Has any game series improved with every sequel?

[Ninmecu]

If we completely disregard story, the Saints Row series more or less improved greatly over the course of its 4 games last gen. Saints Row, was completely and utterly GTA clone dujour. Saints Row 2, was an open world crime game with several diverse and entertaining activities and storyline the player could get into without having played the original. It had a diverse cast of rather interesting people to play with and is one of my top 10 games. Saints Row the Third, was a huge let down for me personally story wise, before we go on, stop, stop trying to tell me Saints Row games were never about the story or the characters, saying that only proves to me you didn't play 2 all the way through. Mechanics and gameplay wise, it greatly improved on the formula and was quite enjoyable about 8 months later when I stopped giving a damn about the terrible plot/story elements/characters being nicked into the ether. Saints Row 4, is essentially the ultimate conclusion, based on the Johnny Gat Clone DLC, the super powers were a godsend in terms of changing up the game, it faltered at times by forcing you back to a "human" state for seemingly no reason to "up the stakes" but had a cast of characters that were more or less likeable, gameplay that was nearly the pinnacle of open world crime based game. And, well, it had Professor Genki 2.0, which was also pretty damn hilarious. All in all, Saints Row was, in my opinion, a series that grew and evolved with every iteration, even if the dev team were phoning it in a bit during development interviews and going for a "Zany" feel, ignoring the fact that the charm of 2 was that it was "weird and insane" in a setting that demanded seriousness.

 

[Me55enger]

Metro: Last Light I would argue was a superb successor to the original.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

I feel like the Jak games did that (assuming you only count the ones with numbers on them.) Every game vastly added to your arsenal of abilities and very rarely was anything taken away.
Though Jak 2 and 3 went a bit of a different direction than the first. I'm sure a few people would argue the first was better since it was designed as more of a Mario 64 collectathon where in the sequels the collecting was optional and unlocked cheats.

 

[MysticSlayer]

For me, Mass Effect definitely did this. The first game had absolutely fantastic writing, but it was a pain to play, and I struggle to make it through it every time I replay it, especially as the genius of the writing loses its luster with every playthrough. ME2 took a serious hit in the writing department, but it was still good enough to keep me interested in at least the characters. What it did was improve the combat so that it was actually playable, and I'd be lying to say it wasn't the game that finally sold me on Mass Effect, no matter how much I enjoyed the first's writing. And, to me, ME3 just felt like an improvement to ME2 in almost every way.

 

[sanquin]

I'd say the Witcher series. One was...'meh'. Two was pretty damn good and had beautiful graphics. A huge improvement to 1. And three is looking like it will be an improvement once again. Though that's not sure yet as the game isn't out yet.

 

[Seracen]

As a rule, I don't consider it a "series," as such, until at least 3 games are out, so...

Thus far, I've enjoyed every game in the SMT (Persona, etc) series, and feel they've gotten better with each iteration. I am not the biggest fan of a few of the titles, but they weren't BAD. I could see Sega (the new owners of Atlus) milking them a bit too much, and screwing it up slightly, but not as of yet.

Until the MMO came out, I would also add the Elder Scrolls to that list. Also, considering I never liked it originally, but snapped up the sequels, Saint's Row was also a good example.

 

[go-10]

the Batman Arkham games have improved with every title and I guess same could be said for Street Fighter series

 

[COMaestro]

Metal Gear Solid to me is the one series where each game improves on its formula. They feel like proper sequels since each iteration improves over the last game and brings in interesting gameplay elements that fit the theme of the game for the most part.

I'm going to have to agree with this. While the story may have gotten somewhat mucked up as the games went on, I felt the gameplay mechanics improved over each game, at least for the console releases.

 

[josemlopes]

I'd just love to have known if the fourth instalment kept it going. Screw you, HAZE, you kept it from us!

Back on Timesplitters though, it was great how even though they made the controls more similar to other shooters (mainly Halo) you could still change them to the classic Timesplitters controls with a shitload of auto-aim, reticule disabled and that weird free-aim zoom thingy (working well for newcomers and older fans). The only drawback I can think of about TS:FP is how the levels dont change depending on the difficulty (and maybe there could have been an unlockable cheat to have the weapons reload almost instantly like in previous games).

