Does Portal even need a sequel?
- Thread starter kidigus
- Start date
I thought it was way to short to just have ended there... And no this isn't some L4D/L4D2 rant type thing with sequels, but Portal seemed more like a beta to me just by the length of it and about half of it seeming like tutorials... Portal 2 looks like it really builds on that and shows just how much is actually possible...
As far as I remember, Portal was meant as a tester, or at least it was a short game to test out a concept. It was done remarkably well and they certainly shouldn?t stop now just to quite while they're ahead. That?s kind of pessimistic, especially when they seem to have so much more to add to both the gameplay and story.
They said somthing about JC...
So the awesome song at the end looks good. *ticks*
For humor it looks like Glados and Wheatly has got it coverd and with wheatly there be some light heart(ish) humour aswell. *tick*
My brain is dead and I can't remember what ambience means but fuck it. *tick*
I've seen the E3 demo so art design. *tick*
'Nerdy atmosphere'. *checks trousers* *tick*
Yep. All coverd.
Except the writing... But there is more characters then just you Glados and companion cube so yeah. *tick*
Good on yah valve.
So the awesome song at the end looks good. *ticks*
For humor it looks like Glados and Wheatly has got it coverd and with wheatly there be some light heart(ish) humour aswell. *tick*
My brain is dead and I can't remember what ambience means but fuck it. *tick*
I've seen the E3 demo so art design. *tick*
'Nerdy atmosphere'. *checks trousers* *tick*
Yep. All coverd.
Except the writing... But there is more characters then just you Glados and companion cube so yeah. *tick*
Good on yah valve.
That was for you by the way...Carnagath said:
I doesn't need a sequel, but I'm really glad they're making one. The original Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Bros. didn't need sequels, but I'm really glad they got them too.
If they can make the game longer and add more harder and creative puzzles then yes it is needed as those are all areas where the game fell down. It was too short the normal puzzles in the game were too easy and the advanced ones were just awkward versions of the other ones. Awkward does mean hard but they should be challenging hard. Also all the puzzles in the first game just repeated with very similar themes. After I got into the last 3 levels I thought I was done with the tutorial not with the game.
It should be: There's money in them thar Portals...BlindTom said:
Anyway, imo, no. I'm willing to be proved wrong. But I thought that Portal was perfectly paced, absolutely brilliant, and very accessible (my non-gamer girlfriend played it from beginning to end and absolutely loved it). Plus the song was classic.
A sequel smacks of cashing in. If they can make that concept work, great, but if they mess it up, Portal will seem less awesome too (don't believe me - see the Matrix. Awesome movie, totally tainted by sequels). Call me conservative, but I'd prefer to see no sequel; leave something that needs no sequel the hell alone.
Incidentally, having an ending where all the threads are not tied up IS NOT the same as having an ending which NEEDS finishing.
portal was short because it was an experiment and it was a triumph valve made a not "huge success" it was hard to over state players satisfaction.
portal two looks like it builds on what portal need more complex puzzles more lies about cakes more galdos more humour more cheating test chambers by thinking with portals so I think yes it is necessary.
portal two looks like it builds on what portal need more complex puzzles more lies about cakes more galdos more humour more cheating test chambers by thinking with portals so I think yes it is necessary.
I think that the sequal is going to ruin it, but it might try some new things that may be interesting and will make me want to play portal 1 again.
I think Portal was a masterpiece, but it was far too short and has way too much potential for it to be left untapped.
And by 'potential' I don't mean it's potential to make money. I mean that it's fun, but there is far, far more that can be done with it before sequels become unnecessary.
And by 'potential' I don't mean it's potential to make money. I mean that it's fun, but there is far, far more that can be done with it before sequels become unnecessary.
As much as I loved the original I do think a sequel is in order. Portal seemed like a preview in some ways due to how short it was, it was perfect in execution but it really was just a tease of what Valve had in store, aka Portal 2. I can't wait until it comes out and I really hope the rest of Apperture Science is as fun as it was the first time.
No, but neither did a lot of games. Portal 2 is looking pretty fun, though, so I won't be AS upset that it isn't Episode 3.