Why do you guys downplay sequels?

[IamSofaKingRaw]

If there wasn't sequels we'd only get like 3-4 games a year because devs would have to put ALL their ideas for a story into one game. This will take a long ass time and extend development time because devs can no longer release games with only 1/3 of the story inot them. To add to this whats wrong with sequels anyway? Some of the best game last year where sequels; Mass Effect 2, Gran Turismo 5, Call of Duty Black Ops, God of War 3 etc..

The few original good games this gen like Uncharted, Ass Creed, Mass effect, InFamous all improved upon or will [footnote]Infamous 2 looks AMAZING[/footnote] their predecessors (heck Uncharted 2 was GOTY and ME2 was up there for GOTY also)

PS: I hate having to type in those two words. I can barely read them properly, am I a bot???

?

 

[Aeshi]

Because ZP does it and that basically makes it a rule that you have to hate sequels (unless they're Valve's of course)

P.S. I hate the word things too (why are they always changing colour and angle and size and all that crap.)

P.S.2. Why the BlackOps hate?

 

[Dark Knifer]

I think it's mainly to do with it no longer being something new. Some sequels are simply cash grabs and others are just too much like the original to be fun to play. So people have learned to dismiss sequels as something to not encourage, even if it isn't justified at times.

 

[Terminate421]

I don't hate sequels. If I did, I wouldn't have enjoyed master pieces like Halo 3 or Fallout 3.

Besides, some hate sequels because they aren't seeing anything "New"

"New" things sound easy to create on paper, but try making something PLAUSIBLE. If I made a game that involved being a fire breathing chicken that could fly and spit acid, and my goal was to kill the princess instead of save her, then my game idea wouldn't exactly be plausible. It would be like playing Angry Birds if they were on fire. But regardless, a sequel allows the game designers to work with their previous franchise and change things up a little, possibly making say, the "Brotherhood of Steel" the bad guys this time, or making the "Covenant" the good guys.

 

[Woodsey]

It's sequels like Call of Duty (can we all just look at how much TF2 has changed for free, and then look at how much CoD has(n't really) changed since MW, just for a second?), I don't think many people would argue against greatly improved sequels like ME2, AC2 and Uncharted 2.

 

[SilverUchiha]

I believe their called Captichas? Captchas?

Sequels aren't bad, but they should only be there if they serve a purpose like improving on gameplay (like Pokemon does) or advancing a story in some important way (like Half-Life 2). But if the sequel does neither, it serves no purpose other than to make money and please fans. I'm not downplaying sequels, but I just think there should be more reason... "Space Balls 2: The Search for More Money".

 

[pyrosaw]

It depended on what franchise where talking about, because things just get old after a whiel.

 

[RabbiiFrystofsk]

Because if you've made something too original, you've raised the bar too high to ever be able to better it in any way that people will like.
See COD 4.

 

[Technicolor]

While there are plenty of sequels made to simply milk a franchise, personally I prefer sequels in video games. Innovative games are rarely polished and often have more flaws the first time around. A good sequel doesn't need to add much, but rather to fix the flaws of the first, while maintaining good structure and gameplay.

 

[Korenith]

I always thought sequel hate was mostly reserved for films which I think in most cases is justified

 

[darth.pixie]

Probably because very few actually add anything to a setting or game. RPGs are excused since it's all about the story but there are some where you simply do things that you could have done in a longer previous game so that you would have more quests and a longer gameplay.

Devs would also spend more time perfecting a game rather than making three different buggy games in three years.

Quality over quantity mostly.

 

[The Wykydtron]

I never downplay a sequel how dare you make such baseless claims, since i have never been truly disappointed by a sequel ever... Playing the same bad games over and over again as a kid probably screwed my "shit this game is bad" sense though... If I was a reviewer i'd be the exact opposite of Yahtzee XD

 

[DustyDrB]

Eh, my favorite two game series are Zelda and Mass Effect. So I'm pretty thankful for sequels.

