PDA

View Full Version : Sequels: Have they gone too far?


Burning Shingo
04-27-2002, 06:19 PM
Is the games industry at a loss for original titles? Across the formats, a huge number of games on the shelves or in production are sequels. From the most popular and long-running francises, to retro classics resurrected for the next generation. However, the same can be said of the movie and music industry, so is this a natural progression for the games industry?

(Sorry if this has already been discussed)

k0ach
04-27-2002, 07:25 PM
yes, the industry as a whole is at a loss for original titles, however, i don't mind sequels at all. especially if the original game is good and the sequel is even better. i am of the opinion that if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

i wish they still made 2d mario games (not that mario64 was bad).

i love the PC mod community cuz you can play the same old game you love but with new and creative levels. i think level editors would be a great idea for a lot of games.

Crono
04-27-2002, 09:35 PM
It's all about name recognition.

Sometimes one game has changed so much from the previous, they only call it a sequel because of the marginal amount of sales due to name recognition.

Ideally a game should sell on its own rights for being great. Getting good reviews from magazines, good word of mouth, and/or a strong advertising campaign all help in attaining sales. Yet you must realize that those who are really into videogames, those who read up on websites for game news, those who follow certain developer's work even before a product is released, are not the largest demographic which pushes a game to be a million(s) seller. This demographic that makes a game become a blockbuster, I'd like to call: "sheep". The little kid that keeps bothering his parents to get a game, those who just walk into a store and just grabs a game without much knowedge what their little brat (or sometimes themselves) would really like just to satiate their appetite for a new game, those who just gets something because other people like a game (trendy!), those who get a game just because it'll serve as something to do aside from their busier life away from videogames [the people who actually made their way through life well, tends to have videogaming not a main part of their lives ^^], all of them are, "sheep". These people typically have one thing in common, videogames are not part of their main lifestyle/hobby, be it time, financial, or work constraints. They tend not to spend their time looking up on this 'hot new game in development'. So comes in the power of name recognition.

"Oh I remember I used to like -Tempest-, perhaps this -Tempest X3- is a worthy purchase." "All of my friends play this 'Final Fantasy' game I keep hearing of, maybe I should give it a try." "Well, I never got into the KOF games, maybe they got the system perfected by 2002." "Madden blew donkey nuts years before, maybe it'll just blow monkey balls this time." "And what is this that I hear about a -Super Monkey Ball 2-? oh wait Madden can preform ****** favors to it"

Ah, the power.

Sometimes, effort should be put into a new original game. Sometimes, a sequel has nothing to do with the original game, yet stand alone well on its own right. Sometimes, a sequel just degrades the whole series. Sometimes a sequel is called for, to complete a story, to follow up on characters that you've grown to love, to take the gameplay a step further towards perfection. Sometimes, a sequel is made just to keep iteslf updated [sports]. Sometimes a sequel is just made to feed hungry developers.

There are many games coming out that are not sequels. Name recognition doesn't even have to be in the title, it could just be by developer. For example, -Xenosaga-, well, it doesn't hurt to leak out that it is made by the same people behind those who made -Xenogears-, it also doesn't hurt to hint that it is of the same series with the not-so-subtle hint of "Xeno". I'm sure that many have played/loved Sonic games, probably because they were Sonic games; that effort could have been well placed into a whole different platformer, but why not just get those who just like the character. What this all boils down to is, don't mock the power of name recognition.

CLOSING REMARK: ???????c

Pdaimaoh
04-28-2002, 01:35 AM
I hate hype tagging

there is nothing about metroid prime that links it to the metroid series in ways that are relevant to it as a GAME

yet it will sell a ton more than if it were called 'generic first person shooter with no multiplayer online modes'

as far as real sequels go, I love em

but it's even funnier to see people bitch about them

hey, you know, millions of people liked streetfighter 2
why should capcom NOT keep making more of the same with minor changes? millions of people liked it the first time around, they are sure to want more (and since they often write letters and such ASKING for more, it's a sure bet)

now, nobody makes you play a game, so if a game is continued on and you never cared for it, well go away and find something else to play

but if you WANT to play more of a game you like, well if they don't make sequels, you are screwed

btw, 'at a loss for original titles' ?
obviously you haven't been here long

back in the day, games were so copycatted, you couldn't turn left and not see the exact same game with a few different colors on it and maybe a different title

that's been a constant since the inception of the game industry

when games like samba de amigo, jet grind radio, lightgun games where you choose your path, etc...there is just as much originality now as there has ever been

you can't expect some brand new, completely different from all other genres sort of game every month
that's never happened, and it never will happen

anyway, if it's all stale to you, you are too jaded
go away for a few years
find a new hobby to pick up
and come back maybe two console generations from now and pick up anything you might have missed along the way...

