surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I don't know, but I also think you miss the point. They're not around to make a sequel to Okami, but did they WANT to? It's bullshit that Platinum no longer owns the rights to the game had that been their intention, but it's a totally moot point if they had no intention of ever making another.
I understand the love for Okami. It really is a great game. I tried editing the article slightly to be a little more understanding of the reason people want sequels.
I'm not a big fan of what's happening with the Metal Gear series. Its done, and it feels like Kojima meant for it to be done. I think Leigh Alexander spoke breifly somewhere about how Metal Gear Solid 4 is in fact an extended metaphor for Kojima's dislike for the continued sequalization of his series.
I don't think she went into great detail, but I really see it now. Old Snake being dragged out for "One More Mission". Raiden becoming more awesome and fighting tooth and nail to keep up with the legend of Old Snake, like some new idea trying break through and have its own spotlight while suffering severe cuts and damage along the way. I haven't thought alot about it, but I can imagine it goes a bit deeper than that.
OK. Maybe its a little silly to consider MGS4 as an "art" game. But, its a fascinating conceit for a game that, more than any other game I've played, places the most satisfying and firm end cap on a chain of lore. I would be absolutely fine with MGS4 remaining the last Metal Gear that ever was.
I don't think she went into great detail, but I really see it now. Old Snake being dragged out for "One More Mission". Raiden becoming more awesome and fighting tooth and nail to keep up with the legend of Old Snake, like some new idea trying break through and have its own spotlight while suffering severe cuts and damage along the way. I haven't thought alot about it, but I can imagine it goes a bit deeper than that.
OK. Maybe its a little silly to consider MGS4 as an "art" game. But, its a fascinating conceit for a game that, more than any other game I've played, places the most satisfying and firm end cap on a chain of lore. I would be absolutely fine with MGS4 remaining the last Metal Gear that ever was.
@Tubatic, that was the first thing I though when I saw the big Old Snake pin-ups. I felt like I was looking at Kojima, bitter and jaded.
there's an interesting distinction between sequels and expansions. At GDC, someone made a point about how games like Halo 3 and Jak 3 shouldn't be called new games, but should be called expansions and people should charged equivalently. In Japan, they don't necessarily call sequels new games, they only refer to new genres or breakthroughs as new games. All sequels are considered spin-offs, unless they completely revolutionize the subject. The Japanese are way more aesthetic than almost any other culture, and I prefer their method for discerning a novel experience.
there's an interesting distinction between sequels and expansions. At GDC, someone made a point about how games like Halo 3 and Jak 3 shouldn't be called new games, but should be called expansions and people should charged equivalently. In Japan, they don't necessarily call sequels new games, they only refer to new genres or breakthroughs as new games. All sequels are considered spin-offs, unless they completely revolutionize the subject. The Japanese are way more aesthetic than almost any other culture, and I prefer their method for discerning a novel experience.
@Snoogans: An interesting viewpoint, and I can see where people are coming from when they refer to a new entry in a series as an expansion. Often new titles such as Silent Hill, expanded upon their universe and lore with the links between Silent Hill 1 and 3, 2 and 4. Still, whatever you call it I think games are too often made in excess and should be just laid to rest when the proper time comes. I'm so very bitter about Double Helix being allowed to treat the corpse of Silent Hill however they so please.
I will never forget the pointless use of Pyramid Head for the sake of fan service.
I will never forget the pointless use of Pyramid Head for the sake of fan service.
I very much agree on all your points, although I'm not sure what would happen if a franchise like Final Fantasy were to stop in its tracks because, creatively, it had been there and done that. I can't think of a second series in a similar situation off of the top of my head, and of the ones you mentioned Silent Hill and Metal Gear Solid don't really fit my example, so anyway. Just pretend I'm talking about x series if it fits the bill.
If SE decided that XIV was the most Final of all the Fantasies, and that a persistent world with constant content updates was the way of the future, would anybody be happy with that? What would happen to the people currently working on FF XIII, Versus XIII, and other assorted spin-offs? Would we see an increase in quality in the Last Remnants and Infinite Undiscoveries, or would they just cut some people and pat themselves on the back?
