the game has a lot of moments.
FC started it all and I still love it. Never will forget that epilogue.
CS2 I haven't finished yet I am at halfway point but so far I am liking it just a tad bit more than CS1.
CS1 , I love the game but compared to the others it is my least favorite. Make no mistake though it is still one of the better RPGs that I have played and I have played quite a bit.
I have played zero no kiseki too so if we count that the list would be like
SC>Zero no Kiseki>3rd>FC>Cold Steel 2>Cold Steel 1
With that said, out of all the games I have played so far I do think that Zero no Kiseki is the best one. Not my favorite but the best one.
Sky SC > Cold Steel 1 > Sky FC > Sky 3rd > Cold Steel 2
SC is self-explanatory, really. In terms of storytelling, it's easily the best so far. It manages to have a great personal plot (and maybe a more flawed global plot, but it's okay since it's not the main focus), and it really managed to make the characters grow in a way FC didn't quite manage to (I mean, Estelle was great from the start, but a lot of party members had to wait for SC before I started taking an interest)
Cold Steel 1 is my second favourite, because in my opinion, it's the only one to have managed to deliver great world-building and decent personal plot (as I said, SC is mostly personal, FC is mostly world-building, the 3rd is kind of bizarre in both senses, and CS2 is a mess). Also, I know I'm in the minority here, but as a whole, I tend to like class VII more than most of the party in SKky (yes, despite Estelle being the greatest character ever and Rean being... Rean). Also, I did enjoy the gameplay more, despite the difficulty being down as a result.
Sky FC is a very solid introduction to the licence, but I feel like it's a really, really good thing that Estelle was the protag, because she basically carry the game alone (okay, Olivier is a good support). The story itself is pretty basic until the very very end, more like episodic adventures while learning about Liberl - which is okay, but done a bit clumsily at times; I honestly think that CS1 gave a better and more balanced introduction to Erebonia.
Sky the third is... weird. It has a lot of enjoyable moments, and learning more about the various characters is very nice... but as a self-contained story, it makes no sense at all. It's also the one where clearly they decided that the plot didn't matter. It's the most basic of games in its structure, and can be really hit-or-miss at times. It honestly feels more like an expansion/bonus dungeon for SC than a full-fledged game.
And finally, Cold Steel 2 might be the most ambitious... but the realization is the most flawed. Trying to raise the stakes of the story with the civil war might have been a good idea in theory, but in practice, you never end up believing it. There's just too much of a disconnect between the personal and global plot, with a lot of NPCs suffering from strange characterization to desperately make things fit. Also, if you HAVE to give a lot of focus to mecha battles (dear god why?), at least make them entertaining. All in all, I like what they tried to do, but I can't help but think they made a mess of it.
(that being said, there's one thing they did manage to do really well: I want to play the Crossbell arc now! Damn teases.)
SC > FC > 3rd > CS I > CS II
I'm not going to go into detail about them since there are plenty of threads where I've discussed why I feel the way I do and I don't feel like writing a lengthy post.
Alot of people love SC2 (Myself Included) due to how it handled the story and the introduction of Ouroboros as a whole in the series
SC > CS 1 = 3rd > FC > CS 2
SC was the best for me: It had an amazing overall story, some of the best character interactions and sub-plots as well as great villains, nice plot progression and plenty of emotionally rewarding scenes.
CS 1 had plenty likable characters, a great world to explore with oodles of lore and background to Erebonia, most of which was just teased in 3rd and SC, and that I found incredibly compelling to learn directly and in more detail. Plot progression was mostly fine, and it even had some pretty good character moments that got me quite invested in the overall story and it's main cast.
3rd is probably pretty much on equal terms to CS 1 for me: Lots of lore and background (I'm a sucker for that stuff), great character interactions with plenty of emotional payoff built up in FC and SC, as well as a solid overall plot that kept me hooked from start to finish.
FC was very good, with a solid cast of likable characters from the get-go and arguably the single best MC ever. Super slow burner in terms of story, but great amounts of lore and stellar setup for SC. Best Cliffhanger-ending and main villain reveal to date.
CS 2 was still good, I liked seeing the cast I learned to love in CS 1 return, but it's pretty weak in terms of story and background lore: Lots of contrived or plainly weird scenes that left me scratching my head in confusion. Mind you, it's still not a bad game by any stretch, but compared to the others it was just not up to par, and it didn't feel as emotionally engaging exept for a couple of moments that were unfortunately few and far between.
Ao has the most epic storyline, and not just in terms of things blowing up and the fate of the world hanging in the balance, but in terms of politics too. I think CS did politics well, but the West Zemuria Trade Conference had some of the most tense and engaging political debate I've seen in a video game. Ao also got to draw on the strong characterisation established by Zero, and to build on its broader themes in a meaningful way. Oh, and it combined the old orbment system with master quartz, which is better than anything Trails has done before or since.
