Tales Of Xillia 2 Will Summarize Tales Of Xillia

By Spencer . September 3, 2012 . 1:25am

imageI don’t know why anyone would want to jump right into Tales of Xillia 2 without playing Tales of Xillia, but Namco Bandai will summarize the events for newcomers.


Tales of Xillia 2 will have an easy to understand digest movie that explains the previous game’s world and story. Tales of Xillia takes place in Liese Maxima while Tales of Xillia 2 is set in a technologically advanced world called Elenpios.


Many characters from Tales of Xillia, like Leia in the screenshot, return as playable characters in Tales of Xillia 2. Ludger, the protagonist, is a new character that Tales series producer Hideo Baba designed so players feel like a hero.

Read more stories about & on Siliconera.

  • Tales_of_Master

    That’s a great addition for new comers, although I’m not sure why would anyone buy the game if they never played the first. Now give me my cameo battle.

  • XypherCode

    For RPGs in general, I think playing the first game is more practical and recommended.

    • keithmaxx

      Yes. People will miss out on a lot of background on the returning main characters. Personally though, I believe most will be missing out on Millia. ^^

    • Daniel Morandi

      Yeah even if the second game were a precuel you will notice gameplay changes and other things in most games.

  • $733987

    On a side note, I once read an article on a gaming blog that recommended playing the sequels of RPGs games even if you’ve never played the first, simply because the battle/gameplay system would usually be better than the first game. I face-palmed and deleted that site from my bookmark posthaste.

    Why would anyone play an RPG and ignore the Role-playing (i.e story) aspect?

    • M’iau M’iaut

      But outside of the .hacks, I can think of few if any sequels where the story is an immediate continuation where there was not a means to review the story. Even in series where the world is the same, the sequel usually tells its own tale.

      Yakuza had an event movie replay function, Shadow Hearts 2 described events that might not have been experienced by a player in SH1, and Lunar2 referenced events that were post-Lunar1. In all instances, a player of the story sequel can enjoy the later games without needing to play the first.

      Look at something like Neptunia or Rorona; major changes were made throughout sequels to correct weaknesses in mechanics or structure. You can enjoy the later games far more because questionable gameplay decisions do not get in the way. I suspect this is what the author was speaking of.

      • Grenalie

        They explain the gist of the story but you’ll miss most of the side info, character backgrounds and references so as a result you won’t enjoy it as much as someone who played the first game; even if the second game tells an entirely new story the first game’s story might still be worth playing but it’ll be harder to go back and enjoy the first game as you’re used to the improved gameplay in the sequel.

      • $733987

        Oh, no. Do let me clarify. Firstly, the sequels of RPG games that were mentioned weren’t just limited to direct sequels. They also included spiritual sequels. Games like the Final Fantasy series, Persona series, Dragon Quest series, you get the idea. There are some lesser known examples that I will not name, cuz’ these popular titles not only suits my argument best, they are also titles that people would be more familiar with.

        Next, in the case of direct sequels where the setting of the story is the same world (Final Fantasy XIII series, Legend of Heroes series), even if the story is a standalone (Record of Agarest War series, .Hack + .Hack G.U + .Hack Link series), the article singled out the fact that each of the subsequent games usually have a better gameplay or battle system than the previous, and so there was no reason to play the previous games.

        And therein lies the source of my distaste. Is the battle and gameplay system the only reason to play RPGs? What about the story? Just like you have mentioned, a player is able to enjoy a game even if he doesn’t get all of the references in a game. I would know, because some times, I play a sequel before the original. But just because the sequels usually have better gameplay than the first, does that mean they would also have better stories? Do you remember hearing about game writers refusing to do a sequel to a game because they felt the story already has a nice conclusion? The inevitable fandisk usually ends up becoming a great source of complaints from the fans, who were the ones who demanded for it in the first place.

