What makes a good sequel?
A good sequel should be different to the games before it. I don’t know many people who like to pay £40 for what is essentially DLC. Whilst it is insanely popular here in the UK, the FIFA series is a huge culprit of this. Every year the game sells millions of copies, when in reality it has hardly changed since FIFA 06. This is probably because the game really doesn’t have any competitors. But other games in more popular genres don’t change much, and still sell phenomenally. I promised myself I wouldn’t be too circlejerky on this site, but the COD games have been very similar since World at War. Aside from zombies mode, there has been little change.
A good sequel should be playable even if you missed the other games in the series. For example, I played Fallout 3, Just Cause 2, Saints Row The Third, and Deus Ex: HR before their predecessors, and I found all of them great. Fallout 3 had a video which pretty much explained the nuclear war, Deus Ex had a story that stood alone, and neither Just Cause 2 nor SR3 was story focused. Since most games are sequels (All 15 games released on Xbox last month were sequels) this is a feature I wish was more common.
A good sequel should be different to the games before it. I don’t know many people who like to pay £40 for what is essentially DLC. Whilst it is insanely popular here in the UK, the FIFA series is a huge culprit of this. Every year the game sells millions of copies, when in reality it has hardly changed since FIFA 06. This is probably because the game really doesn’t have any competitors. But other games in more popular genres don’t change much, and still sell phenomenally. I promised myself I wouldn’t be too circlejerky on this site, but the COD games have been very similar since World at War. Aside from zombies mode, there has been little change.
A good sequel should be playable even if you missed the other games in the series. For example, I played Fallout 3, Just Cause 2, Saints Row The Third, and Deus Ex: HR before their predecessors, and I found all of them great. Fallout 3 had a video which pretty much explained the nuclear war, Deus Ex had a story that stood alone, and neither Just Cause 2 nor SR3 was story focused. Since most games are sequels (All 15 games released on Xbox last month were sequels) this is a feature I wish was more common.
A good sequel shouldn't get rid of good features. This is actually done well 99% of the time, because if a good feature isn't removed, we don’t notice. But if a good feature is removed, people go bat-shit crazy. For a fairly good reason. Of course it was frustrating when you couldn't have a Pokémon follow you in Black or White, and of course it was frustrating when Zombies mode wasn't in Modern Warfare 2 or 3. But that’s life, and sometimes developers screw up.
A good sequel should have improved graphics. If possible. Whilst Crysis 2 looked decent enough, it was pretty much impossible to beat the original. But a great example of this is the NPCs in Skyrim compared to the potato people of Cyrodil (Oblivion). Of course, these games were released more than 5 years apart, but the difference is pretty insane. Another, really drastic change is from Team Fortress Classic to TF2. Again, a lot of time from the original’s release to today’s updated version of TF2, but the difference is, well, noticeable.
A good sequel should have improved graphics. If possible. Whilst Crysis 2 looked decent enough, it was pretty much impossible to beat the original. But a great example of this is the NPCs in Skyrim compared to the potato people of Cyrodil (Oblivion). Of course, these games were released more than 5 years apart, but the difference is pretty insane. Another, really drastic change is from Team Fortress Classic to TF2. Again, a lot of time from the original’s release to today’s updated version of TF2, but the difference is, well, noticeable.
A good sequel shouldn't have forced new modes. We’re looking at you, Mass Effect 3. EA showed why they won worst company two years in a row, and why they are hated on sites like reddit. Yes, the multiplayer was a desperate attempt to grab a bit more cash. It really wasn't very good. But even modes that aren't pay to win can really suck. I know I’m sounding repetitive, but MW3’s survival spec ops mode was so boring. I tried to like it, but it was very repetitive, and took about an hour to become hard.
A good sequel shouldn't be rushed. I much prefer to wait for a good game than to be disappointed with a yearly release. That doesn't mean I enjoy Half-life 3 waits, but I it does mean that I can bare a Bioshock: Infinite style delay. The game was pushed back about half a year, but when it was released it was a game worthy of the original. Another great example is Portal 2. Fans of the ground breaking original had to wait four years before Portal 2 came out, but it was definitely worth the wait. But of course, long delays can lead to large disappointment. Oh Duke Nukem Forever, where did it all go wrong?
A good sequel shouldn't be rushed. I much prefer to wait for a good game than to be disappointed with a yearly release. That doesn't mean I enjoy Half-life 3 waits, but I it does mean that I can bare a Bioshock: Infinite style delay. The game was pushed back about half a year, but when it was released it was a game worthy of the original. Another great example is Portal 2. Fans of the ground breaking original had to wait four years before Portal 2 came out, but it was definitely worth the wait. But of course, long delays can lead to large disappointment. Oh Duke Nukem Forever, where did it all go wrong?
I think I need a name for this section. Oh well, who cares. So this week beat last week in views, which is nice. So yeah, the usual, @KaC__Official on twitter. Whatevs. I think since it's ma bday this week I'll allow user submissions on the Poll. How cool. How heroic. But if you're too lazy to think up something, (I'm not blaming you, I am too) You can vote for an article on why video games have become easier or What games would make good films.