Extra Punctuation: Building Sequels Badly

[Azex]

MK2 was an awesome sequel

 

[adlerman1]

I think a lot of Yahtzee's problem with Portal 2 is Wheatly. To an American a British accent adds +10 charm and IQ where as to him the character is just an inept wanker. Also there is his hate for the sequel as a concept so there are two big strikes off the bat. I will also agree that the game did seem easier. I can only think of one time I was ever really lost in single player.

Also Bioshock was popular because it was a unique setting and driven by an original story(for a video game) so Bioshock 2 was doomed from the start because the story of rapture was closed already. Portal was driven by the unique game mechanics and just adding to the portal physics and expanding the story made a good sequel.

 

[feauxx]

Hilariously on-point as ever. I think I'm genuinely starting to like Extra Punctuation moreso than Zero Punctuation.

Another example I come across I think is Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2. Now...though it doesn't quite fit what you describe here as a pre-requisite for a good sequel, I remember always running across comments like "Oh, but the RPG elements and the equipment bollocking around is what MAKES it a *proper* RPG" and "Yeh, but the music was shittier in ME2 whereas ME1 was that old-skool 80s stuff I like to regurgitate all the time."

And unsurprisingly regardless of these vocal fans, Mass Effect 2 was even MORESO liked than Mass Effect 1, not just in terms of sold units but also by critical acclaim. Because guess what...RPG mechanics dissapearing doesn't have to be as sad as you oldschool numpties make it out to be. And this is me speaking as a big-ass fan of the uncompromising nature of killing off your characters in games like Baldur's Gate 1! Also, if you genuinely think min/maxing stats is what people in general find enjoyable about RPGs...you are wrong. You're just one of *those* people and while it might be going opposite of your own personal fetish, a lot of people also disagree with you.

Finally, the music was utterly ace. Oh, it might not have been quite the 'classic type' from the 80s you claim you love so much. But what it *was* was reminiscent of all the electronic music coming out in videogames during the 90s, some of which I still have very fond memories of. And you know what? A lot of us love those things to death even MORE than the 80s shtick.

Meh. Already wrote way too much here as it is. Probably going to have a ton of comments 'proving me wrong' and getting into it all again. That said, keep on writing by all means! For the past few months or so I can't recall a time when I clicked Extra Punctuation and found myself dissapointed or worse 'sorta half-way pleased'. It always provoked me and that is good.

"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."

The Mass Effect series was planned as a trilogy from the start and thus the ending to Mass Effect 1 was left wide open.

 

[sno719]

I may have stumbled on something a little interesting. I just finished Portal 1 for the 2nd or 3rd time and noticed that the ending has changed. It happened after a bunch of steam updates, but instead of merely lying on the ground looking at the remains of GLADoS, you are dragged away. I may just have not noticed it before, but it struck me as new.

 

[josephmatthew10]

1: Someone said BiOShock 2 is better than BioShock 1. That made me laugh.
2: People saying sequels are the devil are holding back videogame potential. Other mediums are capable of perfectly good sequels, why not videogames?
3: GLaDOS was built (aside from being, hilariously, a disk-operator/de-icer)to RUN THE FACILITY. That naturally comes with some amont of control.
4: Chell never escaped; Valvealtered the ending (via Steam) so that she's dragged back in by a "Escort Robot" or something.
5: GLaDOS was "Still Alive" but not active; her mind was still functioning, but she couldn't do anything.
6: Yahtzee said he liked it; it's amazing how schizophrenic his views can seem from different perspectives.

 

[Veritasiness]

I really don't like the Portal 1 to Portal 2 comparison, but not because I disagree with Yhatzee's conclusions. I don't like comparing the two games because they are not the same game. As Doug Lombardi (Valve dev) has said, "Portal was a test bed. Portal 2 is a game." (see http://half-life.wikia.com/wiki/Portal_2).

Portal 2 is meant to have more story, less action. It's meant to be more involving on an emotional level, to do more and show more and be bigger in length and scale, and it's not meant to just be a puzzle game. It should be graded as such.

If Portal 2 had been exactly like Portal 1, but with newer, more difficult puzzles (think Portal: Prelude), wouldn't Yhatzee have given it flack for that?

By the by, massive example of sequel being better than original: Mass Effect 2. Full stop. Better written, better designed, better gameplay, better everything. And no driving sequences. No, planet scanning does not matter. It wasn't in Mass Effect 1, so if you're comparing, it doesn't make a difference.

 

[OuroborosChoked]

I find it amusing that after seven pages of comments, unless I missed something, not a single person had a problem with the "It's exactly like picking up women." part.

Maybe there are no girls on this thread? Maybe they don't disagree with that assessment?

Either way: hilarious.

 

[bawkbawkboo1]

I thought The Longest Journey 1 and the sequel (Dreamfall) fit together fairly well despite having several characters in both games, although it's true that the main character of Dreamfall wasn't that of the original.

 

[internetzealot1]

And that is why Nintendo is still around.

