Sequels that shouldn't have been made

Recommended Videos

Gladion

New member
Jan 19, 2009
1,470
0
0
DamagedWill said:
Gladion said:
NoMoreSanity said:
Resident Evil 5. The series was perfect at 4 Capcom, why did you have to ruin it for me?
Resident Evil 5 was pretty much an exact copy of RE 4 with a different setting and a co-op mode :0 May I ask how RE5 ruined RE4 for you (however this is possible)?

fix-the-spade said:
Any of the numbered or subtitled Sequels to ALIEN!*

*Aliens was neither a numbered nor subtitled sequel, it's just Aliens.
;) That's a pretty brave statment, seeing Aliens is, together with Terminator 2, always mentioned together with the sentence "better than the original".

The sequel that should never have been made was Riddick (the second movie). For fucks sake... unbelievable. How can you go from PITCH BLACK to this?!
Resident Evil 5 was a dumbed down, shorter and more annoying Resident Evil 4. They finally had a good inventory system in 4 but they, of course, got rid of it in 5. 5 is also ridiculously short compared to 4. 5 had better weapons in my opinion though. Recycled bosses and enemies. 4 had the Regenerators, 5 didn't have a really cool enemy like that. But it did have the Lickers, which was a nice surprise.

When it comes to sequels, it's more of the wasted potential of what could've been then it should have never been.
Dumbed down? Come on :p RE4 was as dumb as any game can get anyways. There wasn't anything to dumb it down. But I have to agree with the inventory system. In a real horror game, a limited inventory makes sense - it increases the tension. But since RE4, Resident Evil was no horror game any more, so it was pointless, as far as I see it. I thought some of the 'Natives' were pretty memorable, at least the ones with the huge clubs. Also, I liked the setting better. Terror in daylight is somehow cooler (yes, there is a difference between horror and terror). The final boss in RE5 was far superior to the one in RE4, I think.
I never bought RE5, but it was pretty damn good. Standing by itself, I think it's even better than RE4. But it recycled many many MANY ideas from its prequel, so there's no way to rate it any higher than RE4.
 

effilctar

New member
Jul 24, 2009
1,495
0
0
if you're going to offend, try to start arguments and not contribute positively, with all due respect, GTFO of my thread. Thank you Joe182
 

joe182

New member
Feb 18, 2005
395
0
0
effilctar said:
if you're going to offend, try to start arguments and not contribute positively, with all due respect, GTFO of my thread. Thank you Joe182
Firstly, un-twist your underwear... Good, now, what the hell did I do? You said sequels that shouldn't have been made, I stated one?
 

ChromeAlchemist

New member
Aug 21, 2008
5,865
0
0
Fucking Perfect Dark Zero...

Oh, so she's American now? Yes, that makes perfect sense. And the game was just awesome...

You shame yourselves Rare. You shame yourselves and your families can't walk the street without being egged anymore. Bastards...
 

DamagedWill

New member
Jul 25, 2009
7
0
0
Gladion said:
DamagedWill said:
Gladion said:
NoMoreSanity said:
Resident Evil 5. The series was perfect at 4 Capcom, why did you have to ruin it for me?
Resident Evil 5 was pretty much an exact copy of RE 4 with a different setting and a co-op mode :0 May I ask how RE5 ruined RE4 for you (however this is possible)?

fix-the-spade said:
Any of the numbered or subtitled Sequels to ALIEN!*

*Aliens was neither a numbered nor subtitled sequel, it's just Aliens.
;) That's a pretty brave statment, seeing Aliens is, together with Terminator 2, always mentioned together with the sentence "better than the original".

The sequel that should never have been made was Riddick (the second movie). For fucks sake... unbelievable. How can you go from PITCH BLACK to this?!
Resident Evil 5 was a dumbed down, shorter and more annoying Resident Evil 4. They finally had a good inventory system in 4 but they, of course, got rid of it in 5. 5 is also ridiculously short compared to 4. 5 had better weapons in my opinion though. Recycled bosses and enemies. 4 had the Regenerators, 5 didn't have a really cool enemy like that. But it did have the Lickers, which was a nice surprise.

When it comes to sequels, it's more of the wasted potential of what could've been then it should have never been.
Dumbed down? Come on :p RE4 was as dumb as any game can get anyways. There wasn't anything to dumb it down. But I have to agree with the inventory system. In a real horror game, a limited inventory makes sense - it increases the tension. But since RE4, Resident Evil was no horror game any more, so it was pointless, as far as I see it. I thought some of the 'Natives' were pretty memorable, at least the ones with the huge clubs. Also, I liked the setting better. Terror in daylight is somehow cooler (yes, there is a difference between horror and terror). The final boss in RE5 was far superior to the one in RE4, I think.
I never bought RE5, but it was pretty damn good. Standing by itself, I think it's even better than RE4. But it recycled many many MANY ideas from its prequel, so there's no way to rate it any higher than RE4.
When I mean dumbed down, I mean mainly in gameplay. I'm not talking storywise or control wise. I agree with the limited inventory increasing tension bit. Daylight was also a refreshing change since RE4 only had a short bit during the day. Actually, the last two bosses of RE5 I thought were pretty cool. Resident Evil always talked Survival Horror but it never quite reached that in my opinion, at least not consistently. The first Silent Hill comes to mind when I think of Survival Horror.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed RE5 but it just felt like it was missing something.
 

