[PhoenixWrong]

I've been meaning to start the Broken Sword series for awhile now (and admittedly I am still trying to decide if I should wait for the remake or get the PC version).

However I have a question about the second game. Everything I've read about it seems very negative. So my question is, is it worth playing and is it connected to the story of the other three games?

[MartyMcFly]

I always feel this game got a hard beating. The answer to both of your questions is yes: this is a good game that is worth playing, and it does tie into the other games.

If you, as i know many did, loved the 2d art style of the 1st game, don't even hesitate. Sure, the first game had a better story. But this game is good also, and i remember loving it upon release. I felt it was a completely appropriate sequel. The third game, whilst perhaps better story wise, suffered in it's move to 3d.

I am sorry to say that, although i love them all, the 4th game really wasnt worth upgrading my graphics card for. The 3d engine gives a sense of a budget release.

Nothing matches the production values of the original 2d broken swords.

Get the 2nd game, at less than £5 now for both the first and second, or £10 for the first 3, you really have nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

[Keregioz]

There's not any significant connection to the stories between each release, apart from the two main characters, as far as I remember. You could play them in any order or you could skip any of them and it would still make sense.
Yes, the first one is the best but personally I enjoyed all of them and I recommend them.

[DustyShinigami]

Yes, i say it's worth playing. There are references in each game of the previous ones. But i strongly recommend you play the first one as it's the best. Wouldn't worry too much about the forth. I also found that one a bit disappointing and it requires too much horse-power to run.

Hell, play them all in order.

[DEMON]

BS 1 is a brilliant game and BS 2, while not as good as the 1st title, is still a very good and entertaining game. I personally liked BS 3 and had no problem with it being 3D, but I hate BS4 oh so much that I never got myself to finish it.
And I suggest you play them all in order, as it´s also chronologically correct.

[Terramax]

Originally Posted by Keregioz

There's not any significant connection to the stories between each release, apart from the two main characters, as far as I remember. You could play them in any order or you could skip any of them and it would still make sense.
Yes, the first one is the best but personally I enjoyed all of them and I recommend them.

You wouldn't understand all of BS3 without playing the 1st. The second is fairly stand alone though, giving the series as sort of episodic feel.

Smoking Mirror does keep the tradition of being lighter hearted though. Main problem with it was the linearity, where there didn't appear to be as many locations to investigate at any one moment, but the writing is still very almost to the standards of the original, and it still looks a mighty fine game.

[Keregioz]

Originally Posted by Terramax

You wouldn't understand all of BS3 without playing the 1st.

Like what?...
When I played bs3 it had been several years since I had played the first one and I didn't remember almost nothing, but I had no problems understanding the story.

[MartyMcFly]

Well, they refer alot to the character of Bruno in the 3rd game, and i guess you would have a greater understanding of the character and more satisfaction with the story is you were familiar with the first game.

[Keregioz]

Well, I don't recall this "bruno" character at all to be honest. Like I said it's been a while. But I doubt that playing the first BS game will have any significant effect to how much you'll enjoy and understand the story on the third.

[Kurufinwe]

If I remember correctly, Bruno was a scientist from an Eastern European country, but he was featured in BS1, not BS2 (his role was small there, though, and you won't miss much background info about him if you start BS3 without having played BS1).

Anyway, I'd say it's possible to skip BS2 completely as far as continuity goes (though I thought it was a decent game that's worth playing whether it's relevant to the next game or not).

[MartyMcFly]

Originally Posted by Keregioz

Well, I don't recall this "bruno" character at all to be honest. Like I said it's been a while. But I doubt that playing the first BS game will have any significant effect to how much you'll enjoy and understand the story on the third.

No offense, but whilst a minor character in the first game, he was a pretty major one in the third, so i am surprised you don't remember him. I certainlly felt more emotional impact in the the 3rd game with events regarding bruno due to my recollections of the character from the first game.

Please understand however, I'm not saying you cant play broken sword 3 without playing the 1st two...im just saying why would you skip them when they are all so cheap now anyway and playing them in order gives a greater sense of satisfaction, narrative development and a greater understanding of the story? Each to his own i guess

[Keregioz]

Originally Posted by MartyMcFly

No offense, but whilst a minor character in the first game, he was a pretty major one in the third, so i am surprised you don't remember him. I certainlly felt more emotional impact in the the 3rd game with events regarding bruno due to my recollections of the character from the first game.

