Poll: Sequels... Goddamn sequels

[IamQ]

I'm not against them. I mean I loved Uncharted 2, and I'm looking forward to either a third or a new Jak and Daxter game (Developed by Naughty Dog this time damn it!)

 

[MiserableOldGit]

I don't assume they'll be crap/pointless, but I'm always prepared for it. Strange that there seems to be more of them in a time when games can easily be updated thanks to online gaming.

 

[traceur_]

The way I see it, a game can have an infinite amount of sequels so long as they are all still fun to play. When it starts to get stale and old, then it's time to move on.

Sequels generally tend to be original game, only vastly improved. So for t reason I often enjoy them more than the original game.

Agreed. Plus, what I like about sequels (in all media) is that there is a lot less time spent fucking around, setting everything up. Sequels dive right in.

 

[josh827]

Personally, i do enjoy sequels, i.e. Assassin's Creed 2. BioShock 2. Mass Effect 2. COD:MW2 (Nor counting WaW or 3.)

I believe these games will be fantastic sequels, that were absolutely needed.

Unlike Left 4 Dead 2, all though i will buy it, i do believe it's not necessary to have it come out so early, since there really is no plot, besides killing mindless zombies. But i'm not going to start a flame war.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

A sequel that improves opon the original or at the very least tries to push the boundaries abit further are ok in my books. Soulless sequels released solely the suck the cash out of the pervious games legacy should be condemned to video game hell.

 

[MagnetoHydroDynamics]

Sequels aren't always about sucking cash. But the ones that are should be shot with an armour piercing sniper moose.

fix'd

 

[likalaruku]

Lemme think about it....

Baldur's Gate II: Awsome.
Diablo II: Enjoyed 1 better, but it was still great.
Serious Sam 3: Awesome.
Neverwinter Nights 2: Awesome, but 2 of the premium mods sucked.
Dungeon Siege 2: Awesome..until the last level.
Elder Scrolls: The mods make for endess good times.
Heroes of Might & Magic 4: I liked it more than 3.
The Settlers 5: It was better than 4.
Myst 2 & 3: Still good. 2 is buggy though.
American McGee's Alice 2: Can't wait.
Harry Potter 2-6: I got my fix from em.


Ummm...No. I guess RPG players don't suffer from Dreadful Sequalitus.

 

[MercurySteam]

It seems like all popular games get a sequel. Left 4 Dead 2, Halo 3: ODST, CODMW:2. I'm not saying that sequels automatically ruin games, I'm saying that most we can do with out. What do you think?

The funny thing is that all the titles you've just mentioned have extremely high expectations and SHITLOADS of people are lining up to be the first ones to get them (with the exception of ODST, which is already out and was rated an awesome game). I can see what you mean though, with games like F.E.A.R. 2 failing horribly (I still only see Extraction Point and Perseus Mandate as the good F.E.A.R. games). But I think the majority of sequels that come out are actually good. 2008 plus this year has had alot of sequels, and 2010 is looking the same.

Here I come Bioshock 2!

 

[Dys]

I'm fine with them, so long as games are not left deliberately unfinished for the sake of a sequal (this means you, halo 2). Honestly, everytime an original concept comes along, people shun it. We can't all hate sequals as much as we claim when we are happy to buy fifa 20xx, half life 2 ep x or call of duty x.

I don't hate sequels since a lot of games that have sequels actually see improvements like Jak 2, Ratchet and Clank 2, and Sly 2, but I DO hate sequels for games such as Halo because they're mostly made for the money. How often do we get sequels that are truly made "for the fans"? Rarely.

No doubt I could pull any number of people up on this, but why single out Halo? Halo 2 developed the single player gameplay introduced in halo and added in a more difficult co-op mode, it also included xbox live (surely a significant move forward, I can't name any earlier online console titles). Halo 3 went onto introduce the forge and further build on the multiplayer game. It also completely desecrated the singleplayer game (though I'm sure they thought they were improving it, and rejecting failure is the same as rejecting progress).

Basicially the only 'sequal' in the halo franchise that has not added anything new (presumably, I've not played it) is the ODST expansion pack. Y'know, that game that isn't a sequal. Would you please go the extra step and explain why the halo sequals are "for the money" anymore than any other game, as it is far from obvious.

Surely I'm not the only person who's sick of all this bashing on halo, it contradicts common sense. No, the game is not even close to the best thing that's happened to videogames, but it surely doesn't deserve this much hate. I get that popular must equal uncool, and that a great many of people within gaming culture strive to be unique and interesting, but just because a band video game has become popular doesn't mean we should all hate it.

 

[Osaka-chaness]

I'm fine with them, so long as games are not left deliberately unfinished for the sake of a sequal (this means you, halo 2). Honestly, everytime an original concept comes along, people shun it. We can't all hate sequals as much as we claim when we are happy to buy fifa 20xx, half life 2 ep x or call of duty x.

