Feature: I Played Kingdom Hearts for the Very First Time, Here's What I Liked and What I Didn't

I haven’t played this for donkeys but I remember getting stuck jumping through trees and couldn’t get any further.

I'm probably in the minority but I didn't like it. First and foremost, the gameplay is a bit rubbish and don't even talk to me about the story. The thing for me is that the whole premise was Final Fantasy meets Disney but you spend most of your time fighting random nonsense and only briefly interacting with said Disney and FF characters.

Sorry everyone but I just don't like it

Who doesn't love seeing Ursula's glitched out eyes during her boss fight lol.

Jokes aside, I really like KH1, KH2 and BBS the most in the series.

Welcome to the fandom! (:
May your heart be your guiding key!

You're probably okay to just stop here. It's pretty much all downhill from the 1st game. I know people love the 2nd but I've never been able to finish it. The story just becomes nonsensical and a mess. There are plenty of other RPGs worth trying imo.

Well if you hated The Little Mermaid world then it's a different kettle of fish in KHII. For me it was for the worst, it was super naff

You're certainly not wrong on anything you say. It is a good jumping on point for people usually intimidated by RPGs as it is quite simple to play. The story is nuts however and the final boss completely mental. I enjoyed it even though I never fully understood the battle system. As you say the Disney aspects carry you through and let's not forget the superb music.

I was not interested in the series much but it having convoluted story and ridiculous side stuff kept me completely off for sure.

"Generally speaking, I've always found it hard to engage with RPGs, which I tend to put down to how long they take to play, and their often complex fantasy worlds that, to my mind, are quite cookie-cutter."

For people who's not a fans of RPG especially with long playthrough, I think RPG's with short playthrough are better to play than KH 1. And I have some suggestions:

• Parasite Eve 1: my 1st playthrough was 8-9 hours
• Ys Origin: my 1st playthrough was 10-12 hours
• Ys: Oath in Felghana: my 1st playthrough was 12-14 hours
• Vagrant Story: my 1st playthrough was 18-20 hours

I personally enjoyed KH 1. The game has interesting story, fun gameplay, and great music. But i totally understand why some people have a mixed bag with the game especially with the story.

You don't know the true pain of Ursula until you've fought her on the PS2 version where you can't skip cutscenes.

@Enuo FFX has a similar issue and that was never fixed even in the HD versions (at least on console)

KH would be vastly better without the gummi ship. I’ve never once enjoyed any segment with it.

KH1 is the best one my opinion, because it is just a light romp through Disney worlds tied together by a sill but sweet coming of age story intended to be followed by humans. The incomprehensibility of the sequels is memed on to no end but it actually has to be seen to be believed.

I was told by a couple of people not to try the franchise, I like Disney but I've only played one Final Fantasy game. They said it wouldn't line up properly, I really like Disney but it just looks kind of off and that's without knowing the non-Disney characters are. It's probably even more off for actual Final Fantasy fans.

@LowDefAl Just thinking about that long unskippable yunalesca cutscene is giving me PTSD

I tried 1 on PS2 not long after it came out. Then on PS4 a few years back to see if I could get it in to it a second time. Long story short it's just not for me unfortunately

I loved the games as a kid but i feel they have aged badly.

They're really not hard to follow, outside of maybe the mobile games stuff, and not messy anymore now that they're all bundled up in collections. Just play them in the intended order and it makes sense. Whether you like the story being told in these games is another matter. But it has a lot of great moments and it's easy to get invested in the characters. Add to that, genuinely fun action combat and worlds to explore, and amazing music and you get a good ongoing series

I honestly think 1 is my least favorite just cuz of the simple (and clean) story it had. The other games give it that "nomuras wild ride" reputation which I personally love. But to give 1 credit, it had the most fun exploration for a long while till 3 finally surpassed it. It had a good amount of interactivity and verticality that pretty much every other game, except maybe dream drop distance, didn't have

I think the first has a lot of charm, but KH2 is far superior game overall.

