What is up with second instalment prejudice?

[Loggymonster]

I have played a lot of games with those funny little numbers on the end, and many more that have given up numbers and really enjoyed myself. I have a few points I just wanted some answers from the community on:
Why do so many people not like remakes or second (third, fourth, etc) installments of games? Whenever I play a game I truly enjoy I like the idea of having more of the same. For example my fiancee and I had a blast with Super Mario Galaxy, and we wanted more of that fun. We don't really enjoy playing story-less games more than one time through though so after we finished it it was over for us. Then along comes Galaxy 2 and we can have that old fun again in NEW content. The same game we loved, but new enough to keep it interesting... why is that so bad?

Another thing: Why do reviewers seem to hate later installments? I can't count how many reviews state somewhere something along the lines of "It's like the original, but tweaked to make it better" But then chastise it for being more of the same... or they give it a lower score than the original. The original gets an 8 while the second (even though they admit is better than the first) gets a 7. Do reviewers suffer from nostalgia that much?

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

People are just picky really. I don't mind Nintendo putting Mario in many different environments because most of them are creative in theory but sometimes in execution they suck. Take Mario Sunshine for example.

 

[Valkyrie101]

Sometimes more of the same gets boring. Then again, sometimes more of the same, tweaked and improved, is exactly what you want. Part of it is when a game is praised for being fresh and original; when the sequel comes out, it lacks that, so part of what made the first game great is lost.

 

[Cherry Cola]

It's because many sequels fail to evolve.

That's really what you want to see in a sequel. Evolution beyond the graphics.

Some sequels are innovative and fun, and go beyond their predecessors (Hitman: Blood Money, Saint's Row 2). Others just stay in the same place, never changing (Most FPS franchises that are currently popular)

Making a worthy sequel isn't easy, you know. It's not just exclusive to movies that sequels are inferior to their predecessors.

 

[Proteus214]

Another thing: Why do reviewers seem to hate later installments? I can't count how many reviews state somewhere something along the lines of "It's like the original, but tweaked to make it better" But then chastise it for being more of the same... or they give it a lower score than the original. The original gets an 8 while the second (even though they admit is better than the first) gets a 7. Do reviewers suffer from nostalgia that much?

Let me explain something about media critics real quick. I think MovieBob covered this in one of his videos but it bears repeating here. Professional critics consume A LOT of whatever medium is the target for their criticism. In this case game critics will be playing just about every mainstream title that hits the shelves as well as lots of less popular games. When you play that many different games that often, you start to see LOTS of repetition. Say for example you critique one game a week for an entire year. That's 52 games per year. Do this for 5 years and in that span you will have played 260 games. Now, I'm one that absolutely LOVES video games, but my library is nowhere near that big.

To a critic, in order for a game to really stand out amongst that kind of rabble, it has to be unique. The average consumer would probably rate games (especially sequels in this case) much higher than critics since they don't have as much exposure to the repetition.

 

[TerranReaper]

No one is ever satisfied, most criticize the next installment to be stagnating and providing nothing innovative, on the other hand, if they tried to innovate, people will criticize it for changing too much. As far as I'm concerned, innovation doesn't equal an increase of quality.

 

[Nomanslander]

Because these are the Yahtzee forums, and since he's against the implementation of sequels, so is everyone else here..0o

But I digress..XP

Truth of the matter is there is absolutely nothing wrong with them, and most people want fan service.

Although with every iteration you have to except a dud now and then, and most people can't handle that.

Personally, I just pretend they never happened when they're that bad. I mean the prequels never happened.....and neither did Crystal Skull since we're on the subject of Lucas' films...-_-

 

[Grand_Arcana]

Well, to reiterate what Yahtzee in Extra Punctuation, I think it's the hatred of sequels that were created solely as a money making vehicle than sequels that are created in a genuine continuation of the story. If the story was already resolved in the first game/movie, then the sequel is not necessary.

 

[Corporal Bill]

People are just picky really. I don't mind Nintendo putting Mario in many different environments because most of them are creative in theory but sometimes in execution they suck. Take Mario Sunshine for example.

D:....Mario Sunshine was an honoured childhood memory

 

[Proteus214]

Personally, I've played more games than that and still love most games.

Maybe you just have a higher tolerance for that sort of thing. I've played at least that many games, but it has been over the course of my lifetime and not the kind of saturation that a professional critic would achieve.