Cliffy B: Gamers Hate Sequels, Like Trilogies

[John Funk]

Cliffy B: Gamers Hate Sequels, Like Trilogies

Gamers may not enjoy sequels to their favorite shooters, but they usually jump back on board for installment number three.

When a developer wants to make a sequel to a beloved game, the team has a very hard and thankless road ahead. No matter what you do, somebody's going to be quite unhappy - either it sucks popular enough to warrant a sequel in the first place [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks]. For whatever reason, says Epic Games front-man Cliff(y B)leszinski, this is a mentality that is especially prevalent in fans of shooter games.

"For some reason in the shooter world, there's this thing about hating sequels," Bleszinski told OXM as part of a Gears of War 3 feature. "Everyone loved Halo and a lot players were like: 'Halo 2 sucked!' Everyone loves Counterstrike and then Source comes out, 'that sucks!' Quake 2, Gears 2, every single shooter...'"

Whether gamers dislike a given sequel or not, though, Bleszinski thinks they come around for the inevitable trilogy. "[Then] the third one is somehow the one where everyone's like: 'Oh, it's going to be a lot more like 1, remember you like 1, right?'"

The trouble, says Bleszinski, is that even if a game is superior to its predecessors, it can never live up to the memory and nostalgia of the first time through. "[You're] competing with the memory of your own success - which is a very difficult thing to do."

I'm not going to disagree with good ol' Cliffy here, really - but I think it goes beyond the shooter genre, doesn't it? Prince of Persia, Ace Attorney, Metal Gear Solid - there are plenty of series where the second game isn't as beloved as the first or third installments.

On the other hand, you could argue that it isn't just fan preference, either. A developer could try something new in a sequel that fans simply don't like - but by the third game, it has a sense of what worked and what didn't and is able to incorporate the best of both worlds.

It's an interesting argument either way, and I don't think you'll ever get a definitive answer. Gears 3 is out in fall 2011 following a recently-announced delay [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103946-Gears-III-Delayed-to-Fall-2011].

(CVG [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=270553])

Permalink

 

[Legion]

I think the point you made at the end is the most valid one. They make something and people love it. They make another and they will always please some while displeasing others. On the third outing they have all the feedback to see what people liked and hater about changes/similarities and can therefore perfect it.

Or you get Ubisoft who figures it out quicker and makes Assassins Creed 2.

On a side-note: Apparently the Gears delay being a sales issue not a game issue is a load of rubbish. Supposedly a level designer got chewed out for telling people that the campaign is buggy as hell.

Although I doubt many actually believed that it was for holiday sales anyway, not when we will probably have another COD released around the same time.

 

[Random Argument Man]

Cliffy's argument could fall if you into the account the sequels that were way better than the original...like Silent Hill 2, Assasins creed 2, Mario Party 2 (IT'S AWESOME, but has stupid AI) and others. After that, the third game sucked. (Or those that only works for movies?)

 

[JeanLuc761]

I saw this very same phenomenon in Mass Effect 2. I adored it. Others thought Bioware ruined the trilogy forever.

We gamers can be an interesting bunch.

 

[hansari]

Lolwut?

How would anyone find Gears2 inferior to the first Gears of War? The best argument would be the redesign of like one gun I guess...

Or you get Ubisoft who figures it out quicker and makes Assassins Creed 2.

Well theres the exception to the rule...when the first game was rather crappy, the second only has to be better. Of course AC2 was more than just "better".

On the other hand you have Kane and Lynch 1 and its sequel...there you have to write another rule...

 

[ssgt splatter]

This is too true. I hate how we gamers are so bi-polar about our beloved games; "We loved the first one, we hated the second one, and the third was meh."

 

[IamQ]

I liked Jak 2 way more than Jak 3.

 

[PurpleLeafRave]

Modern Warfare 3 will be the second coming of christ to some people, regardless of how good it is. I loved COD 4, but didn't like MW2 as much. It was a shame, COD 4 is on my top ten games list for it's single player.

 

[Outlaw Torn]

I'd rather play a game that has a complete story than have to buy two more games to know what is going on. Developers are far too keen to come up with trilogies than they are to come up with a solid game that could warrant another game or two. And the second game in trilogies is usually the worst because if the first game is awful the second game never gets made The third game will undoubtedly be an improvement because the developers (might) listen to complains/praise regarding certain aspects of the previous two titles and use that to change the content or mechanics.