I can't really imagine being a part of something as big as Final Fantasy and then just quietly letting it fade into the shadows for the good of the brand, which is why we won't really see any lasting change when it comes to this. Nobody makes "expansion packs" anymore... In this day and age, we like to call it "downloadable content," or, in the case of Activision, releasing a nearly identical game every year and maximizing our profits.
If SE decided that XIV was the most Final of all the Fantasies, and that a persistent world with constant content updates was the way of the future, would anybody be happy with that? What would happen to the people currently working on FF XIII, Versus XIII, and other assorted spin-offs? Would we see an increase in quality in the Last Remnants and Infinite Undiscoveries, or would they just cut some people and pat themselves on the back?
I can't really imagine being a part of something as big as Final Fantasy and then just quietly letting it fade into the shadows for the good of the brand, which is why we won't really see any lasting change when it comes to this. Nobody makes "expansion packs" anymore... In this day and age, we like to call it "downloadable content," or, in the case of Activision, releasing a nearly identical game every year and maximizing our profits.
Also, I agree with you about Wii Music! I happen to think its a great idea, but aside from that, I think its great that they let Miyamoto just rif now. Whether its setting the world on fire or not, its really interesting to see different ideas packaged up and put out by a "big name" developer personality.
Yeah, exactly. The man has new ideas. Everyone gushes about Pikmin. That was based on his damned hobby. Man just rolled with his idea and got something good. Likewise I've met families that actually were very fond of Wii Music. The game has some merit. It's brought some happiness to people. Some families like to bond with it, some people like to use it as a drunk party game.
This is gonna sound dumb to a lot of people, but in alot of cases, I'm actually more interested in seeing a port/remakes of older games than I am seeing a sequels.
Katamari Forever was a bit disappointing, but I still prefer it to Beautiful Katamari. I'd much rather have a graphics/controls enhanced port of the original Jet Grind Radio than risk seeing a sequel from a new creative team get it all wrong.
Bionic Commando Rearmed Vs the "now-gen" Bionic Commando is a perfect example of where I'm coming from.
Katamari Forever was a bit disappointing, but I still prefer it to Beautiful Katamari. I'd much rather have a graphics/controls enhanced port of the original Jet Grind Radio than risk seeing a sequel from a new creative team get it all wrong.
Bionic Commando Rearmed Vs the "now-gen" Bionic Commando is a perfect example of where I'm coming from.
reading this got me thinking "I wonder what kinds of unique gameplay experiences I missed out and will continue to miss out on because of more mainstream sequels that I buy"
On a related not: I think it would be great if we had a section on D-toid dedicated to a compilation of unique games and gameplay experiences. That way, great experiences won't be missed out by the unintentionally ignorant.
On a related not: I think it would be great if we had a section on D-toid dedicated to a compilation of unique games and gameplay experiences. That way, great experiences won't be missed out by the unintentionally ignorant.
I like sequels, will continue to ask for them, buy them, play them, and love them. Cry moar, your tears fuel me.
You pretty much said everything I have wanted to say regarding sequels. I can't stand the fact that we get sequels to games that we really don't need, nor do the creators want.
I agree with you so much on Silent Hill. Playing Origins and Homecoming were heartbreaking experiences for me. Whats worse, I bought them, encouraging this destructive cycle, now we have some game on Wii and I have decided to not purchase it. I will rent it, at best. I hadn't realized I was directly responsible for this problem until you blatantly pointed it out.
People often defend the new Silent Hill games with statements such as "you are just mad that the developers are American", "the games weren't THAT bad dude", or "the series is EVOLVING (wtf is this, Pokemon?)".
Where the developers come from do not concern me, that point is that these are NOT the original developers, and thus have no idea what the developers intended. It pisses me off when they attempt to "fill in plotholes" when the creators clearly intended for it to be up to your interpretation. Apparently, these guys have the "correct" interpretation, you know this because they have the license -_-....
