Dartpaw86: Not so much that, but it's the story. I mean most games I don't mind if they're stand alone like Mario, hell even Elder Scrolls and Fallout don't require to play earlier games to enjoy them.
But with certain games, like Myst for example, it's an ongoing story that ties together. Like reading a series of novels, I read book 1 and 2, but 3 and 4 are almost impossible to get... should I skip them and read 5 despite the fact I missed so much context between books?
Agreed. If I'm missing part of a narrative I won't continue/skip. Golly, for that matter, I don't even like missing out on the "nods" and nuances title to title in franchises with little to no narrative continuity.
My time with the Ar Tonelico series ended on this very note. The elbow work one had to commit to in order to complete the narrative gaps in the series (research online necessary, not every installment even got localized) put me off entirely. Despite the last installment looking pretty decent, I'll likely never be enticed in all honesty.
Now, in more recent history it hit me with the Star Ocean franchise. Loved Star Ocean 1-3 (yep, I LIKED 3--LOL). However I never got to 4 and would LOVE to pick up 5 but it just doesn't feel right despite knowing that they are relatively standalone (with writing that wouldn't exactly make sense even if you did play each entry thoroughly).
This is a contemporary problem as far I see it. Games sporting so much content over trilogies and what have you was not nearly as common in the generations of yesteryear. One would need to make gaming their second job to keep up with everything nowadays.