Neotericity

Legal Assassin
May 20, 2009
685
0
0
Team Fortress 2... Just kidding
I'm gonna go with Call of Duty 5 or Gears of War 2 was extremely dissapointing, I went into that with low expectations, but what came out was worse than my lowest expectations.
 

thenoblitt

New member
May 7, 2009
759
0
0
effilctar said:
Final Fantasy 7, 12 and Tactics are all set in Ivalice and in Tactics, Cloud and Balthier come back in time (PSP version) so they're probably the same world just at different times

you sir failed, 12 and tactics are set in ivalice but final fantasy 7 is set in an entirely different world, cloud was brought to ivalice by one of the machines they use in tactics, god i hate feeling like a nerd
 

lostclause

New member
Mar 31, 2009
1,860
0
0
Radeonx said:
I disliked Halo 2, but Halo 3 is a good game,
Prime example of how opinions differ, I'd have put it the other way round then added halo wars shouldn't have been made (at least not for xbox). But anyway, I was more disappointed with Gears of War 2. I liked the first one but there seemed to be no difference between the games, even the plot sounded similar (at least from zp, never bothered pursuing it further).
 

Steel Ronin

New member
Apr 14, 2009
213
0
0
Condemned 2.I don't hate condemned but all of this sci-fi nonsense in the second game and talk of an ancient mystical cult just ruined the game for me.
odubya23 said:
Fallout 3. Terrible game, I can't believe people could fool themselves into thinking it was anything other than a shameful franchise rip-off. Oblivion was better, for goodness sakes!
Oh come on we all know Oblivion sucked.I guess some people just like leveling up when they are asleep probably makes you feel you're acomplishing something whenever you take a shit or fall asleep.
 

tomtom94

aka "Who?"
May 11, 2009
3,373
0
0
Everyone seems to think Red Alert 3 sucks...I haven't played it unfortunately so I can't make a judgement.

I'm going to say Lego Racers 2, for changing everything good about the first game into...disappointment.
Also Fifa Street 2 by virtue of the fact that the first one was bad enough!
 

Plinglebob

Team Stupid-Face
Nov 11, 2008
1,815
0
0
I'mgoing with Red Alert 3 and Final Fantasy XII.

Red alert 3 because of the forced co-op in the campaign. If it had been optional then I wouldn't have minded, but being forced to rush things because the AI commander wouldn't sit still was a pain in the arse.

Final Fantasy XII because it had a boring story, annoying main character and and even more boring combat system. When playing a Final Fantasy game, i want the main character to be interesting and the one doing everything. In XII, it felt like everyone else was doing all the hard work and he was just getting brought along for theride. The combat was also annoying. The levelling/combat systems are my favourite thing about the FF games (yes, I liked both Junctioning and dress-spheres) but in XII it got to the point where I started a boss battle, didnt touch the controller once and still won.
 

CrazySlyHawk

New member
Feb 28, 2008
56
0
0
Cod5 is pretty tired.

If Halo 2 had Halo 3's graphics and Halo 3 was actually a huge step up, then I would accept Halo 3. I loved Halo 1 and Halo 2 was a huge step up, thus it too was great in my mind.

Halo 3 was more of a step to the side, not to mention its own smugness. Watch the scene where Cortana is doing her 'help me Obi-wan Kenobi' bit in the meeting between Hood, MC and the Elites. When she is suddenly in pain I wonder how many people Bungie hoped to cry out in sympathy?
 

blaze96

New member
Apr 9, 2008
4,515
0
0
What is E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial for the GBA Alex?

Who thought that would be a good idea:
"Sir, do you remember that game that nearly destroyed the entire industry in the 80's?"
"Yes I do. What about it?"
"Lets make a sequel to it!"
"I'm just high enough that that sounds like a good idea!"
 

IamQ

New member
Mar 29, 2009
5,226
0
0
Burnout Paradise. Why couldn't you just stick to the Burnout 3 formula and improve it with this generation of consoles? Why did you have to make it free world and ruin the controlls?! WHY?!
 

Vrex360

Badass Alien
Mar 2, 2009
8,379
0
0
Bioshock 2. I was actually quite a happy chappy when I played through Bioshock and killed Fontaine and saved the little sisters and got an unambiguos ending without any loose ends to tie up and could now just reflect on a totally brilliant game. I didn't really think a sequel is neccessary, like in games like Halo or Half Life there is reason to make sequels as there is a contiuing overarching story line (or a great big expansive universe with many other stories besides the main plot to tell) but there was no overarching story line in Bioshock. It ended quite nicely and there is no need for another one. Besides it focusses way to heavily on action rather than exploration and explopration and immersion into the atmosphere was the main thing I liked about Bioshock.
If I want ACTION I'll play one o the three Halos, if I want EXPLORATION I'll play Bioshock.
 

Manji187

New member
Jan 29, 2009
1,444
0
0
Devil May Cry 2 (3 is good), Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (MGS3: Snake Eater is great though), Resident Evil 5 (the innovation came with RE4, RE5 is an encore), Final Fantasy X-2 (the gaming equivalent of chicklit), Tekken 4 (worse than 3 despite the graphics) and practically all Mortal Kombat editions after it's PSX era.