The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I was watching Scream 2 on the TV on Sunday night. In it, they discussed (in a film class) how sequels rarely surpass the originals, movie-wise. A few exceptions were mentioned, such as Godfather Part II (the only sequel to ever win a 'Best Motion Picture' Oscar...damn I'm clever), but on the whole it is agreed. Take a look at recent examples, such as Austin Powers and Jurassic Park. The franchises have never recaptured that magic of the first incarnation. Usually film sequels are just a result of a big box office success, and the makers deciding to milk the cow. But this is nothing new; as I've said, pretty much everyone agrees that sequels seldom live up to the billing. What IS relatively new, however, is the gripe that the video-gaming industry has with sequels.
This was most notable when the Playstation 2 was launched. Ridge Racer 5? International Track and Field 3? Tekken 3.5? Sony's distractors picked apart the launch line-up, complaining that the company is just releasing rehashes of old games, with a few new bells and whistles attached. Companies like EA release sports games every year, often leaving nothing between the copies except for updated rosters and minor graphical improvements. "This is the next generation," people complained. "We want new games, not old games in pretty new DVD cases." You can see their point - you may even be one of them. But one thing many of the detractors might not have done is play the games.
The three titles I gave as examples were the very first batch of PS2 titles, and as you could expect, were pushed heavily as pretty games. When I first loaded up Tekken Tag Tournament my eyes were lit up by real-time shadows, swaying clothing and amazing FMV...as expected. But what I found inside was the same Tekken 3 gameplay, just with four characters fighting where there used to be two. As with Ridge Racer and Track and Field, old games were not tampered with, just made more attractive. But look at the other games on offer, shall we? TimeSplitters, a highlight for sure with its frenetic, fast pased FPS action and multiplayer laughs. SSX, a game that gave you speed, tricks, races and lovely snow effects and was regarded as the best of the bunch, not just as a snowboarding game, but a PS2 game.
Sorry, I digress...or do I? SSX Tricky, the recently released sequel to SSX, gave harder races, bigger tracks, better graphics and more to unlock...just what a sequel should do, right? Yes...but it's there that films and games differ. The industry has become skeptical when they hear that the likes of Men In Black II are arriving. It is expected to bring in the same old faces with the same old gags, but not quite the same magic...and usually, they're spot on. In games, it's expected to be the same as the last one, but bigger and better. So why do they get so much flak?
Let me take Championship Manager as another example. Updates are released every year for about £20, and every four or so they release a totally new version. However, people who buy these new versions resent the fact that within 365 days their disc will be rendered almost useless because it's out of date, and so in order to get pretty much the same game, only with a quick update of teams and stuff, they will have to shell out for a brand new game. Same with owners of Tekken 3 looking at Tekken Tag Tournament, SSX owners seeing SSX Tricky released.
People time and again complain that, essentially, sequels have the same gameplay as the originals. Take Tony Hawk's 3: get number 2's engine, add in a Revert and Bob's your uncle...but why do people hate Bob so much? With stores up and down the country (including SR) offering trade-in services, it's easier than ever to take back your Metal Gear Solids and grab hold of your Sons of Libertys....take in an old game, come out with a new one. More levels. More playable characters. New weapons. Nicer bit-mapping.
Film sequels may not exceed the standards their originals set, but that's not the case with games. Sometimes you go a small step up (Fifa 2002 to Fifa 2003), and sometimes you go a mile (Grand Theft Auto 2 to Grand Theft Auto 3), but you almost always get a better end product. Tony Hawk's 4 is in production with more characters, bigger levels and an overhauled Career mode. TimeSplitters 2 is all-set to be the true sequel to GoldenEye, and the best First Person Shooter ever. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City will let you go into buildings, use machetes and pilot helicopters...forget about the fact that the code hasn't been drastically altered - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. See how the developers have looked at their first release, and put in what was missing, nudging their sequel even closer to The Perfect Game (tm).
You may hate sequels, but I love them. I look forward to seeing if GTA:VC fixes out that pop-up. I can't wait to roam through THPS4's PROPER interactive environments, not just some people to knock over and buckets to grind. Moan all you want at how Lara's starring in Tomb Raider 6: Final Fantasy is in double figures, and getting better every time. There's nothing wrong with improving your product - it's a small price to pay for a better experience all together.
I'd be happy to debate (read: argue) with anyone about this subject if you wanna leave a message here for me to reply to...or just say how great my hair looks with this new quiff. Snuggly, you can put that in the Quote box if this wins =D
Thanks for reading.
-swander87
This was most notable when the Playstation 2 was launched. Ridge Racer 5? International Track and Field 3? Tekken 3.5? Sony's distractors picked apart the launch line-up, complaining that the company is just releasing rehashes of old games, with a few new bells and whistles attached. Companies like EA release sports games every year, often leaving nothing between the copies except for updated rosters and minor graphical improvements. "This is the next generation," people complained. "We want new games, not old games in pretty new DVD cases." You can see their point - you may even be one of them. But one thing many of the detractors might not have done is play the games.
The three titles I gave as examples were the very first batch of PS2 titles, and as you could expect, were pushed heavily as pretty games. When I first loaded up Tekken Tag Tournament my eyes were lit up by real-time shadows, swaying clothing and amazing FMV...as expected. But what I found inside was the same Tekken 3 gameplay, just with four characters fighting where there used to be two. As with Ridge Racer and Track and Field, old games were not tampered with, just made more attractive. But look at the other games on offer, shall we? TimeSplitters, a highlight for sure with its frenetic, fast pased FPS action and multiplayer laughs. SSX, a game that gave you speed, tricks, races and lovely snow effects and was regarded as the best of the bunch, not just as a snowboarding game, but a PS2 game.