Please understand however, I'm not saying you cant play broken sword 3 without playing the 1st two...im just saying why would you skip them when they are all so cheap now anyway and playing them in order gives a greater sense of satisfaction, narrative development and a greater understanding of the story? Each to his own i guess

No offense taken. I didn't say he wasn't important, just that I didn't remember him because it's been a long time since I played the games.
I believe that in these specific series it's not at all necessary to play the games in order (ecxept maybe for the first so you can see how the two main characters meet). Sure they may be some story links between them but they are minor and don't really detract from the experience. Nothing important as far as character of narrative development either, as far as I remember.
I'm with you however, no reason to skip any game of the series since they are all very enjoyable.

[Terramax]

MartyMcFly explains everything perfectly. Playing the original BS gives you a greater understanding of the 3rd. Greater background information on the Templar's, Neo Templars (the main villain takes place as the leader if I'm correct), the situation between Nico and George, Bruno. There are some references like the clown nose in Nico's apartment, etc.

Of course, playing the original is not essential, but why not?

[veruncheek]

I enjoyed Broken Sword 2 more than the first game. There are beautiful places and it is fun to play. Really good game.

[veruncheek]

Originally Posted by DEMON

BS 1 is a brilliant game and BS 2, while not as good as the 1st title, is still a very good and entertaining game. I personally liked BS 3 and had no problem with it being 3D, but I hate BS4 oh so much that I never got myself to finish it.
And I suggest you play them all in order, as it´s also chronologically correct.

I also enjoyed the 3rd game, but have negative experience with the 4th. Anyone else had problems with George "not running"? Though it is not the only reason I uninstalled it quite quickly.

[PhoenixWrong]

Thanks everyone!

Should I play Broken Sword 2.5 after 2?

[Tiocfaidh]

Originally Posted by Terramax

Of course, playing the original is not essential, but why not?

For an adventure gamer it is absolutely essential to play BROKEN SWORD 1 no - matter - what ... !

[seanparkerfilms]

I'm going to be devil's advocate here and say that I was immensely disappointed by Broken Sword 2. The quality of the writing, art, music, and story did not live up to the first by any means (in my opinion). It was not, by any means, a terrible game. But considering that the first is one of the best adventure games yet made and the follow-up is fairly mediocre, it's a massive letdown.

Though I'm glad that so many people on here seem to enjoy it. I just couldn't get into it... although it's worth playing if you are a fan of the series, and there are definitely some good moments.

[Terramax]

Oh I agree. I think the fact that they'd begun work on the sequel right after the first game was released (they even mention the sequel on the first game's end credits) supports my conclusing that Revolution knew they had a winner and rushed a sequel out to capitalise on the success.

Visually, the game's awesome (Captain Ketch's island is one of my favourite locations), but the comedy did seem a little forced, it was too linear, and the music outstayed its welcome (you got a 20 second track every time you so much as looked at anything).

[MartyMcFly]

Originally Posted by Terramax

MartyMcFly explains everything perfectly. Playing the original BS gives you a greater understanding of the 3rd. Greater background information on the Templar's, Neo Templars (the main villain takes place as the leader if I'm correct), the situation between Nico and George, Bruno. There are some references like the clown nose in Nico's apartment, etc.

Of course, playing the original is not essential, but why not?

Yeh, thats exactally what i meant, thanks for clarifying. You certainly can play the games out of order, or exclude some...but i really don't see the point. Its like how i watched terminator 2 long before i saw the first one, but now i have seen the 1st, the 2nd holds more weight.

Certainly the second game is alittle removed from the overarching series narrative, however, being in that glorious 2d and largely sharing the same interface as the 1st game, i think it would be a shame to be forgotten. Certainly, whatever it lacks compared to the 3rd and fourth games (block puzzles perhaps? only kidding) it more than makes up for with simply being a good old fashioned adventure, that you just don't get many of anymore.

Thats probablly why im enjoying a vampyre story so much atm, as is my girlfriend. If that game was exactally the same story, puzzles, music, everything, but was in the 3d engine of lets say broken sword 3 or 4...i doubt i would as much. (which i know is kinda wrong).

Sadly, the only adventure game i loved in 3d was, surprise surprise, grim fandango. The land of the dead perhaps would have lost some of its scope in 2d. But hey i'm off on a tangent. Broken sword is a series i grew up with, and i would recommend each and every one of them. As i said before, at the price they are now (all of them combined for less than the price of a ps3 games), whats there to lose?