Games that really didn't need a sequel
- Thread starter Dragoon
- Start date
I guess I can understand that. Still, I love sandboxing about more than I do the plot of the sandboxey game, most of the time. That's why I kill so many things in Fallout 3 and New Vegas. Walking around on my own and doing whatever just appeals to me.Heathrow said:
Bioshock. I like the direction they're taking with Infinity, though. If it turns out to be good, I will accept that Bioshock 2 was merely an unfortunate hiccup.
I enjoyed Far Cry 2 up until the end, I just did not like the ending at all.^=ash=^ said:
Bioshock - I don't consider 2 a sequel It's a "companion novel"
Dragon Age - I would have been OK without a sequel, but I enjoyed 2 anyway
FEAR - Didn't feel it needed a sequel, but it was OK
Prototype - I thought it ended well, not complaining that there is going to be a sequel though
Games I am still waiting for the sequel too
Command and Conquer 3 - I want to know how the series ends
Valkyria Chronicles.
Which is weird, because I used to be one of those people who really wanted a sequel to that game. VC2, while it is still a good game, didn't really live up to what I hoped it would be...
Which is weird, because I used to be one of those people who really wanted a sequel to that game. VC2, while it is still a good game, didn't really live up to what I hoped it would be...
I dunno, I enjoyed the first Myst, and Exile was nice, but I could never get into Riven. Past Exile the quality's declined, though.Gabriel Majeski said:
I'm having some serious nostalgia thinking about Myst and Exile, though. Damn there was some imagination and creativity in there, those games don't get nearly the praise and acclaim they deserve.
Sandbox games have traditionally capitalized on emergent gameplay, that is elements of gameplay which aren't specifically designed by the game makers but which are still dictated by the designs of the tools given to the player for interacting with the game world. There is a counterpart or subset of emergent gameplay which I like to refer to as emergent story. Emergent story is a device designed to provide the player with a desire or motivation which coincides with the motivations of the character they are playing.FalloutJack said:
This device can be very straightforward: i.e the overarching goal of reaching the end of a series of maps in Left 4 Dead and thus attaining victory, scavenging for food, water and ammo in Fallout games, or searching for malaria medication or diamonds for upgraded weapons in Far Cry 2. This device can also be extremely complex like the enormous economy of EVE Online or the gathering/crafting system in Minecraft. The important element of emergent story is simply that the desires of player and character are synchronized and therefore any action you take is the same action your character would want to take anyway. In this way immersion is created and the fact that you are actually playing a game is (mostly) forgotten.
All of which is my very windy way of saying that I enjoy a good romp through the wastes too. I just find GTA games to be particularly bad at emergent story, and if all the story is dictated to you then it had better be compelling or else the game will be boring.
By far, The Force Unleashed. The original game was a self-contained affair that proved to be a multimedia experiment in exploring an untouched portion of the Star Wars mythos. And a successful one at that. I loved the game, got the graphic novel, and all was well. That was it.
Unfortunately, money spoke louder, and an absolutely needless "sequel" was crapped out, one that added nothing to the story, and couldn't have been any more half-arsed than it proved to be.
What annoys me is that in their previous, similar experience with Shadows of the Empire, they called it all a success and moved on. No sequels, no more tie-ins, that was it, story's done, move on. Yet this time, they done fucked up. Pity.
Unfortunately, money spoke louder, and an absolutely needless "sequel" was crapped out, one that added nothing to the story, and couldn't have been any more half-arsed than it proved to be.
What annoys me is that in their previous, similar experience with Shadows of the Empire, they called it all a success and moved on. No sequels, no more tie-ins, that was it, story's done, move on. Yet this time, they done fucked up. Pity.
FFX-2 should never have existed. =_=
Nor should Legend of Zelda: Pantom Hour Glass, or Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks. Windwaker, imo, wasn't even that good, and the sequels just got worse and worse. Nothing from the Zelda franchise will beat Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask.
Nor should Legend of Zelda: Pantom Hour Glass, or Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks. Windwaker, imo, wasn't even that good, and the sequels just got worse and worse. Nothing from the Zelda franchise will beat Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask.
BioShock.
The original was tight as all hell with no dangling plot threads needing to be tied up. Twas' as neat as can be. Didn't need a sequel.
The original was tight as all hell with no dangling plot threads needing to be tied up. Twas' as neat as can be. Didn't need a sequel.
I actually agree with you there, Duke Nukem was fun and all, but it didn't need moreCrazyJuan77 said: