Sequels. prequels or nothing

[redisforever]

I usually think that the sequel is the best of a series. Obviously, not always, but usually. I don't think that banning sequels, or prequels is a good idea, but banning those that are exactly the same is a better one. Come on, HL2 is very different from HL1, and so on. If a game continues the story where the previous one needed a continuation.

 

[Twilight_guy]

No. Hell people complain about the slight bit of censorship but a world where sequels were illegal would be the biggest censorship ever.

 

[Uriain]

Just my opinion, but sequels should be looked at like Comic book/Video game Movies.. by a group of people who are knowledgeable on the subject and see that it maintains the lore/fluff/cannon (whatever you want to call it) that the first/series has already established.

That way, we (should) have less screwball attempts like Bloodrayne movies and movie tie-in games....well that would be my hope anyways

 

[krazykidd]

Fuck no.

We'd still be getting the same stagnation, just without memorable franchises.

How do you figure? This is a genuine question and i am hoping for an answer that isn't just a list of succesful fanchises.

No. Hell people complain about the slight bit of censorship but a world where sequels were illegal would be the biggest censorship ever.

How would that equate to censorship? I mean no one is preventin you from using ideas , just put it all in one game or make a new IP with different ideas.

 

[Scentless Apprentice]

Fuck no.

We'd still be getting the same stagnation, just without memorable franchises.

How do you figure? This is a genuine question and i am hoping for an answer that isn't just a list of succesful fanchises.[.quote]

Just because people can't make sequels, doesn't mean they wouldn't make something very similar to whatever was popular. We'd basically be getting the same game with a different name.

 

[G-Force]

The thing with games is that many of the celebrated classics are seaqules because developers really took the time to actually improve the core game and not just made it a quick map pack expansion.

GTA and Saints Row established their identities around their second and third installment
Uncharted did not become a household name until the second game.
Resident Evil 4 is reguarded as the best game of the series
Even Yahatzee's favorite games are seaqules Prince of Persia and Silent Hill 2

 

[boag]

There's a difference between a sequel that continues the story of - or expands upon - the original and a sequel that is just made because the first one sold well.

I find your statement to be well cemented in logic, and particularly reasonable.

however, I will point out that almost all existing sequels, have been made because the first one sold well.

 

[Twilight_guy]

No. Hell people complain about the slight bit of censorship but a world where sequels were illegal would be the biggest censorship ever.

How would that equate to censorship? I mean no one is preventin you from using ideas , just put it all in one game or make a new IP with different ideas.

Let's say I make a game and its cool and super awesome and people love it. Then one night I have an Epiphany where I suddenly have an new idea for the main character and want to tell a story about what happens years later in the story. According to a world without sequels its illegal for me to make a continuation. According to these rules I have to start over from scratch establishing a new idea. In addition it may be impossible for me to tell my story now if the story I want to tell depends heavily on those particular characters in that setting. I can't just recreate the same game, since that'd be considered sequel or close enough so I have to make it different and by making it different I can no longer tell the story. Suddenly my arm is being twisted because a rule has been put against me telling me that I can't use an older idea or setting.

If we look at games not as a one-off flash in the pan discrete block but as the creation of a setting that we can later expand upon by adding new ideas and situations then its easy to see that this kind of law is the worst thing ever.

Not to mention that since this applies to all media since we're not defining one in particular that means that the concept of a "universe" or artificially created world would no longer exist since ever story is a discrete block and we can never revisit it or imagine things outside of its one view since all those other ideas, are sequels or extension ideas.

This idea is just stupid all around and an exaggerate response to the idea that too many sequels get released. It's curing the disease by killing the patient and then burning the body and eating it.

 

[Mike Richards]

The problem here is that we get a lot of games that aren't sequels that suck just as hard, except no one pays attention to those because they don't have anything associated with them yet.

Crap is always going to exist and we are never going to get rid of it. The only thing we can do is enjoy the stuff that's actually good, and a lot of those are in fact sequels. Even removing the Invisible War's and the Modern Warfare 3's of the world (As well as Skyrim, GTA IV, Silent Hill 2, HL2, Uncharted 3...) wouldn't remove things like Mindjack or Vampire Rain.

 

[Hides His Eyes]

The problem with sequels/prequels is they are trying to capture the wow factor from the first game, this is VERY hard to do. A series like Mass Effect works because it is an ongoing story bioware even made significant gameplay changes between the two.

