Bad Gaming Sequels
- Thread starter dark707
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm going to jump into my Wayback machine and travel to the Mythical era of the late 1990's for this one.
Phantasmagoria: A Puzzle of Flesh.
The first Phantasmagoria was an awesome Horror/Adventure game with a dark story involving demonic possessions and haunted mansions and dark rituals with the things that should not be.
The Puzzles were challenging, the setting was creepy and the acting was...okay the acting was crap but it's an FMV Adventure game from the Mid 90's what do you expect?
Anyway the first few hours of A Puzzle of Flesh involve your main character doing such horrifying things as feeding his pet rat, finding his wallet, and filing reports in his cubicle at work. (DUN DUN DUN!)
And it just keeps on with that same pace through the whole thing. You check your email, check your mail at home, go visit your doctor, go to a night club and hang out at T.G.I.Friday's with your gay buddy from work.
All of this mindless tedium takes up like 90% of the game.
The Sci-Fi/Horror elements of the story just pop up randomly and it's not until the last few minutes of the game that the stupid truth behind the non-existent mystery is revealed. And that's even worse because you never solve anything, you just find a letter that spells everything out for you.
I can see what the game was getting at by putting me in the shoes of a Joe Everyman who's life just starts falling apart as he's driven to madness by a situation beyond his control. In the right hands that scenario could be truly horrifying but it's wasted here. The big reveal is stupid, the story is uninspired and I seem to remember having to play through the game again just to be reminded of who the Villain was since he's only mentioned a handful of times prior to his big reveal.
Phantasmagoria: A Puzzle of Flesh.
The first Phantasmagoria was an awesome Horror/Adventure game with a dark story involving demonic possessions and haunted mansions and dark rituals with the things that should not be.
The Puzzles were challenging, the setting was creepy and the acting was...okay the acting was crap but it's an FMV Adventure game from the Mid 90's what do you expect?
Anyway the first few hours of A Puzzle of Flesh involve your main character doing such horrifying things as feeding his pet rat, finding his wallet, and filing reports in his cubicle at work. (DUN DUN DUN!)
And it just keeps on with that same pace through the whole thing. You check your email, check your mail at home, go visit your doctor, go to a night club and hang out at T.G.I.Friday's with your gay buddy from work.
All of this mindless tedium takes up like 90% of the game.
The Sci-Fi/Horror elements of the story just pop up randomly and it's not until the last few minutes of the game that the stupid truth behind the non-existent mystery is revealed. And that's even worse because you never solve anything, you just find a letter that spells everything out for you.
I can see what the game was getting at by putting me in the shoes of a Joe Everyman who's life just starts falling apart as he's driven to madness by a situation beyond his control. In the right hands that scenario could be truly horrifying but it's wasted here. The big reveal is stupid, the story is uninspired and I seem to remember having to play through the game again just to be reminded of who the Villain was since he's only mentioned a handful of times prior to his big reveal.
ok im getting tired of haveing to defend bioware from purests like you so if i come off as an asshole please understand its because of my growing frustration with RPG purests and i mean no direct insult nor am i trying to start a flame war.Mr. Moonshine said:
1) the game was good, the story was good though felt a little rushed but all in all better then the first.
2) try playing the game on a harder difficulty setting leveling is a bit trickier.
3) the inventory system in the first game sucked it was cluttered to hell and gone so of corse like GOOD developers they got rid of what didnt work.
4) ok ill admit i wish they would have left the ammo thing alone but i can see how infinite ammo would have broke the game with the new tarrgeting system.
Now please dont quote me only to call me an idiot because at this point i will simply report you.
OT: crackdown 2 ok i liked the game still but it was basicly the SAME game as the first with less choices and prettier graphics. Though the fact they let you have a RUBBER DUCK THAT EXPLODES! kinda makes up for it a little
Does Star Craft 2 count as a bad sequel or does it not count since its split into 3 different parts?
While i loved ME2 I do agree that they did streamline it ALLOT. it was basically a 3rd person shooter. I dont think it was crap but i agree with Mr. Moonshine on everything elseMr. Moonshine said:
You can go HA BISKY yourself with big fat black HA BISKY while HA BISKY HA BISKY HA BISKY and I HA BISKY your mother how about that. Fallout 3 was a terrible FPS. The guns felt cheap and weren't fun to shoot. The enemies were dim as fuck. Also, VATS was cheating. The roleplaying wasn't that great.Judgement101 said:
I'm not saying it's a bad sequel because it's different from the first two games, even though it is. I'm saying it's a bad sequel because it's bad.
Critics and sales figures say otherwise. Its not even a sequel it's a triquel! (loopules FTW) (My spelling is bad tonight)Dragons In Space said:
I think there are still some people that would say Left 4 Dead 2. I am not one of those people, just saying.
With sequels there are few that are just plain bad though, there are aspects that may not be as good but generally they have improved a few things too.
Modern Warfare 2 for example lost in the single player campaign in my opinion but gained in the Multiplayer but lost again in modification options. Although I guess you could be picky and call it COD 6.
With sequels there are few that are just plain bad though, there are aspects that may not be as good but generally they have improved a few things too.