Burning Shingo
04-28-2002, 05:26 AM
My points above are not necessarily my views. I just wanted to stir up some debate on the issue. I had the idea when I walked into a games retailer and saw just how many PS2/GC games were sequels or remakes.

I often want to play more of a game, but many sequels take a series downhill. Some examples: Sonic, Final Fantasy, King of Fighters, Bomberman, Gran Turismo. Of course all of these series were victims of their own success, as you say, the public demands more of the same, with little time to improve/alter gameplay.

I fully remember the 8bit age and it was a very similar situation then. 16bit, and PC/Amiga gaming gave the scene a boost, since the power allowed for new creative ideas. The same can be said about the transition from 32/64 to 128bit. I just hope some of these 'cash cow' sequels are going to fund financially risky original titles.

devie
04-28-2002, 09:36 AM
Well on one hand, sequels are good, because they allow you to play more of a game that you love, with some improvements. Be they graphically or game-play wise. On the other hand they're bad. When they just offer improved graphics or a few extra cars or characters then they suck. It's being noticed more and more nowadays because people play, say a racing game.

I'll use Moto GP as an example. When it first came out, people loved it because it was one of the few realistic motor bike games. It was like Gran Turismo except with bikes. Namco thought they better make a sequel so that they can milk this formula for more money. With Moto GP 2, it only offers about 5 extra tracks and a new action thing where you can perform wheelies while racing along. Along with that, they improved graphics and all the other stuff you'd expect from a sequel. And that's the problem with sequels.

Gone are the days when you could just improve graphics and add a few extra things and you'd have yourself a descant sequel. Nowadays we're looking for things a bit more inovative (if that's the right word) Which is why everybody's taking an interest in the Japanese market all of a sudden.

What have they got? Kareoke games, moskeeto games, orchestra games. And it's because of this, that sequels are being given a hard time. I voted that sequels are a good thing, because on the whole, they are. When we see a new Gran Turismo game, we all get excited. But deep down we all know that all it's going to offer is improved graphics. When we are used to a series of games, we tend to stick to those games. And it's because of this that there aren't a whole load of new, fun, interesting titles on the shelves. Publishers and developers see this, and think "would they rather have a new football game, or a game where you take over the world with monkies?" And seeing as football games sell much more than games based on world domination, they make us a new football game.

If it's anybodies fault for the huge amount of sequels that we have, it ours. If we want new fangled worl domination games then we should stop buying sequels.

But they are soooo tempting....:D

mxgame
04-28-2002, 10:27 AM
The sad truth is original games don't get made that often is because of us, the consumer. We show developers and publishers what we want with out wallets. Just go look at your game collection or some of your friends. I know you will find at least a few sequels in there.
Why do you think we are getting so many RPGs in the US now as opposed to the 16bit days. People buy them, it is that simple. Unfortunatley, the casual gamer is not going to buy an original game unless it recieves massive amounts of press time,i.e. hype.

Pdaimaoh
04-28-2002, 12:40 PM
there are several 'original' sorts of games I personally hate
hell I was never interested in dance dance revolution

so if I ran out and bought every game considered 'original' then I'd have been burned many times over for the FEW times it was really worth it

so it's not exactly SADLY that the casual gamer won't buy an original game w/o a lot of hype

the sad part is the companies that can afford that hype usually waste it on subpar stuff...


btw, I personally hate all normal racing games, and am utterly and totally offended at that Sega Saturn racing game that had ONLY TWO TRACKS
it was an arcade port, but an arcade port WITH ONLY TWO TRACKS???
and ohhhh they MIRRORED those tracks so it has FOUR WHOLE TRACKS???

what a god awful screwed up bullshit waste of time, money, development, and anything else related to that game

how the hell can't you make more than two tracks for a RACING game???
it's not like they were busy making up new racers to use those measly puny two tracks!

racing games
a dime a dozen

I can just go out on the highway and have more fun

(sorry about the sudden off topic rant)

Burning Shingo
04-28-2002, 01:44 PM
Well, arcade conversions like Sega's racers are always far better in the arcade than they are in the home, mainly because they never bother to change anything, and you can't use arcade equipment at home. Conversions like that aren't really a waste of time, money, etc, since so little was spent in the process!

You might have more fun on the highway, but do you have two hundred different cars in your garage? ;)

ATMA
04-28-2002, 01:58 PM
Well i think it's a natural progression ..i think it's part of the game industry ..i mean sometimes people want to know what will happend after the end !!..It has to do more with innovation make new things and stuff !!
Like what i like about the FF series(FINAL FANTASY) ..it's always some other characters other worlds, other stories , the gameplay in a wide point of view yes it's the same ..but there's always some changes ..and that's what i like about the FF series ...always something different but yet under the same name !!!And also i think if a great game have to many innovation in it it will take away the great feeling the previous version had !! ..So in a way i think innovation is a double edge sword !!!!