Other then that it just improved so much that even though the storymode of the 2 was fun (random timetravel adventures) the story of the third was so well made that it would be hard to trade it for more random timetravel adventures (even then there are still those challenges imitating the simplicity of the storymode of the previous games)


Fuck, those games were great, fuck you Haze!

 

[Lex Darko]

The elder scrolls series.

Mass Effect's gameplay, inverse with its writing/storytelling

Ghost Recon Series

Rainbow Six Series

 

[SuperSuperSuperGuy]

The Hyperdimension Neptunia series, hands down.

Allow me to explain. The first game in the series was kind of a mess. Clunky and over-complicated mechanics, graphical issues and slowdown problems plagued the game, and the clever and humourous dialogue and interesting setting were brought down by poor pacing and disjointed side scenes. However, the premise alone made it really charming, and the characters in it, while not particularly deep, were quite endearing.

The second game in the series, Hyperdimension Neptunia Mk. 2, did away with the old dungeon and battle system, replacing them with newer, slightly more traditional ones that form a more cohesive experience. The graphical issues were improved, too, though it did still suffer from slowdown problems. The story also flowed much better and seemed to have an actual point to it. The character interactions were also greatly improved. However, it was very different in tone from the first game, opting to be significantly more serious. This is a problem because the zaniness was one of the things that the first game had in its favour. It also turned the main characters of Neptunia into side characters, replacing them in the spotlight with less charming and endearing, though possibly more believable, characters. It also replaced the dynamic character portraits from the first game with 3D character models, which, to be quite frank, didn't look nearly as good. All in all, significantly better technically, but lacked a lot of the charm that the first game had.

The third game, Hyperdimension Neptunia Victory, actually really pretty well. It carried over the battle system from Mk. 2, with some improvements that increased the flow of battle a lot. It's also pretty challenging at times. They also brought the original main characters back into the spotlight, in addition to the lead character from Mk. 2, and added some depth to them. It's tonally similar to the first game, and even brought back the character portraits. It improved the dialogue and character interactions even more then Mk. 2 did. They did relegate a few important supporting characters to mere side roles, though, and even got rid of a bunch of them entirely. It still has some issues with slowdown and game flow, however, and the dungeons are small and, in many cases, re-used from Mk. 2. While the changes to the battle system do streamline it, it reduces the potential amount of depth to it, though granted Mk. 2 didn't really do anything with it depth-wise in the first place. Overall, though, it's the best game in the series.

More or less, the constant improvement of the Neptunia series comes down to the developers trying new things and seeing which ones click, and changing and improving the things that they tried and didn't work, thus creating a series which, in a way, takes two steps forward and one step back with each iteration. While it does take that one step back with some of the changes, there are enough positive changes to make each game better than the last.

 

[Phlogiston]

Metal Gear Solid to me is the one series where each game improves on its formula. They feel like proper sequels since each iteration improves over the last game and brings in interesting gameplay elements that fit the theme of the game for the most part.

I'm going to have to agree with this. While the story may have gotten somewhat mucked up as the games went on, I felt the gameplay mechanics improved over each game, at least for the console releases.

I completely agree about the mechanics, it's just a shame that Kojima fancies himself more as a Hollywood director than a game designer...the ridiculously long expositions at the end of MGS2 meant I thought the original was a better game...also who wants to play as Raiden instead of Solid Snake?

 

[AgedGrunt]

Narrative, writing, characters, etc. are pretty subjective for any series, but overall I'd go with Grand Theft Auto. It's been impressive how it continues to step up the game and keep delivering something even better.

But GTA V looks like a masterpiece, and it will make me anxious until the next release. GTA VI will either start a disappointing slide from perfection or maybe, just maybe, Rockstar will really shake things up. I'm dying to get out of New York and LA.

 

[Mikejames]

While I wouldn't say that the Mass Effect series improved on all fronts as the series went on, I still think that there were factors that each game seemed to do really well in its own right.

