A thread about sequels

[Thirdkoopa]

No you can't lurk from this either.

I'll let you guys reply on this one this time, but for now, discuss what YOU think makes a good sequel with gaming. What can truly hurt one and so on. Also pro tip: Don't turn this completely self-centered into you. k, thanks.

Oh yeah. Here's my lengthy reply/ramble from another site for anyone interested:

[spoiler]
Person I was quoting

So the problem here still is that pokemon is pokemon and if changed, it wouldn´t be pokemon.

Sigh.

Not quite.*

You have to consider with a sequel what content would you be changing and how much people cared for it in the first place - There's a bit more but I forget. A Graphical innovation is one that can't be bad as long as you don't skew with the art design too much. Soundtrack quality isn't bad, sure. When you start to change the game's theme around, poop hits the fan. To make this less rambling, let's look at plot for instance. Compare two example situations:

1)A Pokemon game with all guns and the likes in a dark themed Persona/GTA setting. The game completely ditches any old plot element it once had. You instead start out in the gang streets of LA and end up battling graffiti masters at certain parts.

2)A pokemon game that instead adds more substance to why the Trainer is doing everything he does - Why does he want to help other people? What do the bad guys want so much out of money? Adding more plot points outside of gyms, more to do, and so forth.

Now, both were very vague descriptions but you should get the general idea. See the big difference? They'd both still be "Changing" Pokemon, but number 2 is obviously far less stupid than number 1 when it comes to a sequel (Asides from the awkward one out who would say "Oh hey that's a cool idea!")

Now take into note that a sequel will never be "The same" as the original. If we just confined ourselves to say "Having only 2D Battles" or "Having a mediocre same plot all the time" There would be no room for creativity. With Sequels however, a standard still exists. A great example of this would be (As inevitable to bring wherever I go) Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door. It improves upon every concept of the original. Plot, characters, setting, depth, combat, and so forth The only thing that's actually factual that's been pointed out is the fact that the first one has an arguably better difficulty/learning curve.

Either way, when changing content you'll still have people who complain about it regardless. People complained about the silhouettes in the 5th gen without even being shown the content. People complained about Guitar Hero 6 when only seeing 19 songs and contrary to what the developers stated about it all. People ninnyed about Sonic 4 just for stuff like "Sonic has green eyes, he sucked then". Bam. See?

We have Metacritic, a gazing review site with about 20-40 reviews for every game. Easily more critical sites out there as well. We have "Personal opinions" which I could just say something like "lol guys portal is gay" And get away with it without even playing it - The opinion wouldn't be as backed up or backed up at all, but you could still manage to pull it off. It doesn't matter what game it is, you can. Don't forget our ever so favorite word "Nostalgia" Which ends up skewing more than you think it does. Of all the people I've seen on the internet, only what? 5 don't use nostalgia as a basis at all? Then there's those who say they don't but still manage to do so every once in a while. There's a balance between keeping most of your old fanbase and still managing to improve at the same time with innovations.

Easier than it sounds, I know. I don't know how to really structure that but I think I got the point across. Ranting about it on numerous occasions helps

* = I'm really using random examples when it comes to any other game I mention.[/spoiler]

[Eizweir]

It progresses the story where it feels like it needs to be progressed.  If you've already closed said and done then there's really no point in making a sequel, but if you need to finish a story then keep going.

For the record, the numerical series in FF are not sequels

[MoS]

A lot of games now leave their endings open or unfinished just so they can make a sequel in the future, which most of the time never happens, It's lame.

[Allegory]

The problem with sequels is that you expect more out of them then they usually give, this makes them suck. I think sequels are necessary to progress a story, but other than that I don't usually care for them.

[Night the Lucario]

I have, to this day, not come across a good sequel. In videogames or movies. And in books they're incredibly rare.

[Kilroy]

Team Fortress 2.

YOU LOSE.

YOU GET. NOTHING.

[Magnum]

Sequels would be my rival when it comes down to it. I always have the mad eye to them, but I have found some sequels that overtake the original, and it's not too rare most of the time.

[Mystic]

I have, to this day, not come across a good sequel. In videogames or movies. And in books they're incredibly rare.

Super Mario Bros 3, Back To The Future 2, and Harry Potter are disappointed in you.