@Yousef- It's probably the power of Disney's marketing then, I've seen that franchise across so many Disney stores/the PSN and assumed it must be a massive franchise. Then I asked people and they said to stay away from them, you know your stuff so I'll take the advice. I've so rarely seen them mentioned on here too, I know people love Final Fantasy and I love Disney so I thought super fans would love those games. The more I look at the screenshots the character with the brown hair looks awkwardly placed there. Like if one of my Fromsoft characters landed in Palworld.

I've played everything there is to play in the KH franchise and love most all of it. I'm not sure what the entire convoluted story comments are all about. It wasn't convoluted at all to me. Not sure of some of the people saying that even played the games, or if they just heard from others that it's convoluted after the first one.

Strongly recommend continuing with at least KH2 - It was brilliant. Series has nosedived for me since (for the most part) but still loved the second

I started it like 2 years ago, still haven’t finished it 🤣

@CWill97 i think ship segments suck in all these types of games, another one is ratchet & clank for example

I didn't have any interest when this came out because I never played Final Fantasy, and although I liked Disney movies as a kid I was a grown adult when it came out. But there was a demo of it in the Playstation magazine (how I miss those) so I gave it a try and got hooked. Funny story, about a week after the game came out, a friend called me up and asked me to go out for drinks. I told him I couldn't, because I had to help Winnie the Pooh find his honey. Never heard the end of it after that, until a few months later when the same guy proudly told me he found the honey.

It's one of the most overhyped series imo. Disney pretty much carries the game, take out and replace any Disney related content and this series would fail to sell a couple million.

I played Kingdom Hearts when when it came out in 2002. I was 12. I SAW final fantasy characters and I was hooked

@carlos82 it’s disappointing when you don’t like a game most others do. That’s how I felt about persona 4 golden on the vita which everyone was raving about.

I liked the music but apart from that really didn’t see what the fuss was about. Each to their own!

@UltimateOtaku91 That really makes no sense at all. The games were literally developed around the Disney stuff. You're creating complete strawman arguments.

@UltimateOtaku91 The game selling point is Square x Disney. If you took one of them out then it wouldn't be Kingdom Hearts anymore.

This was a great article! Thanks for this one. Always been on the fence about playing Kingdom hearts. I’ve been interested but just haven’t pulled the trigger.

I could never get into this series.
I'm not really a fan of Disney, except for the short films, from the 40-50:s.
The characters lacks the personality of the cartoons. The mix just don't work for me...

Likes

• Disney characters
• First installment concept

Dislikes

• Organization XIII , Nobody, Unversed Nonsense
• Convoluted storyline
• The micro prequels to connect between first, second and third installment.

When I first played it or helped someone play it (to a point, didn't beat it, but got through a fair few worlds, the game is probably my thing I just have to sit through it and understand all the PS2 era design, which I do like but even I know how awkward that era of games is but love the experimentation, the gameplay of this era compared to the modern era (strafe, and shoot, cover that's not that much better then those introducing and adapting to cover in different ways, too much going on of safe animations for melee/magic) with the bland dumbing things down and making the worlds less exciting to play in with boring movesets for humans/animals and anything anthropomorphic and worlds being less interactive unless it's a sandbox survival game or oddities like Echoes of the End on occasion) as I'm always playing older games just not ones like Kingdom Hearts, to me I was like hmm this is a bit awkward but charming.

30 hours is reasonable for that era I think, not just if getting confused at times, but just in general. Kingdom Heart iosn't as back and forth linear RPGs pathetic to grind at least that's for sure. I've played some of those and they are atrocious.

I think Kingdom Hearts worlds are sizeable for the time to offer what they can, they are magical and creative while trying to fit in with what Disney wanted.

