Does my method make sense?

If I understand correctly, you'd like to replicate Starcraft's business model?

(The first game was broken in 3 segments, + 1 expansion for 3 segments, whereas the 2nd game is 3 actual titles, each focused on each of the factions).

Correct?

I have always be fond of re-using the same world for different games. Each adding more depth to to world background.

But, I don't quite understand what you want to do. Why can't you make one game in which the player switch viewpoint and character as the game progress. In the first chapter the player play as a member of the faction A, in the second the faction B, etc...

if you plan to make all three game a RPG, why separating them in three games? Except if you want to release your game quicker, then yes it is justified.

I think building a coherent universe across games (say "episodically") would be very nice but at this level of abstraction it could be pretty much everything.

I have always be fond of re-using the same world for different games. Each adding more depth to to world background.
But, I don't quite understand what you want to do. Why can't you make one game in which the player switch viewpoint and character as the game progress. In the first chapter the player play as a member of the faction A, in the second the faction B, etc...
if you plan to make all three game a RPG, why separating them in three games? Except if you want to release your game quicker, then yes it is justified.

I think building a coherent universe across games (say "episodically") would be very nice but at this level of abstraction it could be pretty much everything.

Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?

Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.

Three stories and three games is not a method, it's a trainwreck. Concentrate on telling one cohesive story, even if sometimes seen through three seperate lenses, in one game. Effectively telling one story would put you far above 99% of idie devs.

Kurtz: Are my methods unsound?

Willard: I don't see any method at all, sir.

Three stories and three games is not a method, it's a trainwreck. Concentrate on telling one cohesive story, even if sometimes seen through three seperate lenses, in one game. Effectively telling one story would put you far above 99% of idie devs.

Yeah. Get rid of all distractions that prevent you from focusing on only ONE game.

But the problem is that I am literally telling 3 stories. With different characters and telling why they are doing what they are doing and how they became who they are now. Each of these is a separate experience that when finished will have given a player a more in depth knowledge of the world and each faction before they make the choice of what faction to fight for. Rather than just telling backstory through little bits of quests and speech in a larger game.

Your goal reminds me a bit of Dragon Quest IV. An old game where you play through 5 chapers of a larger story. In each chapter you have a completely different character with their own story that tells part of an on going story happing in the world. One character is a tom boy princess, another merchant, It's not to that last chapter that the character all come together to help save the world.

Could you not do something similar? Tell one story but split it into 4 chapter each chapter telling that character's side of the story.

Well what is the common point between the story lines? How are they interacting and what parts of each story are needed in the other to actually make it make sense?

You possibly don't need all of the stories. Ideally if the stories are strong then they should be able to stand just fine on their own without the others holding them up, but the real trick in story telling in this manner is weaving them together in such a way that while each story is good on its own they are in turn reinforced and enhanced by the other stories.

Not a game, but look at A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones), and think about how the story would really be if you cut out 90% of all the other 'story lines' and only read from one "point of view". Jon's story of him being the illegitimate son of a noble and going north to freeze on the wall while hearing bits and pieces of what is going on in the south is still a very compelling story all on its own, even if we don't hear a single word from Rob's point of view. Basically every single main character's point of view sections can easily stand on their own for a far shorter overall story, and have the potential (with some work to fill in the odd gap) to still be an epic story that people would read and love. Told all together is making an insanely long and detailed story to tell, but the whole can remain great even if you were to remove entire POV sections of half the characters.

So where are your stories tying together, and why do you feel that you need them all? Start from there, and then you can examine things in better detail to figure out where you need to go next.

Would the games play alike or be very different due to the different factions?

If the latter I would try to keep it in a single game, it will allow you to create focus on a single project.

Perhaps you could do it like in Dragon Age Origins, where depending on what role you choose the opening chapters are different?

Eh, making a concept over many games can become boring or messy in my opinion. You really had me with your idea about factions, until you said you would need 3-4 games to do it.