Topic: Persona 5 Strikers

yes I know i had to deal with that crap in Persona 3 for PSP. Not my first rodeo with Persona games.

Im saying is that Id love to jump into Persona 5 Strikers because it doesnt have the time schedule time limit but I would be confused with the characters in the game since I never played Persona 5.

That and Im busy with Persona 4 anyway.

@urrutiap
I think it’s not really confusing. While true, the game does start off with characters you’re not familiar with, you wouldn’t be familiar with those characters in Persona 5 either until after you spent some time in conversations with them. Which, you’ll spend time in conversations with them in P5S. So the way I see it there’s really no difference. You’ll be familiar with them enough within the first hour or two.

Not to say playing P5 is a bad idea. I just don’t think it’s necessary or that you should feel it’s a requirement or that you’re going to be confused if you don’t.

@urrutiap No, I'd recommend playing P5 first. You'll gradually unlock all the characters and there's a lot of character development and cool moments that I doubt Strikers has. Besides, it's a sequel, so you'd almost spoil the first game by playing Strikers first.

yes I know that TheJGG. I said Ill have to play Persona 5 first before getting into Srikers.

I also said Im a little busy with old Persona 4 anyway

@TheJGG
You'll gradually unlock all the characters and there's a lot of character development and cool moments that I doubt Strikers

While that’s true, that’s not really anything to be “spoiled” by Strikers. Unless one is to consider a character merely existing to be a “spoiler”. Which I think most normal people when they refer to spoilers they mean like a major plot twist at the end of the game that will get ruined. And Strikers has absolutely nothing to do with the plot of the first game so, ya.

So if it’s just a matter of saying “the ideal preference is to play P5 first, if you want to”, then I agree. But by no means do I think it’s required or needed to avoid spoilers or anything of that nature. You can play in reverse- Strikers then P5, and still enjoy all the character development and unlocks and cool moments, and there’s probably an argument to be made for it enhancing the experience of playing P5 second.

@JaxonH Lavenza technically fits the criteria of a spoilerish character merely being part of the story considering they only show that character in that specific form pretty late into Persona 5 itself

Again, P5 isn't required per se, but it's absolutely recommended since without it a lot of the callbacks that aren't merely surface level stuff will be lost on the player. I think playing P5 before Strikers at the very least will somewhat recontextualize the plot and what's going on

@JaxonH Strikers does spoil a few things, the chapters of Strikers seem to mirror the chapters in Persona 5, so details of certain events from the Persona 5 are dropped quite often in conversation. Newcomers might not remember those details though when they go back and play Persona 5, so it might not be a huge deal, but there are certain things like the death of Haru's father and mementos being merged with the real world that are fairly big spoilers. I don't think it's enough to ruin the experience of Persona 5, but if someone has the option to play that first I would probably recommend it before Strikers. In general it's also nice to understand certain references and inside jokes the characters make.

I would definitely highly discourage playing Strikers before P5. Not that Strikers is impossible to enjoy without that added context but it'll definitely take away a lot from a potential P5 playthrough, with how casually a lot of P5 spoilers are mentioned.

And yes the characters themselves are spoilers as well, considering the buildup to each of their introductions in P5, especially Futaba. And yeah as was mentioned before, Lavenza's existence is a pretty massive spoiler.

@TheFrenchiestFry
I agree with that assessment. It’s not that I think it’s a bad idea or shouldn’t be the recommendation, I just think some people get way too caught up in this kind of stuff and think oh my gosh, I can’t play donkey Kong country tropical freeze because it might have spoiled a pack of bananas in the first game back on SNES! It’s like... it’s fine. You’ll be fine. You can totally play this game first. Will you miss a few references? Sure. Will there be one or two things you see that would have been discovered in P5? Almost certainly. But keep things in perspective. It’s a, “sure, if you want to, and prefer to squeeze every last drop of juice you can get from Strikers... then ya, do that” but not a “omg it’ll totally ruin the game. You NEED to play P5 or you won’t understand anything, the entire plot will be ruined, not only will you not enjoy Strikers, but if you ever do go back and play P5 it won’t even be fun anymore”.