Oh I got one! The (Western) Silent Hill series. Origins was a copy paste of Silent Hill 1, Homecoming was a copy paste of Silent Hill 2, Shattered Memories was a really good and cohesive game which is more than just a "re-imaging" of Silent Hill 1 and Silent Hill Downpour is the series learning from the good stuff of the Western titles.

Downpour > Shattered Memories >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Homecoming > Origins

Yeah, with all the wavering in developers, storylines, and styles of gameplay, it can be a little tricky to objectively compare the whole series back to back.

I'll second that Downpour took things in the right direction though, and I'll readily defend Shattered Memories' as one of the better stories of the series.

 

[Sande45]

Metal Gear Solid to me is the one series where each game improves on its formula. They feel like proper sequels since each iteration improves over the last game and brings in interesting gameplay elements that fit the theme of the game for the most part.

True, if you leave Peace Walker out. It was more like MGS3 lite with base management. And even though they improved the gameplay elements in MGS4, MGS3 still kicked its ass.

I think it says a lot about how poorly many devs understand why their games worked in the first place since they're so rarely capable of preserving the magic in sequels. Keep what worked, ditch what didn't sounds like the simplest thing in the world, but apparently it isn't.

 

[RJ 17]

I'd like to say Mass Effect, but there's a bit of an * to go with it. As Zhukov pointed out, this is all subjective anyways, but while I'd say the gameplay definitely improved with each game in the series, the story kinda stumbled backwards a bit for ME2. I still enjoyed it, but I thought chasing down Saren was a much better story than hunting the Collectors.

The first game was by far the best in the series. I feel EA got their snot all over the other two.

Opinion based argument is based in opinion. I've said my piece and you're more than welcome to feel that the first game is the best. Just don't try to state it as though it's a certified fact.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

The Mother/Earthbound series.

Mother was a Dragon Quest clone with a quirky story and atmosphere.

Mother 2 (Earthbound) was essentially Mother-redux, making gameplay improvements such as eliminating random encounters and removing much of the grind and tedium that plagued the first game.

Mother 3 was an emotional tour-de-force and one of the best JRPGs in recent memory.

 

[lacktheknack]

Civilization is the easy pick.

So is Rollercoaster Tycoon. (RCT4 isn't out on PC yet, so it doesn't count.)

More controversially, I'll choose Tropico. While the first on is beloved, it's too. Damn. Slow. And while the second one was more streamlined and entertaining, pirates just aren't as fun as the Banana Republic. Then Tropico 3 and 4 were very improved versions of the first one, so hopefully Tropico 5 continues the trend.

I've heard that The Shining Force does this too, but western audiences will never find out, will we?

 

[deathmothon]

GTA1 through GTA:SA we're all an improvement over one another. 5 straight improved games. To bad 4 was boring and annoying.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

I also thought each Mass Effect game was an improvement on the one that came before. Which I'm sure is a position that absolutely nobody could ever disagree with. Although each game also leaned on the foundation of its predecessor, so it's an odd case.

The Half Life games also saw steady improvement.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head since I'm not counting "series" of just two games and most games that keep churning out sequels beyond three or four end up screwing the pooch eventually.

Agreed with all those points, 'cept maybe Half-Life - as I'm not sure the Episodes count, for me at least. They felt like frustrating stopgaps after H-L2.

But yeah, Mass Effect is one series which got better [in my books]. Even if ME2 will always be my favourite because of the focus on character narrative over overblown universe ending plot, I think ME3 was the most successful blend of all ME's elements.

I don't count anything without a trilogy, at least, so other examples that I can personally reference are tough to think of. I'd guess - from videos, what various gamers have said, and reviews - Saints Row would be another, as I absolutely loved IV and tend to think I wouldn't react as strongly/positively with any of the other, more GTA Clone era entries.

Most series have ebbs and flows. F'instance, ODST and Halo 3 are probably my favourite Halo's, with Reach being my least favourite, and 4 being a flawed but still hugely enjoyable entry, which improved upon some elements (e.g. narrative and visuals), but dropped the ball on others (mission goals/structure).