Trilogy-itis

[TakerFoxx]

Terminator 1: Brilliant, Terminator 2: Worst, Terminator 3: Infinitaly better than 2, not as good as 1. Terminator 4: still not as good, but nice to see arnie got buff again to cameo

Wait a minute, Terminator 2 was the worst but 3 was infinitely better? Er, what?

 

[NickCaligo42]

So! Can anyone think of more examples/trilogies that defy this/an explanation for it?

Mega Man X3 and Mega Man Zero 3, Ratchet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal, Metal Gear Solid 3, Grand Theft Auto 3, Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening, Super Mario Bros. 3, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Persona 3...

To sum up: Yeah, plenty. Usually the third game is actually where the developers hit their stride, in my experience.

 

[deathbydeath]

After watching the latest Zero Punctuation, it dawned on me that the second game in a trilogy is almost unanimously the best and the third game is when they start removing features that were present in the second game as well as it just being a weaker game in general.

So! Can anyone think of more examples/trilogies that defy this/an explanation for it?

Mass Effect 2 for various reasons was a horrible game that for me killed the franchise and made me lose all interest in it. (horrid nonsense story, retcons galore, worse combat system, DLC that made the entire main story plot pointless and should have been the 2nd game instead, Cerberus, Shepard dying, Shepard being resurrected, and other more minor things)

As such your opinion the 2nd game in a trilogy is always the best is flawed as Mass Effect 2 proves.

Not always. It says 'almost unanimously'. As in, most people think it's better most of the time. I think Mass Effect 2 was critically acclaimed.

Besides, Mass Effect 3 isn't out yet. Who knows, you might hate 3 so much that your head explodes.

1. Fair enough.

2. Most review sites are bogus and seemingly have developers paying them for good reviews. I rarely trust review scores as many horrid games. (ME2, Final Fantasy 13, Call of Duty, etc.)

3. As said ME2 killed all interest I had in the franchise. I will not get 3 as such it matters not how bad it is. Besides from the news it looks like the combat has gone to the point of making it kinda a Gears clone. That does not impress me. As for the story and if there will be lots of retcons obviously I won't know of them until the game is released but it matters not as the combat being horrid will keep me away. Had I knwon ahead of time Mass Effect 2 had gone down the road it did with the combat I would not have gotten it.
Besides even if it had been a good game the recent BS pulled by EA (SOPA support, Orgin, unfair Orgin bans) have made me boycott them and I will not buy any of there products ever again. And this is coming from someone who was playing the Mass Effect games on console and thereby would not have to deal with Orgin myself. Despite not having to use it I find it so appalling I just can not in good faith give them my money.

4. In the end I have to give Mass Effect 2 credit for 1 good thing it did. It taught me to never ever ever ever preorder a game. I since then and forever more will wait a few weeks to a couple months to hear all about the game's mechanics and story summary before determining if I should buy it.

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

i do, even though i think it's mostly shit

 

[Laxman9292]

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

Last I checked my post said MOST not ALL.

It's not most, it's not even half. There is the odd Kane and Lynch fiasco, but for the most part reviewers are just gamers who managed to get a public that listens to their opinions. Much like yahtzee. He might be popular but he's just as right and wrong about games as any of us. We all have different tastes but just because there's a trend for reviewers to like high profile games doesn't mean they are getting paid. For example, I read Game Informer and for the most part I trust their reviews, but GameSpot? Not so much, or at least not the reviewers reviews.

 

[James Mann]

Terminator 1: Brilliant, Terminator 2: Worst, Terminator 3: Infinitaly better than 2, not as good as 1. Terminator 4: still not as good, but nice to see arnie got buff again to cameo

Wait a minute, Terminator 2 was the worst but 3 was infinitely better? Er, what?

Anything without that kids voice in it is infinitely better than anything with that kids voice in it.

True story.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

In addition to trilogy-itis, there's something I like to call the "Capcom syndrome".

