Shitty game, incredible sequel

Okay, so the game doesn't have to be shitty (nor does the sequel have to be incredible), but it happens too many times where a company has a meh first game, but then follows it up with a great sequel that mostly fixes what was wrong with the original game and achieves the greatness the previous game was just hinting at. What are some instances of this you can name from personal experience?

• Age of Empires (meh) to Age of Empires II: Age of Kings (amazing)

The first Age of Empires game had some good concepts going on in the background, but it was held back by too many questionable design decisions. The second game came along, and realized the potential of the original game. In the process, it delivered arguably the best strategy game of all time, and one of the greatest games ever.

• Assassin's Creed (flawed) to Assassin's Creed II (amazing)

The original Assassin's Creed suffered from the Ubisoft curse of too many great ideas bouncing around that all falter in execution. While it was still a great game, it had too much that held it back, and its promise was ultimately realized by its sequel that became among the best games of its generation.

• Far Cry 2 (crap) to Far Cry 3 (great)

Far Cry 2 was just an ill conceived and poorly thought out game- its sequel, Far Cry 3, came as a big surprise to everybody, because no one expected it to creep up like it did. Great gameplay and some excellent characterization helped Far Cry 3 stand out in an otherwise mediocre year for gaming.

• Persona/Persona 2 (mediocre) to Persona 3/Persona 4 (amazing)

Persona and Persona 2 (both Persona 2 games) were ultimately really poor spin off takes on the Shin Megami Tensei concept. The promise of the Persona concept would ultimately be realized in Persona 3, which was a breath of fresh air in a fast stagnating genre, and then further improved in Persona 4, which would cement Persona as one of the forerunners in the RPG genre.

• Metroid/Metroid II (promising) to Super Metroid (GOAT)

Let's face it, the first two Metroid games were largely underwhelming, with a lot of poor design that got a free pass because we flat out didn't know better. The true realization of Metroid would come with SNES's seminal 1994 masterpiece, Super Metroid. With tight game design that stands at the pinnacle of what 2D has to offer, Super Metroid, regarded as one of the greatest games ever made, was an amazing leap from its limited predecessors.

This is just the five examples that came to my mind. Some others I was considering were GTA II to GTA III, Assassin's Creed III to Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag, Killzone to Killzone 2, Uncharted to Uncharted 2, and so on.

What are some instances of an underwhelming game followed up by an amazing sequel, in your opinion?

Super Mario Galaxy to Super Mario Galaxy 2

9 to 10

Just Cause was average at best. Just Cause 2 is amazing.

I wish I played and remembered more games.. I really enjoyed MML2 over MML1 except for the "story".

Uncharted to Uncharted 2.

Uncharted to Uncharted 2, Assassin's Creed to Assassin's Creed 2.

Aside from those already mentioned, I feel Rockstar Games has had significant impact in its IP evolutions:

- Max Payne to Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne

- Grand Theft Auto 2 to Grand Theft Auto 3

- Red Dead Revolver to Red Dead Redemption

Resident Evil 1-4 (meh), Resident Evil 5-6 (amazing)

haha, good one

Super Smash Melee over the original, improved in every single way possible

Funny you bring this up. We've seen where developers take feedback from the fans (Assassin's Creed being among the best examples) leads to taking a concept, and polishing the rough edges. Gamers win.

How many people here feel that Too Human deserves a second chance? Yeah it had its flaws, but wasn't really "broken" by any stretch. The hack n' slash combat was immensely satisfying in its visceral way. I mean it was more kinetic than most others of this type. The leveling and loot was greatly rewarding. And it had a rich lore to explore. If a sequel were permitted, all they'd have to do is address the more glaring issues;

* make the death cinematic skippable
* tweak the camera control
* tweak the analog attack targeting, or just find a new mechanic to replace it
* increase the quantity & variety of the maps, don't have players repeat 4 zones to reach level 50 and higher
* increase the variety of enemies beyond recycling the same templates with different colour schemes

If Silicon Knights had been given the chance to absorb the fan feedback, they could have taken a rough stone and turned it into a real gem.

Anybody else feel the same and hoped for an improved sequel?

Red Steel 1 to Red Steel 2

Pokemon RBY or RGY to Pokemon GSC

Persona 2 is mediocre? What are you smoking bro? Have you even played P2 IS or EP or you´re just talking out of your ass?

Persona 2 mediocre...now I´ve heard everything lol.

Really, I can't say I liked it at all, sorry.

EDIT: Played Eternal Punishment (that was the one that originally released in the west, right?)

half life 1 to half life 2?

Ocarina of Time to Majora's Mask

You not liking it doesn´t mean the game isn´t good,Persona 2 is in fact great and better than P3 and P4 in many ways,especially the combat. You´ll find that many of the fans of the series have P2 as their favourite,especilly P2 IS.

I thought it was pretty great and with a much more interesting tone to it than the slice of life high school drama of the newer games and I only played it after playing P3 and P4.