I still enjoy the scale of Spyro worlds, I think the 2nd/3rd game have too much errands/minigames but the 1st game while some levels could be bigger (even if despite hardware limits) I enjoy many showing off their sky towering trees, or particular islands and most closed off levels less exciting which happens more in the other entries or most games. Seeing the skybox/islands is more appealing.

But anyway.

The gameplay is hit and miss, the menu approach I think is fair, it isn't a bad thing, it's different but I kind of like it, the key blade, the xp, the items, where to go can vary for sure, the combat isn't bad, it is fair for what Square was trying to do at the time, and kind of why I appreciate how Xenoblade or others do it too but it's 'still get hit' but your making menu choices for attacks/support is still awkward the lack of real time avoiding things and still targeting, at least with Xenoblade X, can't say for 1 to 3 as not played 3 yet have a copy of it).

I think the menu/turn based that way but real time in animations is fair. But has other things to access the menu for if need be, it's a fair system.

The worlds are small but like any PS1/PS2 worlds are still magical, I don't need big scale worlds and some boring bland environments to walk in, go to shops, talk and be very empty unless intentional, Kingdom Hearts small scale levels make sense and don't feel as empty or as quest bland compared to 99% of other games, but I haven't played 3, I have collection and 3 (not the combined one, I'll get to them all one day), I need worlds that are small and packed with exciting creativity. Or gameplay interactions if it's a platformer with compelling level design to use items with.

Part 2: So I don't know about the laughing about the new Elliott game at all. It looks good to me, but my expectations aren't everyone else's, I am either fair or more brutal depending how uncreative I think devs are. I don't know all players think but even then I thought it hiarliosu the backtracking of Portal to be what it was, Vita app reworked and Dualsense, no dual screen, no input from devs but cloud, how bland, so Indies to me laughing or annoyed at it, I agree with. If I was an Indie I'd be annoyed. Not at the lack of a handheld, that's fine, 1st or 3rd parties not having to work on something to shift development to sure, but the lack of any developing for it for dual screen or any other aspects IF THEY WANTED TO, due to how bland it's supposed to be and not interface with at all. It's pathetic. That's the level of hilarious for me. Elliott looks fine.

I think E33 is ok, but overrated, it has fair elements as a JRPG format game made by a French studio, it's still has quality no doubt, I've enjoyed many AAs or European games, but it didn't impress me at all. It's combat is fair, I think JRPGs having no dodge or other aspects was always stupid, so it addressing that was great. But the world/premise seemed rather eh to me. Sea of Stars is probably fine, but like when I was playing Dream Tactics I enjoyed what it offered, was awkward at times but I respected it, even as someone not into card based approaches, the cycling of what ones I wanted in that moment but the worlds and characters were good. Sea of Stars I haven't played but it looked fine. I don't have much to say about it. I've not played many RPGs like it that's why I compared it to Dream Tactics even if they aren't that similar.

The Disney stuff can take or leave but I think they do a good job with it.

The Gummi Ship is my thing so I have to say more about it sorry article writer/anyone reading this, I like ship segments, not turret segments though, but I do like alternate gameplay segments, but most people don't, they want to play as characters the whole game and not vehicles, while I like vehicles as to me I find playing as characters with the same gameplay all the time boring. If there is new mechanics/items/gear to use (not in the potions/new weapons RPG way), I get excitied, it's why Zelda games are fun, each new item/mechanic is fun, puzzles or combat in any game I am allowed to use it that way. Spyro breathes, Ratchet gadgets or weapons. It's why I don't mind Ratchet/Clank for combat/exploration or puzzle solving either, or the puzzle gadgets, or platforming.

Part 3:
It's why while the modern moments in Echoes of the End were hit and miss the old school stuff was so much fun as games are just dialogue/exploration and the gameplay is so boring. The dialogue/'puzzles' in the Last of Us were more boring then the more exciting balance in Uncharted. SO yeah I enjoy Uncharted no just because it's an action adventure movie with an explorer/treasure hunter, but because the puzzles, combat and down time moments work. In other games I find them bland.

if were just talking linear games, open worlds have their own amount of issues for me.

