
|
|
|
|
On my vacation I watched a LOT of movies. I was never that big on film because I always had something else going on. I'd always be that guy. The one where you try bringing up a classic movie, then I just stare at you, then you look at me with contempt and I cry myself to sleep. Obviously I'm not a cinema expert. It's a common saying that movie sequels are never good and I always thought that was an oversimplification. I thought to myself, "Surely there are plenty of films that surpass their prequels." After cramming about 100 movies in a month, I now say to myself "... mebbe nawt." Recent experience goes to tell me that you're lucky if the first sequel is close to the same level of quality as the original, and it's a rare miracle if the second sequel isn't awful.
I'm still hardly a movie connoisseur and could well be ignorant in this, but it got me thinking about gaming sequels. Whether it's games or movies, sequels are all heavily driven by cash-flow. If something makes a lot of money, it's going to see sequels. I find it interesting because games themselves are far more sequel driven than movies ever hoped to be. While it may not be uncommon for movies to become trilogies, game series can easily expand into double digits over time. Activision is the current hot topic company when it comes to sequels, but pretty much everyone does it. The parallels aren't perfect, especially keeping in mind that game sequels are typically known to be better than their predecessors. Games continue to outdate their forefathers on a regular basis and continue to become bigger and better. Many people might read that and think optimistically about it, but working at a GameStop I actually have a very jaded outlook on this fact. Two points contribute to this jaded outlook: I am a collector and thus have a constantly updating knowledge on games that are valuable in at least some way, thus I have a good eye for generally collectible games. You know, the kind of games that if you randomly found you might say "SCORE!" out loud like a fucking jackass. Next up--thanks to the occasional need to clean and reorganize my store--I'm practically in an intimate relationship with my damned store's bargain bin. Thanks to these two things when I look at a bargain bin, mentally I see a sign hanging over it that says "The crap nobody wants anymore." Based on sheer size, if my store's PS2 bargain bin got into a fight with all the other PS2 games it'd be like watching a Soccer Mom trying to kidnap Mike Haggar's daughter. Nobody's willing to pay more than chump change for the games in that bargain bin. The majority of the PS2's library--the library of the former console wars king--is considered outdated and worthless. What's more, there's tons of sequels in there. Honestly, it's not as though those games don't deserve to be there. It occurred to me that jumping from movies to games, the sequels may be improved but they are decidedly less distinct. They're often similar enough that there's no real reason to so much as hold a preference for one over the other beyond minor details. Even despite improvements, these frequently occurring sequels are so similar that the customers I sell them to will often come back to me in a few days ready for something else. Using one of the most famous sequel driven series out there as an example, there's actually a common rule amongst Madden players. "Buy Madden, wait three years before buying another." Now obviously they say this because it's generally acknowledged that jumping from one year to the next, the game is practically the same thing beyond the details. The fact that this rule even exists should imply that sequels aren't automatically worth money, and yet at the same time implications don't mean a thing. Numerous people buy every Madden every year without even caring about the relative lack of change. Likewise this sort of thing rings through the whole industry. How gaming has been able to sustain itself this way is a testament to how enjoyable they can be. Even as a diehard Mega Man fan I realize that though each and every game in the classic series is fun, they still feel the same. Likewise I'm sure everyone has a sequel driven series they're fond of. You probably understand this feeling I'm talking about. What're you're playing has not fundamentally changed, but you're still enjoying yourself. Objectively there is a point where we have to stop and realize that fun aside, the number of new ideas in our sequels can be scarce. Personally I think it doesn't need to be that way, but realistically I'm just dreaming. Clearly I can't tell game developers how to do their jobs, but games in general would have more individual value if more time was allowed between entries. I'm not even necessarily talking about actual development time. I'm just talking about the natural flow of time required in order to accumulate new ideas, even if it's just between projects. Something truly significant needs to be infused into each game in order to give them individual value. Somewhere there's a combination of unique story, setting, characters, and gameplay mechanics that will make your game feel like more than just a continuation. The one thing I think needs to be dispelled between sequels is a gut feeling. The simple instinct you have as a player where as you play a game, you realize it feels familiar. Let's face it. Games can be remarkably similar between competitors as is. It's not as though we need an even stronger sense of familiarity within the series themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
|
Comment with FacebookClick 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!

Follow
RSS
Contact
Comparing Ocarina of Time to Twilight Princess and you'll find that the mechanics were given a facelift and slight tweak, but the game was lacking a strong and cohesive narrative. The experience felt shallow despite being a wonderfully crafted game.
Conversely, I absolutely love the Mega Man series in-spite/because of the amount of variety provided by its many titles. The same goes with DMC; the modifications to the mechanics can create an entirely different experience once you get deep enough into the gameplay; I welcome sequels in these cases because I want that new experience.
The countless arguments over "only T2 and Empire are better follow ups", "games have shitty sequels", "sequels suck", etc etc.
I have so much to say I don't even know where to begin. I'll just note in summation: it depends on the title, and sequels can be fanservice, which means the enjoyment factor is entirely defendant on whether or not you're a fan of the original.