Yes, the games weren't THAT bad, but they weren't needed, I hate needing to clarify that I mean Silent Hill 1-3 when recommending the games to people, otherwise they come back with "homecoming sucked". It did.
hahah
You struck a nerve with me man, excellent article. I had put off making a Destructoid account for awhile and this finally inspired me to sign up, I will direct people to your article every time they ask me why I get pissed regarding unnecessary sequels.
I agree with you so much on Silent Hill. Playing Origins and Homecoming were heartbreaking experiences for me. Whats worse, I bought them, encouraging this destructive cycle, now we have some game on Wii and I have decided to not purchase it. I will rent it, at best. I hadn't realized I was directly responsible for this problem until you blatantly pointed it out.
People often defend the new Silent Hill games with statements such as "you are just mad that the developers are American", "the games weren't THAT bad dude", or "the series is EVOLVING (wtf is this, Pokemon?)".
Where the developers come from do not concern me, that point is that these are NOT the original developers, and thus have no idea what the developers intended. It pisses me off when they attempt to "fill in plotholes" when the creators clearly intended for it to be up to your interpretation. Apparently, these guys have the "correct" interpretation, you know this because they have the license -_-....
Yes, the games weren't THAT bad, but they weren't needed, I hate needing to clarify that I mean Silent Hill 1-3 when recommending the games to people, otherwise they come back with "homecoming sucked". It did.
hahah
You struck a nerve with me man, excellent article. I had put off making a Destructoid account for awhile and this finally inspired me to sign up, I will direct people to your article every time they ask me why I get pissed regarding unnecessary sequels.
yes, but sequels can be the very things that generate funds for more experimental projects. Not that I'm all 'buy crappy sequels to support companies you like' or anything, but I certainly don't begrudge companies for doing something that's going to make them reliable amounts of money.
Ive gottta say im one of the worst kind of consumers, im always wanting more sequels and am one of a very small group who actually believes most sequels are better than there original counterparts. What people need to understand is that when a game makes a connection with the player on a level of entertainment like all good games do then it is obviously going to make the player want more after the original iteration is complete. In my personal opinion there is not such thing as an uncessary sequel as there will always be fans who want a continuation of the series in question.
@Randolph: Right. You miss the point.
@Fredrick2003: But of course not all sequels are bad. I just don't like seeing developers being tied down to games they don't really want to make. Sonic Team is a good example of the kind of horrors this can lead to. I don't think anyone's ever confirmed it, but rumors have gone around that Sonic Team is basically a sweat shop now. They're forced to make Sonic games. I could bet you the reason they suck is because they aren't allowed to do anything else.
Sonic Adventure was one of my favorite games as a kid. Admittedly it's a little dated now, but at the time it was new and interesting, and Sonic Team itself had other projects like Phantasy Star Online and Chu Chu Rocket. They were allowed to make what they wanted, and they really should have succeeded for it. Stupid Dreamcast failing for possibly a dozen reasons. So much creativity, so little reward. I don't know what could possibly have saved them at that time. It seemed everything was against them.
@makesfive: It's hard to actually begrudge a company at all, really. They are a company and it's not like people are extremely invested in them (if they're reasonable.) Like I said, sequels themselves I have no problem with, if the game was something the developers actually wanted to make. When it gets to the point that sequels are made for the point of just having sequels though, I won't knock a company for doing it but I'll probably stop buying the games.
If they really do use that money to go make new ideas, that's great, but I probably will always lament the beating of a dead horse, especially if I ever loved that horse.
@Fredrick2003: But of course not all sequels are bad. I just don't like seeing developers being tied down to games they don't really want to make. Sonic Team is a good example of the kind of horrors this can lead to. I don't think anyone's ever confirmed it, but rumors have gone around that Sonic Team is basically a sweat shop now. They're forced to make Sonic games. I could bet you the reason they suck is because they aren't allowed to do anything else.
