As I mentioned in a previous blog, I'm re-working my way through the Legacy of Kain series. Having just finished Soul Reaver 2 this weekend, I'm pondering whether to play through Blood Omen 2 (which is no doubt the black sheep of the family, but a part of the story nonetheless), or just skip ahead to Defiance.

On one hand, I started replaying them with the intention off going through the whole story in one elongated go. Blood Omen 2 may be detached from the main story with future Kain and Raziel, but it helps inform that one.

On the other hand, Blood Omen 2 is probably the weakest of the games as far as gameplay goes, and has more than its share of bad bugs. Defiance, by comparison, is polished and really fun.

At the moment, I'm leaning toward Blood Omen 2, if only so Defiance will seem that much better when I make my way to playing it. What do you guys think?

Half the Mega Man fans out there were excited that the Classic series was getting a new entry, while the other half scoffed at the fact the game wouldn't be a 3D entry, or even a 2D game with hi-res, next generation quality sprites. Instead, Capcom was making what's effectively its first NES game in over a decade.

There were cries of laziness, among other things, but the anger was tempered a bit by the fact the game would be available for only 10 bucks for a download. Over the months since its announcement, it became clear that Capcom wasn't just doing it because it was easier, but to really call back to the Blue Bomber's glory days, by including sprite flicker as an option, and commissioning so-bad-it's-good box art like in the old days.

So, being a big fan of the series, I downloaded the game the other day. It's charming in its old school presentation, and all it's missing is an option to blow on the cartridge. The game plays as well as the old game, though personally I wish they hadn't gotten rid of Mega Man's slide and charged shot, because without them the game is pretty darn hard.

I've only gotten through two levels since I got it (Like I said, it's not an easy game), but so far I've loved what I've seen. The level design is challenging without feeling cheap, and the music is catchy. If you've got ten bucks to spare, I'd definitely recommend picking it up, especially if you're like me and grew up with the old school platformers.

I find, though, that sometimes it's more fun to mix things up, even if I didn't do it deliberately. For example, when I first started reading Discworld, I wasn't reading them in any particular order, and in fact the first book I read was toward the later end. In just about all the books, characters will make reference to previous events, and at first I thought they were just throwaway gags, like a line about how the main city had been burned down several times in the past, sometimes by enemies, sometimes by defenders, and once for the insurance. The gag is great on its own, but it became even funnier when I went back and read the first book, in which it happens.

For the most part, though, I end up doing this more with games, especially since many of the series I've played started back when I was in diapers. The Final Fantasy series isn't all that strict on continuity since each installment is entirely self-contained, but it's fun to go back and find out what the later games were referring to, and where things I thought were modern day advances started.

It happened with the Jak & Daxter series as well. I got the third game in the series as a gift, played through it, and loved it, even if I wasn't sure exactly what was going on. When I went back and played the first two, I caught a lot of the foreshadowing I otherwise would have missed.

And most recently, as I mentioned in previous weeks, I've been replaying through the Legacy of Kain series. It was another series I came into late, but at the second installment of five, so I wasn't too late. Now that I'm replaying it after having tracked down the first game, things are popping out at me that I completely overlooked the first time around. One area, for example, has a gigantic skull face just sitting on the ground. When I first found it years ago, I just sort of chalked it up to the gloomy atmosphere, or I thought maybe there was some giants somewhere in the world. Now, though, I recognize it as a continuity nod, as the giant skull was a prominent feature of one of the first areas of the original game.

I generally try to get things in the right order when I play them, but when I find myself late to the party, I like looking back and seeing how things came to where they were.

That's a tough question to answer, and not to make too obvious of a cop out, it depends on the game. But I think, in general, story has gotten more important when it comes to gaming over the past two decades.

Back when gaming began, story was pretty much just there to answer the question, "Okay, but why is this carpenter trying to climb up a construction site with a monkey on top?" There were exceptions, to be sure, like the first RPGs, but for the most part, story was an afterthought, if there was one at all.

This can be traced primarily to two things: The arcade format of most games, which meant most people weren't playing long enough to get into any story more complicated than "stop the aliens"; and the lack of storage space, which meant that you couldn't fit in many more lines than "save the princess."

As games moved to consoles, though, and technology got better, story started to move up in priority, if slowly at first. Even the first of the modern console RPGs, like Final Fantasy, had pretty bare stories.

Now, though, every game is required to have a story of some sort, even if the game exists solely for the sake of multiplayer havoc.

