Son of Return to the Sequel II

[Halbert]

I have this theory that cliffhanger endings are more of an in-house marketing thing, and it doesn't really carry much risk. If the game does well, it practically guarantees that you'll be making another one. If the game doesn't do well, what does it matter that the story didn't wrap up? Nobody played the game and you're moving on to different things anyhow.

It amazes me that anybody can talk about bad sequels/cliffhanger endings without mentioning . . . *shudder*, KOTOR 2. To this day, I instinctively reach for my pitchfork and torch when I think about that game.

 

[Archemetis]

Previous statements about the Mass effect ending have had me wondering now, Could I have been the only person not to notice there was a cliffhanger?

I mean Now people have explained it, it's apparent to me why I never noticed, because like Shamus says, the intial conflict was resolved. So to me just felt like a typical victory over the established intergalactic evil.

Then again it might also be the fact that I bought my copy very late and was completing it by the time the second one was announced, so I knew more was coming, so when it was stated that there is a possibility of a greater threat I might've just politely shrugged it off.

Another thing I agree with is the winning formula of the Final Fantasy franchise, although I'm compelled to think to myself "Are they really sequels?" Sure they have the corresponding numbers to indicate that they're sequels, but whenever I think of sequels I normally think of a follow-on to an already established world and cast of characters. Really it might just be a narrow-minded view on the subject, but it does confuse me.

Episodic gaming I think is a fantastic diea, on paper, shorter games, for less money released more frequently, but the only problem with the equation is the more frequently released part. Because today's market apparently expect top of the line graphics and physics which take years to create in themselves, then there's the narrative to consider, the ideas the additions in gameplay mechanics.

I think what i'm getting at and more than likely what Shamus was getting at is when it takes so long to create the next link in the chain, is it really worth trying to create a series of games with an on-going storyline throughout?

What i'd prefer to see is episodic gaming, but with simpler concepts and mechanics maybe even dumb it down some. Forget gritty realism and perfect real world physics and intricate blood splatter dynamics or whatever they have entire teams for now days, just go back down basic formats and just make it "Fun" fun, not "It's fun because it can plausably be done in real life" fun.

This is possibly why Nintendo franchises, althuogh drastically declining in quality now, are still very popular.

 

[Flap Jack452]

In the subject of endings which you addressed, I think this is something Mass Effect did well. They give you a cliffhanger, but they also rap up the story of Saren and Sovereign in a satisfying way.

I agree. Games like Halo that give you a cliffhanger are infuriating. Especially if in the next game you learn virtually nothing.

 

[Patrick J McGraw]

Very good article, Shamus. These are contributing factors to why I enjoy my three favorite game series: Final Fantasy, Castlevania, and Zelda.

Final Fantasy and The Legend of Zelda do some true sequels, but for the most part they do new stories that re-use themes specific to the series. (Supposedly, there is a Zelda timeline, but people have gone mad trying to figure it out. As far as I'm concerned each incarnation of Link occupies his own continuity, i.e. Zelda I & II, Link to the Past & Link's Awakening, Wind Waker & Phantom Hourglass, etc.)

Castlevania is an interesting case because while it has a definite timeline (complete with dates) and recurring characters, nearly every game features an original protagonist. They realized pretty early on that they couldn't just have Simon Belmont killing Dracula over and over again, but they could hve lots of different people killing Dracula over and over again. The need to kill Dracula over and over again is actually an important theme that shapes many of the games' stories - most notably the "Sorrow" games. From a gameplay standpoint, the use of different characters enables a variety of gameplay, letting the developers experiment greatly with what the player character is capable of doing.

 

[Grampy_bone]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that the whole cliffhanger-sequel-preplanned-trilogy thing is a western trend. Japanese companies will happily crank out sequel after sequel to a successful game, but they usually make each game self-contained with some sort of satisfactory resolution (Xenosaga notwithstanding). Japanese TV is the same way. Instead of trying to create a concept and characters and then running the show for as long as they can, they create a series of set episodes, and then that's it. If it's popular they make another series, if not oh well.

 

[dochmbi]

I like sequels. If the game is good and people want more of the same, why not give it to them?

 

[Dorian Cornelius Jasper]

Nailed it on the head as always, Shamus.
Someone still might want to remove the formatting artefacts in the last paragraph on page one, these s are really annoying.

I assumed these were intentional.

I like sequels. If the game is good and people want more of the same, why not give it to them?

This is true. It's also true that developers and publishers could at least give some story closure with each game. After all, it's not like a cliffhanger ending makes anyone more likely to buy the sequel--they'll buy it if the gameplay's good, so why shaft the player of a proper reward in this game?

 

[Sewblon]

Final Fantasy is not a series it is a seal of approval that square soft give to RPGs that they badly want to sell. The problem is story and game play should not be treated as separate elements, both are better when both are equally intrinsic parts of the games premise.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

In the subject of endings which you addressed, I think this is something Mass Effect did well. They give you a cliffhanger, but they also rap up the story of Saren and Sovereign in a satisfying way.

This is true. One of the only games that has both cliffhangery-nonsense and resolution.

That Max Payne idea is actually really good... having a single character that isn't recycled as they are reinvented each game.

Mass Effect didn't strike me as having a "cliff hanger", that's what I usually call an "open ended" ending, wraps up most of the story, but leaves it open for a sequel.

 

[Tales of Golden Sun]

Nice article.

Sequels aren't necessarily bad, but developers need to understand the limit of how far they can go with their stories.

 

[KingPiccolOwned]

The guy has a point with the whole "Stories should have closure" bit, but I think that there is such a thing as a story with too much fucking closure,i.e. Neon Genisis Evangellion. And anyone who knows how that ended should know what I mean.

 

[zoozilla]

Cliffhangers are extremely irritating, especially in the case of a little game called Shinobi.

We will never see the ending. Ever.

 

[Bete_noir]

Sequals, like you said, are okay in moderation. Honestly I would like to see more breaking away from the numbers (Unless it's Final Fantasy, you stick to your numbers because everything else kind of sucks.) Like, what is it Halo Wars? That gives you some back story into the Halo universe that you don't have to look for in your local Books-A-Million in poorly written fan-fiction...

However, I read the article for Bioshock 2 and it looks to have redone a lot of things. A very nice looking sequal sadly I'm looking foward to it more than Final Fantasy XIII. The point is it comes down to money. Let's make Halo 5.339 because people will by it and we'll make a mint.

There's nothing wrong with wanting money for games but games are still a media art and require the spice of creativity. It's not all their fault either gamers are complacent, despite some of our wining about unoriginality, we are kind of asking for the formula we want it, and we don't like change. That's why I say bravo to Capcom for giving Resident Evil a face lift (I won't say much story-wise because I picked it up at four and was quite thankful for the refreshers.)The point was they had the stones to try something new.

 

[SandroTheMaster]

Shame on you Shamus.

As a PC gamer, you should know that Final Fantasy isn't the only franchise to get the "clean slate" idea nor the first. Wizardry would also pretty much start a whole new game each installment and Might and Magic also had a new world, even though it also followed continuity it also made sure each game is its own thing.