SC is a close runner-up. It has an epic storyline too, and it also gets to draw on a previous game's worth of characters and worldbuilding. It has better antagonists but worse party members (what are you even for, Schera?), and a bigger, more colourful world but worse pacing and no fast travel.
I love Zero. The small cast means a lot of depth invested in their characterisation and relationships in a way none of the other games manage, even FC/SC (and let's not even start on CS). The game has what I feel to be more mature themes than those two, exploring corruption, institutionalised crime and international politics alongside more personal story arcs. Above all, it's great at portraying struggle in the face of helplessness. Crossbell's problems are far bigger than the characters facing them, and not just the internal ones but the way it costantly walks a tightrope between two amoral giants longing to swallow it whole. Watching the good guys lose the way they would lose against such impossible odds in real life makes it all the more potent when they grow and succceed.
FC occupies the same position as Zero as the slow-paced game that gets you to care about the characters and the world before the brakes get taken off and the accelerator slammed down in the sequel. It introduces a setting you can't help but love. It introduces Olivier and other, less excellent but still good characters. It smoothly ramps up the plot from minor incidents to massive events. As my first Trails game, it has the power of nostalgia behind it.
Trails of Cold Steel belongs to the same category as those two. There's a lot to be said for it. The academy students are collectively among the best minor NPCs in the series. The setting is well-developed and its politics are engaging. Machias and Jusis's interactions are a thing of beauty and a joy forever. But. The story follows a rigid formula within a rigid formula. One of the antagonist factions is embarrassingly blatant in its evilness. Some key plot points don't make sense. The progatonist is simultaneously bland and excessively trope-laden. The dungeons are both simple and small compared to past games, the orbment system is reduced to a shadow of the great original, and the less said about the balance the better.
CS2 is a game I wanted to love, indeed started out loving. It builds smoothly on the foundations laid by CS1. It gives the player a feeling of freedom not normally found in Trails games. It has exciting things happening in a unique and dramatic context. But soon it trips over itself and falls, and doesn't get up again. The civil war, the point of the entire game, is a joke. The suspension of disbelief required throughout is excessive. The protagonist gets worse rather than better, he is driven by absurd delusions which everyone else also subscribes to, and the characters and relationships so painstakingly developed in CS1 are left to wither on the vine. CS2 is still a Trails game, but it would be the worst Trails game I've played so far but for...
The 3rd. A partner once described The 3rd as "a mediocre dungeon crawl punctuated by moments of awesomeness", and that encapsulates my views perfectly. With the exception of one of the main endgame twists, which I found appalling, I quite enjoyed the main story. The door stuff was trademark Trails writing, and thus great. But the framing of it all... The mechanic by which you buy new stuff was so gamey that my suspension of disbelief was on the ropes from the word go. The doors, the beating heart of the game, make no sense as a concept, and are never explained (and why are flashbacks only ever shown to the people who already have those memories?). And above all, Phantasma is boring. I hated being made to trudge through monster-infested corridor after monster-infested corridor, periodically being bounced back to base to open the latest crystal, just so I could eventually reach the reward of a new door or a new story scene. I do not play Trails games for the combat, and it boggles my mind that FALCOM would apparently create a game specially for those who do.
Whipping your party up into shape! That's what I tend to use her for - making others work fast.
8.5/10 Cold Steel 1 - beginning was a little bit slow, but it picked up quickly. Story was good and everything seemed to make sense.
7.5/10 Sky FC - beginning was slower and went on longer than Cold Steel 1, but nothing bad with how the story went, everything made sense.
5.5/10 Cold Steel 2 - If this were a "relation to other games" rating it would probably be a 3. Reasons as to why some enemies "got back up" made zero sense and the Finale almost seemed like a "sad sappy joke" that went overboard. (sorry for so many "quotes ")
9.5/10 Sky SC - I couldn't really find anything wrong with SC when I played through it for the 1st time, I was really engaged and at never any point felt like something was dragging on. Playing through it a second time minor things bugged me but nothing to complain about, it's alot of story after all.
8/10 Sky 3rd - I'd rate this about the same as Sky FC since it's completely ludicrous and drags on near the end (at least for me) where the story should never drag on. As for why I'd make it above higher than FC is because of all the "side stories" that are implemented to get background, they are just litteral "lore/story dumps" but they're entertaining none-the-less.
I did not complete CSII yet.
FC Slow start, rather simple battles in the beginng, but great characters and even better ending-cliffhanger.
SC Sad start, very challenging, more great music, great story and again: Great Characters. Only chapter 2-4 were a bit repetetive.
3rd Mysterios start, best battle system and difficulty-balance so far, dark kevin-story and the great cast of SC returns. I thougth sometimes the game is trivial, because it doesn´t play in the real zemuria and does´t matter very much in the end.
CS1 Slow start, boring school, very repetetive chapters, no unlimited bonding points, no Estelle, worse cast-interactions, because the cast is far to focused on rean. Most of the time to easy bosses. The pros are the better graphics, the turbo mode (!!!), the voiceover (especially Sara) and the moment you there put into a mecha boss fight.