I think most of the problem is devs/pubs are becoming reliant on big brand names to sell games hence we end up most of the money being poured into call of battlefield honour instead of putting it into making a new IP. Pubs want a sure thing so even a shitty sequel to a good original will rake in cash, rather than risk it on a new IP.

You're exactly right and you know what? It pisses me off that this is common knowledge, I mean it's completely obvious, it's an opinion shared by gamers all over the internet and by several high-profile game critics - and yet nothing changes. There's such a huge discrepancy in the games industry between what gamers want and what developers give us. Maybe we should start to actually boycott mediocre sequels and brown-and-grey shooters, rather than complain about them and then buy them anyway because they're kinda fun.

 

[Erttheking]

Unlike Yahtzee many people get enjoyment from sequels that don't bear the name Half Life or Silent Hill. For me, farting out a completely new universe and gameplay mechanics every release would be confusing and rushed and frankly you can only design so many kinds of games before things start looking similar. I like franchises because they take a universe I enjoy and expand on it.

 

[Vault101]

seaquels arnt bad

they can be abused but arnt bad, and it it does get to that point just pretend it doesnt exist

and not even yahtzee can deny alot of games he likes have been seaquels

also you cant put all seaquels is the "seaquel box" thats like lumping all videogames together as one thing because they are videogames

 

[AyreonMaiden]

No it's not. Everything becomes banal if you give it enough time, even "originality."

Look at indie gaming. Even THAT has tropes now. Fun games are fun no matter the number attached to the end of their titles.

 

[him over there]

This may be hard to believe but most sequels, at least regarding videogames are better than the original. Mostly because having an original idea is one thing but you aren't going to get it right the first time most of the time. Sequels exist for refinement of rough ideas present in the first. Mario Galaxy is infinitely better than mario 64. What we should hate is franchises that exist for the sake of cash and cash alone that are essentially the same thing.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

After watching an old Zero Punctuation video, Yahtzee said "imagine a world without sequels, wouldn't that be sa wonderful place? Sure we'd miss a few good sequels but isn't that worth it?"

Would it erally be better if there was no sequels in the world, or would they just start making prequels? And would we miss any good sequels?

One word : "Aliens".

"Game over man, game over..."

I happen to think the original Alien is far far superior to Aliens. I also don't like the direction the series went after Aliens. All in all though, its a different kind of movie.

 

[Vault101]

After watching an old Zero Punctuation video, Yahtzee said "imagine a world without sequels, wouldn't that be sa wonderful place? Sure we'd miss a few good sequels but isn't that worth it?"

Would it erally be better if there was no sequels in the world, or would they just start making prequels? And would we miss any good sequels?

One word : "Aliens".

"Game over man, game over..."

I happen to think the original Alien is far far superior to Aliens. I also don't like the direction the series went after Aliens. All in all though, its a different kind of movie.

correction there wasn't anything after Aliens..the series ended there.

Oh you dont belive me?..."damn, another one" dont go anywhere I need to uhh [sub/] find out where you live and kill you [/sub] do somthing

 

[Nouw]

I'm baffled as to why this thread is discussing films and books when this is the Gaming Discussion forum. Nitpicks aside, I like my sequels thanks. They can fix the errors of the original game and innovate. Yes sometimes the sequel can turn out to be a completely different game or shit but other times they can be quite great.

snip

Pfft, back in my day we joined the Mobile Infantry. Come on you apes, you wanna live forever?

 

[OrokuSaki]

Yes and no. Personally, I hate being conned every time someone sequels one of my favorite games and then does the game developer equivalent of farting in my face (See Prince of Persia and Devil May Cry), but at the same time sometimes sequels actually add to the story.

My opinion, ban sequels, but make the game writers tie up every loose thread and completely finish the story before the game is released. That way the prince of persia trilogy wouldn't just be a trilogy of above-average games, but instead a masterpiece that flows from beginning to end.

 

[Squilookle]

Since I don't consider spiritual successors to be sequels, yes, we would be better without sequels, because all the next-step games would still be made, except since they aren't using an established IP to sell the game by itself, the devs are forced to treat every game as one that needs to prove itself, and so better gameplay occurs anyway.

 

[Something Amyss]

The same lack of creativity that lends itself to sequelitis would find a home in a world without sequels.