Wolf
04-28-2002, 03:45 PM
Innovation and a break from the norm isn't always good. Look at Jet GRind Radio for example. It oozed style, pioneered the ever popular cel-sahding, had incredible music and fun gameplay yet sold like dirt in Japan and North AMerica. The same could be said for Shnmue, Rez, Klonoa, and any other "break from the norm". Videogame execs want tried and true products. Like a license from a recently released movie or a sequel to a popular game (Look at all the Tomb Raider. Crash, Spyro and Mario based games.)

grahf
04-28-2002, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by Wolf
Innovation and a break from the norm isn't always good. Look at Jet GRind Radio for example. It oozed style, pioneered the ever popular cel-sahding, had incredible music and fun gameplay yet sold like dirt in Japan and North AMerica. The same could be said for Shnmue, Rez, Klonoa, and any other "break from the norm". Videogame execs want tried and true products. Like a license from a recently released movie or a sequel to a popular game (Look at all the Tomb Raider. Crash, Spyro and Mario based games.)

The flawed in your argument is that all those games you listed were made by Sega, and sadly, also marketed by Sega. And we all know how clever those Sega commercials can be. Why who else besides them would do a commerical mimmicking, get this, a Japanese commercial for a game whose targetted audience were inline skaters who thinks tony hawk is cool.

Seriously though, all those games were failures because Sega marketed them as so. The only example you had, Klonoa, which wasn't a Sega game, did pretty well in Japan and US last I heard.

folken001
04-30-2002, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by Burning Shingo
Is the games industry at a loss for original titles? Across the formats, a huge number of games on the shelves or in production are sequels. From the most popular and long-running francises, to retro classics resurrected for the next generation. However, the same can be said of the movie and music industry, so is this a natural progression for the games industry?

(Sorry if this has already been discussed)


Sequels or no sequels don't really matter. I don't mind as long as the game plays well and has a decent story.

Black Sugar
04-30-2002, 04:08 PM
Bah.. I adopted Tresure's philosophy on this one: We never do sequel. End of discusion

^-^!

Pdaimaoh
04-30-2002, 11:47 PM
I only have 198 cars in my personal lot

sure
it's sorta pathetic, but what's worse is how many speeding tickets I have...I had to get fake IDs just so I wouldn't be sent to prison! yeesh!

Pikachu
05-02-2002, 10:13 PM
There are a few games that I think should not have anymore sequels:

Mortal Kombat - sick and tired

Pokemon - too much pf the same already

King of Fighters - it's not a sports game, why do you need a sequel every year?!

Nascar 200X - too many sequels of a crappy series

Crono
05-08-2002, 03:42 PM
It's been a while since I've been on this forum, so I apologize for not replying earlier.

I had made a long post by primarily focusing on name recognition. However, I did fail to say if I were pro-sequel or con-sequel. The actual answer is the usual resounding "it depends" from me. Most of it was explained in my "Sometimes" paragraph in a previous post on this thread. Some cases are good, some bad.

The main focus that I had on name recognition was due to the reason that it does make a game sell more units. Be it name recognition of the title or by developer, it helps to add more revenue to any company/firm, since most businesses are out to make money (there are always those non-profit organizations, but I don't hear much buzz of console videogame developers which gladly make games for no return in money). Developers with a long history are at an advantage, whereas new development houses, starting from the ground up, must rely more on original titles (to build a good foundation). Sure, a new development house can still score with name recognition by securing the rights to some persons, characters, or story from another source (like movies, comics/manga, endorsements, etc.), but they still must start with an original game [for instance, a developer called 'New', which I am unaware of any other games they made, used the --Hajime No Ippo-- license for their first game (to my knowledge), but they still had to design a game from the ground up, instead of relying on a previously designed game they made; or Neversoft with their Tony Hawk endorsement (probably provided through Activision), still had to create an original game design first in order to establish a series, along side Treyarch which has ported their games to other platforms; all of these are examples of new development houses which still relied upon name recognition].


Sometimes, effort should be put into a new original game. Sometimes, a sequel has nothing to do with the original game, yet stand alone well on its own right. Sometimes, a sequel just degrades the whole series. Sometimes a sequel is called for, to complete a story, to follow up on characters that you've grown to love, to take the gameplay a step further towards perfection. Sometimes, a sequel is made just to keep iteslf updated [sports]. Sometimes a sequel is just made to feed hungry developers.

[This is partly aimed at Pdaimaoh's replies.] I did forget to mention that *sometimes*, some games weren't meant for *you*. For example, I have played and disliked the Tomb Raider line of games, yet I know of people that do like them. So who is to judge what a "true" sequel is. Also, when I said "original" in that paragraph, I meant the seminal work/game that spawns off a series, instead of "original" meaning a completely innovative game (which in that case I'd use the term 'innovative' to cause less confusion). "Sometimes a sequel is called for, to complete a story, to follow up on characters that you've grown to love, to take the gameplay a step further towards perfection" applies well for games like -Street Fighter 2- which underwent a few revisions, a full set of prequels, and a set of a sequels and spinoffs. The Street Fighter line of games, could have well featured a whole different cast of characters, with similar moves, be given a completely different title, and still stand alone [like -Vampire-/-Darkstalkers-]; yet it chooses to utilize some name recognition.

I had also forgotten to mention that *sometimes*, games are updated (or sequels) are made to just introduce to a newer generation [or re-introduce to gamers], its classic gameplay. For instance -Tempest 2000/X3- for the old -Tempest- or -Ys 1&2 (Eternal) Complete- from the classic -Ys Books 1&2-.

Sequels do have their place in videogaming. All described in my many 'sometimes' scenarios. Originality, in terms of innovation, isn't always the best route for a videogame. Tried-and-true gameplay may just be the optimal way of making a good game.

CLOSING REMARKS: ???????x?????????

[semi-reply to Pikachu] For the KOF games, I think they just keep making "sequels" because then they can just tweak the already set systems of the game to add variations. Since games can't reprogram themselves to make new gameplay systems, SNK just releases a yearly change (some greater than others). To my knowledge: 94 = the first of the series where teams of 3 fight, 95 = ability to edit teams, 96 = revamped game (redrew sprites, revamped sounds, redone movement) and limited most projectiles, 97 = Advanced and Extra meters (story ends), 98 = dream match (almost every character in), 99 = strikers (new story begins), 2k = armor and speed (?) modes, 2k1 = ratio system. Of course they also benefit from name recognition and their characters.

[to Black Bahamut] Treasure has some iffy cases about sequels. There's -Ikaruga- which is based from -Radiant Silvergun-, the absorbtion idea inspired this game (and originally, the ships in -Ikaruga- were silverguns). Treasure (a few key members) did do some work on -Silpheed: The Lost Planet- which is a sequel to -Silpheed-, but that's a GameArts product. Treasure did buckle a bit to financial needs to make that with GameArts and -Sin and Punishment- with Nintendo. They're still one of my more favorite developers ^^.

[to Pdaimaoh] Sega had a good strength in arcade games. Most arcade games were about playing and forgetting (games like the Virtual On series or Crazy Taxi games, mostly just insert your money and get your minutes worth of gaming). Back in the day, games were complimented for being a respectable port of the arcade games, nowadays we expect better than arcade ports like -Soul Edge/Calibur- with all the extra features not found in arcades. When Sega released the same games for home consoles, it was probably to increase the amount of games available for the system, and they banked that an arcade equivalent would be enough to satiate their audience, or at least capitalize on name recognition ^^. Thus games like -Virtua Racing-, -Daytona USA-, -Sega Rally- had 3 tracks which all correspond to what their arcade equivalents had. [Granted 3 tracks (without mirroring) isn't much either, but I couldn't recall which Saturn racing game had only 2 tracks.] Wish I had that much free money for that many cars ^^.

k0ach
05-09-2002, 12:07 AM
Sequels or no sequels don't really matter. I don't mind as long as the game plays well and has a decent story.

kinda going off on a tangent, i don't think games need a story beyond kill bad guy and beat level. yes, its a nice added touch, but ultimately unnecessary. go back to the 8-bit and before days and games didn't really have much of a story. it was all about gameplay.
When they just offer improved graphics or a few extra cars or characters then they suck.

once again, i say if it ain't broke, don't fix it. how many people are still playing counter strike? same game, just new levels released every so often. i loved super mario 3. i'd play a game with the same system with a whole new bevy of levels. hell the "real" super mario 2 is just a harder version of super mario. i like these kinds of sequels. now, if all people did were make sequels, that would be bad but fortunelty, someone is always thinking of the next big thing. i guess what i'm trying to say is that i want a new side-scrolling mario game dammit!

hootie17
05-10-2002, 06:31 PM
Well considering i am a avid player of the Final Fantasy series i will say that sequals have not gone to far, however with games liek mario who have games that prob go to far liek mario tennis and golf (bad sports or at least for a video game)
i dunno

k0ach
05-10-2002, 07:04 PM
with games liek mario who have games that prob go to far liek mario tennis and golf

what the hell are you talking about!!?? mario tennis and mario golf aren't sequels of super mario bros.

hootie17
05-14-2002, 09:29 PM
I heart sequals