But even with that, just how important is the story? In some games, it's still pretty much an afterthought. Team Fortress 2 is about two rival construction companies but...well, who cares? For other games, though, story is everything, particularly in RPGs. A lot of games fall somewhere in the middle, though, and a good story can make a mediocre game great. At the same time, good enough gameplay can make up for a crappy story.

Overall, I'd say while a story is important, it's always going to take a backseat to how the game plays, which I personally prefer. I'd rather have a game that plays great even if I don't get the story, than slog through the next Tolkien-level masterpiece of literature that feels like it was programmed by a one armed chimpanzee. But maybe that's just me.

For those that don't know, the Legacy of Kain series mainly follows the murdered-nobleman-turned-vampire Kain as he...well, he's got a few different goals during the games, ranging from "get revenge on the guys who killed me" to "take over the world" to "save the world."

If that sounds like it leads to a very complicated story, well, you'd be right. Legacy of Kain probably has one of the most labyrinthine storylines I've ever played through, involving time travel, alternate time lines, and ancient conspiracies for a start. And the real kicker is, it all makes sense and it's one of the best crafted stories in gaming, despite some of the installments being developed by entirely different teams, which usually spells trouble for a coherent plot.

Additionally, the series, despite originating in a time when voice acting was more of an afterthought than anything, has had fantastic voice acting in all of its installments, with a very talented cast rounding out the characters. The storyline and voice acting are, frankly, enough reason to play the games. That said, the gameplay itself is also great, though it varies quite a bit over the five games.

I first got into the series with the second game, Soul Reaver, which I bought pretty much entirely on impulse. I'd heard of the game, of course, in the game magazines I read, but it wasn't something I was particularly watching or looking forward to. One day, though, I was in the mall with money to burn, and picked it up. It turned out to be pretty good, even if it ended on an infuriating cliff hanger (the result of a deadline, which a part of me can appreciate for obvious reasons). I found myself hooked on the story, and played the next three games to find the story's conclusion (for now, anyway. There's no sequels announced, but I'll bet one's coming).

Which, of course, left a gap: I'd never played the original. So I tracked it down (yay for retro gaming stores!) and started playing it last week. It's a little rougher around the edges than the later games, understandably, but so far it's good. There's some rather inventive mechanics, and it's fun to see the world before it went completely to hell. I may have a more thorough review once I finish it, but for now..."Vae Victus!"

This time, I'm tackling Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, and trying a few new things at that. For one, a week or so ago I invested in a new little toy: A digital video capture for my laptop. After completing the Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time walkthrough, I noticed the publisher added a bunch of Youtube videos to the walkthrough of different sections of the game. So, I figured, what the heck, I'll just do that myself.

I eventually found a good way (for my current laptop hardware, anyway) to get some good quality videos. I'm shooting to just do boss fights for now. Unfortunately, something happened in transferring the videos from my back-up lappy to my internet capable one, which broke my old flash drive. I eventually just uploaded them directly from the older laptop (had to do some digging to find the old 'net adaptor), and got a new flashdrive.

Anyway, Prime 3 is a new challenge as far as walkthroughs go, because unlike the first two games I did, it's distinctly less linear. Whereas, honestly, in God of War or Prince of Persia, most sections boiled down to "Walk over here and kill these dudes," Metroid as a series is based around more freeform exploration. Right now, I've stopped at a point where the path splits in two more or less equal directions, and I forget which one can be completed first. And this is just in the first real level.

Should be a pretty good challenge to figure out how to go from here. And I'm always up for a challenge.

Anyway, yesterday I spotted this article on Kotaku.com, and thought I should highlight it. Every other week, it seems, I see another story about some schmuck blaming his idiotic decisions on something he saw in a video game, so it's nice to see a story where games aren't villainized.

Now, a part of me does take issue with the fact that the family apparently let an 11 year old girl play something like Grand Theft Auto. The game's rated Mature for a reason, and it ain't for kids. Also, yeah, this probably isn't the be-all-end-all rebuttal to the "Games are Evil" crowd.

What it is, though, is a nice little story that runs counter to the common "wisdom" that games corrupt children. Here's a little girl who showed great presence of mind in a dangerous situation, thanks to (admittedly erroneous) knowledge she gained from playing games, and helped pull her family out of the wrecked car.

I know this story isn't going to get any kind of play on national networks (it probably would if the game got blamed for the crash, rather than the rescue), so spread the link around.

On a similar note, anyone out there got stories about how video games helped them in some way? I'd love to hear them.