I enjoyed them but personally not as much as the original game. I realize it and myself are leftovers of a bygone era but there was much more imagination and whimsy in the OG game compared to the new remakes. The storyline changes, like I get why they are doing it to some degree but I don't really enjoy it. Changes to the story start almost immediately.

At any rate I'm an old codger, perhaps don't listen to the hardliners. Enjoy what you enjoy.

The only thing you'll miss out on is knowing the original story because it does change things a bit. Other than the main plot beats, it's a totally different game.

Would they enjoy it as much as you enjoyed the original ..? Maybe. Maybe not. There's a whole slew of other reasons why FF7 was such a massive hit back in the day, and Rebirth does not have that kind of impact amidst other, modern games. Gotta remember that in 1997, FF7 was the most epic RPG available. Games these days all tend to have stories just as epic and large.

In general I'd say yes if you like modern final fantasy where combat isn't turn based and there is a lot more flavor to flesh out the world and NPC than games in the 90s could hope to perform. Pretty graphics, Decent overall voice acting, minigames that usually don't overstay their welcome and you never feel caught up in one area too long. If you actually learn the various mechanics Id say the games are actually pretty easy overall, most people I see complaining don't even know how combos work, or trying to button mash the same combo onto an optional boss.

90s (j)RPGs were a different breed all together compared to games today that have that title, so while knowledge of the first game would let you in on the fanservice and call back moments, those aren't required and I'd be betting more than half of the people who played remake or rebirth never played the other FF7 games. In fact some players who did were upset that some characters or scenes were changed quite drastically because what was okay in '97 definitely would not be well recieved by wider audiences in '24

At this point I'd say no, because it's not complete. Once it's complete it may. Some parts are much better done. Some are weirdly changed and don't really make sense imo. I'm working off foggy memory at this point for how much it changed. But in the end, I'd say that you'd be better served by the original if you are ok with classic games.

Most of the story beats are still there. Most of the emotions from the OG are still there - except one thing. I'll try to avoid spoilers but if you've played OG and remake, you should know.

The major change in the story itself is the continuation of something you saw at the very tail end of the first Remake, that probably made you go WTF, the meta-narrative you're suspicious about. It might be a concept you don't really like because it sounds like it'll break the story, but it actually doesn't concretely change anything until the end. The places, the events, the world, the mission are still the same. The most critical change that caused a lot of noise is a big cliffhanger that will only be resolved in the final game, when it was expected to be a big emotional hit now. It's very clear that this is a trilogy, and expecting this game to end the same way as the OG caused a lot of distress. People who loved the OG for one specific reason or another might feel robbed by the way this game is pretending to change things, but actually doesn't, but actually maybe yes - and you'll only get the resolution in the last game. If that means something to you, maybe you should wait for the trilogy to be completed and treat it as a single game, because this part 2 is only half of the game you liked back then, and it might not have what made you love it - yet.

One big change in storytelling is what it focuses on: it gets much more into the psychology of Cloud, Tifa, Aerith, Barret, about mental health, trauma, and their relationships (in the same way they massively developped the Avalanche trio in Remake). Basically, they're making everyone real human beings with a history and interactions. Now you understand from the inside of their head why they do or don't do this or that. It also adds focus on some aspects and perspectives that only developed in the Crisis Core prequel and were not a thing in the OG. It's a massive improvement on storytelling and world building (the world now has a history of geopolitics scattered everywhere in every side quests), but it looks like a lot of fans of the OG who expected things to go a certain way get hung up and slowed down by all the new details, and it feels like fluff or a change they don't like. You clearly feel the stretch from one 50 hour long turn-based RPG into 3 action RPG that last 50 (remake) + 120 (rebirth) + 1?? (part 3) hours, and it's a lot, and you might not like it.

It absolutely has tons of gaming content to enjoy, both in the characters and the absolute shitload of things and side quests and mini-games to do absolutely everywhere for a 120 hours playthrough and you don't even see the time pass, but it might not be exactly what you felt in the OG. It's a new perspective. I've seen among various streamers that the people who were the most confused by the ending are often the harder fans of the OG, and new fans see the details and hidden explanations that OG fans miss because they think they know what's going on - and get blue-balled on what they came here for.

And then Sephiroth changes. We still don't know if they're whitewashing him by giving him a sad backstory and a big personal mission (the gacha game Ever Crisis that's still ongoing is developing his time as a young SOLDIER) or if they're making him an even worse guy, and so far it has the potential to ruin the character. We have to wait until it's all resolved.

I didn't enjoy the story changes. But the game was fun in and of itself. The big thing is the story doesn't land the same way bcz they kind of shove it in your face. The subtlety of the original with sephiroth being this huge shadow villain in the original is lost. You fight him so many times in the game that it kind of loses it's meaning.