So how is this series?

Does it actually have good gameplay, story and characters? Is it worth getting into?

>>3797837 (OP)
bad. literally 'indie' slop with an expensive price for what it is

>>3797837 (OP)
Tries to be something like Redwall or Lugaru/Overgrowth in tone. Fails at it.

>>3797837 (OP)
>Gameplay
Not really, every Little Tail Bronx game is mid in the gameplay department.
>Story
Yeah the story is pretty good, very character-focused.
>Is it worth getting into?
Eeehhh... the LTB franchise definitely has a lot of love poured into it but that's all I can say about it.

>>3797872
yeah, pretty much a slop since it never evolved into anything other than
standard TB tank combat -> social links

It's pretty charming but not worth what they charge for it. 2 and 3 are asset flips with a little new content.
Gameplay is passable, they never get very hard but it's not an autobattler either. Main issue is repetition, especially in 2. Despite having a decent core it doesn't go far with it.
Character-plot interfacing suffers because someone can die in every chapter, main events get written very neutrally so they can proceed no matter state your team is in. Most of their characterization is exclusive to intermission events between pairs, which requires multiple playthroughs to view all of them.
I liked the story itself, but some people find it divisive because the tone shifts dramatically in 2 and 3. 1 reads more like a grounded, gritty war story, while 2 and 3 have rapidly escalating stakes, technology, and a few asspulls.
I'd give 1 a pirate and see what you think, it's not that long.

one thoroughly mediocre game and 2 really bad ones propped up by furries who need more misery porn and child death because they're fucking degenerate weirdos

>>3798183
Despite the tonal shift in 2 & 3, how do you view the story as a whole?
Do 2&3 even warrant existing? Does it feel like a complete end, and even a necessary end?

>>3798340
Real.
Sadgooners and child mutilation fetishists shall face a grand contempt.

>>3798183
>2 and 3 are asset flips
I'm tired of pretending asset flips are bad as a blanket term.

>>3798579
The funny thing is that most sequels are asset flips, people just aren't aware of it. Different games from the same company can also be partial asset flips.
Re-using assets is 101 of game development.

>>3798575
1 could be standalone. It leaves a few unanswered questions but resolves the conflict it started.
2 was filler. It introduces a couple characters and terms important in 3 but most of the game is spinning its wheels. 3 gets back on track, answers the loose ends from 1 and brings a final end to the story of the tank. I enjoyed it as stupid fun thanks to the characters and ideas, but I wouldn't say it's well crafted.

>>3798692
I started up Fuga 1 based off this post.
Combat feels fairly tough. Feels like I'm constantly on the hinge of being advised to use the soul cannon or the kids getting injuries/fear/anxiety

>>3798579
>>3798587
Persona 4 was an asset flip of Persona 3 but at least it brought new characters and has a whole different vibe.
This is the type of asset flip people liked, not this one

>>3797837 (OP)
I enjoyed Fuga at first but the combat got way too repetitive for me. I like that they tried to make it strategic but after a few chapters the game didn't really have anything new to show aside from the bosses and just dragged the levels out with the enemy encounters long past the point where I was having fun. By the time I finished it I had no desire to play the sequels, so my take is: it's just OK. 6/10