Extra Punctuation: Building Sequels Badly

[Katana314]

Now that we're under the mindset of not listening to the fans, I'd like to suggest this be applied to the Sonic games.

"Return to the classic gameplay" my ass.

 

[Gigatoast]

Well it official, Zero Punctuation is starting to become The Jimquisition, only with less sarcasm.

 

[bojac6]

Sequels aren't a bad thing - sure, in movies they're often a little pathetic, but with games, they're a great way to expand on the original's mechanics. Half-Life, Mass Effect, TES - all great games with great sequels, that are often better than the originals.

Yes, but Half-Life and Mass Effect were originally designed to have sequels and TES has sequels with little in common with the first, different characters, different settings, and new storylines. Yahtzee's point still stands, that unless the game is made with sequels in mind, it doesn't make a good one. But that holds true for any medium. Look at movies or books.

 

[Choppaduel]

The thing about Zelda is that each sequel works more like a remake than a continuation or a separate story. It's the same story, again & again, just with slightly different settings and slightly different dialogue.

Except that's not true and unless you are saying that for comedic affect i would greatly appreciate you don't make strawman arguments when you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. Yes many of the games are similar with similar themes and story structures but if you think that Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are remakes then you sir need your head looked at.

I just wanted to thank you. I'll be quoting this and posting to my friend's FB page. We were debating "geeks" vs. "nerds" and I think you have properly defined it here. Despite what contradictory, poorly translated hypotheses you may have read off IGN and other sites about the overarching timeline of Zelda, once you saw the ending to Ocarina it became pretty difficult to argue that there is a consistent, linear timeline going throughout the franchise. Zelda has much more in common with, say, Robert Rodriguez's Mexico trilogy than Star Wars. Some games clearly take place after others, but overall the same events keep happening and each game can clearly be read as much as a remake as a sequel. So you may rescind your condescension, Mr. Snarkypants, because everything he said is true.

Also, what is this "Strawman" you keep referring to?

A strawman fallacy is where person A refutes an argument that person B does not make or argues against a position that person B does not hold.

Also the quote HeroKing has is mine, though he has dropped the quote code for some reason.

edited for spelling.

 

[Godzillascott]

Sequels that are better than the originals.

Star Control 2 (Massive story that blows the original out of the water. SC3-not so much.)
Frontier: Elite 2
Wing Commander 2, 3, 4, Prophecy (Constant upgrade to the gameplay mechanics. Introduction of cinematic exposition.)
King's Quest 6.
Doom 2
Baldur's Gate 2 (Can anyone who played both not agree?)

You know how these games succeeded. Lack of feedback except through trade magazines/info. The inclusion and permeation of the Internet has doomed us all. Such a concept back in the day would drive developers mad.

MAD!!!!

MAD, I TELL YOU!!!

 

[blankedboy]

How about all the Trackmania and Jumper games?

 

[Labcoat Samurai]

Name me one sequel to a game that wasn't left open for sequels, with the same main characters as before, whose story was regarded as better than the first. Let me help you out: there aren't any.

Very few games meet those criteria at all. Even Bioshock 2 does not, since it shares virtually none of the same characters....

The phrase "wasn't left open for sequels" is, in particular, too limiting. Very few games aren't left open for sequels.

Some games I'd point out that meet the criteria in spirit would be Half-Life 2, Halo 2, Saints Row 2, each of the two Neverwinter Nights expansions (both were full campaigns, both let you carry over your character, and both had better stories than the original game), and Gears of War 2 (by virtue of the first having a self-contained story where a sequel is only hinted at by some voiceover tacked on to the ending). A couple of examples I'm not sure about but would probably be candidates are Just Cause 2 and Dead Rising 2. Never played either of those games, but the consensus I've heard is that they're really good, whether or not they meet your "story is better" requirement.

One could probably argue that most of those don't fit the criteria, and that would largely be on technicalities, because the criteria are too restrictive for the statement to be meaningful. Even Portal doesn't meet that requirement, because I'd argue that ending with Chell passing out and with GLaDOS singing about still being alive, the suggestion is that it is "left open for a sequel". As much as the original Half-Life was, at any rate... particularly once you factor in that they went back and added some content onto the ending. In practice, many of the games on the list I provided are only left open for a sequel by some trivial thing exposed at the end, that could have been as easily removed.

 

[SFR]

Okay, people keep giving examples of gaming sequels that are better than originals, but that's generally true. He said games that DON'T NEED sequels while using the same character and then focusing solely on the quality of the story. I would say Portal 2 was a better game than Portal 1 (and I completely disagree with almost everything Yatzee said in this article about it), but not many games fall into the category he laid out for it. Gears of War 2 almost does and was a lot better in my opinion, but even that game sort of left it open for a sequel story wise (and really does for the triquel). Uncharted 2's story was awesome and well executed. I never played the first, so I have no idea what the first story was about XP. Anybody got an opinion on it?

 

[For.I.Am.Mad]

Every week Yahtzee gives me a glimpse of what it would be like to have British dad.