        And here is my biggest concern. What if the story of the sequel sucks? Isn’t that the most important aspect of an RPG, seeing as how all RPGs have a higher “story development” to “gameplay development” ratio, meaning that the game spends more time unraveling the story than experiencing new gameplay elements. Plenty of games stop introducing new gameplay elements before the game’s story reaches the mid-way point. Sure, the game might be fun to play, but is there anyone in this world who would enjoy the battle system so much that they would play an RPG to completion, even if they seriously hated the story from the first hour? It’s like being one of the companions of the Hero. You have decided to support the Hero in battles because you enjoy the fights, even though you have doubts in the Hero’s conviction. When the world is saved and your name forever etched in the sands of time as one of the legendary heroes, you shrugged nonchalantly and decide it is time to find another Hero to support and continue fighting somewhere else. So, why is this guy not playing an MMORPG instead?!

        On the other hand, what if the story of the prequel is good, yet burdened by a frustrating battle system? For me, Final Fantasy XIII comes to mind. See, the battle system isn’t very good in my opinion, and a player spends a fair amount of time in battles instead of just purely experiencing the story (cutscenes). So in this case, would you have continued playing the game to completion, even if it was just to rush straight to the ending? My answer is… no. I am ashamed to say that I had to return the ps3 to a friend at chapter 11 (where the game finally stops being linear!), and so I had to play FFXIII-2 without completing the prequel. T_T But that’s why I can safely say it would have being better if I had completed FFXIII first. When I reach the point where Lightning revealed the ending of the previous game, I couldn’t understand what was going on. And mind you, I’ve watched all of the digest recap videos before starting. I can tell you that while the narrator was telling me how they saved Cocoon, I felt no excitement whatsoever. All I wanted to do was to start playing FFXIII-2.

        Anyway, it was never my intention to raise doubts on whether or not the players can enjoy the sequel (whether it be gameplay or story or both) without experiencing the prequel first. And if you already enjoy the sequel, then playing the prequel after that shouldn’t affect your affection for the sequel, even if the prequel sucks. I just wanted to point out that avoiding a game just because its gameplay sucks is something I can’t agree with, especially in an RPG where the real attraction is the story. I love Ys I+II (a.k.a Ys Chronicles) just as much as Ys 7, for example. I wouldn’t mind it if the players at least tries the game before quitting halfway through, instead of outright avoiding it without giving it a chance.

        P.S This also goes for non-RPG games. Have you heard about Specs Ops? It was brought to my attention in a video analysis over at Penny-Arcade. Short version is, it is an FPS with a great story, except it’s not fun. Sure, it is not relevant to this debate seeing as how it’s not a sequel or prequel, but well, I think story is more important in these genres.

  • Nitraion

    Hmm jude already confirmed that leaves millia

    • ┬áHe sure took a level in spikiness.

      • Nitraion

        Lol last year he was complain with the look like “just another NPC” if i remember XD
        Well maybe he go to salon and spent hair gel like crazy…

  • Learii

    they should make Ludger talk in the game as well

  • I will play Tales of Xillia when Namco will release the game into the west. At the moment I don’t know proper Japanese and therefor I cannot properly play the game.

  • personablaze

    This is cool but,I’m still gonna buy the first one when it comes out here in the west,The tales of series is amazing a I’m not letting one of these games pass me buy!

  • That’s nice and all, but I’d rather still like to play the first one when it heads my way.

  • Xillia 1 was a such terribly rushed Tales mothership title… (even the creator admitted it was rushed for the Anniversary Event)… There is really 0 reason to play Xillia 1 at this point now they have a summary of it in Xillia 2… Seriously Xillia 1 was so lacking in more than one ways, the only good part of it was the battle imo.

  • btw, the first game was hardly memorable at all… I beated it the first week it came out, and by now already forgot most of it because it didn’t make the impression of Vesperia or Graces F on me. Hell… I remember Abyss and Legendia (both from playing the PS2 version) better than Xillia and that was like 8 years ago or something…

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos