Poll: Crackdown deserves a sequel?

[chinese_democracy]

A few months ago? Well then sadly, you might have caught it at the wrong time. It was one of the first 360 games (or at least close to the release date of it), and was pretty damned good at the time. Now, you just happen to be comparing it to everything ever to have come out for the Xbox, which is unfair. I feel a sequel would take a fun, free roaming game and put huge depth into it.

I think it is very fair. I just bought the DLC release of FF7 on the PsP and that game is over ten years old and still find it to be one of the best in my game library. The first time I played ff7 was about in 2001 and it was considered pretty old even then. Crackdown was only released two years ago. Maybe the graphics have gotten a little better in those two years but game innovation, immersion, story, and mechanics were not invented after Crackdown came out. This game was terrible and the critics should be ashamed of putting this game on a pedestal. This is one of the only reviews http://www.gamecritics.com/crackdown/review I saw that pointed out Crackdowns huge gaping flaws.

there is a mistake, in which you are unfair there, your comparing ff7, (one of my favorite games in the whole world, no matter which final fantasy 7 it is) it is an instant classic, which means that its a game that will never be downgraded for its age or anything because its perfect for what it was trying to accomplish, ff7 still ranks till this day in the top 100 games in among tons of polls and reviews, so if your going to try that pick a game that isn't an "instant classic" such as overlord or a game that is good at the time, but not quite the amazement.

and personally i did like crackdown, as people stated it was a fun free roaming map, in which there were tons of possibilities as being a super cop but if you were in the freakin asian sector then you were probably going to get shot down by the heat seeking missiles, so it wasnt all as easy as it may have seemed on hard mode

I don't understand your logic. Because FF7 was so good I shouldn't compare it to anything? How do we say if a game is good or bad if there is no relativity? Anyways, I also recently bought Jeanne d'Arc. It was released the same year as Crackdown and is much much better.

what my logic is that your trying to compare crackdown (a fairly good game) to an all time game, if you compared every game today to zelda or ff or WoW for a matter than mostly every game will fail to its expectations, thats why im saying your comparison isn't fair, i would say crackdown is a fairly good game which i enjoyed, and i do think it deserves the sequel but there is no way im saying i would buy it before ffxii or such

crackdown does succeed at being a good free roam sandbox game, but trying to compare that to a ff7 rpg game doesn't make too much sense

Okay, lets compare it to a game that is in the same genre. Lets say GTA3. Yup, it still sucks. You always have to compare something against another relative subject. Just because something is not in the same genre doesn't mean you cant compare them.

Ex: You could say getting poked in the eye with hot needles is fun when you compare it to playing an hour of Crackdown.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

A few months ago? Well then sadly, you might have caught it at the wrong time. It was one of the first 360 games (or at least close to the release date of it), and was pretty damned good at the time. Now, you just happen to be comparing it to everything ever to have come out for the Xbox, which is unfair. I feel a sequel would take a fun, free roaming game and put huge depth into it.

I think it is very fair. I just bought the DLC release of FF7 on the PsP and that game is over ten years old and still find it to be one of the best in my game library. The first time I played ff7 was about in 2001 and it was considered pretty old even then. Crackdown was only released two years ago. Maybe the graphics have gotten a little better in those two years but game innovation, immersion, story, and mechanics were not invented after Crackdown came out. This game was terrible and the critics should be ashamed of putting this game on a pedestal. This is one of the only reviews http://www.gamecritics.com/crackdown/review I saw that pointed out Crackdowns huge gaping flaws.

there is a mistake, in which you are unfair there, your comparing ff7, (one of my favorite games in the whole world, no matter which final fantasy 7 it is) it is an instant classic, which means that its a game that will never be downgraded for its age or anything because its perfect for what it was trying to accomplish, ff7 still ranks till this day in the top 100 games in among tons of polls and reviews, so if your going to try that pick a game that isn't an "instant classic" such as overlord or a game that is good at the time, but not quite the amazement.

