As you are all aware, sequels are popping up all over the place today and people either like this trend or wish it'd go fuck itself. What I want to know is what is what is worse, a sequel with nothing to do with the original, or one with too much to do. I'm basically speaking in terms of all the major elements in a game (gamplay, story, presentation, etc.)
Me personally, I'd go with the latter. Even if it can't really be considered part of a series because of how different it is, if it's good, it's good. If a game has too much to do with the original, it may be good, but it may only be good because of the fact that it uses what made the game great in the first place. At least is if a game is different but good, it tried something new and succeeded. Maybe that's just me.
Me personally, I'd go with the latter. Even if it can't really be considered part of a series because of how different it is, if it's good, it's good. If a game has too much to do with the original, it may be good, but it may only be good because of the fact that it uses what made the game great in the first place. At least is if a game is different but good, it tried something new and succeeded. Maybe that's just me.