As usual people who hate vehicles, or don't understand it or don't care for shoot em ups. Yeah well there is a reason I find playing as humans and going to boring locations boring, I'm not immersed by that, I am by gameplay.

I find on foot gameplay boring most times unless they mix it up so I'm fine with vehicle segments. It's why I find modern Call of Duty boring, even besides it's other issues.

While I'm buying up every PS3/360/Wii and older shooter, each with cool mechanics, or fair settings, or whatever.

Part 4:
Titanfall 2 didn't have much but even it's 2 best levels were great, or going for the mech, it had enough modern/but in-between other stuff. Splatoon 1 to 3 does in it's way, the grapple in 2 isn't much but the use of it is fun.

It's why when I play a Mario game I go if only I could use the power ups for longer and not lose them but use them for interacting interactivity in the stages, in the 3D ones sure you can but even still, as to me the power ups for level design moments is the best part.

While in other games that are niche, popular, part of a trend or not, it is more the core so I get more interested in them.

I want to see what devs can do, what levels they design, what they program, animate, etc. not just recreate basic things from books, or reality, or surface level fantasy/scifi, or surface level contemporary and not alter it. It's just boring. I can have a bigger imagination then that and I want to see it done, but I don't and get disappointed by how boring people really are. Until the moments when people are that creative and I'm glad to see it.

What imagination they have, unfortunately not enough apparently if everything has to be just go from place to place solving problems but it'[s just combat/talking, you can make characters do anything, but apparently not act on it in gameplay, that's why I find 'games' boring. I'm not playing a game to play a movie or some book or some person's experience. I'm playing to see what adventure with interactivity they went on, what their moves are.

It's like saying yeah some people exaggerated their stories, but yes I want to play that not their more bland version of the story. XD

Or focus on just the emotional or other bland moments. I don't care about that. I care how their moves were, their strategies, not how they felt or that they solved their problems. In a TV show/movie maybe, but even then it's because the events are exciting or the comedy is good also.

I hate modern games are 99% to 100% on foot and just bland combat/dialogue/quests, even outposts, where are the modifiers, oh just layouts/enemy patrols, boring. I can have more imagination then that, so to me I get bored with them, if there is only the way to go about them via combat/stealth and that is it, why would i want to do 100s more? I'd want traps, or poison gas, or if not environment causes, challenges to motivate me to want to do it under a time limit or only use one weapon type, or only defeat armoured enemies. Give me a reason to care.

This is why arcadey design was so much fun, not look how realistic or cinematic it is, that's not exciting to me at all. I find it a mimic of reality or films/bland game design. It's not fun, it's copy paste in open worlds.

Older games had padding but I respected it if it was them taking their time out to create an entire other game design environment to add a vehicle or other characters, or a puzzle envrionment they just put elsewhere in the level and moved the camera to it. Tha'ts impressive and cool.

Ratchet had spherical worlds, the objects/enemies that way is impressive, Mario Galaxy had them on a different scale and was enjoyable too.

Crush and Super Paper Mario had 2D 3D mechanics in different ways, one a puzzle game the other an RPG platformer (as much as the series is per entry and changes things)

Part 5:
Ratchet had a lot of experimentation I respect, while Spyro had it too but in less fun errand ways of minigames I find. I still memorise how to do them, but it doesn't mean I find them fun either.

Doesn't mean I go oh guns, I go oh gadgets because I care more about those things, or moves a character has to navigate a level or the environment being particular to get around, how do they do it, wall jump do they use an item/gadget, how they go about doing it.

