Would you rather an IP.....

Span the story out like a trilogy like in Halo or someting? OR Would you rather it have many installments but each have a different story (each game based in the same world only a totally independent story) like Deus Ex?

Personally, I like each to have a different story. I hate waiting for a continuation and I never quite remember the specifics when they come around.

Mixture of both.

Either. There are advantages to both. I think what should be said though is that there is a line where the the series needs to end on a high note, depending upon its genre and such though.

I don't know. As long as thier told well I could enjoy either.

i would rather have them build the story on one game packed with content each time, rather than making part of it each time, unless it already has lots of content on one disc to be enough

I'd rather it be good. I don't care what the format is.

It depends.

Either. And this has me intrigued. So I don't have to play the previous Deus Ex to get into the new one?mrmusicman247

Ideally, a game should have a story that can stand on its own, while making references to past installments. I just hate it when games end with cliffhangers that make promising stories conclude with 'lol wait for the next game'. This trend should be killed off instantly.

Either.....but I didn't played Hannah Montana.:P

i just dont like it when a story for a sequel feels tacked on. developers should know when their story is spent and move on. kingdom hearts, for example, does not have material fertile enough for however many games theyve pumped out of that well of theirs.

so really, i dont mind if they are direct sequels or not so long as the story has room to breath. mass effect is getting worthy direct sequels because bioware intended for the game to be a trilogy from the beginning and doesnt need to make absurd extrapolations in order to squeeze out more of the story. im also fine with each game being in its own bubble like the main entries of the final fantasy series. it gives the writers room to work with. you can argue all you like about whether or not the stories themselves are good, but having a fresh palette every game means that the writers dont have to squeeze 2 or more stories out of 1.

If you have an utterly terrible story, then why make your fans suffer through a trilogy? lol. But really, I'd go with either, having a great background story and atmosphere would make the "different story, same world" work extremely well. Having a great background story along with a massive, and interesting story would make a trilogy better (ex: Mass Effect, you can't fit as big as that in one game).

Trilogies lead to games like Halo 2 and Mass Effect 2. Almost no game developer has ever handled the "middle" of a trilogy well and always has cut it short and left a cliffhanger. I've always loved how Fumito Ueda approaches game development. He creates a world, then builds games that despite being set in the same universe, are vastly different in terms of settings, times and characters. That is my ideal IP that gets more than one game, something that builds on the same universe, but approaches it in vastly different ways.

Either. And this has me intrigued. So I don't have to play the previous Deus Ex to get into the new one?mrmusicman247

Depends. For sandbox and open-world RPGs, I like each game to be it's own story, like the modern Fallouts. But, shooters and Bioware-type RPGs are best served in series. Not prolonged, fifteen entry series, but a good duology or trilogy is always something that's appreciable.

It really depends on the game, but if I had to choose, I'd go with a trilogy-like continuation.

Depends on the game, but if I had to choose between superb trilogy or superb single game, I'd go the trilogy I guess. More great games. However, I think games that finish their story in one game tend to be told better. If a trilogy relies heavily on the story, it will probably be drawn out.

I think both work CAN well. A trilogy can give a developer time to correct plot holes, but for most games a single game would work best. The problem with trilogies is that the 2nd installment tends to be pretty weak plotwise (see Mass Effect 2) and cliffhangers.

Trilogies lead to games like Halo 2 and Mass Effect 2. Almost no game developer has ever handled the "middle" of a trilogy well and always has cut it short and left a cliffhanger. I've always loved how Fumito Ueda approaches game development. He creates a world, then builds games that despite being set in the same universe, are vastly different in terms of settings, times and characters. That is my ideal IP that gets more than one game, something that builds on the same universe, but approaches it in vastly different ways.

foxhound_fox

I agree with this, if I were ever to become a game designer I would approach game development the same way. Same universe different story, different characters, plot and era.