So ya. If you want to squeeze every last drop and get every last reference, then sure. But I wouldn’t skip out on this amazing game just because you haven’t played Persona 5. Especially if it’s one of those situations where, “oh I won’t play this unless I play P5, but I’m never actually gonna get around to that, so I guess I just won’t play either”

I also think a lot of the things perceived as “spoilers” aren’t actually spoilers for those who haven’t played the game. If you haven’t played P5, then you’re not gonna know which characters are in that game or aren’t in that game or when they show up or if they show up... you could see the end boss and you won’t even realize that’s what it is because you haven’t played the game. So it’s still just as much of a surprise if you go back and play it later, because you don’t know until you play it and the surprise happens that, oh! I saw that in Strikers! But it didn’t damage the effect because you didn’t know ahead of time. I think that’s a big mistake a lot of people make having already played a game and knowing a connection, forgetting that someone who hasn’t played the game doesn’t know that connection even exists, and won’t ever know unless they go back, play the other game, see it happen, and then make the mental connection after the fact. But it’s too late to be spoiled by that point- the surprise has already occurred. It’s only after it occurs you realize you’ve seen that before.

I'd say, by all means play P5 if you want. You'll definitely appreciate the game more if you do. That's great. But don't let having not played P5 hold you back from experiencing this incredible game by making the mistake of feeling you "need" to or will suffer any significant detrimental downsides to doing so, particularly if you have no real intentions of playing P5 or aren't currently already playing it.

I’d argue Lavenza is the biggest spoiler of all, especially how it ties into one of the main “reveals” of Persona 5. It would really be anti-climactic playing the games in reverse or just jumping to Strikers. You miss all the little things in the dialogue in story.

As someone who is literally playing Persona 5 Strikers without having played more than the beginning of Persona 5, I can personally attest to the fact that it’s perfectly fine. Nothing “anti climactic” about it.

I think fans have a tendency to overestimate the importance of such things, and tell themselves these neat little connections that they keenly perceive are somehow more important than they actually are. Yes, it’s neat to see. Yes, you’ll appreciate a few things slightly more. No, that’s not going to ruin either game, not even in the slightest. There’s a reason countless people say Witcher 3 is one of their favorite games of all time, despite “missing all the little things in the dialogue in the story” from not playing the first two, and despite there being such an intertwined overarching plot the save data can literally be imported. But I’m willing to bet the people who played all three Witcher games would likewise vehemently insist you’ll “miss so much” if you don’t do what they did and go play 2 100 hr RPGs first. But... it’s not true. Witcher 3 holds its own, as it’s own game, and so does Persona 5 Strikers. Much more so in fact, because there’s no overarching plot. It’s not even remotely close to The Witcher series, and even that was perfectly fine. It’s more like another episode of Scooby Doo, with a new villain and a new conflict and a new set of circumstances for the same beloved characters to unfold.

Any character revealed later in P5 isn’t really “spoiled” just by virtue of being in Strikers, because literally nobody knows they’re in the main game if they haven’t played it in the first place. It’ll still be just as much of a surprise because they don’t know that yet. You do, but they don’t. And even if they did... I don’t think anyone’s going to play P5 for 50-75 hours, with dozens and dozens of different characters, and then in that single moment in the game they’re going to say dang! I saw this character in Strikers and it completely spoiled everything and my 75 hours of gameplay has been ruined”. It’s no different than Xenoblade Chronicles and Xenoblade Chronicles 2. There’s a reveal at the end of XC2, where IF you’ve played the first game, you’ll get a lot more out of that ending than if you haven’t. And it’s good to play XC1 first because of that. Just like it’s good to play P5 first if you can. But by no means is the entire game of XC2 stilted if you miss that one reference and that one scene doesn’t hit as hard. By no means is the entire game of P5S stilted if you miss the reference to one character revealed in the first, or vise versa. It just means one scene doesn’t hit as hard as it could have. Not the end of the world.

