Enough Sequels!!!!

Have you noticed that in the recent years , most of the games that come out are sequels to older games , or just revamped ones that look like older games but with new names.Seriously how many new good titles have come out in the past few years.Excluding-Halo , God Of War and Okami.Help me out.Besides these games have there been any new games considered classics for todays standart , that aren`t sequels to alredy existing games?Steve_FOX86

[QUOTE="Steve_FOX86"]Have you noticed that in the recent years , most of the games that come out are sequels to older games , or just revamped ones that look like older games but with new names.Seriously how many new good titles have come out in the past few years.Excluding-Halo , God Of War and Okami.Help me out.Besides these games have there been any new games considered classics for todays standart , that aren`t sequels to alredy existing games?The_Zoid

360) Gears of War, Overlord, Heavy Weapon, Eternal Sonata (coming soon)
Wii) Elebits
PS3) fl0w, Resistance: Fall of Man
DS) Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Meteos, Trauma Center, Puzzle Quest
PSP) Lumines

And, for good measure...

PS2) Odin Sphere, Grim Grimoire
GCN) Ikaruga, Luigi's Mansion
GBA) Drill Dozer

See? There's not such a dearth after all. There rarely is.

The developer of Haze (Free Radical) said in PLAY magazine that the reason why devs make sequels is for money to support their studios. But it is once in awhile devs do something original, like how they're making Haze instead of a Timesplitters sequel.

So the sequels won't stop anytime soon. For me, I use to criticise devs for churning out sequels, but I learned to appreciate them more. As long as they improve the game and create all new exciting experiences, I don't mind. Playing Call of Duty 3 after Call of Duty 2, for example, is a welcome thing for me. Playing games like Command and Conquer 3, a new Brothers in Arms game, and anticipating Star Craft II, sequels can be great. Also, who can argue when Nintendo brings out a new Zelda game like Phantom Hourglass for example.

The only problem I have with sequels is when they start to become too similar to the previous installments. That's when I say "enough is enough" and find other games to play. The Final Fantasy series for example, is borderline on my " I'm getting sick of this series" list. Square-Enix managed to wow me with FFXII...but for some reason, I'm not to excited about FFXIII because something tells me that it will be just like FFVII, VIII, and X, since it is the same team that made these.

Anyway, that's how I feel about sequels.

Okay,I sometimes hate all the sequel-stuff,but after all there are many games I just want more of the same stuff.Grandia,Guitar Hero,SingStar,Gears of War,Einhänder,...the Genre doesn´t really matter.And if a company knows that,why should they stop making them?Of course,more "Original"Games whould be good,but many of them are released by no-name-companys and sucked.Why?Because the new Ideas had been nice and not good.I prefer a good sequel over a bit-over-medicore original game after all.

As for the devs the main problem making a "Original"Game is also the time to develop it.Everyone always expects them to re-invent the genre after all and you just can´t do that every time whitout a quality loss.It´s all about money.If a game totally sucks it could cost their jobs.For example Beyond Good and Evil,Gun and XIII...truely somewhat original games and absolutely great,but almost no one bought it.

The developer of Haze (Free Radical) said in PLAY magazine that the reason why devs make sequels is for money to support their studios. But it is once in awhile devs do something original, like how they're making Haze instead of a Timesplitters sequel.

ASK_Story

[QUOTE="The_Zoid"][QUOTE="Steve_FOX86"]Have you noticed that in the recent years , most of the games that come out are sequels to older games , or just revamped ones that look like older games but with new names.Seriously how many new good titles have come out in the past few years.Excluding-Halo , God Of War and Okami.Help me out.Besides these games have there been any new games considered classics for todays standart , that aren`t sequels to alredy existing games?ShenlongBo

360) Gears of War, Overlord, Heavy Weapon, Eternal Sonata (coming soon)
Wii) Elebits
PS3) fl0w, Resistance: Fall of Man
DS) Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, Meteos, Trauma Center, Puzzle Quest
PSP) Lumines

And, for good measure...

PS2) Odin Sphere, Grim Grimoire
GCN) Ikaruga, Luigi's Mansion
GBA) Drill Dozer

See? There's not such a dearth after all. There rarely is.

:lol:

Actually, if there were only that many original games per system, then the industry would have a desperate shortage of new content.

The disturbing thing for me is that original videogames exist to perpetuate sequels. There are very few videogames that are meant to be the first and last game in their series. Of the games you listed, many have got/will get sequels. And others were simply not commercially successful enough to justify a follow-up.

I'm not saying that there aren't original games out there. What I am saying is that there aren't enough of them. And the fault lies squarely with the gamer, who has shown and endless willingness to buy the same game repeatedly.

Considering that many - if not most - video game sequels turn out better than the original, I don't see how this is a problem.

This isn't like the movies; technology continues to advance in gaming at a rapid pace, so of course, later installments in franchises have much better benefits. They have more talent the whole way 'round, usually; it's not just about enhanced graphics. God of War was amazing, but GoW II was better. Diablo II was far better than Diablo. There is no comparison between Medal of Honor and Medal of Honor: Frontline. Few would say the original MGS, Gran Turismo, Zelda, Need for Speed, Grand Theft Auto, Resident Evil, Madden, or Twisted Metal titles were the best in those fabled series. There are exceptions, of course - you could make arguments for Super Mario Bros., Devil May Cry, and Half-Life - but for the most part, later installments are often better than their predecessors.

Do we even doubt for a split second that GT 5, DMC 4, Halo 3, GTA IV, RE 5, R&C: Tools of Destruction, and MGS 4 will be absolutely stellar? Because I sure don't.

P.S. I'm not including Final Fantasy in this debate simply because none of them (save FF X-2) are "sequels." But even if you did include it, the first FF was certainly NOT the best.

[QUOTE="Steve_FOX86"]Have you noticed that in the recent years , most of the games that come out are sequels to older games , or just revamped ones that look like older games but with new names.Seriously how many new good titles have come out in the past few years.Excluding-Halo , God Of War and Okami.Help me out.Besides these games have there been any new games considered classics for todays standart , that aren`t sequels to alredy existing games?The_Zoid

and we would be stupid to complain if those sequels are FUN TO PLAY

Who cares if it is new or a sequel... what matters is if it is a good game or not

debate simply because none of them (save FF X-2) are "sequels." But even if you did include it, the first FF was certainly NOT the best.

fathoms_basic

You're out of your mind. AT THAT TIME, the original FF was definately the best RPG on the market by a long shot

[QUOTE="fathoms_basic"]

debate simply because none of them (save FF X-2) are "sequels." But even if you did include it, the first FF was certainly NOT the best.

weirjf

You're out of your mind. AT THAT TIME, the original FF was definately the best RPG on the market by a long shot

...the hell does that have to do with anything? This is a discussion about sequels, if you hadn't noticed. A direct comparison of the original FF and something like FF VII or XII is completely absurd.