Modern Warfare 2 for example lost in the single player campaign in my opinion but gained in the Multiplayer but lost again in modification options. Although I guess you could be picky and call it COD 6.
I'm surprised Final Fantasy X-2 hasn't been mentioned more than once already. I hate that game with a burning, unrelenting passion.
It's like Nomura went into the game saying, "Hey, you know all that good stuff about 10? The interesting turn-based battles and the complex, thought-provoking story? Yeah, lets just piss on that, and put all the girls in skimpy outfits. Cause that sells, right?".
I mean, yeah, a good sequel SHOULD change a few things, but this game just feels completely at odds with the original. Plus, it just feels cheap. Almost all the areas from the first game are re-used shamelessly, a good chunk of the enemies are also re-used (including the unforgiveable sin of re-using bosses), and the final boss was not only a let-down, but AGAIN, it was a re-used character model.
But the most annoying thing about it is that it's completely and totally pointless. I LOVED 10's ambiguous, non-fairy tale ending. It let you fill in the blanks yourself. But this one just throws all that away, in favor of telling a crappy, disjointed story.
...damn, it felt good to get that rant out of my system.
It's like Nomura went into the game saying, "Hey, you know all that good stuff about 10? The interesting turn-based battles and the complex, thought-provoking story? Yeah, lets just piss on that, and put all the girls in skimpy outfits. Cause that sells, right?".
I mean, yeah, a good sequel SHOULD change a few things, but this game just feels completely at odds with the original. Plus, it just feels cheap. Almost all the areas from the first game are re-used shamelessly, a good chunk of the enemies are also re-used (including the unforgiveable sin of re-using bosses), and the final boss was not only a let-down, but AGAIN, it was a re-used character model.
But the most annoying thing about it is that it's completely and totally pointless. I LOVED 10's ambiguous, non-fairy tale ending. It let you fill in the blanks yourself. But this one just throws all that away, in favor of telling a crappy, disjointed story.
...damn, it felt good to get that rant out of my system.
All of them, most sequels are just plain bad, it's just a developers way of saying "Hey, guys, I think we missed some money on the last property! Let's make another one, with the same storyline, same character, same everything and see if we can milk it dry!"
Yes, I am looking at you Nintendo.
Yes, I am looking at you Nintendo.
Of course it's not a valid sequel for this thread. I don't care what paid critics say. I am a game critic too, but even if I wasn't I can still have my own opinion. Almost everything in Fallout 3 was low in quality. The place was big and there were a lot of quests, but quantity != quality.Judgement101 said:
I hated the Mako, and was glad to see it go, and I know for a fact that I"m not alone in that sentiment. I do agree that scanning planets sucked, even if you got the upgrade that made it faster. And Bioware eventually added the Hammerhead, which is vastly superior to the Mako (though I would have appreciated it more if it had been around for the entire game).Mr. Moonshine said:
The inventory system was terrible. There was nothing more tedious and annoying in Mass Effect than realizing your inventory was full and having to go through and turn your weakest guns, and most useless upgrades into omnigel. Now don't get me wrong, I liked having more guns and more upgrade options in the original (though I liked how ME2 handled the armor a lot), but sorting through that inventory screen was almost as frustrating as sorting through your items when you wanted to sell them- which was a nightmare.
So for Mass Effect 3, I'm hoping they bring back the options for guns, but find a better way to handle the inventory menus.
Haven't read the thread, but I saw FFX-2 and need to say something about it.
I remember reading years back that Squaresoft would never make a sequel to Final Fantasy game (I doubt I could ever find this article again). Fast forward after Enix was aquired, FFX-2 was announced and released, contradicting what Square said in the past.
End result? One of the most hated Final Fantasy games ever.
I myself never finished it, but I didn't actually hate it, just thought it was different.
For a bad recent sequel.. Starcraft 2.
I wish I was trolling. I explain things briefly here: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6273407.html
For me, Starcraft 2 was afflicted by a multitude of personal issues, most resulting from being a dedicated Starcraft fan from 12 years ago. I may write a review of it one day to really elaborate on everything, but it's not on my to-do list.
I remember reading years back that Squaresoft would never make a sequel to Final Fantasy game (I doubt I could ever find this article again). Fast forward after Enix was aquired, FFX-2 was announced and released, contradicting what Square said in the past.
End result? One of the most hated Final Fantasy games ever.
I myself never finished it, but I didn't actually hate it, just thought it was different.
For a bad recent sequel.. Starcraft 2.
I wish I was trolling. I explain things briefly here: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6273407.html
For me, Starcraft 2 was afflicted by a multitude of personal issues, most resulting from being a dedicated Starcraft fan from 12 years ago. I may write a review of it one day to really elaborate on everything, but it's not on my to-do list.
You win thread. Congradulations! But Warren Spector didn't have anything to do with that piece of pablum.Imbechile said:
For what it's worth, I thought Diablo 2 was a goddamn cartoon romp through the Unicorn Vale compared to the first, which actually did a pretty good job of instilling dread in the player. Especially if you're dumb enough to be a mage. Plus, I'm a sucker for randomized dungeons, especially when they're supposed to be manifested from the subconscious of someone possessed by chaos.