Sonic Adventure was one of my favorite games as a kid. Admittedly it's a little dated now, but at the time it was new and interesting, and Sonic Team itself had other projects like Phantasy Star Online and Chu Chu Rocket. They were allowed to make what they wanted, and they really should have succeeded for it. Stupid Dreamcast failing for possibly a dozen reasons. So much creativity, so little reward. I don't know what could possibly have saved them at that time. It seemed everything was against them.
@makesfive: It's hard to actually begrudge a company at all, really. They are a company and it's not like people are extremely invested in them (if they're reasonable.) Like I said, sequels themselves I have no problem with, if the game was something the developers actually wanted to make. When it gets to the point that sequels are made for the point of just having sequels though, I won't knock a company for doing it but I'll probably stop buying the games.
If they really do use that money to go make new ideas, that's great, but I probably will always lament the beating of a dead horse, especially if I ever loved that horse.
@Blue Odeyssey: Again, I'm not totally against sequels and I do acknowledge in my article that it's natural to want more of something you love. Still, I think they hold people back. While you may want more of the same, you're not the one making the game. For a creative mind doing the same thing forever can be like torture.
Imagine if you were a writer who had to write the same story over and over again, only slightly different. You ran out of ideas a long time ago because you're basically writing the same story, and you're really tired of doing it, but your fans would rather buy that story from you than buy something interesting and new that you might want to do instead. Now imagine that new story idea you wanted to make absolutely never happened. Wouldn't that suck?
Zone of the Enders 3 comes to mind.
Imagine if you were a writer who had to write the same story over and over again, only slightly different. You ran out of ideas a long time ago because you're basically writing the same story, and you're really tired of doing it, but your fans would rather buy that story from you than buy something interesting and new that you might want to do instead. Now imagine that new story idea you wanted to make absolutely never happened. Wouldn't that suck?
Zone of the Enders 3 comes to mind.
I like game series where sequels are either the same basic game with additions that make it superior or take on a different angle with the same quality as the last. It would be foolish to ask the same freshness as a new IP from a sequel but they should at least try to make some sort of progression.
I would like to hear some opinions on what classifies as milking a series and what's just the countinuation of one. I hear complains that Final Fantasy has gone on too long (I've said this at one point myself) but too be fair 13 main games from a large company from the NES days to this generation isn't that bi8g if you look at it.
@EggmaniMN
I wish more people would realise that and follow that example. Game creators need to have a good concept behind the game before they just decide to churn one out and fans need to stop asking for games that the creators don't want to make.
Everytime I see someone complain that Mother 4 isn't being made I dislike the world a little bit more.
I would like to hear some opinions on what classifies as milking a series and what's just the countinuation of one. I hear complains that Final Fantasy has gone on too long (I've said this at one point myself) but too be fair 13 main games from a large company from the NES days to this generation isn't that bi8g if you look at it.
@EggmaniMN
I wish more people would realise that and follow that example. Game creators need to have a good concept behind the game before they just decide to churn one out and fans need to stop asking for games that the creators don't want to make.
Everytime I see someone complain that Mother 4 isn't being made I dislike the world a little bit more.
It's the same thing for the movie industry. Demand + Big Company Owns Brand = Sequels
Imagine if The Big Lebowski had a sequel. It'd sell like hotcakes, but would undoubtedly cheapen the original material.
Imagine if The Big Lebowski had a sequel. It'd sell like hotcakes, but would undoubtedly cheapen the original material.
Then again, there are times when demanding a sequel has worked out well. Kingdom Hearts, for example, was said to be released as a single game. Then when it was shown that there was interest, Nomura expanded the series, world and story tenfold and it's still going strong.
But if someone truly has the creativity to create the original product that the public crave then they must have the ability to incorporate similar mechanics into an entirely new game while keeping certain aspects in line with the original. Final Fantasy is the perfect example, each game is totally different and creativity is not contained within a set formula, there are a few staples which are key for it to retain its identity for example Chocobos.