I'm just suprised that he didn't just jump straight in with "lolz, gamers like pentrilogies so we're only going to make franchises with five games in now, lolz. DON'T FUCKING CALL ME CLIFFY B. lolz fruity pies." and we will never see a game from Epic that has anything more than chest high walls and a morsel of what might be called a plot.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I don't know what he's talking about... people love Counter-Strike: Source, Gears of War 2, and Halo 2... and Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 2 and Team Fortress 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 and Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 and... and I could go on but I think you get the point. Gamers love sequels and trilogies. There is no way to please everyone, but I don't know where he's getting these ideas from.

 

[Megacherv]

Taken way out of context, it sounds as if he's saying "Cliffy B says gamers hate sequels, but like more sequels"

But he makes sense, but it's not necessarily not liking sequels, it's just ungrateful twats saying they hate it anyway because they're, you know, ungrateful twats.

 

[D_987]

I'm just suprised that he didn't just jump straight in with "lolz, gamers like pentrilogies so we're only going to make franchises with five games in now, lolz. DON'T FUCKING CALL ME CLIFFY B. lolz fruity pies." and we will never see a game from Epic that has anything more than chest high walls and a morsel of what might be called a plot.

You do realize that despite all the jokes and stereotypes "Cliffy B" is actually a very good games designer right? I mean you could write a pretty substantial article on the way Gears of War has impacted the games industry, and what it did differently to anything else on the market - the clever and well-designed tweaks to gameplay that made it so unique and a hit in the first place.

If you read what he has to say, or watch an interview with him when he talks about the industry it's actually very interesting. Gears does have a plot by the way - a very average plot designed entirely to give the player a reason to travel to the elaborate environments, but a plot non-the-less. Gameplay should always come before plot, but nice attempt at trolling.

I don't know what he's talking about... people love Counter-Strike: Source, Gears of War 2, and Halo 2... and Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 2 and Team Fortress 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 and Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 and... and I could go on but I think you get the point. Gamers love sequels and trilogies. There is no way to please everyone, but I don't know where he's getting these ideas from.

Not really; some do, some don't - it's just that those most vocal about their feelings are often those that disliked the changes made. Mass Effect 2 is a good example; personally I think Bioware made a really bad game, and one that might have destroyed the franchise in my eyes; others beleive it to have been a really good game. If you go on a forum specifically about the game you'll usually find a vocal minority that will claim the first game is better.

Though on the Gears forums people are particularly rabid regarding the changes made.

 

[Legion]

I don't know what he's talking about... people love Counter-Strike: Source, Gears of War 2, and Halo 2... and Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 2 and Team Fortress 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 and Uncharted 2 and Mass Effect 2 and... and I could go on but I think you get the point. Gamers love sequels and trilogies. There is no way to please everyone, but I don't know where he's getting these ideas from.

If you look at the Gears of War forums, you will see what he means. People get very nostalgic for Gears of War 1 and complain about a lot of changes to the franchise for Gears 2.

 

[Drop_D-Bombshell]

I actually liked halo 2 and GoW 2. I know what he means and it's true in some cases...

 

[DTWolfwood]

Well i can name a few sequels ppl liked more. Tho to be fair some of them did take a really long nap b4 the sequel was released, TF2 and HL2 for example.

COD2 > COD.
Uncharted 2 > Uncharted
ME2 > ME

But yes i see his point. those are the exceptions rather than the rule. I would rather not have sequels or trilogies UNLESS it was specifically designed too be.


I

 

[Hosker]

I'm pretty sure that just about everyone agrees that the second Gears of War is better.

 

[Capo Taco]

Just because a lot of people are complaining doesn't mean they didn't like it. I can complain about my girlfriend, my parents, any number of things. Doesn't mean I don't like them.

 

[godofallu]

Anyone ever go to Epic Games forums, specifically the GOW2 section?

It was like 90% flames and holy shit this is one broken ass game.

So i guess Cliffy has decided that the game didn't do so well, because of it being a sequel, and not because the matchmaking takes 20 minutes and people quit in 99% of the games anyways.

I'll rent GOW3 and give it a chance as I enjoyed the first one, but if they use a similar matchmaking system I can't see the game succeeding.

 

[Infernoshadow211]

Ace attorney was awesome all the way through.