The Attack of the Seductive Number 2

[agentmaine]

Twas brilig and the slithy troves,
did sequel and gimble in this lucrative affair...

It was just yesterday when the number 2 was slapped on a game, you either hated it or loved it. If the sequel was better than the first, good, if it was equal to or less then, execute the devs.

Is it just me or is the number 2 more common then no number at all? Just this release season we are getting/got Assassin's Creed 2, Bioshock 2, Battlefield Bad Company 2, Uncharted 2, Dead Rising 2, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Army of Two: Two, Mass Effect 2, No More Heros 2, Super Mario Galaxy 2, Lost Planet 2, Just Cause 2, Crysis 2 and to move on to more obscure but never the less existent titles, Magna Carta 2, Manhunt 2, Lego Indiana Jones 2, Resident Evil: The Rail Shooter 2, Blue Dragon 2, Black 2, Divinity 2, Supreme Commander 2 and Mafia 2.

I collected this list in about 5 minutes.
There are 23 games listed here, all of which were/will be released in a 4 month period.
Come on devs! Stop milking and start thinking! This is absolutely out of control.
I would bet that out of these 23 games, only 5 to 10 will make meaningful changes to gameplay and story and the rest will get high scores anyway.

It is things like this that make gaming harder to defend every day.

 

[Amnestic]

People like sequels. That's a fact.

For all their cries of "Oh, give us more originality!" and "Stop milking!" you still see sequels rake in absolutely disgusting amounts of money meaning that people still buy them.

Why stop something that people love and want to buy? That's terrible business sense and not the nicest move to make to your customers either.

 

[agentmaine]

People like sequels. That's a fact.

For all their cries of "Oh, give us more originality!" and "Stop milking!" you still see sequels rake in absolutely disgusting amounts of money meaning that people still buy them.

Why stop something that people love and want to buy? That's terrible business sense and not the nicest move to make to your customers either.

What people like has caused wars and while I am not saying that sequels will cause a war, I am saying that just because people buy it does not mean it is good and i would argue that sequels have killed good things.
For example the Matrix was an amazing film that was followed up by a mediocre film that was followed up by an utter piece of shit.

Customers want sequels because of 2 reasons

1) They are afraid of something new or change in general
2) If it is bad, they can say "Oh i bought it because the first one was good so you can't call me stupid for buying it" and you can't use that excuse on non-sequels

 

[Ben7]

huh I thought Mass Effect 2 will be orginal, brand new script, new characters, more worlds to explore, overhaul of the combat system ect ect.

 

[Slash Dementia]

They're businesses, they're supposed to try to make money. What better way to make money than give the fans of those series another game in that same familiar setting that they're most likely to enjoy?

They have less money and just imagine the amount of money a new IP would cost, and if it were to fail? They'll lose money. They are thinking and they're thinking pretty clearly.

Edit: Sure a sequel can flop, but the risk of the sequel flopping is less than that of the new IP.

 

[dmase]

Some games deserve a sequel: mw, ac, and bs.(yes all acronyms I'm a genius) the rest I have no real opinion on.

 

[Jamiemitsu]

Well, I don't plan on buying the first AC due to its apparent "repetitiveness", but Im getting AC2 (which is apparently way better) for Christmas, so there good in that respect. Also, MGS2 showed the world just how lovably crazy Hideo Kojima is, not to mention Zelda: Ocarina of time, Metal Gear Solid, Super Metroid, Half life 2, and Final Fantasy VII are all sequels.

 

[agentmaine]

They're businesses, they're supposed to try to make money. What better way to make money than give the fans of those series another game in that same familiar setting that they're most likely to enjoy?

They have less money and just imagine the amount of money a new IP would cost, and if it were to fail? They'll lose money. They are thinking and they're thinking pretty clearly.

I need give only 1 example to disprove this

Borderlands

Borderlands is a new IP that was given a 9.25 by Game Informer and it outsold Uncharted 2 which was given a perfect 10
Failed new IPs are damaging, but successful new IPs are better than any sequel

 

[orangebandguy]

People love sequels, mainly because people don;t like change.

Some sequels are good, but some are terrible. It's the same with standalone titles.

 

[almostgold]

My problem isnt with sequels, its with lack of originality in general. If each of those franchises above had original gameplay/ innovative components, and the sequels carried on the tradition, id be alright. But they dont. I mean, when I finish a good game I want to see what happens to the characters later/ what it would be like if more was added, so you cant blame developers. Finnally, think of it this way: all those 2's coming out this year mean there were 1's that came out last year or the year before. Thats a good sign. At least it not a list of 4's you have up there.

 

[Lexodus]

You know what should be up there? SKIES OF ARCADIA 2.

Some sequels are brilliant. I absolutely loved Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the New World, Battalion Wars 2, the different Guitar Heros (which have steadily improved from game to game), every Fire Emblem (several were direct sequels or prequels), the DBZ Budokai and Tenkaichi series, Timesplitters series, etc, etc, etc.