 

[BonsaiK]

Yeah go on Yathzee, ruin the co-op story before I've even gotten a chance to play it, you asshole. Grrrr.

Agree with the central point though.

It's okay though, he didn't actually spoil anything. You can still save science worry free.

Yes he did. Now I won't be playing through the co-op campaign wondering if there's a sinister twist or not, he wrecked that for me.

I feel so strongly about this that I'm going to cancel my subscription to The Escapist next time it wraps around until I've recouped enough money that I would have spent on subscriptions to pay for Portal 2 (at current prices).

 

[MahouSniper]

Metal Gear Solid 3 I think is better than 1 or 2, though that's probably just me. Saint's Row 2 I'd say is better than Saint's Row. Mass Effect 2 seems to generally be considered to be superior. I liked Assassin's Creed 2 much better than 1 as well, though that arguably didn't feature the same character.

 

[Sandytimeman]

Looks I think the majority of us agree that Bioshock 2 SUCKED, but clearly not all sequels are bad for instance look at Mario 3. Probably the best NES game of all time.

 

[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.

I feel like there was an opening at the end of Half-Life for a sequel, one that seems fairly clearly referenced at the beginning of Half-Life 2. (You know, G-Man whisking Gordon away for further adventures at the end of Half-Life). I'd agree it's way more tenuous than the connection in most sequels though.

Perhaps it's my own bias... When I played Half Life 2, I had to remind myself that it was a sequel, cause it just didn't feel like one. To each his own I suppose.

I guess that means I agree with Yahtzee... sequels suck.. Notably Half Life 2.

 

[rneilson]

"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."

Thief 2, System Shock 2, Wing Commander 2 (and then WC3, in relation to WC2), Monkey Island 2 - and those are just the PC games I can name off the top of my head. (It should be noted, btw, that Origin/Looking Glass/Irrational knew how to sequelize.)

 

[walrusaurus]

This is the first time i can remember disagreeing so strongly with you. Not about the gameplay, your spot on there: the gels were disappointing, and it as a whole didn't feel nearly as tight as before (personally i would have liked to see more done with the light bridges). The story on the other hand i found to be much better. I remember reflecting as the credits rolled on the last time I felt this invested in the characters and story of a video game. The only game that i have ever played that comes close was Sands of Time.

Is portal 1 better? Perhaps, the gameplay was a bit more compelling, but in my opinion the payoff in Portal 2 was much better. Different strokes i suppose...

 

[VandreKhonos]

I can sort of see why Portal 2 was bad as a sequel for Portal as a whole. While the story in Portal 2 was entertaining and informative in its own way, it does end up killing the world in which Portal is set.

Everything becomes set in stone, every shadow illuminated. There is no more room for the possibility of mystery and adventure. The bizzare persona of Cave Johnson remains a dead phantom, the main character becomes a definite anomaly never to be seen again, and the once undefinable character of Glados is now just an out of control machine addicted to testing.

The game mechanic of Portal might show up elsewhere, but the world that engendered it is laid open like an old dusty history book, dead as the words it. Sure, they'll pull another sequel out for the sake of the money mill, but the story will be forced, awkward and out of place. A good example of this would be Dragon Age 2, and that half sequel Awakenings.

 

[vivster]

i don't care really
i'm not a hardcore fan of anything so i appreciate pretty much all sequels to games i enjoyed
and even more good sequels to games i didn't enjoy(DA2)
i appreciate the portal 2, the final fantasys after 10 and especially all (hopefully numerous) sequels of Assassin's Creed

fans are idiots
hating a sequel just because it didn't match the expectations(which it never does) is as stupid as booing out your favorite sports team because they played a bad game
i wouldn't even consider those people fans
i mean isn't the sole definition of a fan to stand to his fandom against all odds?
how can people be called fans if they start nitpicking everything they don't instantly appreciate?

 

[NoNameMcgee]

Finding myself agreeing less and less with Yahtzee these days where as I used to agree with him a lot. Not sure if it's my tastes changing or his changing.

Anyway, I love sequels. and a lot of them are better than the originals. Portal 2 was better than Portal 1.

 

[Weyrling]

Half-Life 2 counts (assuming you liked it better than the first, which I didn't).

Some people are saying Half-Life violated the first rule, but there's a difference between an ending which teases more of THIS story, and an ending that allows ANOTHER, subsequent story to follow it. Half-Life falls squarely into the second camp. Indeed, it would be hard for any story not to without killing all the main characters. Which would then violate the second rule, creating a very unfair contradiction that would eliminate most all contenders from answering Yahtzee's challenge. So I have to assume that by "opening for a sequel" he means a game that is deliberately inconclusive in anticipation of a sequel that will continue the present storyline.

Given that SHODAN is really the only main character in the series, I think it's fair to answer: System Shock 2.

Also: Riven.

Also: Yahtzee, I get the impression you don't like sequels that try too hard to be like the original, and then spend most of the article getting bent over all the ways Portal 2 isn't like the first one. Does not compute.

Also: SPAAAAAAAAAACE!!!!!!

 

[Draconalis]

Suikoden II.... best sequel.