Extra Punctuation: Building Sequels Badly
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
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.
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?
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?"Choppaduel said: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.funguy2121 said: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.HeroKing89 said:
Also, what is this "Strawman" you keep referring to?
Also the quote HeroKing has is mine, though he has dropped the quote code for some reason.
edited for spelling.
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.
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.
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.
I'm utterly humorless... sometimes.funguy2121 said: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?"Choppaduel said: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.funguy2121 said: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.HeroKing89 said:
Also, what is this "Strawman" you keep referring to?
Also the quote HeroKing has is mine, though he has dropped the quote code for some reason.
edited for spelling.
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.
hmmm... I don't get the reference
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.
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.Choppaduel said:
Anyway, in case you can't tell from his name, Uncle Grandfather (yes that implies exactly what you think it does) is a perv.
Really feel I have to mention Zone of The Enders: The Second Runner as a sequel with a better story (and gameplay). The first one explained very little and then Second Runner explained the politics of the universe and finished the storyline with no loose ends really.
Hmm, don't agree that Portal 1 was so significantly better than Portal 2, in fact I think everything was pretty much perfect in Portal 2, a perfect evolution of the original as it expanded into full-game status. I felt the story and characters were very amusing, the new mechanics quite fun and satisfying to use, and the sections between test areas were a perfect break from the tests themselves.
You're just reaching for things to nitpick at. Don't lie, you know you loved it.
You're just reaching for things to nitpick at. Don't lie, you know you loved it.
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.CopperBoom said:
I'm REALLY Looking forward to Skyrim. If it can be Oblivion and then some, I'll be happy.. wife won't be though.
Actually, my avatar is Coiffio, the Evil Controller of Cats.funguy2121 said:
this is Uncle Grandfather
I just realized how off topic we are.
uhhhhh... GO YAHTZEE! YAY! you show those fanboys.
I understand the point, or rather because I'm a fan I think I do but are dead wrong. The problem with
sequels is that the developers work to much on how to please the fans,
and don't work hard enough to make the game better. That may be a valid theory. I can't say.
I'm a real big Yehtzee fan so as the article says I'm probably wrong. : ) Or not.
sequels is that the developers work to much on how to please the fans,
and don't work hard enough to make the game better. That may be a valid theory. I can't say.
I'm a real big Yehtzee fan so as the article says I'm probably wrong. : ) Or not.
I agree with most of what Yahtzee says,and he is right about some critical bullet points like the re usage of old characters in sequels,one of the main interesting stuff about good games is the interrogations that it leaves you with,for example take the first 3 halos,halo 1 was by far the most creative game of the 7(I think they are 7),while halo 2 and halo 3 spoil some of the mystery about the Halos and the covenant,the same can be said about good sequels like for example Hitman:blood money,which focus itself more on delivering new missions instead of keep running the same basis that contracts left(the whole Romanian cloning facility stuff.
However as a fan I must point out a game that often didn't screw up on its sequels,and guess what it is,yep ace combat which is by far the best game series ever conceived by human beings,the reason of why this game is so awesome is simple(take a note that I'm a fan and therefore whatever I say next gets into the layer of fanboysm).
Its all down to how the game is told,and how it encourage you during gameplay,I been playing ace series and the game hasn't move an inch from its basis stablish 15 years ago,but anyone who has played ace combat will have a different favourite game of the series, because they always change the way that the game is told,in AC2 you have your standard history of aces mercenaries taking down a coup,this happens in a strangereal place called "strangereal",but the evolution of both the concept and the game made the series make huge jumps,for example they forgot everything about what they did about top gun in ace combat 2 and decided to make an anime based story with AC3(only in Japan)but this aspect made the series evolve in many many areas like storytelling and concepts,and didn't recycle any elements from previous ace combat games,just gameplay.
After that come the best game in the series which are AC04,AC5 and ACZero(coincidentally all in PS2),the thing about these games is they way of their storytelling structure respectably,and how they decided to provide the story of each game with relation of the previous game but without using direct elements implied,just the place(stragereal) and some events like the asteroids from AC4 and the belkan war in both AC5 and zero,for example in AC04 you were an ace pilot in a normal war between the same enemies not represented directly but equal and with their own original background,in AC4 they told the story in gameplay with the radio charter and the mission briefing,while at the other side of the conflict an child tells the story from one of the affected countries and its relation with its enemy,and is really well put together and structured,is like portal 1 in this regard.
Then you have the Ac5 game with a really good story which suits more a movie,almost all elements from the past game are taken away,then using the existing assets in creating yet another good story using both gameplay,radio charter,briefings and cinematics,a bit over dramatic but way better that what you find in shooter or war related games these days,there is no patriotism and all that bullshit that plague all shooters these days(I should have address this before ,not involving the US faction in war games is really good for storytelling),and the story is well told and well produce,in fact one of the best productions I have seen.
And then there is my favourite game of all,ace combat zero,the 6th game manage to be the best game, although some people consider AC5 the peak of the series I sustain that Zero manages the top of all games,the reason for this is the perfect integration between all elements,everything fit together,the player decisions did matter in gameplay and everything is beautify put together to create and amazing ending that have direct correlation with gameplay and story,a perfect ending for a videogame,nothing is overdone and the story is simple,and it uses the gameplay to max the experience like any other of the previous games(similar to Half life 2 in this respect)and its uses also the perfect storytelling production without involving any of the previous elements,just the place and the gameplay.