Gran Turismo since 4 (even 7 has them just bad progression, other then that I respect the game more then most others having 2 event types and being bland, simulating cars and brands/track licenses is boring and repetitive to me, not realistically exciting just bland and forgettable) had driving challenges and they were a lot of fun to have cones, fuel limiting or other things to set rules or them. Juiced 2 had 4 drift event types, that's effort to give rules like that. That's why I like old gaming arcadey or transitioning era, PS3/360+ was boring and Wii/PSP/PS2 ports were more exciting, not modern gaming's blandness and empty worlds, but scale is not impressive if they don't fill it with something exciting, and no errands and textures of different worlds/characters is not filling it with things

Back on topic with Gummi Ship:
Kingdom Hearts having the Gummi ship was awkward at first like any vehicle segment but I enjoyed it. It fits the journey they go on, it fits the magic of Disney. I don't see a problem and think oh it has to just be a cutscene, or oh it's repetitive and boring and want to get back to the bland on foot playing as a human with the Disney characters or any other game with bland boring on foot gameplay. I am ok with games mixing it up. I get bored of the same gameplay if it doesn't add a new item, each world is not compelling enough if the game world isn't enjoyable to navigate.

I play games different to what I enjoy from watching people on an adventure versus playing an adventure, I need more going on or I won't play a game. Simple as that.

Part 6:
From my point of view if a game is just architecture/textures/terrain, and characters, why should I care. It's not an attention span thing, it's what makes each world unique as a game design/game dev thing, nothing oh ok then thanks.

Yeah mazes can vary in quality.

I think the characters are fun enough, general dialogue and such, that can be the case in many games, even if i prefer the world/;gameplay to do the talking and playing as a character alone, but some parties are good. Voices, character design or otherwise. I'm more for different voices then more generic ones.

There is a reason i can play many shooters and ignore their voices I don't care how serious, gruff or otherwise. I know what state the world is in, most dialogue in them is typical, and I care about the mechanics/worlds and not what they have to say/how they say it XD

Playing Alice Madness Returns I had so much fun with it's dark/interesting presentation, fun use of mechanics for such a small but interesting mix of gear and the level design was pretty fair. I had a blast with it.

I think Kingdom Hearts story is fine, it may interconnect sure with the Final Fantasy side, other Disney worlds and other aspects of the world it tries to tie in (like anything that wants to be big or showcase so much but struggles to handle all sides of what it's bringing up), but even still. That varies because of all the handhelds and consoles it jumps to, to try and get a game out on them. Or whatever worlds. I haven't even played them and think that's the case. I may be off but I think it factors in somewhat.

Having the original voices is a nice touch, you never do know if they will so it's great to hear that.

Good right up.

I will say, I think the other stuff in Kingdom Hearts isn't as bad (though some factions, politics and more to add depth I am sick and tired of in media, I don't care about politics or military or others, can they not think up something else? Apparently not, even if more fantasy versions of such things of whatever councils and such, I just don't find it exciting at all, it's depth I find mostly boring, sometimes it works but most times it's very boring).

Always this higher power nonsense bores me in media. So Kingdom Hearts having the other villains and why the heartless (not that I understand why but can probably guess) and more even if main villains, sure but I can see why people just want to experience the Disney characters in a game and the rest over complicates and isn't as exciting to people.

That and without it being a 'just play the other Disney games or party games' when you know having the interconnection of worlds is good enough.

Yes you'd have some regions with that, or you need something familiar, but if the same frameworks of that in a fantasy/meideval way or modern way, and no spin on it or just focusing on the characters going against others with some motivation, why should I bother?

Even if every day life can be boring, sometimes i just enjoy comedies more as the dialogue has to work there. While adventure stuff over time I just stop caring due to what frameworks they use and I don't care for the emotion/themes and the villains are usually boring and the world is filled with boring factions and political systems that are just boring.

I don't care about the contemporary life themes either, I care about the comedy dialogue. That's it.

Message bounce off me because I've heard them enough. So I care more about the structure/tropes and how to use them, not the messages/culture they are presenting at all anymore. I get into behind the scenes type care then I do the in universe itself if the in universe isn't compelling enough.

