Sequel-itis

[Mungaf]

Is it just me, or have game developers all of a sudden become increasingly reluctant to develop new franchises and innovate their games? When I look at the best rated and best selling games of 2004, most of them are 2s and 3s, and next year there are some high profile 3s (AOE III) and 4s (Elder Scrolls, Civ) slated for release.

So do you think that this is a new direction for the industry or just part of a pendulum swing? More than that, is it a good direction to be moving in? Myself, I hope that the big players can get off of their asses and bring us some truly original material, no disrespect meant to the hallowed franchises of course.

 

[Fetus4188]

Good games have always had sequels, unlike movies success can be duplicated in sequels. The fans demand sequels and the fans get sequels.

 

[andvruss]

World of Warcraft and Call of Duty were very good games released last year and recently. They were both innovative, and had no prequels.

 

[WildFire]

Yes, Call of Duty had no World War II games before it.

Oh wait...

Battlefield 1942....

Medal of Honor...

 

[andvruss]

Direct sequels.....call of duty is not a sequel of medal of honor or battlefield.

 

[punkbass2000]

You can't expect every game (or every anything) to be ground-breakingly original, you know. It's not that easy.

 

[Wolfe Tone]

I don't mind sequels, as long as they are at least as good as the original. There are a number of games that I'd be happy with just a new story line.

 

[nonconformist]

Direct sequels.....call of duty is not a sequel of medal of honor or battlefield.

It is sort of a merge between them.

 

[Syterion]

Did you play Katamari Damacy? I think not.

 

[Silverflame]

Look at the biggest games of 2004, all follow the more of the same formula. Halo 2? More of the same. GTA San Andreas? More of the same, even the glitches are still there. Metroid Prime Echoes, Metal Gear Solid 3, Half-life 2, Doom 3, all of them follow the same more of the same formula. Annoying.

Resident Evil 4, however, will not. Replacing zombies with homicidal villagers, throwing the player into an open, fully 3d environment, with a claustrophobic camera perspective, and so many other changes that only trailers or playing the demo will do it justice, there is absolutely NO reason to complain that Resi 4 is too similar to its predecessors. Yet, it's still the same old Resident Evil that will scare one into never sleeping again. Resident Evil 4 will own your soul.

 

[Dr. Yoshi]

I think that the main problem is that Americans, in general, are simply unwilling to take any sort of risk anymore. The Japanese are coming out with original games and franchises all the time because they are willing to take that sort of risk.

American companies must be willing to take chances if they are to survive much longer in the global economy, and the same holds true for video games.

 

[andvruss]

Look at the biggest games of 2004, all follow the more of the same formula. Halo 2? More of the same. GTA San Andreas? More of the same, even the glitches are still there. Metroid Prime Echoes, Metal Gear Solid 3, Half-life 2, Doom 3, all of them follow the same more of the same formula. Annoying.

They are the same because they were successful at first. Why fix was isn't broken. The sales and reviews of alsmot all the games you listed prove that sequels can be better than the original before it (GTA:SA, Halo 2, MP2, etc.).

 

[Mungaf]

Did you play Katamari Damacy? I think not.

The damned Best Buy didn't have it

I'm not trying to diss currently made games, I'm having a great time with Halflife 2 and World of Warcraft, which are conservative well-made games. I'm saying we could be in trouble if we don't go back into a period of innovation.

 

[Dell19]

American companies must be willing to take chances if they are to survive much longer in the global economy, and the same holds true for video games.

They don't if customers would rather pick up the sequel to the game that they liked rather than buying a new game that sounds promising but may not really be that good. There is a place for innovativeness but there is also a place for sequels with new features.

Yes, Call of Duty had no World War II games before it.

Oh wait...

Battlefield 1942....

Medal of Honor...

Thats pretty silly to say. The vast majority of games have some sort of predecessor. I guess you don't want another RTS, TBS, RPG or FPS ever again since theoretically all games fit into a genre that has been created by previous games.

A final point, originality isn't the opposite of sequels. Its possible to do both although the customer would expect some common elements.

 

[Silverflame]

They are the same because they were successful at first. Why fix was isn't broken. The sales and reviews of alsmot all the games you listed prove that sequels can be better than the original before it (GTA:SA, Halo 2, MP2, etc.).

I never said more of the same was a bad thing. But when every single huge title of the year is a sequel with no major changes over its predecessor, it's easy to see why Gamespot decided to give the Game of the Year award to some MMORPG.

 

[Gainy]

Thats pretty silly to say. The vast majority of games have some sort of predecessor. I guess you don't want another RTS, TBS, RPG or FPS ever again since theoretically all games fit into a genre that has been created by previous games.

Yer but he was responding to what andvruss originally said;

They were both innovative, and had no prequels.

Call of duty was by no means innovative, and until now I always thought it was part of the moh group (showing how similar they are )
I wouldn't mind if it was a vast update, but MOH/BF1942/COD all seem the same to me.

Regarding the original topic, i'm fine with sequels. I'm happy they released Civ3, HL2, soon to be BF2, Pirates2, AOE3 etc. The original games were great, it would be a shame if they weren't developed more.

 

[andvruss]

To the non-FPS gamer, they could look the same. I could say the same thing about Everyquest 2 and World of Warcraft. Im not a big MMORPG guy, so I could say 'Hey look, these games both have magic and elves and trolls, etc.. They must be very similar then. '

 

[Babbler]

Call of duty was by no means innovative, and until now I always thought it was part of the moh group (showing how similar they are )
I wouldn't mind if it was a vast update, but MOH/BF1942/COD all seem the same to me.

Wasn't COF devloped by devlopers who worked on MOH? They got into trouble with their former publisher. (I can't remember the details)