I say all this because... that’s me. I’m playing it without having played all of Persona 5. And in fact it’s actually hooking me more than the main game did. So when I hear people say how detrimental it is to not play P5 first, I can’t help but chuckle a bit. Because I’m literally doing exactly that, and the game is amazing. Ironically, I never see first hand accounts of people who play a game and complain they can’t get into it because of references they’re not privy to. I only ever see claims that that is what will happen, despite it never really happening to people. And I’d wager many (if not most) people considering buying P5S who have not played Persona 5 haven’t played it because they don’t have access to it, and therefore aren’t even going to play it afterwards anyways. So any “spoilers” wouldn’t even be relevant anyways. So if the question is, “I haven’t played P5- can I still play and enjoy P5S?”, then the answer is a resounding yes. Play Strikers. There’s a good chance it’ll get you into the series. If the question is, “I’m going to play both games- which should I play first?”, then the answer is most definitely to play P5 first. No reason not to if you’re going to play both anyways.

@JaxonH
For more narrative driven games like P5 and P5S playing in order is essential. For games like DKC or Mario though the plot isn’t based around previous iterations. When Persona 5 is inevitably ported to switch those that have played strikers first are going to spoil the experience of the game just like I did while playing P4G and seeing one scene in Arena spoiling the villain. I’ve not completed Golden so nice then. Why would I?! The mystery was no more!

@GameOtaku
It’s not essential. It’s preferred it possible, recommended even, but not even remotely “essential”. There’s a difference between being narrative driven and being narrative driven with an over arching plot. Scooby Doo is also narrative driven. Doesn’t mean you need to see the previous episode to enjoy the current one.

And when Persona 5 is inevitably ported, the experience will not be “spoiled”. It’s a different story that lasts 50+ hours. It’s not like Strikers is a play by play re-run of Persona 5. It’s got it’s own story. Having one or two things that relate to the previous game isn’t going to “spoil” the previous game. Ok, one character is shown in Strikers that’s revealed in Persona 5... which nobody would even know about if people weren’t shouting it from the rooftops. That hardly constitutes spoiling the game.

In fact, games like this are specifically designed to pull new players into the franchise. To expand the audience. That’s why it exists.

@JaxonH
Yeah but you wouldn’t tell someone to read book 3 of a series without reading the first in the series. You need to have at least some starting point before you jump into something like Persona. The payoff in having played 5/R first compared to going in blind is easily seen.

Myself personally I like to play games in order to get the most out of a narrative. Stand-alone numbered series like Persona and Final Fantasy can be played out of order assuming though that it’s not directly influenced by the other (ex playing FF 7 without 1-6 is fine but playing X2 without X is not as it directly references and spoils major plot points of X). I’m almost tempted to buy a physical switch copy of strikers just to have so I can play immediately after I finish P5 on switch (when it comes). Having one game spoiled by playing another already once was enough for me.

@GameOtaku
Not if the 3 books were a consecutive overarching story. I absolutely would if the three books were three individual stories about the same characters, like Sherlock Holmes movies.

You don’t need to have a starting point to play something like Persona. I’m not saying there isn’t a payoff in doing so. I’m not saying it isn’t recommended. I’m not saying it isn’t better. I’m saying it’s not required, and anyone can absolutely jump into this game without having played Persona 5, and that should even be encouraged to get people into the series. Gatekeeping new players by telling them they can’t enjoy Persona 5 Strikers just because it has the same characters as another game in the series is ridiculous. It’s one thing to say, “I think you’ll enjoy it even more if you’ve played the main game”. It’s quite another to say, “it’s essential- you can’t enjoy this without completing P5 first, it’ll ruin both games if you do”. That’s just nonsense, I’m sorry.

