Quantcast
Destructoid - Sen's Community Blog




About Me
I'm just another twenty-something who grew up with gaming as an integral part of my life. I've owned just about every console since the ColecoVision, and gaming replaced TV for me as my standard entertainment close to a decade ago. I'm not a "hardcore gamer" in the sense that all I want to do is "pwn noobs" but i'm definitely a gamer at heart, and love all things gaming.

I own and operate Players Lounge, Australia's first dedicated Xbox 360 console lounge. We're not a Net Cafe or Gaming Cafe, we have custom made leather couches, 26" HD LCDs, and a clean modern shop. We do corporate events, team bonding, birthday parties, and tournaments/comps as well as dedicated game-nights and other events.
Gamer Profile
3DS friend code:
Steam:
Battle:
PSN:
Mii:
Gamertag: PLA Sen
Following (1)
Capn Birdseye
What makes a sequel suck?
Sen | 7:58 PM on 10.20.2007 5 comments


It's an endless debate.. I don't expect to find any answers.. but it's been confusing me more lately than ever with all these sequels coming out. Why is Call of Duty 2 more fun than Call of Duty 3? The graphics are 11ty billion times better, the size and detail of the maps has been improved hugely, there's extra features like air-strikes, vehicles, etc.. yet when we have our Call of Duty 3 nights at Players Lounge, people last about 2 rounds on COD3 before they're crying out for COD2.. and i'm crying out the loudest! I can't even explain it myself, I just have more fun with COD2.

Thousands said that Halo 2 campaign was nowhere near as good as Halo 1.. that PGR4 is worse than PGR3 (even me in my last blog).. in all these games the graphics are improved, the complexity is increased, and the depth of the game goes to new levels. Before you say that "Graphics aren't the be-all and end-all of a game".. you're right, but Gran Turismo has proven that graphics can make up for crappy handling in a car game.. Halo 3 has proven that more complexity in game-play and adding some more weapons and vehicles can make up for the fact that it's the same flat/shiny graphics.

There's obviously multiple factors that need to be taken into account.. graphics, complexity, size of game area, how linear it is, the story behind the campaigns, the weapons/vehicles/maps in the multiplayer (even the lobby matters!), and so much more.. but it's just interesting how hard it is to predict, and how much money companies will pour into a game in the HOPE that it will be better than the last. MILLIONS spent on making a game graphically superior, massive maps, and amazingly expensive soundtracks complimenting stories by hollywood script writers.

I'm sure there's some complex "Sequel Formula" that involves multiplying the amount of blood splatter with the detail of the leaves on the trees, divided by the polygon-count of the water ripples, then subtract the number of clouds in the sky. Take that number, convert it into Euros, spend it on marketing, and hope the gamers like it. It can't be any more specific than that, or every sequel would be better than the previous version.

What's some other games you thought the sequel sucked? What's some games you think the sequel kicked ass? And more importantly, WHY?



Is this post awesome? Vote it up!

0



Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

5 comments | showing # 1 to 5
prev next

Eschatos's Avatar - Comment posted on 10/20/2007 20:19
Eschatos
Either more of the same, or it changes it so much that people don't like it.
Clockwork's Avatar - Comment posted on 10/20/2007 20:21
Clockwork
The Spiderman video game franchise was pretty interesting (the ones based on the movies that is). The first one wasn't too bad, not too great. The second one was fucking awesome cause you could go anywhere in the city whenever you wanted just swinging around killing bitches. Spiderman 3 sucked donkey dick cause it was exactly like Spiderman 2...and considering it was two years later there were no excuses for the shit that that game produced.
aborto thefetus's Avatar - Comment posted on 10/20/2007 22:18
aborto thefetus
The reason why COD3 isn't anywhere near as good as COD2 is because it wasn't created by infinity ward, the original creators of the series. At least thats what I believe.
Sen's Avatar - Comment posted on 10/21/2007 06:05
Sen
Yeh. Call of Duty 3 was made by Treyarch.. but Call of Duty 4 has been handed back to Infinity Ward which is probably why the Beta was so damn good (and hopefully it was indicative of the final game!).. I think Activision learned their mistake ;)
Capn Birdseye's Avatar - Comment posted on 10/22/2007 21:11
Capn Birdseye
Yeah, here's hoping.

good post m8
prev next

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!