The only aspect a sequel has to have is to retain a section of the previous name in most cases (Brand Awareness), a name is just that, it does not limit the potential a game can have. You use the idea of a writer creating the same the story each time over this conveys you views very clearly and I can see where you are coming from but if a writer has write sequels there is no limits as to what he/she could do under that title, just because certain limitations would be in place in order to relate to the previous incarnations it doesn't mean originality is stunted. I hope this made sense, I think it does.
The only aspect a sequel has to have is to retain a section of the previous name in most cases (Brand Awareness), a name is just that, it does not limit the potential a game can have. You use the idea of a writer creating the same the story each time over this conveys you views very clearly and I can see where you are coming from but if a writer has write sequels there is no limits as to what he/she could do under that title, just because certain limitations would be in place in order to relate to the previous incarnations it doesn't mean originality is stunted. I hope this made sense, I think it does.
I can see what you're saying, but the big problem is that if you don't want to make something you don't want to make it. A person's greatest creativity comes out when they're doing something they really want to, and the games industry rarely just lets a game series lay to rest when the people have decided they've done everything that they wanted to do.
Some series have a time when they deserve to be left to rest. You don't need to perpetually create games in a series forever. That's my point. Quality over quantity is a good motto. Final Fantasy is a good series, but none of the Final Fantasies are what you can actually call sequels. What you can call sequels are the endless deluge of side-games made because of rabid fan demand, stunting Square Enix's capacity to create something aside from Final Fantasy on the side.
Some series have a time when they deserve to be left to rest. You don't need to perpetually create games in a series forever. That's my point. Quality over quantity is a good motto. Final Fantasy is a good series, but none of the Final Fantasies are what you can actually call sequels. What you can call sequels are the endless deluge of side-games made because of rabid fan demand, stunting Square Enix's capacity to create something aside from Final Fantasy on the side.
Though admittedly you never know if Square Enix really does want to continue making Final Fantasy VII spinoffs. Hard to say.
Look at Naughty Dog and Insomniac, they let Crash and Spyro go... they simply stoped to do those games and moved away to new things! Crash and Spyro became whores of the industry, where players wanted more games and more games with their names on the cover were made by other developers. The result? SHIT!!!
Crash an Spyro games stopped on Crash Bandicoot 3:Warped and Spyro: Year of the Dragon to me...why? Because the original team it isn't on the development team anymore, that's why!
I would love to see another Crash/Spyro game made by Insomniac and Naughty Dog again, but hey! There's Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Resistance and Jak & Daxter out there now, thanks to their decision to do new things!
Crash an Spyro games stopped on Crash Bandicoot 3:Warped and Spyro: Year of the Dragon to me...why? Because the original team it isn't on the development team anymore, that's why!
I would love to see another Crash/Spyro game made by Insomniac and Naughty Dog again, but hey! There's Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Resistance and Jak & Daxter out there now, thanks to their decision to do new things!
Wry Guy:
The problem is that most people only see video games as just that: games. Therefore, variations or improvements in gameplay mechanics, accompanied by the obligatory graphic augmentation, will be enough for the vast majority, regardless of how degraded the quality and inspiration of the original essence is.
You'll see that amongst reviewers and gamers. Was SH: Homecoming a competent game? Yes. Was it scary? Depends on the person, but at least was creepy. Was it a true SH? Simply, no. But since it is not a failure as a game, that's enough for most.
The question is: Why do we deserve better, when editors on this site and the community with its blogs keep on fapping off to announced sequels or the possibility of them? Buy oh yes, when Kotick comes out and says he only wants to make sequels, we immediatly start yelling "GREED", "EVIL"...
The problems is not iteration, the problem is that most times we are the ones asking for the abuse and whoring out of the idea we originally liked.
The problem is that most people only see video games as just that: games. Therefore, variations or improvements in gameplay mechanics, accompanied by the obligatory graphic augmentation, will be enough for the vast majority, regardless of how degraded the quality and inspiration of the original essence is.
You'll see that amongst reviewers and gamers. Was SH: Homecoming a competent game? Yes. Was it scary? Depends on the person, but at least was creepy. Was it a true SH? Simply, no. But since it is not a failure as a game, that's enough for most.
