I think the only appropriate answer is 'NONE' because this console and its game developers are ruining all these franchises.
For Example: Ghost Recon...How is it Ghost Recon 2 and GR2: Summit Strike for the first x-box supports 4-player splitscreen co-op and is the best fun I've had on the X-box....then GRAW does not...it instead creates 4 stupid missions in a city block where all you do is kill everyone...GRAW2 tries to compromise and does a poor job...
Perfect Dark...Why is every character exactly the same when I could make 1000+ combinations for my what my character looks like in the first Perfect Dark a decade ago for N64? Why also can I not have the same multiplayer options as I could in that game? Why does that game have better single player AND better Multiplayer? And more options? AND more features?
Conflict Serise.... . there are 4 Conflict games...I repeat: FOUR conflict games for the first X-box ALL of which support 4-player splitscreen co-op with its traditional 3rd person style....the next Gen game (By Eidos...uh oh) which comes out Feb. 8, only features 2-player co-op, is no longer 3rd person and has none of the chracters from the first 4 games.....uhhhhh how is it a Conflict Game then....and how is it next gen if it doesn't do ANYTHING the first game does and does EVERYTHING WORSE than the first 4 games do....
Then there's Halo 3, the most overrated game in history, defended to death by blind wallet feeding fanboys who also think paying Microsoft to play online (when its free on PC with MORE features AND free downloads WITH dedicated servers, etc....). This game takes 5-7 hours to beat....wait what? yeap 5-7 hours to beat....woah...and that came out in 2007...welcome to the next gen ladies and gents, gameplay less than what you found a decade ago...a console with 4 controllers that you cannot use...sure Halo 3 supports 4 player co-op...PSYCH!!! you can only play with 2 on your console...hah, had you fooled... you thought it would have next-gen features and were wrong again. Yeap the game looks alright for next-gen but is not that much of an improvement of Halo 2 which also sucked ass single-player. This game gets so boring so fast and the gun balance is as worse as ever, they brought back the original Halo rifle but made its clip 28 shots less...you still can't put single-fire on the battle rifle, the guns all have so few ammo and are still retardedly week. You're better off with a real gun from WWI or WWII, hell a bow and arrow would do more damage then half the weapons. You know they're desperate when they give you a Hammer to use in Halo. The multiplayer is boring as hell with again barely any customization or features that you could find in the first Unreal a decade ago or again the first Perfect Dark on N64. Thank god we got COD 4 shortly after, geeze. How did this game get 9.5? How is this 95% perfect? Well because if it got an 8, whoever wrote the review would get fired by Microsoft...err I mean Gamespot (ala Kane & Lynch style)
So no more sequels to GOOD games, make sequels to crap games, that won't hurt long-time fans or real gamers.
Koal_Jadian
I understand where you're coming from but I also think that for every great title that is released there is that much more expectation for the sequel to surpass it in every way. When a developer creates a game as highly regarded as Halo or Call of Duty, it's difficult for them to live up to the hype, and the task of out-doing themselves in every way for the sequel is a daunting, if not impossible task. Also, I noticed that you've listed numerous titles that you have been disappointed in the sequel to, but haven't mentioned any that have improved upon the predecessor.
For example, I think pretty much everyone can agree that franchises like Zelda, Mario, MGS, Final Fantasy and older titles that still create successful cross platform titles like Contra or Castlevania along withmany others have built upon their original success to create their own little piece of game history. To be honest I think a huge reason behind some of the failed sequels in due to a (quick) change in technology and jumping from one generation of console to another and even switching development teams. If you look at the Call of Duty series and the sheer number of titles on different platforms that have been released, many of which by different dev. teams (i.e. Gray Matter or Infinity Ward) you can definitely see a difference in detail, quality and overall appeal.
I think that to go along with your point of many a franchise being ruined by a terrible sequel that it should be noted there are many successful secondary and tertiary titles released that improve upon the original formula, and make the jump in generations of consoles.
Not all sequels are bad, and like anything else you need to be patient sometimes for it to come out right. Just wait for SSBB (if you have a Wii) and you'll see what I mean man.
Log in to comment