I’m not bashing your preference of how you like to play. And some other people may also share that preference, and in that case, then absolutely go back and play Persona 5 first. But that doesn’t automatically apply to everyone. This game is completely playable as a standalone entry and even as a gateway into the series (as evidenced by the fact I myself am thoroughly enjoying the game without having beaten Persona 5)

@JaxonH
But you will be missing out on a lot of narrative background for these characters and their world. It may be perfectly playable by itself but you are missing out on a lot. If the game gives away the ending to what came before it then why even bother going back to 5? The mystery has already been solved. You can’t just conveniently forget details you’ve already found out about. Oh so this character that was so unassuming is the one to watch out for huh? So that is affecting how we would play the game. That’s why for Atlus to release this on Switch and PC without 5/R is so strange. The anime and manga adaptations gloss over a lot of details, trying to stuff 100s of hours of content into a 24 episode show and you are sure to have cuts to the story (so no don’t watch Corpse Party Tortured Souls to get caught up on Blood Drive because it changes a lot and is not relevant to the plot of BD).

@GameOtaku Even as someone who doesn't like the Persona 5 anime it does actually cover pretty much the entire game in pretty faithful detail with some extra scenarios that show more of the main party outside the Metaverse emulating the slice of life feel of the social sim aspect of the game

It's nowhere near as effective of an adaptation as the Persona 4 anime or the Persona 3 movies to where it would be a great alternative to learning about the story other than playing the game but it does actually do that much that it's at least serviceable if you have literally no other option, including just emulating the game on PC

With P5S from what I've played, so far the actual concrete references to Persona 5 are nowhere near as prevalent as the references to Persona 3 and 4 were in stuff like Arena or Persona Q. It's sporadic and surface level enough for people who haven't played Persona 5 or Royal to get into without much problem, while people with the background knowledge of the game's events will be able to catch more specific callbacks to stuff like Confidant routes, or the scripted social events and other stuff like that

And like Jaxon said, there isn't really a "starting point" when it comes to these games. I think P5S has a good enough standalone feel that won't completely alienate those who haven't played the main entry, while also giving those same people a taste of what the gameplay loop is like in a more condensed format that while missing some key elements of the numbered games, is engaging enough that it will probably pique their interest should they give the other Persona games a try

@TheFrenchiestFry
It’s still rather presumptuous on Atlus part that other platform gamers would buy into this sequel when the main game isn’t even available to them. To me a lesson learned from being burned last time is never to play the direct sequels even if they are spinoffs if you want to experience the games as intended. As I’m writing this I picked up strikers but have no intention of playing it until 5/R is ported to the switch and in the off chance it doesn’t (at this point a port in inevitable given the demand) I’ll just sell the thing.

@GameOtaku Or you can just get a platform that has the game?

I genuinely don't get why you'd expect a predominantly PlayStation/PC exclusive series to just suddenly have a prominent showing on a Nintendo system

Persona is just another example of a series that's largely been associated with other platforms that has occasionally shown up on a Nintendo system, just like series like Metal Gear or Kingdom Hearts

If you were going to buy a platform with the expectation that a series like Persona was going to have a strong showing on it, Switch should've been at the very bottom of your priority list because not only is Strikers a spinoff game but it's only like the third Persona game on a Nintendo console overall

Even despite the "demand" for a port of any mainline game this has literally never played a part in affecting how Persona did on other platforms. In fact even looking at Strikers specifically, the digital version of the game has ended up in the top sellers list on both the PlayStation and Steam stores for weeks at this point and hasn't even reached the top 15 Switch eShop titles at least in Europe. Despite all this talk about how much people have apparently been begging for Persona games on Switch, there's not nearly as many people buying many Atlus games in general on the platform of the ones that have come out, so clearly this demand is only present among a vocal minority. Even of the games eligible for ports frequently listed in Atlus' consumer surveys the ones that actually materialized were Catherine and SMT Nocturne, not one Persona game.

@TheFrenchiestFry
SMT is predominantly a Nintendo series but it has had one mainline on Sony and its remastered on both Sony and Nintendo platforms so I’d say Persona has just a good of a chance if not more so.

If they would port the games demanded they would sell better on other consoles. They honestly cannot be stupid enough to think “if Catherine meets a certain number of sales we will port Persona 5”?! How does that even remotely make good common sense let alone business sense. Catherine is a different beast of a game than Persona. One being a strange puzzle game with some social aspects and the other while having more social aspects is a turn based rpg! It’s like Nintendo saying if we want a new F-Zero to buy the newest Yoshis Cookie!