The question is: Why do we deserve better, when editors on this site and the community with its blogs keep on fapping off to announced sequels or the possibility of them? Buy oh yes, when Kotick comes out and says he only wants to make sequels, we immediatly start yelling "GREED", "EVIL"...
The problems is not iteration, the problem is that most times we are the ones asking for the abuse and whoring out of the idea we originally liked.
To be fair, some franchises do make the effort to constantly reinvent themselves, such as Final Fantasy or Castlevania. If there has the be a sequel, that's better than just doing a sequel thats a mild enhancement of the previous game.
Expansions can be argued to be sequels depending on the product, but in offline product they tend to be more of a sign that the initial product is incomplete (oh hi Fallout 3 GOTY Edition, nice you finally got done and all those kinks were worked out a year late.)
Rock Band 2 is the only Rock band this generation will ever need, though. The very nature of the game is to be constantly something that cab be added to.In this respect, that's a good thing. Its something I wish sports games would consider doing, rather than being roster updates with a few tweaks.
all that said, I can kind of excuse a slew of sequels when the developer strives to make and publish new content. Atlus is a great example of this. There's a Shin Megami Tensei title almost every half-year these days, not to mention all the loving attention games in that series get, I can't help but appreciate what Atlus does. Atlus does bring out original properties and goes to bat to publish for others as well, bringing even more fresh content under their banner. I root for Atlus because the bring the right balance
I do think Tim Shafer and Miyamoto have it the best, though. I wish more developers had the kind of freedom they enjoy.
Expansions can be argued to be sequels depending on the product, but in offline product they tend to be more of a sign that the initial product is incomplete (oh hi Fallout 3 GOTY Edition, nice you finally got done and all those kinks were worked out a year late.)
Rock Band 2 is the only Rock band this generation will ever need, though. The very nature of the game is to be constantly something that cab be added to.In this respect, that's a good thing. Its something I wish sports games would consider doing, rather than being roster updates with a few tweaks.
all that said, I can kind of excuse a slew of sequels when the developer strives to make and publish new content. Atlus is a great example of this. There's a Shin Megami Tensei title almost every half-year these days, not to mention all the loving attention games in that series get, I can't help but appreciate what Atlus does. Atlus does bring out original properties and goes to bat to publish for others as well, bringing even more fresh content under their banner. I root for Atlus because the bring the right balance
I do think Tim Shafer and Miyamoto have it the best, though. I wish more developers had the kind of freedom they enjoy.
Atlus and Shin Megami Tensei easily get a pass. They make a lot of SMT games, but they're ridiculously different from eachother. In the same way that Final Fantasy fans bicker about the best game, SMT fans are fairly opinionated about which are the better SMT games. Because they're different.
We do get too many of them, though. My wallet can't handle it.
We do get too many of them, though. My wallet can't handle it.
I wouldn't exactly say the new Zeldas and Marios have maintained much in the way of creative drive. Mario's been collecting stars for going on 14 years like there's no other way to chart progression in a 3d platformer, and I wouldn't say Wind Waker or Four Swords were radically different from their predecessors in any substantial way.
If you ask me, sequels are best when they elaborate on the potential and concept of the original. The Hitman series has done a bang-up job expanding on the formula with every successive game up to Blood Money, which is almost not even comparable to the first game, Codename 47. I don't know about Okami and Skies of Arcadia, but Jet Set Radio could definitely benefit from similar expansion- the game was spectacular in style and form, but in function it left something to be desired. (Ico shouldn't need a direct sequel though that's silly.)
Likewise with Killer7, which I'm going to bring up for no reason- fans of the game know that it was rushed through development, and the end result bore little resemblance to the original design doc, and many of us would like to see the game without the heavily Resident Evil influenced puzzles and the frustrating and occasionally unpolished (though completely unique and amazing) mechanics, but... actually I have no comment to tie up this sentence, but let's just say it's completely impossible to make heads or tails of any of Suda51's public statements.