I don't hate sequels since a lot of games that have sequels actually see improvements like Jak 2, Ratchet and Clank 2, and Sly 2, but I DO hate sequels for games such as Halo because they're mostly made for the money. How often do we get sequels that are truly made "for the fans"? Rarely.

No doubt I could pull any number of people up on this, but why single out Halo? Halo 2 developed the single player gameplay introduced in halo and added in a more difficult co-op mode, it also included xbox live (surely a significant move forward, I can't name any earlier online console titles). Halo 3 went onto introduce the forge and further build on the multiplayer game. It also completely desecrated the singleplayer game (though I'm sure they thought they were improving it, and rejecting failure is the same as rejecting progress).

Basicially the only 'sequal' in the halo franchise that has not added anything new (presumably, I've not played it) is the ODST expansion pack. Y'know, that game that isn't a sequal. Would you please go the extra step and explain why the halo sequals are "for the money" anymore than any other game, as it is far from obvious.

Surely I'm not the only person who's sick of all this bashing on halo, it contradicts common sense. No, the game is not even close to the best thing that's happened to videogames, but it surely doesn't deserve this much hate. I get that popular must equal uncool, and that a great many of people within gaming culture strive to be unique and interesting, but just because a band video game has become popular doesn't mean we should all hate it.

I apologize. It's just that I hear too many people saying that Halo is the best shooter ever (and most sick of a lot of 360 fanboys calling it the best system ever. They both have their positives and negatives.

And yeah I wasn't talking about Halo 2(though that is pretty overhyped), I was talking more about Halo 3 because of the reasons you mentioned...however as for ODST, I actually WANT to play that game because the only thing it has in common with the other 3 Halos is the enemies. I saw a few videos from it and I chuckled at quite a few scenes (the one where your allies, including a tank (going backwards) are running away from a fight and the guy you're playing as asks where the fight is and one guy is like "Where do you think?" XD) but since my friend's 360 is in a state of disrepair, I won't be able to play it for a while.

 

[TPiddy]

Sequels are great.... they're also the lifeblood of the industry. Sequels give developers a chance to see what works and what doesn't. If people don't learn lessons from building something the first time around then we wouldn't get some of the amazing games we have today...

In fact, most of the best games ever were sequels....

GTA: San Andreas
Resident Evil 4
Prince of Persia: Sands of Time

etc....

The list of ORIGINAL IP games that are ranked as the best ever is far smaller than the list of sequels that are ranked as the best ever...

not everyone gets it right on their first try.

 

[Versago]

I'm willing to put up with the shite (Fable 2) that gets sold sheerly off of fan base (i bought it because Fable rocked).
I'll put up with it because of the truely great sequals - Majoras Mask, HL2, that are good enough to make the concept worthwhile.

Fan-based sequal hype is mostly bad (HALO 3 is mediocre and you KNOW IT) - but i am enjoying the exitment for L4D2.

So i see sequels are morally grey.

 

[high_castle]

I think when the sequel's focus is expanding on the story, and when there's enough story left to expand on in the first place, they can be good. One of my favorite games of all time is Baldur's Gate 2, a sequel that managed to be just as good if not better than its predecessor. And I'm really looking forward to Mass Effect 2, which could deliver the same result.

But those sequels which are shamelessly tacked on to milk a series for all its worth annoy me to no end.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

If it's appropriate and not in excessive number sure, but anything beyond a third sequel is milking the franchise and any and all companies that do it should be loaded into a cannon and fired into the sun. The only time I'll consider a sequel beyond the third acceptable is if you introduce a brand new villain with a new scheme etc. and none of that "Oh it was actually the old villain all along" crap. I'm looking at you Zelda.

 

[Julianking93]

Just like anything else, you can't judge it just because its a sequel.

Just like all other games, it could be good, it could be bad. Although, when they make sequels only to make money (like Iron Man 2 for example. Who the hell is gonna play that?) they should just be nuked.

 

[Lordmarkus]

Most sequels I've played are good. List time!!

Sequels that are better than the original
Half-life 2
Team Fortress 2
Call of Duty 4


Sequels that are worthy the original
Fallout 2
Call of Duty 2

Yes I know that I've only rounded it up to 4 gamingseries but I like new IP's, ok?

[small]Sequels that are somewhat worthy of the original[/small]
[sub]Fallout 3[/sub]

 

[ThatZombieGuy]

You guys have kind of changed my opinion. Without some sequels we wouldn't have great games like, Half Life 2, COD:4, and Halo 3. It's just when the developers go over the edge. When they make games just for the money. But the worst part is, when they do that, it usually gets them A LOT OF CASH. So I guess I don't hate sequels, but a good deal of them can be shot on sight.

 

[Snotnarok]

There are some really good sequels out there, it's just unfortunate that many sequels or rather recent games that are out usually end relying on a sequel coming out and end on such agitating cliffhangers it's does get on ones nerves. It's to the point where basically all games just end on cliffhangers with no closure.

I enjoy sequels but the constant cliffhangers have to stop, they're not needed in every title and have been abused too much.