Former glory
- Thread starter Manji187
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes please! A new Wing Commander adventure would be awesome. I wouldn't say no to another Privateer either. I so miss those games.megs1120 said:
I wouldn't mind another entry in the Bushido Blade series. I think Square could come up with some inventive ways to make a sequel. Maybe...
I raise you REmake on the Gamecube.fix-the-spade said:
And I would love to see a good continuation of Custom Robo and Eternal Darkness. Damn you cliff-hanger endings, I want to see what happens with Mantorok!
I have to agree with this, although there are a few noteworthy exceptions. I swear every time I hear the word 'reboot' and it's not referring to the show "ReBoot" or talking about computers, I get the insatiable desire to rip somebody's lungs out.fix-the-spade said:
That's the exception, it's also eight years old now!MikailCaboose said:
That's how bad it is, in ten years there has been one remake worth remembering in a positive light.
broken sword could use a revival (not sequel cuz only the first three were actually good, due to 4 and onwards made by someone else)
Gonna have to agree with this, at least in principle. I don't see it quite as cynically - I'd suggest they probably give it the franchise name before they realise it sucks. But there we go.fix-the-spade said:
Yeah, I'm not keen on the idea of reviving long-dead franchises. Generally speaking, they died for a reason. I'm alright with trying to get faltering series back on track - for example, Final Fantasy hasn't been properly good for the best part of a decade now but I don't think it's beyond redemption, hence why I keep playing them. Same goes for the Tony Hawk games, although admittedly I have no intention of playing any more of them until they get rid of the stupid plastic skateboard controllers.
Potential is just that, potential. If used well, it will make a great game, if used poorly, it will suck.Manji187 said:
The thing with sequels is there needs to be 1)interest from a developer to attempt a sequel 2)interest from whoever owns the licence to see a sequel 3)these two groups need to be able to arrange some sort of deal that they can both agree on.
Not an easy proposition, especially for older games. If some huge company is holding onto a licence, perhaps with no intention of using it. And some small company would like to give it a go, they're going to have to pay to use the licence, and maybe even give the licence holder a cut of the profit. It's a lame position to be in, but that's kinda how it is.
I love it when a game I enjoy gets a sequel, but I don't yearn for sequels to games I once loved. Like Freespace 2, Freelancer, Metal Fatigue, Heavy Gear 2. I'd actually be happier to see a game that was BETTER.
I would be excited to see ANY action-oriented space game released. I am excited to see ANY game that has mechs in it. Each time I tend to compare them to the past, and what I see as "the potential", and every time (so far) I'm disappointed.
But hey, EVENTUALLY there is going to be someone who loves mechs or space combat as much as me, and tries to blow audiences away with their fresh, innovative ideas. And I'll be first in line with my hard earned cash.
TLDR; Is it the name that makes the game great or the ideas? The ideas and the vision live on, they can be built on by game developers. Any good game has an effect on the industry, weather or not it gets a sequel. I think making BETTER GAMES are always more important than keeping a franchise alive.
You have some valid points. But we can have both...better games that keep a franchise alive.Cypher10110 said:
Metroid Prime is a great example...staying true to some core ideas (mystery, exploration etc) while providing a refreshingly new experience. I would rather not talk about the abomination that is Other M. A franchise is not (just) its name...it's a set of ideas.