Extra Punctuation: Building Sequels Badly

[barrelroll37]

Wow, a 3 pager. Very nice.

OT: Video game sequels really should only be used to indicate that the game uses some of the same mechanics, while delivering a new story every time.

Though it has to be said, I enjoyed Kingdom Hearts 2 better than Kingdom Hearts. The mechanics were much tighter and the story really was better. You had an actual group you were fighting against that had multiple people with differing perspectives on their objectives instead of a single person vaguely hinted at throughout the game that doesn't even show his face until the end.

That is up for debate. While the game has stronger mechanics in some areas, some have argued that it is so easy that compared to the first game its just a button masher. And that it has QTEs that are more stupid than the average ones since it involves only the triangle button, which makes it more button mashing.And as for the story, while u have a valid point others can say that sora has no real character growth compared to the first one. And that goofy and donald feel more like they're just along for the ride than the first one, which had at least a few moments here and there (i.e donald arguing with sora in deep jungle, donald and goofy defending sora at hollow bastion) so its a matter of perspective on that one.

 

[Common Knowledge]

I don't see what the big issue is with sequals. Sure with films it can get pretty silly (Police Academy 7!) but if done right games can reinvent the original. I think the Dawn of War games are a pretty good example of this, the first just had one campagin and four races but was still a good game. The sequal was mostly the same but featured another race added, and then Dark Crusade arrived and featured seven campagins, was third in the series and is still one of my all time favourite RTS's - in my opinion better than the original.

 

[mschweiz]

I really think that Ubisoft needs to read this. they need to let Ezio and Altair go.

 

[Hachura]

Someone above had said something like "Too bad fans are the ones with the money" and I couldn't agree more.

Devs are having to sacrifice things like creativity and originality to cater to us assholes who demand more of the same thing in a sequel, and then proceed to ***** when it turns out inferior to the original. People are bullshit.

Let's have a renaissance I say. All the way back to the good ol' days of cave paintings. I'm betting THOSE artists didn't whore themselves out, trading their values for a buck.

 

[Norix596]

Interesting point. I guess if you set squeals in the same universe as the original with different characters, it inherently has to be more original and capable of standing on it's own. Unless it's a poorly written one.

 

[Wolcik]

Read some of the comments, and the point has been proven Second page has a bite, and third had a description of outcome of it XD

 

[Lightning Delight]

See, thats something that confused me about Portal 2. In the song at the end of Portal 1, GLaDOS is singing about how alive she is, and how she gets to live indefinitely, doing science forever. Then in Portal 2, its revealed that she has been dormant for 999999, and she hates you for killing her. And what the hell happened to "I'm not even angry?" Her motivations in the second game made no sense based off the ending of the first.

 

[Pseudopod]

I disagree with this article largely because mechanics and gameplay can do a lot to save a game sequel even if the sequel doesn't add much to the story. There's series like Mario where the stories are total repetitive nonsense, but the games continue to be good thanks to Nintendo constantly adding and refining mechanics. Pokemon is another good example, where the story changes minimally between sequels, but virtually everything else is improved. Sometimes even a graphical update is enough to justify a sequel. There are franchises to which story is very vital and needs to be a strong consideration when making a sequel, but there's also plenty where I'm find with a bit of nonsense in the story department for the sake of improvements the rest of the game's design. There's more than one valid reason to make a sequel, and some franchises just aren't as story dependent as others.

That said, story is very important to Portal, but I have yet to feel like Portal 2's story or GLaDOS's inclusion in it have been forced. The game is solid when it comes to mechanics and pacing. The new "toys" in Portal 2, such as the various goos, excursion tunnels, and hard light bridges, expand well on the mechanics of the first game and add loads of fun. I haven't gotten bored with testing at all. The game is plenty broken up by the different sections of the facility, "off rail" segments, and by the additions of Cave Johnson, Wheatley, and the changes in GlaDOS. The atmosphere changes a lot as you move forward. All in all, I felt Portal 2 succeeded as a sequel by subtly expanding on the history of Aperture Science through more excellent character dialogue, with lots of humor and mind bending puzzles to keep the player engaged.

Portal 2 has amazed and entertained me immensely. I know fan pressure can negatively influence franchises, but I see no evidence of this in Portal 2.

 

[CopperBoom]

Elder Scrolls (Oblivion was FAR better than any previous game, which looks to be surpassed again by Skyrim)

While I do think Skyrim will be amazing Oblivion was only better compared to Arena.
I thought (personally of course) that Morrowind was MILES better and deeper than Oblivion which was so mass-market and watered down... and that one is not even my favourite!
My favourite is still Daggerfall, although it has been a while since I have played it, it has the biggest world to play in and seems the most "free". It was like an FPS single player Ultima Online.