It´s not necessaritly my favourite but to say P2 is in any way,shape or form mediocre is just crazy.

P1 was mediocre yeah,P2 was a great game bro.

Well, I was thinking more of P1 when I said mediocre, Persona games have been on an upward slide generally, and I do know Persona 2 is considered better than Persona 1. But really, compared to what comes later, it's... really rough around the edges, shall we say.

Which Persona 2 was released on PS1 in the west? That's the one I played, btw. It was Eternal Punishment, right?

Yeah,it was Eternal Punishment wich is good but not as good as Innocent Sin,it was the one I played first but once I realised the community had translated IS to english I gave that one a go and it was pretty damn good,there´s a handheld version of that game now for the psp I think but that´s a heavily censored version though,sadly.

They have been on an upward slide for the most part yeah,though I´d quite frankly say that P2 IS is better than P3 for sure.

Depends on which version you are talking about. Vanilla P3 and vanilla P4 are both somewhat underwhelming. P3 FES and P4G are amazing, though.

Streets of Rage to Streets of Rage 2. The first was an incredibly boring/average run of the mill beat em up, then the sequel.. lts the undisputed king of the genre

Star Fox 64, l hated the SNES game... Though Starfox 2, l played a rom of it and its a LOT better than the first game as well. But not sure if lt counts because lt was never really released

Harvest Moon 64. Massive improvement over the original game too.

pitfall to pitfall 2.. First game ls pretty lame, and incredibly boring. Sequel is one of the best 2600 games ever.

The first witcher was pure crap, the second is one of my all time favorite rpgs.

50,000 posts!?!

Someone needs to play games instead of talk about em

I know not everyone may agree, but the first two Dead Rising games were pretty crappy but the third one rocks my socks off.

Been a member since 2006. That's seven years ago running on eight.

Let's take it as seven and a half years. That's 2,738 days, or 18 posts a day.

Which, you know, takes about what, 30 minutes every day? Yes, I am sure this is eating into my gaming time so much.

i used to post here in 2002 as hughes57

Sonic 1 (no spin dash) to Sonic 2 and then to Sonic 3 and Knuckles

UC1 to UC2

Super Smash Bros to SSBM

And yes AOE1 to AOE2

P3 FES adds only a sort of epilogue and The Answer,wich is a very underwhelming part of the game,especially without any S-Linking and any of the stuff seen in the main game,it´s just not very good,it does flesh out the story a bit more but that´s it.

P4G is a good addition to what P4 was originally but honestly,it´s still the same thing,the major additions to the game are mostly non playable sequences of all sorts of slice of life stuff that really adds very litle to the game aside from some fan service,there´s a new character sure and a new later dungeon that comes with it and a few very minor changes including the extended ending but those things alone don´t exactly make that version of the game all that much better,especially in the gameplay department.

Unless you´re a massive P4 fan,if you played P4 on the PS2 you really aren´t missing much by skipping P4G tbh.

duke nukem II

DUKE NUKEM 3D!!!

Let's Rock

Dude, not at all. I'm going to have to disagree so heavily with you here.

I won't say much about your thoughts on FES, that's your opinion, and I can't argue that. But Golden is factually so much more than Persona 4 vanilla. We're talking about new social links, changes and streamlining to a whole lot of mechanics that was severely needed, tying up of loose ends in the original story that left so much hanging, new events, nearly three more playable months and an altogether new dungeon. We're talking about cleaned up graphics, more voice acting, new music.

I was underwhelmed by Persona 4 vanilla. At that point, I actually found Persona 3 to be the better game. After Persona 4 Golden, P4G is basically my favorite RPG ever. It's amazing how much it adds to the game, and how obsolete it makes the original Persona 4. I heavily urge you to play P4G if you get the chance.

Team Fortress Classic to Hat simulator

the contrast between the two is ridiculous now

I see what you´re saying but I personally don´t agree for the most part,I played through P4 when it came out on the PS2 and really liked it a lot,when P4G came out I was very close to getting a vita to play it but decided against it and watched a playthrough of it instead and even if some of the additions to that version are really cool,I didn´t felt they were significant enough to actually buy it(especially since I had to buy the system to play it),a lot of it is so much filler.

What I mean is,if you never played P4 before then the version to go is Golden but if you have,I personally don´t see a great deal of value in getting it,especially if you don´t already own a vita. If they had released it on psn then I´d be all over it from day 1 but as it is,not so much.

I guess it comes down to how much of a fan of the game you are like I said before,and I thought I was a pretty big P4 fan but apparently not enough,at least not enough to buy a new system to play it that is.

Then again I´m not much into handhelds,otherwise I would´ve already gotten a 3DS to play Fire Emblem,but you know how I am with that shit lol.