So,I disagree with Ben Yahtzee in the aspect of "no games with good continuity",there are games with terrific sequels(HL2 for example)the only issue with such games is to find them or to have a good original concept unexploited for its income,something that have become an standard in the industry,apparently,and designers hasn't manage to find out best creative ways to create stories based on the existing gamplay instead of story(like project aces did the last 15 years until they sort of cock it up with 6 but never mind,maybe AC assault horizon manages to be good but one huge barrier is the fact that US in it).
And yep,I like portal 1 more,it was more "cheesy" somehow.
However as a fan I must point out a game that often didn't screw up on its sequels,and guess what it is,yep ace combat which is by far the best game series ever conceived by human beings,the reason of why this game is so awesome is simple(take a note that I'm a fan and therefore whatever I say next gets into the layer of fanboysm).
Its all down to how the game is told,and how it encourage you during gameplay,I been playing ace series and the game hasn't move an inch from its basis stablish 15 years ago,but anyone who has played ace combat will have a different favourite game of the series, because they always change the way that the game is told,in AC2 you have your standard history of aces mercenaries taking down a coup,this happens in a strangereal place called "strangereal",but the evolution of both the concept and the game made the series make huge jumps,for example they forgot everything about what they did about top gun in ace combat 2 and decided to make an anime based story with AC3(only in Japan)but this aspect made the series evolve in many many areas like storytelling and concepts,and didn't recycle any elements from previous ace combat games,just gameplay.
After that come the best game in the series which are AC04,AC5 and ACZero(coincidentally all in PS2),the thing about these games is they way of their storytelling structure respectably,and how they decided to provide the story of each game with relation of the previous game but without using direct elements implied,just the place(stragereal) and some events like the asteroids from AC4 and the belkan war in both AC5 and zero,for example in AC04 you were an ace pilot in a normal war between the same enemies not represented directly but equal and with their own original background,in AC4 they told the story in gameplay with the radio charter and the mission briefing,while at the other side of the conflict an child tells the story from one of the affected countries and its relation with its enemy,and is really well put together and structured,is like portal 1 in this regard.
Then you have the Ac5 game with a really good story which suits more a movie,almost all elements from the past game are taken away,then using the existing assets in creating yet another good story using both gameplay,radio charter,briefings and cinematics,a bit over dramatic but way better that what you find in shooter or war related games these days,there is no patriotism and all that bullshit that plague all shooters these days(I should have address this before ,not involving the US faction in war games is really good for storytelling),and the story is well told and well produce,in fact one of the best productions I have seen.
And then there is my favourite game of all,ace combat zero,the 6th game manage to be the best game, although some people consider AC5 the peak of the series I sustain that Zero manages the top of all games,the reason for this is the perfect integration between all elements,everything fit together,the player decisions did matter in gameplay and everything is beautify put together to create and amazing ending that have direct correlation with gameplay and story,a perfect ending for a videogame,nothing is overdone and the story is simple,and it uses the gameplay to max the experience like any other of the previous games(similar to Half life 2 in this respect)and its uses also the perfect storytelling production without involving any of the previous elements,just the place and the gameplay.
So,I disagree with Ben Yahtzee in the aspect of "no games with good continuity",there are games with terrific sequels(HL2 for example)the only issue with such games is to find them or to have a good original concept unexploited for its income,something that have become an standard in the industry,apparently,and designers hasn't manage to find out best creative ways to create stories based on the existing gamplay instead of story(like project aces did the last 15 years until they sort of cock it up with 6 but never mind,maybe AC assault horizon manages to be good but one huge barrier is the fact that US in it).
And yep,I like portal 1 more,it was more "cheesy" somehow.
I've been trying to put words as to why Portal 2 didn't have much impact - you've nailed it.
I don't think it's a subjective opinion to state that a good story & concept loses its value for a second telling. It was impossible for Portal 2 to exceed its prequel by adding to an existing story.
I don't think it's a subjective opinion to state that a good story & concept loses its value for a second telling. It was impossible for Portal 2 to exceed its prequel by adding to an existing story.
The original plan was to make F-STOP, a game that had no portals and no Glados in it but still tied in with the original setting of Aperture science.
I am quite happy with the way Portal 2 turned out anyway, sure it will never be as surprising as the first one, but the story was good and Stephen Merchant's character is hilarious. Surely it does not quite expand the universe in any big way, but I think it stays true to the original story while exploring some new ground.
I see your points, but I think Valve managed to make a correct balance for this Portal 2. However, there's been already enough Glados for me, I hope if Portal 3 ever comes out, they explore something different. It's been a good ride anyway, it must not have been easy for the writers to achieve the balance needed to be funny for the whole duration of the game.
I am quite happy with the way Portal 2 turned out anyway, sure it will never be as surprising as the first one, but the story was good and Stephen Merchant's character is hilarious. Surely it does not quite expand the universe in any big way, but I think it stays true to the original story while exploring some new ground.
I see your points, but I think Valve managed to make a correct balance for this Portal 2. However, there's been already enough Glados for me, I hope if Portal 3 ever comes out, they explore something different. It's been a good ride anyway, it must not have been easy for the writers to achieve the balance needed to be funny for the whole duration of the game.