If you ask me, sequels are best when they elaborate on the potential and concept of the original. The Hitman series has done a bang-up job expanding on the formula with every successive game up to Blood Money, which is almost not even comparable to the first game, Codename 47. I don't know about Okami and Skies of Arcadia, but Jet Set Radio could definitely benefit from similar expansion- the game was spectacular in style and form, but in function it left something to be desired. (Ico shouldn't need a direct sequel though that's silly.)
Likewise with Killer7, which I'm going to bring up for no reason- fans of the game know that it was rushed through development, and the end result bore little resemblance to the original design doc, and many of us would like to see the game without the heavily Resident Evil influenced puzzles and the frustrating and occasionally unpolished (though completely unique and amazing) mechanics, but... actually I have no comment to tie up this sentence, but let's just say it's completely impossible to make heads or tails of any of Suda51's public statements.
I really don't think the fans have anything to do with the blight of sequels. You want your fans to like your game. You want them to make sequels.Tell me Super Mario bros. has anything on Super Mario 3. When they start getting out of control, that is another fault entirely. It is to risky to go to unknown territory. This has happened because developers release total crap (Facebreaker, Castlevania Judgment, Golden Axe: Beast Rider), or can't find their target audience and make a game that INTERESTS them (Psychonauts, Beyond Good & Evil, Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars). Some of these missteps could be prevented with a little sitdown and some focus. As for the bringing out a bad game, regardless if it was because of time restraints or your project just stinks this go round, it's just bad form. So publishers are afraid. And rightly so, look at all the crap that comes out. Even our favorite companies do some lame stuff. GTA on the ds? Come on, where is your target audience.
In closing, there will always be great new IPs like Assassins Creed to break up the monotony. And there will always be great and much needed sequels like Assassins Creed 2. Treat the problem, not the symptom.
In closing, there will always be great new IPs like Assassins Creed to break up the monotony. And there will always be great and much needed sequels like Assassins Creed 2. Treat the problem, not the symptom.
The biggest problem with sequels is when the company doesn't take enough time to make them. I mean what I SE made a numbered Final Fantasy every year? It would be rushed and pathetic. I mean people would still buy it, but at what price? However because they take years to come out with the next installment it keeps people interested and wanting more. The exception to the rule would probably be Persona 4. That game came out like a year or so after 3 but was still freaking awesome. Yeah it used the same graphics and basically the same fighting engine, but there was enough change to keep me happy.
Sequels aren't a bad thing, they are just used badly (Guitar Hero). Some series deserve sequels. I would kill to have a proper Lunar 3 in my hands right now, or how many times the thought has crossed my mind to write a letter to Tecmo and Nintendo demanding they bring Fatal Frame 4 to America. See sequels are needed but the companies involved should also take the time to develop them properly, by implementing new and creative ideas.
Now as for Metal Gear Solid, I never have understood why Kojima hasn't remade Metal Gear, and Metal Gear 2. That would be awesome! It would be a good chance to fully complete the story of the Solid universe, while maintaining the integrity of the series. Also after those are out of the way, if Konami still wants to make MG games, they could start fresh with new characters. I'm talking fully fresh, not even talk of Snake or Raiden or anything else. The longer Konami clings to the series roots, the less of a chance it has of trying to make it move forward.
Sequels aren't a bad thing, they are just used badly (Guitar Hero). Some series deserve sequels. I would kill to have a proper Lunar 3 in my hands right now, or how many times the thought has crossed my mind to write a letter to Tecmo and Nintendo demanding they bring Fatal Frame 4 to America. See sequels are needed but the companies involved should also take the time to develop them properly, by implementing new and creative ideas.
Now as for Metal Gear Solid, I never have understood why Kojima hasn't remade Metal Gear, and Metal Gear 2. That would be awesome! It would be a good chance to fully complete the story of the Solid universe, while maintaining the integrity of the series. Also after those are out of the way, if Konami still wants to make MG games, they could start fresh with new characters. I'm talking fully fresh, not even talk of Snake or Raiden or anything else. The longer Konami clings to the series roots, the less of a chance it has of trying to make it move forward.
follow
