Sequence of a Prequel and Sequel

[Shinrei_Reheiner]

Uhhh....I don't know how to put this...
Well, let's say that there are 2 VNs and they are a Prequel(past) and a Sequel(future). Both of them are about the same protagonist.

Considering that everything couldn't fit into one VN and that dividing it into 2 is necessary
(maybe due to the VN's filesize getting too big...),
what I want to know is which is better to release first, the prequel then the sequel(to know what happens to the protagonist after the first game,basically an after story.) or the sequel then the prequel(to explain stuff about something in the past that were not clearly stated.) ??

(*Magically warps away*...but fails....)

[Vatina]

Depends on the story you want to tell, I guess? And how you want it to work.

Would it be more interesting and useful to see one part before another? Otherwise I would think that releasing them in chronological order would be the norm?

[Adorya]

It depend on how goes the "main story". Usually the prequel is added to explain part that the reader couldn't grasp (or parts that the author couldn't explain/introduce/use in the main story), also can work as a filler while you do the sequel of the main story, also as a fansucking service when the main story can't have a sequel.

Using the prequel > sequel is also risky since sequel quality is usually worse than prequel, you can do anything prequel storyline wise but you know how the story will end (by the beginning of the sequel) while a sequel might end up not as expected (some readers might think a sequel would have been unnecessary if they liked the end of your prequel)

[sake-bento]

Is it one long storyline that has to get divided, or two separate tales that involve the same character(s), setting, and so on? If it's essentially a continuous storyline, I would definitely like the one that is chronologically first to come out.

[Jake]

Also consider why the reader should continue reading, at any point. (Noting that keeping-reading is a benefit for the reader, being entertained, not just massaging the ego of the writer.)

For example, if you have a story which features a hero with a Dark And Mysterious Past - say, for example, Cowboy Bebop - then his past is an interesting factor throughout the story. It's a hook which catches the reader's attention and gives them an investment of interest in your story, so that they keep reading.

If you then release a prequel story which details the dark past of the protagonist, then the reader will be interested to find out what happened to make the character like he is in the chronologically-later story. Their interest in the character stems from the later story, which motivates them to keep reading the prequel. Elements in the prequel will have special meaning to him, because he sees them reflected in the 'sequel' he saw first.

However, the prequel may well not really work on its own, and not stand alone so well. If a reader comes across the prequel first, then they don't have any interest investment in the character, they won't recognise things in the prequel which influence the character's later behaviour in the sequel, because they haven't seen the sequel yet... so it's not so interesting to them, and they might give up and stop reading. And if they don't, when they get to the sequel, the character no longer has a mysterious past - he has a well-documented and thoroughly explained past! So that element of interest in the sequel is gone, too.



I'm not saying that it's always better to release the sequel part first and the prequel part second. I'm just saying that there's no fixed rule - consider which order is most interesting, which order is most entertaining, and release in that order.

[Wintermoon]

When in doubt, use chronological order. This makes it easier to keep track of events, both in the reader's mind and your own. Out-of-order works are prone to continuity errors.

[PyTom]

The one caution I have is that you do want to make sure both parts are complete works, with a beginning, middle, and end. It's often a better idea to release a larger work than to try to break it up into two parts, and risk leaving people unsatisfied at the break.

[Jo'ogn]

Rumours say, that George Lucas decided to start with Episode 4 of "Star Wars" because it was more likely to be accepted by the public at this time - 1977 where sci-fi was considerably new for the cinemas. So this decision was based on thinking in terms of profit. Watching episodes 1-3 you can tell that much was written at the time of making the films (as it is not clearly supported by the 'original films') - of course meanwhile things had changed making effects technically possible that weren't back 30 years ago.

"Metal Gear 1+2" were games of the early 90s and didn't get much attention until "Metal Gear Solid" on the PS1 in 1997. It took place some four years after MG1+2. It was followed by "MGS 2" (2002) on the PS2 which plays (iirc) another 3 to 6 years after MGS. "MGS 3" (2004) jumped back 30 years into the past, filling more gaps of the (background) story... only to jump ahead into the future again with MGS4 (2008), finishing the line of Kojima's game. As far as i can tell - having only played MGS1-3 - it worked smoothly. But those guys knew how to write a wild story... o_0;


I would say it depends on your abilites to write such a story. How relevant the details (past) are and how you want to introduce them. I sort of have grown tired of 'flash backs' - because they have become so over used in gaming. Esp when the story is reduced to nothing but an 'excuse' for the game play, like in "ego shooters". They don't have stories. They have a 3D engine, lots of weapons and things to destroy. Then they feel the need to come up with some 'excuse' (as opposed to a real story) to justify the pretty pointless slaughter happening in that game.

It is a bit similar in sex based VNs. The main action is explicit sexual activity and they add a sort of justification in shape of some rough 'excuse' (barely a story) to make it ethically more appealing.

If both your VNs can stand for their own, i.e. you can play part 2 without needing part 1. The order shouldn't matter. If you feel it has more to it to reveal the past later. It depends on your dramaturgy skills ( ;

[LVUER]

Since we're talking about creative products, there are limitless variety since people are creative. There is no boundary or fixed rules when we're talking about creativity. But if I see from your case (and if the VN is new, with new unknown author, and new company too), then it all depends on the story itself.

If the prequel part is a stand alone, then the sequence is doesn't matter. If both of them are closely related, then...
1. If the sequel is the continuation of the prequel and people must see the prequel before continuing onto the sequel to understand th plot, then the sequence is prequel-sequel (like .Hack game series, Xenosaga game series, etc).
2. If the sequel part already finished its own plot and the prequel is there only to fill the plot hole, like what's actually happened, the real story, mastermind behind the scene, dark past of the protagonist, etc. (finishing the main story first, then you tell the audience the rest later), then it's sequel-prequel since the prequel is worthless for people that still haven't finished the sequel.

[Shinrei_Reheiner]

Sorry I wasn't able to reply sooner(Trying to learn to color with GIMP and layers...)...

Hmmmm...Looks like it would depend on the story itself and what would be more interesting.
I'll keep this in mind if I ever make a story that would actually reach that long.^^;;
Arigatou gozaimasu.Thank you for the replies.^w^

(*Magically warps away*...but ends up in an unknown area...--;;)