Sequels are good. The allow developers to go back and make the changes necessary (Assassin's creed II being the ultimate example in my mind, and I guess we'll be seeing how this is done with Two Worlds II tomorrow). And some sequels really aren't sequels at all (Red Dead Redemption). People love to complain. I mean, I guess a new call of Duty every year is ridiculous. But not many franchises have new games come out that quickly, except Guitar Hero.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Eh, having less sequels has its benefits.
Innovation
More time spent on IPs making them more refined
Less things I need to buy.
Overall improved quality

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

Because ZP does it and that basically makes it a rule that you have to hate sequels (unless they're Valve's of course)

P.S. I hate the word things too (why are they always changing colour and angle and size and all that crap.)

P.S.2. Why the BlackOps hate?

- terrible spawn points
- horrible lag on PS3 (at first I thought it was me but then I play World at War and THE GAME FREAKIN WORKS SEAMLESSLY)
- Guns unbalanced [footnote]why is the AK74u not the classified weapn when it is the best submachine gun? heck with Warlord, Grip and Rapidfire it is the best damn GUN[/footnote]
- All the maps are boring to play on and are too small [footnote]well all COD games are like this but I play KZ2 a lot which has humongous maps so...[/footnote]
- Terrible hit detection
=========Knifing [footnote]why is it one hit kill when half the time you get knifed first because of the lag. On your screen you knife the guy but the other guys screen you knife the air or something. Also, I hate how sometimres people can lunge at you and sometimes they can't, it pisses me off when someguy gets a magical commando knife when hes just aout to get gunned down.[/footnote]

 

[Something Amyss]

If there wasn't sequels we'd only get like 3-4 games a year because devs would have to put ALL their ideas for a story into one game. This will take a long ass time and extend development time because devs can no longer release games with only 1/3 of the story inot them. To add to this whats wrong with sequels anyway? Some of the best game last year where sequels; Mass Effect 2, Gran Turismo 5, Call of Duty Black Ops, God of War 3 etc..

The few original good games this gen like Uncharted, Ass Creed, Mass effect, InFamous all improved upon or will [footnote]Infamous 2 looks AMAZING[/footnote] their predecessors (heck Uncharted 2 was GOTY and ME2 was up there for GOTY also)

PS: I hate having to type in those two words. I can barely read them properly, am I a bot???

?

None of those do it for me. Well, MAYBE Uncharted 2, but I haven't played it. I should really finish the first at some point. Oh, one exception, I didn't notice Ass Creed. And part of the problem with that is that Assassin's Creed 2 was only head and shoulders above the first because the first was pretty meh.

Buuuuuut...I don't hate sequels per se. I just never cared about GT or COD, and ME2 was a huge letdown.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Don't hate sequels at all, if they brought a new better game, but when you look at something like CoD4 you realize they are just reselling the same game again and again.
Not to mention sports games sequels, they change the player names and off it goes...

Then you see what was once an original idea going stale and just get reprinted for the sake of more money for no extra work, and that is what I don't like.

 

[Justanothergamer300]

What are you talking about I love Sonic the hedgehog 2

Call of Duty Black Ops

? What

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

If there wasn't sequels we'd only get like 3-4 games a year because devs would have to put ALL their ideas for a story into one game. This will take a long ass time and extend development time because devs can no longer release games with only 1/3 of the story inot them. To add to this whats wrong with sequels anyway? Some of the best game last year where sequels; Mass Effect 2, Gran Turismo 5, Call of Duty Black Ops, God of War 3 etc..

The few original good games this gen like Uncharted, Ass Creed, Mass effect, InFamous all improved upon or will [footnote]Infamous 2 looks AMAZING[/footnote] their predecessors (heck Uncharted 2 was GOTY and ME2 was up there for GOTY also)

PS: I hate having to type in those two words. I can barely read them properly, am I a bot???

?

Uhhhh, there isn't. Only people like Yahtzee are making fun of the trend. 5 of my 6 most anticipated games of next year are sequels.

 

[Geekosaurus]

Why change what isn't broken? I find Call of Duty fun, and I'm sure a lot of other people do too, so why alter that? Besides, it's that formula that made them all millionaires.