Customers want sequels because of 2 reasons

1) They are afraid of something new or change in general
2) If it is bad, they can say "Oh i bought it because the first one was good so you can't call me stupid for buying it" and you can't use that excuse on non-sequels

Bullshit. Where's 3) The first game was a fucking decent game with good characters that they wanted to see more of?
or 4) they enjoyed the first one and the new one promised a similar system but with a graphics/engine/mechanics/gameplay upgrade?
or 5), any other reason imaginable?

 

[Amnestic]

People like sequels. That's a fact.

For all their cries of "Oh, give us more originality!" and "Stop milking!" you still see sequels rake in absolutely disgusting amounts of money meaning that people still buy them.

Why stop something that people love and want to buy? That's terrible business sense and not the nicest move to make to your customers either.

What people like has caused wars and while I am not saying that sequels will cause a war, I am saying that just because people buy it does not mean it is good and i would argue that sequels have killed good things.
For example the Matrix was an amazing film that was followed up by a mediocre film that was followed up by an utter piece of shit.

Customers want sequels because of 2 reasons

1) They are afraid of something new or change in general
2) If it is bad, they can say "Oh i bought it because the first one was good so you can't call me stupid for buying it" and you can't use that excuse on non-sequels

You forgot 3:
3) More of the same with all the knowledge of the first incarnation helping to polish the game. One need only look at the hype behind Modern Warfare 2, the praise given to Assassin's Creed 2, the eagerness that Mass Effect 2, Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 are being met with.

Sometimes this backfires. I thought that they took a step backwards with the inventory system in Resident Evil 5 compared to Resident Evil 4, but it was more of the same and they'd taken what they knew worked and changed it up to see if that worked too and with the exception of the bullshit DLC, Resident Evil 5 was a decent sequel and worth whatever miniscule fee I paid for it second hand.

The Grand Theft Auto series is the epitome of taking something, polishing it, tweaking it and pushing it out the door to see what fans like.

 

[dududf]

1) They are afraid of something new or change in general
2) If it is bad, they can say "Oh i bought it because the first one was good so you can't call me stupid for buying it" and you can't use that excuse on non-sequels

3) Because sometimes the first game didn't finish the story, and people WANT to know what happens next
4) It's a meaningful upgrade from the previous
5) They can join the hype train, of "The first was good so the second has to be DOUBLY good!
6) People like the number 2


Companies don't WANT to make games that will only get one game out of. They WANT to build up a fanbase around the game and then make sequels, progressively getting more people each time a game is released.

It's not very cost effective to make a game with no sequel

 

[almostgold]

Also, yeah its because of money, but you know what? People are trying to find a cure for cancer so they can make money. Nothins wrong with profitting of a good thing.

 

[Slash Dementia]

They're businesses, they're supposed to try to make money. What better way to make money than give the fans of those series another game in that same familiar setting that they're most likely to enjoy?

They have less money and just imagine the amount of money a new IP would cost, and if it were to fail? They'll lose money. They are thinking and they're thinking pretty clearly.

I need give only 1 example to disprove this

Borderlands

Borderlands is a new IP that was given a 9.25 by Game Informer and it outsold Uncharted 2 which was given a perfect 10
Failed new IPs are damaging, but successful new IPs are better than any sequel

But they're not from the same developers. Of course some will take the risk and I'm not saying all new IPs flop.
Halo 3 did better than Halo: Combat Evolved so does that disprove your argument? No, it doesn't.

Successful new IPs get sequels (a lot of them do). A new IP is how it all starts, but developers get comfortable and why take a big risk (again) if you already did it. I'm not saying that developers shouldn't make new IPs because they do, and yes, it could be good (like id's Wolfenstein, Doom, Quake, ect.).

 

[Legion]

So now having a single sequel is called "milking"? Christ.

 

[BubbaJeff]

Best thread title ever.

OT: Standalones are cool and all, but sometimes people want a little bit more.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Games get better with sequels. Yahtzee is wrong.

 

[ThreeKneeNick]

People like sequels. That's a fact.

For all their cries of "Oh, give us more originality!" and "Stop milking!" you still see sequels rake in absolutely disgusting amounts of money meaning that people still buy them.

Why stop something that people love and want to buy? That's terrible business sense and not the nicest move to make to your customers either.

Another fact is that those sequels started with the number 1, releases that were popular, fun, commercially successful and - original.

People want both.

 

[Amnestic]

People like sequels. That's a fact.

For all their cries of "Oh, give us more originality!" and "Stop milking!" you still see sequels rake in absolutely disgusting amounts of money meaning that people still buy them.

Why stop something that people love and want to buy? That's terrible business sense and not the nicest move to make to your customers either.

Another fact is that those sequels started with the number 1, releases that were popular, fun, commercially successful and - original.

People want both.

I would never suggest otherwise. Everything starts somewhere, but the constant clamouring for new IPs and 'No More Heroes Sequels' grates on my nerves. Sequels can do just as much for a genre as a new IP and the numbers are behind me that people enjoy sequels just as much as people enjoy new games, so saying that people should cut-that-shit-out is silly.