Street Fighter < Street Fighter 2 turbo

Soul Blade < Soul calibur

Killzone < Killzone 2

Grandia < Grandia 2

DOA < DOA 2

MGS < MGS2 (yeah I said it)

Street Fighter Alpha < Street Fighter Alpha 2

Fatal Fury < Fatal Fury 2

TC obviously doesn't know what 'shitty' means. Age of Empires 1 is 'shitty'? It revolutionized the RTS genre. Assassin's Creed 1 shitty? A game which got 9/10 on Gamespot?

Just because the sequel is better, doesn't mean it's shitty. Get your facts and logic straight TC.

Right in the OP:

Okay, so the game doesn't have to be shitty (nor does the sequel have to be incredible)

Literally, this is the first sentence in the OP, how did you miss it?

Get your reading comprehension straight.

Witcher 1 is a piece of shit, Witcher 2 is much, much better.

From BF:BC1 to BF:BC2 multiplayer that is.

Honestly the entire AC series is pretty shitty.

Pokemon gen 1 to gen 2. I don't need to explain that.

Pokemon gen 3 to 4. The transition to moves being physical or special based on the move used not type has made going back to older games basically impossible for me.

Witcher to Witcher 2. I've only spent around 5 hours with Witcher 2 but the combat is way better than the shit that was The Witcher's.

Red Steel to Red Steel 2. Infinitely better game, and an amazing revamped visual design.

Age of Empires was truly unique. The only thing that bothered me really was the low pop cap.

Even if AOE 2 had the better gameplay, I still return to AOE 1: The Rise of Rome a lot because of its setting: I like to build an empire out of nothing, starting as simple caveman.

What ? No way were Max Payne 1 and GTA 2 shitty. They were amazing games for their time. Heck, Max Payne 1 was the best TPS for a long time. It got praise everywhere, not a single negative aspect. You are calling it shitty ???

"Max Payne was released to universal acclaim, especially the PC version. The game won many annual awards for the year 2001, including Best PC Game by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts; Golden Joystick Award by Dennis Publishing; Visitors Award Best PC Game at the European Computer Trade Show; Best Game of 2001, Best Graphics in a PC Game, and Best PC Action Game by The Electric Playground; Readers Choice Best Game and Best PC Game by Pelit; Computer Game of the Year by The Augusta Chronicle; Best PC Game of 2001 by Amazon.com; PC Game of the Year by Shacknews and by Gamezone; The Best of 2001 - PC and Editor's Choice by Game Revolution; Reader's Choice Game, Best Single Player Action Game, and Best Xbox Game by GameSpot; Readers' Choice Game of the Year, Best Storyline, Best Graphics and Best of Use of Sound, and Best Adventure Game (Xbox) and Editor's Choice by IGN; Gamers Choice Award (Xbox) by Games Domain; Best Game Character and Best Game Cinematography by Eurogamer; Best Gimmick by GameSpy (runner-up in the Best Ingame Cinematics and Best Movie Trailer categories); and Editor's Choice and Best Innovation Destined for Overuse by Computer Gaming World.^[8] The staff of IGN wrote: "This game garnered so many votes from the readers that we almost decided to create a new Best Max Payne Game of 2001 category."^[36] The site also called it the 986h best PlayStation 2 game. They claimed that gamers thought of Max Payne instead of The Matrix when they thought of bullet time.^[46]"

Ugh.... sounds like pure shit to me. Would not play.

Actually Max Payne 2 was receivend more negatively than Max Payne 1 was. So it's the exact opposite as you were saying. Also, funny, as Rockstar had nothing to do with development. They acted only as publishers for the second one. And porting the console versions.

The only thing people bitched about in GTA 2 were the graphics, that they were still 2D. But the gameplay was fun as hell, and it still has some of the best missions ever to be in a GTA game. It was a huuuuuuge improvement over GTA 1 and just a lot of fun to mess around in.

No series can have a shitty entry and then an amazing sequel. Because if a game is shit, it means utter incompetence from the developer, and the sequel will never be amazingly better, unless it's made by a totally different dev.

And he is right: AOE was a truly special RTS, it did a lot of things different from what we had on the market at the time. Just because AOE II was even better doesn't mean much, in those days sequels actually improved a lot on the previous games, not like the expansion packs going for sequels we have now. Same with AC I would say.

Your thread title does not match anything in your OP.

@Pffrbt: I disagree. However, most people who down the first one got sick of the investigation missions, but the hole hidden blade to the neck and tackling the assassinations how i wanted was so new that i did not care at all.

GTA4 to GTA5

Once you play 5, it is very hard to go back to 4. Both are great games. GTA4's time has come and gone

Max Payne 1 to Max Payne 2.

MP1 was really good, did so many amazing things with bullet time, etc., but it was MP2 that truly capitalised on it, and made a truly special TPS.

Uncharted to Uncharted 2

Red Steel to Red Steel 2

Just Cause 1 to JC2.

The first Just Cause didn't even feel finished. It was an absolute mess, which makes it so unbelievable that the same studio that produced that, was able to produce Just Cause 2.

Street Fighters to Street Fighters 2.