I haven't played the Castlevania series, but from perpetuated opinions it sounds like C1 kicked ass, C2 fucked up hard, then C3 went back to the kickass, C4 was a remake of 1 that kicked even more ass, then Symphony of The Night on PS1 completely radicalized the franchise, but then C64 came and double-jumped the shark and never got a good title since.

Something similar happened to Devil May Cry, which I have played. 1 kicked ass, 2 fucked up completely, 3 was what 1 should have been but somehow still dropped the ball with the clunky styles. 4 is what the gameplay should have been but fucked up again because it pulled a Metal Gear Solid 2. Now there's that upcoming "Dmc" atrocity that's going to completely kill the franchise dead.

 

[Kopikatsu]

So! Can anyone think of more examples/trilogies that defy this/an explanation for it?

Mega Man X3 and Mega Man Zero 3, Ratchet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal, Metal Gear Solid 3, Grand Theft Auto 3, Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening, Super Mario Bros. 3, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Persona 3...

To sum up: Yeah, plenty. Usually the third game is actually where the developers hit their stride, in my experience.

None of those are trilogies, though.

Otherwise you could include Skyrim and junk in there, too.

 

[Nfritzappa]

So! Can anyone think of more examples/trilogies that defy this/an explanation for it?

snip

None of those are trilogies, though.

Otherwise you could include Skyrim and junk in there, too.

Once there's a 3rd entry in one series, it makes it a trilogy.
Metal Gear Solid was a trilogy until the fourth one.


But if you really want to be like that, I'll bite and say Spyro 3 is the best in its PS1 trilogy.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Star Wars Episode III was the best in the series...I'll give you that one but how about Halloween III the one without Michael Myers?

 

[Kopikatsu]

Star Wars Episode III was the best in the series...I'll give you that one but how about Halloween III the one without Michael Myers?

I've never seen any of the Halloween movies. =x How was there a movie without Myers, though?

 

[BlumiereBleck]

Star Wars Episode III was the best in the series...I'll give you that one but how about Halloween III the one without Michael Myers?

I've never seen any of the Halloween movies. =x How was there a movie without Myers, though?

Just one because of a new director, he decided to make a 3rd Halloween relating to a witch.

 

[putowtin]

1. Fair enough.

2. Most review sites are bogus and seemingly have developers paying them for good reviews. I rarely trust review scores as many horrid games. (ME2, Final Fantasy 13, Call of Duty, etc.)

3. As said ME2 killed all interest I had in the franchise. I will not get 3 as such it matters not how bad it is. Besides from the news it looks like the combat has gone to the point of making it kinda a Gears clone. That does not impress me. As for the story and if there will be lots of retcons obviously I won't know of them until the game is released but it matters not as the combat being horrid will keep me away. Had I knwon ahead of time Mass Effect 2 had gone down the road it did with the combat I would not have gotten it.
Besides even if it had been a good game the recent BS pulled by EA (SOPA support, Orgin, unfair Orgin bans) have made me boycott them and I will not buy any of there products ever again. And this is coming from someone who was playing the Mass Effect games on console and thereby would not have to deal with Orgin myself. Despite not having to use it I find it so appalling I just can not in good faith give them my money.

4. In the end I have to give Mass Effect 2 credit for 1 good thing it did. It taught me to never ever ever ever preorder a game. I since then and forever more will wait a few weeks to a couple months to hear all about the game's mechanics and story summary before determining if I should buy it.

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

Thank you, your reply has the correct amount of sarcasm for my country, as such I name you a Honouree Brit (unless you?re already British, in which case, stiff upper lip dear boy)

Oh and The7Sins, stop typing in red, it?s really annoying and not necessary to get your point across.

 

[Byere]

If it adds to the topic at hand, the Broken Sword series is a part-way on the two styles. The first was brilliant, the second amazing... and 3 and 4 were just utter shit...

Maybe we can expect the same from Megaman Legends?

 

[Yopaz]

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

Thank you, your reply has the correct amount of sarcasm for my country, as such I name you a Honouree Brit (unless you?re already British, in which case, stiff upper lip dear boy)

Oh and The7Sins, stop typing in red, it?s really annoying and not necessary to get your point across.