and personally i did like crackdown, as people stated it was a fun free roaming map, in which there were tons of possibilities as being a super cop but if you were in the freakin asian sector then you were probably going to get shot down by the heat seeking missiles, so it wasnt all as easy as it may have seemed on hard mode

I don't understand your logic. Because FF7 was so good I shouldn't compare it to anything? How do we say if a game is good or bad if there is no relativity? Anyways, I also recently bought Jeanne d'Arc. It was released the same year as Crackdown and is much much better.

what my logic is that your trying to compare crackdown (a fairly good game) to an all time game, if you compared every game today to zelda or ff or WoW for a matter than mostly every game will fail to its expectations, thats why im saying your comparison isn't fair, i would say crackdown is a fairly good game which i enjoyed, and i do think it deserves the sequel but there is no way im saying i would buy it before ffxii or such

crackdown does succeed at being a good free roam sandbox game, but trying to compare that to a ff7 rpg game doesn't make too much sense

Okay, lets compare it to a game that is in the same genre. Lets say GTA3. Yup, it still sucks.

now your just getting meat headed about the situation, obviously why are you asking the question when your clearly trying to smash down anybody reasoning about liking the game, and comparitively i didn't really like gta3 that much, it got boring way faster than it did for me on crackdown, idk if it was the superhumanness or what but gta games just get boring..and what the hell is with the cell phone?? half the time they have a terrible accent where you can't understand for shit what they are saying on that game, so the stupid side missions and stuff make no sense, i'd much rather have my super robo cop car which i can fucking BLOW away semi's and busses with than have some stupid 60's piece o shit kia car

i respect gta being good games but they just aren't for me, crackdown seems to keep my interests longer, and clearly about 90% or so people agree with me in the poll about the games fairly goodness? so why are you trying to negate that your in the small minority here

 

[Kelbear]

Crackdown was fun! I liked it, but Prototype kind of kicked it's ass.

I was hoping Crackdown 2 would step up to the plate in response, but it doesn't look like they added as much as I hoped. Prototype still looks like it has better gameplay than Crackdown 2.

Crackdown definitely has more interesting terrain to play in, but the agents are just pansies next to Alex Mercer. They don't need to do wild crap like change form, but the grab'n jump movement of Crackdown just feels primitive after Prototype's free-running or Assasin's creed's fluid climbing.

Gunplay was always kind of boring(superman doesn't need guns!), and the hand to hand still looks extremely repetitive. Instead of just repeating the same kick and gunbutt, they've added a 3-hit combo...not much to look forward to.

It's nice that there's more to play in this superhuman genre, but it doesn't look particularly exciting. I'll probably play it since it should at least be as good as Crackdown or slightly better, but I don't think it'll be setting a new standard for anything.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

very true about the gunplay and kick and gunbutt, i found myself doing the lui kang kick a billion times when i was in a group of baddies because the guns were useless,

hah i played this game straight for one day until i beat it and i went out that night and almost rear ended like 3 cars, thinking i could just launch them off the road, i really want that super car =[

 

[axlr4]

ihm.....go check out the lates issu of game informore.

 

[Eldarion]

Yes. It was legitimately fun, and is a great free-roam game. Plus the sequel is one of the closest things we currently have to a sandbox zombie game.

Wow.

No point in posting anything else, he wins. We can all go home.

But seriously, crackdown gave me the excuse to run around shooting thugs shouting "I'm here to shoot your wang!!!!!!!" and for those of you who don't know "Wang" was the name of one of the gang leaders you have to kill.

 

[Cuniculus]

A few months ago? Well then sadly, you might have caught it at the wrong time. It was one of the first 360 games (or at least close to the release date of it), and was pretty damned good at the time. Now, you just happen to be comparing it to everything ever to have come out for the Xbox, which is unfair. I feel a sequel would take a fun, free roaming game and put huge depth into it.