 

[funguy2121]

The thing about Zelda is that each sequel works more like a remake than a continuation or a separate story. It's the same story, again & again, just with slightly different settings and slightly different dialogue.

Except that's not true and unless you are saying that for comedic affect i would greatly appreciate you don't make strawman arguments when you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. Yes many of the games are similar with similar themes and story structures but if you think that Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are remakes then you sir need your head looked at.

I just wanted to thank you. I'll be quoting this and posting to my friend's FB page. We were debating "geeks" vs. "nerds" and I think you have properly defined it here. Despite what contradictory, poorly translated hypotheses you may have read off IGN and other sites about the overarching timeline of Zelda, once you saw the ending to Ocarina it became pretty difficult to argue that there is a consistent, linear timeline going throughout the franchise. Zelda has much more in common with, say, Robert Rodriguez's Mexico trilogy than Star Wars. Some games clearly take place after others, but overall the same events keep happening and each game can clearly be read as much as a remake as a sequel. So you may rescind your condescension, Mr. Snarkypants, because everything he said is true.

Also, what is this "Strawman" you keep referring to?

A strawman fallacy is where person A refutes an argument that person B does not make or argues against a position that person B does not hold.

Also the quote HeroKing has is mine, though he has dropped the quote code for some reason.

edited for spelling.

Geezus, Uncle Grandfather, I thought you could tell I was joking from the emoticon. So we both agree that you weren't using the "strawman?"

Anyway, I refuse to use the word "strawman fallacy" in an argument because it's very largely troll terminology, and because the people using the word are usually the people doing it. Also, that is not a fallacy, which drives my inner word-nerd nuts.

Now, turn around, and...back into my hand.

...and if you don't get that reference, then no cookies for you for ever.

 

[veloper]

This is by far the weakest extra punctuation yet.

When talking about game sequels the gameplay changes are the most important issue by far, but all Yahtzee worries about is the stupid story.

Games. The original story was shit, the following story is shit and the shit doesn't matter.

Game sequels are good, because there's almost always parts to improve or expand for the actual game.

 

[Carnagath]

You make a lot of assumptions, such that the writers themselves didn't want Glados back, and that had been the intended story from the get go. You also seem bothered by the fact that Valve didn't think the core of Portal was the same one you did.

Exactly. So much for trying to make a point, I guess Yahtzee didn't pay much attention to the Portal 1 developer commentary.

 

[Choppaduel]

The thing about Zelda is that each sequel works more like a remake than a continuation or a separate story. It's the same story, again & again, just with slightly different settings and slightly different dialogue.

Except that's not true and unless you are saying that for comedic affect i would greatly appreciate you don't make strawman arguments when you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. Yes many of the games are similar with similar themes and story structures but if you think that Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are remakes then you sir need your head looked at.

I just wanted to thank you. I'll be quoting this and posting to my friend's FB page. We were debating "geeks" vs. "nerds" and I think you have properly defined it here. Despite what contradictory, poorly translated hypotheses you may have read off IGN and other sites about the overarching timeline of Zelda, once you saw the ending to Ocarina it became pretty difficult to argue that there is a consistent, linear timeline going throughout the franchise. Zelda has much more in common with, say, Robert Rodriguez's Mexico trilogy than Star Wars. Some games clearly take place after others, but overall the same events keep happening and each game can clearly be read as much as a remake as a sequel. So you may rescind your condescension, Mr. Snarkypants, because everything he said is true.

Also, what is this "Strawman" you keep referring to?

A strawman fallacy is where person A refutes an argument that person B does not make or argues against a position that person B does not hold.

Also the quote HeroKing has is mine, though he has dropped the quote code for some reason.

edited for spelling.

Geezus, Uncle Grandfather, I thought you could tell I was joking from the emoticon. So we both agree that you weren't using the "strawman?"

Anyway, I refuse to use the word "strawman fallacy" in an argument because it's very largely troll terminology, and because the people using the word are usually the people doing it. Also, that is not a fallacy, which drives my inner word-nerd nuts.

Now, turn around, and...back into my hand.

...and if you don't get that reference, then no cookies for you for ever.

I'm utterly humorless... sometimes.

hmmm... I don't get the reference

 

[lazinesslord]

I don't think that the fanbase is contradicting itself. It's just that it's really big meaning there's many different opinions. A portion hates Windwaker but loves Twilight Princess but for another portion it's vice versa.

 

[funguy2121]

snip

Your avatar. "Uncle Grandfather," from the Adult Swim mini Perfect Hair Forever. There may be a small chance I'm wrong and that it's the old dude from Dragon Ball but...excuse me, my dork is showing.

Anyway, in case you can't tell from his name, Uncle Grandfather (yes that implies exactly what you think it does) is a perv.

 

[Cybele]

You say that nothing good comes of it if developers listen to the fans.
Yet I recall that in a review of the Thief series you said that the second game was the best in the series because the developers actually listened to the fans.