I want them to just go on an adventure, not all this other stuff.

It's why with games i care for gameplay, with TV shows/movies sure, but with games they can take you anywhere and i can play in it, but no we get the same book/movie/TV show logic and I'm kind of sick of it.

Sure puzzle games and others exist, but still.

I remember playing through a few of the games like...9 years back in preparation for Kingdom Hearts 3 and in my highly personal opinion, the original game is definitely the worst one(and holy ***** has it aged like a glass of milk) in terms of gameplay followed by Dream Drop Distance and Birth by Sleep(slightly better than the original game but not by much).

Kingdom Hearts 2 is probably the best game in the series followed by Kingdom Hearts 3.

Part 2:
Even racing, sometimes I don't mind the motorsport side (I enjoy motorsport films, but sometimes i don't care for the business politics, I just care about the races or the other in moment stuff, I don't care how the team feels and what not, complications do happen but even still, it's why I'm not always that fussed by no racing game stories whether business related or street racing or whatever), but other times i just want rules for different events, not realism, and brands because uncreative people or players

I want to just drive a car, but utilize fun random rules for events/modes.

Have animals be platformer exciting characters with using their tales, the claws, anything else. I'd play as a bar of soap and just stick to walls, split/attach, have weight for pressure plates, split to fit into gaps or anything else. I can think up that and more for a bar of soap, bubbling for whatever, or even more creative of using whatever items/powers to slide or convert to water, or melt/reshape to fit into things, that or even further unrealstic of power ups, like a laser eyed bar of soap, but notice how i still kept it somewhat believable with how soap would be reshaped or react, before I went to laser eyes and other further random things, that's the point. That's gameplay first mentality even for an object.

Not generic animals. Humans that can do whatever, but oh we get them dumbed down as generics not these acrobatic types or any other skills, just generic climbing/fighting and talking, collecting, whatever else.

Well justify it with puzzles, what items, we aren't getting a can manipulate their body to stretch or slide under things or whatever else. Or mundane items like Pitfall Lost Expedition in a metroidvania. We get Uncharted like stuff, or the odd Tomb Raider approach of skills, and guns, but the guns allow for not just combat, but exploration unlocking or filling in gaps (if they cared to do that with bridges and more that way, but they don't, oh well).

A fair balance of that adventure. Sometimes it happens, sometimes or most times not. But we can't have that apparently. Sigh. Not in the modern era. Realism or TV show/movie/book logic only. Has to be familiar to people and their stuck media view points, forgetting spinning it off, unless it's culture, I'd rather care about gameplay, not dialogue thanks. Or whatever stuck in their mind of how an IP already did it.

I'm fine with the main crew and some odd villains with their motives but not always a big boss commanding them or too many layers of villains, I just don't care, the drama/tension doesn't interest me, the emotional motivation garbage and they aren't that exciting, but have to be this secretive boss and wait a long time to reveal them and so on and they aren't even that exciting no matter what tidbits or actually seeing them in the end anyway.

With games I just ignore it and if the gameplay is fun sure. Not the boring themes/dialogue I'm going to ignore anyway. The messages don't appeal to me. I've heard them 1000s of time at this point. This is why I focus on gameplay first. Gameplay substance or music sound design substance not dialogue substance I don't even care about.

Or bland worlds reflecting our own then being more gamified.

Was going to reference something else but cut that bit.

Some premises can work without over expanding the universe and other villains who aren't even that compelling.

Great opinion article. I'm kind of in the same boat, that I've been interested in the series, but never got to play it. The story over the series is intimidatingly complex. But I feel attracted to the simple combat and the linear structure.

@GirlVersusGame You don't really need to know anything about FF to enjoy the games in my opinion as the story doesn't really tie into those games at all, and got dropped in later entries.

some characters appear, but its not like you need to have played the games to grasp who they are. Think of them more like cameos in films. You might now know the reference but can still enjoy the role.