You know, I could never get into the 1st two Elder scrolls games.. believe me I tried.. there seemed to be a massive barrier to entry for me which they ironed out (in my opinion) in Oblivion. Oblivion just played well, so well I sank over 100 hours into it. It was massive too. Could be it was watered down for less hardcore players? I don't know, but it was immersive, which is what a RPG should be and accessible enough to get me into it.. so in this case, it was a sequel to a game which took it's origins, listened to feedback and emerged with an awesome product which suited a broader RPG audience. Maybe it's an approachability thing, I never got into Baldurs Gate but loved Neverwinter Nights. That said, I never did try Morrowind - I guess Arena and Daggerfall put me off - I might give it a try if I can get hold of it.
I'm REALLY Looking forward to Skyrim. If it can be Oblivion and then some, I'll be happy.. wife won't be though.

I think we are both looking forward to Skyrim with the same optimism.
Which is the important thing, so what if one game gave us more fun as a time sink we are both Elder Scroll fans.

I think Oblivion, with its fast travel and waypoints and all that is "streamlining" and "watering down"... but that is not totally a bad thing.
I liked how hardcore the other ones were but that was when I had no career and no friends and could fully commit to that RPG experience, now I probably do want things to just fulfill me with huge story and pacing and not really need to "live" in the world as much though I am sure I could. That is why I think we are both equally excited about this new one.

I just hope there are no annoying stryders or whatever they were called that get in the way of resting in the wild.

 

[Crono Maniac]

Yahtzee was right, most of these comments are really really dumb.

 

[GiantRaven]

I just thought of another three games that fulfill Yahtzee's criteria; the three Hitman sequels.

All three feature the same main character.
None of the games leave any doors open for potential sequels.
Each game is generally received better than the one previously, although Contracts may not have been story-wise (Personally, I don't agree there).

 

[Nomanslander]

I thought Portal 2 was massively superior to Portal 1. Why is that? This is at least was a full fledged game with hours worth of improved gameplay. A much more intertwined and pleasing story, and a better fleshing out of the characters with its story arc.

The first game was nice little treat, a hersey's kiss had for the first time if you've never had one. This was a three scoops double chocolate sundae, with fudgy chunks, and hot fudge syrup on top. Maybe a little too much for your tastes, but I have a much greater appetite.

There! Your harping has just been refuted as you said it is my right to do so. Enjoy!

 

[Worr Monger]

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.

Personally, I think it's safe to assume Yahtzee himself would say Half Life 2 is better than the first...

I would completely disagree, but that's just me. I'm just hear to point out the contradiction.

 

[Daedalus1942]

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 on the Sega Mega Drive (Genesis).
A great sequel, with the same main character.
Metroid, Metroid II, Super Metroid, Metroid Fusion, etc.
-Tabs<3-

 

[sukmyrooster]

Anyone else pick up on the Animal Farm reference?

 

[SuperShadowAce]

It might be because I'm a generic middle class office worker but I liked Portal 2 better.

 

[Freechoice]

Fans are clingy, complaining dipshits who will never ever be grateful for any concession you make. The moment you shut out their shrill, tremulous voices, the happier you'll be.

Incidentally, why not buy a Zero Punctuation T-shirt?

 

[Chrono180]

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.

Hmmm... lets see... I must admit I have trouble thinking of a sequel that meets his criteria... Riven maybe? Myst may not have slammed the door on sequels, but since it ended without any direct "hooks" (aside from where Sirius and Achenar went after their books were destroyed) maybe it would qualify.

I would say x-men legends 2, but the very nature of comic book games tend to lend themselves to sequels.

 

[hitheremynameisbob]

Scanning these pages, I see a few people have already brought up System Shock 2, but it seems mostly to compare it to Bioshock. I'd like to throw in the suggestion that it also qualifies as an answer to Yahtzee's challenge to, as he said it: "Name 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."

System Shock did not end with a cliff-hanger. SHODAN, as I remember it, had to basically be retconned back to life with little hint that it was going to happen to be found in the original game. While the protagonist of the second game was different, the character with far and away the most presence, SHODAN herself, is the same, as is the timeline and the general premise. System Shock 2, I think most would agree, also had the better story.

 

[MegaManOfNumbers]

Uuuh... well this seems rather awkward. seeing that he claims that I'll criticize his stuff because I'm a fan.

does that make him hypocritical, right, arrogant, foolish, or "all of the above"?

.....

No wait, he's Yahtzee. He's his own catagory.