I think it is very fair. I just bought the DLC release of FF7 on the PsP and that game is over ten years old and still find it to be one of the best in my game library. The first time I played ff7 was about in 2001 and it was considered pretty old even then. Crackdown was only released two years ago. Maybe the graphics have gotten a little better in those two years but game innovation, immersion, story, and mechanics were not invented after Crackdown came out. This game was terrible and the critics should be ashamed of putting this game on a pedestal. This is one of the only reviews http://www.gamecritics.com/crackdown/review I saw that pointed out Crackdowns huge gaping flaws.

FF7 I feel is an unfair example, as people of all generations tend to love it. That's basically like comparing Crackdown to the most loved game of all time. I'm not saying it's the best of the Xbox 360 now or even back then, just that it's fairly fun and not as bad as it might seem now when compared to games with more depth.

The review points of some flaws, yes, but mostly just harps on the lack of story. Also, you can "start from the beginning" with a fully upgraded hero by reviving the gangs. I've done it a few times.

 

[Kermi]

I think it is very fair. I just bought the DLC release of FF7 on the PsP and that game is over ten years old and still find it to be one of the best in my game library. The first time I played ff7 was about in 2001 and it was considered pretty old even then. Crackdown was only released two years ago. Maybe the graphics have gotten a little better in those two years but game innovation, immersion, story, and mechanics were not invented after Crackdown came out. This game was terrible and the critics should be ashamed of putting this game on a pedestal. This is one of the only reviews http://www.gamecritics.com/crackdown/review I saw that pointed out Crackdowns huge gaping flaws.

Really? I played FF7 and thought it was shit. The characters were unlikable, the graphics were pitiful and after disc one I sold it to a friend rather than play it. I find 90% of current FF7 fans are either caught up in the hype or adore it for nostalgia value alone and are therefore incapable of enjoying it objectively. And that's just the ones who've actually played it - I know people who will profess FF7 is the greatest game of all time, based purely on what people tell them and the cutscene of Aeris dying they see in top-ten lists every few months.
Maybe I should have played it ten years ago?

I guess since I have an opposing viewpoint, you must be wrong to like FFVII. Unless different people like different things? Nah, must be the other thing.

I'd personally rather play Crackdown than FFVII. And I'm not even saying Crackdown was particularly good, but as the first sandbox game in this generation of consoles it gave us a good peek at how things had improved over the previous era, as well as a passable plot and excellent beat em up action. Plus it's hard to not like a game where you get to hurl cars at people.
What Crackdown 2 is going to do is take that idea, that action, and make it bigger and better. Is the story anything like a Final Fantasy game? No. Because it's an action game, not a turn-based electric novel.

 

[TPiddy]

Not sure whether the OP was trolling but just because you didn't like something doesn't mean a lot of other people didn't like it either. Many people could say that Halo didn't deserve a sequel either.

Crackdown was fun for what it was and enjoyed by many. The Halo 3 beta was extra incentive to try it, but those who did for the most part found it enjoyable. I would definitely lump it in with Saints Row 2 as a game that had it's flaws but ultimately provided great fun.

 

[iJosh]

Crackdown was extremely fun. Running around blowing stuff up. Time well spent.

I would buy the sequal if they made one.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

So you didn't like Crackdown. That doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a sequel. Some people did like Crackdown. Plus Crackdown 2 looks so different that you can hardly call it a sequel. You didn't like a game. That doesn't make it the worst game ever and completely undeserving of critical acclaim. I don't like some things that other people like. I got my copy for 12 dollars, so it was cheaper than what it would have been as DLC. So really I don't understand the point of your rage.

 

[BolognaBaloney]

Sure, why not?

 

[Kollega]

Didn't play it,but have mental image. Crackdown was a good idea balanced by terrible execution,and if they improve it,it will be better.

Plus,ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE! BRAAAAAAIIIIIINS!

 

[DeathWyrmNexus]

Heh, this thread made me go check out what Cracked 2 was going to be about since I only heard things about the first game and never played. I might have to actually get the second one.

