I have mixed feelings about them as games. I loved the first one, I won't lie, but the other two were definitely flawed. I had a lot of fun with them, but I won't pretend that they're than mediocre. That's one of the core tenets of analysis, though; any text can make for a productive and interesting close-reading. We're not really evaluating quality, but studying the choices that game developers make that help to create meaning.
The reason I went with LoS is because the characters are fairly broadly written, I know it very well, and we're talking about the monomyth and its influence on gaming early on. The beginning of the semester really is focused on narratives as a whole; we're doing conflict and plot tomorrow and Monday, and I'm using the whole of Rise of the Tomb Raider. After that, though, we'll be looking at narrower-scope stuff. I'm using a few sections of Bioshock to talk about level design and its relationship to story, for example, and the first levels of a few earlier games (including Castlevania) to talk about extradiegetic sound (soundtrack) vs. diagetic sound (sound effects and music coming from in-game sources, etc.)
As I said, Lords of Shadow just works well because Gabriel takes on a distinctive role in each game, and it allows me to bring in Alucard's arc as a foil, etc. It's in no way an original story, but the familiar beats are what make it accessible.