I thank you for the honour and I agree with your annoyance of the red text. That pisses me off almost as much as the bogus the text is saying.

 

[DementedSheep]

Yeah come to think of it that is often true.
I suppose it makes sense. The 2nd game often has a bigger budget and is more refined; things that were missing from the 1st get added. The 3rd is when the concept is starting to stretch thin, made to ride on the popularity of the first too or they start adding gimmicky crap to try and add something new. (obliviously I?m generalising and this is not the case for many games.)

 

[LittleJoeRambler]

I liked Age of Empires 3 more than 2, but only just. I think it mostly has to do with the time period, I'm a sucker for Napoleonic-era conflict.

I thought Mass Effect 1 was better than 2, I never seemed to be able to get into the story in 2 like I did in 1. I stopped playing after like 14 hours and haven't picked it back up, so the better graphics and better AI didn't matter as much to me as the better story ME1 had. Oh well.

 

[CaptOfSerenity]

Nah, Modern Warfare 2?
Someone who played every God of War enlighten me (I only played 1 and 2).

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

Just because you didn't like it, doesn't everyone else is "corrupt." There are millions of people who like ME2. I'm one of them, and I use to not like it.

Grow up.

 

[Netrigan]

In trilogies, I've always noticed that the first usually ends on a somewhat ambiguous ending, but an ending nonetheless. The second ends of a giant fuck off cliff-hanger, and the third ends the main story, but leaves a character cliff-hanger so they can make more later. Have yet to see anything deviate from this.

Off topic, but every time I see the title of this thread, I think it says "Trilogy-tits"

Same. Reminded me of recall.

That seems to be the fall-out of the Star Wars saga, where everyone decides to take the sequel and break it into two incomplete movies. The Matrix 2 & 3 would have made a really good movie, likewise Pirates 2 & 3; but they keep forgetting that Empire finished the story it was telling and the cliff-hanger whetting your appetite for the next film (Back To The Future did the same thing).

But in games, the reason so many second installments are better than the original is that they have a bigger budget and can put in all those things they wanted to do the first time around. The improved gameplay often covering up narrative problems (such as rehashing the original's plot). Unless they completely revamp the game (ala Grand Theft Auto III), then they're not only repeating the story beats, but they're not adding anything of significance to the game play.

There's a few games that buck the trend, such as Assassin's Creed, with the third installment taking place in the series' best environment (there is no ancient city as iconic as Rome) and the ability to call in assassins being one of the series' best additions. Revelations is where it becomes obvious that they're not too many more mountains to conquer for this franchise.

 

[CaptOfSerenity]

.

Yeah, all game reviewers lie about mass Effect 2. In fact all fans of the series who think Mass Effect 2 is better are paid to say good things about it. There's not one single person alive who actually likes Mass Effect 2.

Just because you didn't like it, doesn't everyone else is "corrupt." There are millions of people who like ME2. I'm one of them, and I use to not like it.

Grow up.

Oh come on, you should know that is sarcasm, it's pretty obvious.

I hope it is, but I've seen too many posts, made seriously, to give him/her the benefit of the doubt. If it is, then my bad, although my point still stands.

There are people who think this for real, and they're nuts.

 

[TyrantGanado]

Not a trilogy, but from what I remember the first Tomb Raider game was good, Tomb Raider 2 was great, and 3/4 were pretty bad.

Am I alone in thinking that The Last Revelation was Core's best Tomb Raider game? It only went rapidly downhill from then on until Eidos gave it to Crystal Dynamics.

OT: Personally I reckon the problem is due to many factors. If the second instalment is highly regarded then the third is already going to have a lot to prove which works against it. This might lead the team to focus too much on outdoing certain areas of the previous entry while neglecting the other parts of the game, leading to a jumbled mess. Other than that they could just be trying too hard to get the next one out on time so it's either a piece of crap or highly polished but a lot shorter.

Other times there are simply things that, for whatever reason, are left out of a sequel that can annoy one to no end (where the hell is my goddamn cheats menu in Drake's Deception, Naughty Dog!?)