 

[Garzo]

Sequels have been made for worse games.

 

[HellsingerAngel]

Really? I played FF7 and thought it was shit. The characters were unlikable, the graphics were pitiful and after disc one I sold it to a friend rather than play it. I find 90% of current FF7 fans are either caught up in the hype or adore it for nostalgia value alone and are therefore incapable of enjoying it objectively. And that's just the ones who've actually played it - I know people who will profess FF7 is the greatest game of all time, based purely on what people tell them and the cutscene of Aeris dying they see in top-ten lists every few months.
Maybe I should have played it ten years ago?

I guess since I have an opposing viewpoint, you must be wrong to like FFVII. Unless different people like different things? Nah, must be the other thing.

I'd personally rather play Crackdown than FFVII. And I'm not even saying Crackdown was particularly good, but as the first sandbox game in this generation of consoles it gave us a good peek at how things had improved over the previous era, as well as a passable plot and excellent beat em up action. Plus it's hard to not like a game where you get to hurl cars at people.
What Crackdown 2 is going to do is take that idea, that action, and make it bigger and better. Is the story anything like a Final Fantasy game? No. Because it's an action game, not a turn-based electric novel.

I couldn't have said it better myself. For me, my good sir, you have won the internet for the day!

In all seriousness, though, what was the original poster thinking? Not to say that your opinion is wrong, but you're comparing Crackdown (a game totally void of story to get into the action faster) to two RPGs (games that are cornerstoned around how they tell a story). Me thinks there's some issues with doing that. All in all, for what Crackdown was supposed to be, it did its job and it did it well. Can it compare to games now? Of course not, no game in those genres can. The only thing that makes a game a legend is the story that backs it up because a good story is a constant and will never change but gameplay will. Does that make Crackdown a bad game? No! It's fun and that's the point of games.

Actually, now that I think about it, if took the time to play the game and finish it, you would know that there is a small bit of story. And really, I think that the game shines because of that. It doesn't need 80+ gameplay hours to get its point across. It takes two cutscenes (TWO!!!) to make you go "wait, what!? I wonder where this plotline is going..." and set itself up for a sequel. Final Fantasy, on the other hand, dredges you through hours of gameplay (if you can call mashing attack gameplay?) to get the same result. All in all, I think Crackdown is overall more entertaining than FF7, if only because it involves fast paced gameplay without the hassle of being forced to stop every five seconds to learn about some insignificant thing about a completely minor character that doesn't matter in the end.

To best sum up my argument: http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c354/HellsingerAngel/1240042841622.jpg

Replace Pen & Paper with Crackdown.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

OP: you're entitled to your taste in games but not entitled to expect everyone to share that same taste. Others, myself included, found Crackdown to be an excellent and highly-enjoyable game that's easily worthy of a sequel.

If you have a problem with that, it's your problem to deal with; not Realtime World's or ours.

-- Steve

PS: the game's not perfect; I hated the vehicle controls to the point that I concentrated on levelling up my character's Agility to increase running speed rather than wrestle with those wild-arsed car segments. (And the crap, IMO, music selection available when driving. Eugh.) Plus jumping from building to building just never got old...

 

[Rusty Bucket]

Yes, it definitely does. If only for the 4 player co-op they're adding in.

 

[Slash Dementia]

Shouldn't this be: "Did you like Crackdown enough to want a sequel?" or something like that?

Crackdown, although I didn't play it (and am uninterested), was well-liked by a bunch of people.
If you compare this game to games that you do like, of course you're going to choose the game that you like better...

I enjoyed Quake 4 (it wasn't well-received) and I really dislike the GTA games, is that reason
to say that GTA sequels were undeserved? No. People like the game. Just because I don't like it doesn't mean that it's undeserving.

Also, if the developers want to make a sequel (and they are), who is anyone to stop them? They have confidence in what they are doing and believe this to be the right move for their business.