Sorry, I digress...or do I? SSX Tricky, the recently released sequel to SSX, gave harder races, bigger tracks, better graphics and more to unlock...just what a sequel should do, right? Yes...but it's there that films and games differ. The industry has become skeptical when they hear that the likes of Men In Black II are arriving. It is expected to bring in the same old faces with the same old gags, but not quite the same magic...and usually, they're spot on. In games, it's expected to be the same as the last one, but bigger and better. So why do they get so much flak?
Let me take Championship Manager as another example. Updates are released every year for about £20, and every four or so they release a totally new version. However, people who buy these new versions resent the fact that within 365 days their disc will be rendered almost useless because it's out of date, and so in order to get pretty much the same game, only with a quick update of teams and stuff, they will have to shell out for a brand new game. Same with owners of Tekken 3 looking at Tekken Tag Tournament, SSX owners seeing SSX Tricky released.
People time and again complain that, essentially, sequels have the same gameplay as the originals. Take Tony Hawk's 3: get number 2's engine, add in a Revert and Bob's your uncle...but why do people hate Bob so much? With stores up and down the country (including SR) offering trade-in services, it's easier than ever to take back your Metal Gear Solids and grab hold of your Sons of Libertys....take in an old game, come out with a new one. More levels. More playable characters. New weapons. Nicer bit-mapping.
Film sequels may not exceed the standards their originals set, but that's not the case with games. Sometimes you go a small step up (Fifa 2002 to Fifa 2003), and sometimes you go a mile (Grand Theft Auto 2 to Grand Theft Auto 3), but you almost always get a better end product. Tony Hawk's 4 is in production with more characters, bigger levels and an overhauled Career mode. TimeSplitters 2 is all-set to be the true sequel to GoldenEye, and the best First Person Shooter ever. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City will let you go into buildings, use machetes and pilot helicopters...forget about the fact that the code hasn't been drastically altered - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. See how the developers have looked at their first release, and put in what was missing, nudging their sequel even closer to The Perfect Game (tm).
You may hate sequels, but I love them. I look forward to seeing if GTA:VC fixes out that pop-up. I can't wait to roam through THPS4's PROPER interactive environments, not just some people to knock over and buckets to grind. Moan all you want at how Lara's starring in Tomb Raider 6: Final Fantasy is in double figures, and getting better every time. There's nothing wrong with improving your product - it's a small price to pay for a better experience all together.
I'd be happy to debate (read: argue) with anyone about this subject if you wanna leave a message here for me to reply to...or just say how great my hair looks with this new quiff. Snuggly, you can put that in the Quote box if this wins =D
Thanks for reading.
-swander87
El blokey wrote:
> Although I have high hopes that instead of just using him for skating
> games, AckLame could branch out and have stuff like Tony Hawk's: First
> Person Shooter, Tony Hawk's Rugby and Sim Tony Hawk's. You know, get
> their money's worth.
*
Maybe they should do a Jet Set Radio thing and turn it into a skateboarding adventure. Introduce graffiti tagging and cop chases.
> Although I have high hopes that instead of just using him for skating
> games, AckLame could branch out and have stuff like Tony Hawk's: First
> Person Shooter, Tony Hawk's Rugby and Sim Tony Hawk's. You know, get
> their money's worth.
*
Maybe they should do a Jet Set Radio thing and turn it into a skateboarding adventure. Introduce graffiti tagging and cop chases.
"such as Godfather Part II (the only sequel to ever win a 'Best Motion Picture' Oscar...damn I'm clever)"
I knew that too. Therefore, I'm also clever. Yay me
I knew that too. Therefore, I'm also clever. Yay me
gamezfreak wrote:
> Sequels are good if they improve from in first game.
>
> Take The Fifa series, they release a game every year, half of them
> just have updated players and stuff, Them type of sequels are
> dissapointing.
Care to post anything NOT already mentioned in this thread?
=D
> Sequels are good if they improve from in first game.
>
> Take The Fifa series, they release a game every year, half of them
> just have updated players and stuff, Them type of sequels are
> dissapointing.
Care to post anything NOT already mentioned in this thread?
=D
Sequels are good if they improve from in first game.
Take The Fifa series, they release a game every year, half of them just have updated players and stuff, Them type of sequels are dissapointing.
Take The Fifa series, they release a game every year, half of them just have updated players and stuff, Them type of sequels are dissapointing.
That's exactly what I'm saying - sequels are great as long as they're an improvement.
Although I have high hopes that instead of just using him for skating games, AckLame could branch out and have stuff like Tony Hawk's: First Person Shooter, Tony Hawk's Rugby and Sim Tony Hawk's. You know, get their money's worth.
Although I have high hopes that instead of just using him for skating games, AckLame could branch out and have stuff like Tony Hawk's: First Person Shooter, Tony Hawk's Rugby and Sim Tony Hawk's. You know, get their money's worth.
I read that Tony Hawk has recently signed a deal with (whoever makes the Tony Hawks games) until 2015 - that means we will be seeing Tony Hawks 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 etc. I find this kind of thing a bit depressing, especially when there'll probably be a new Tony Hawks sequel released every 12 months.
For me, the thrill in gaming comes from playing a new and original game: the first Tomb Raider will always be the best because at the time it was so ground-breaking.
But having said that, I suppose that every day more and more people are getting into gaming and games like Tomb Raider(5): Angel of Darkness will be (for them) like they are playing the first game (if you know what I mean).
So in this sense, sequels are a good thing, but I prefer to play games with game characters I've never seen before. Having said that, I will be buying Turok Evolution, Crazy Taxi: high Roller, and, if there was one, I'd buy Rez 2 - so what the hell - sequels are great! :)
(as long as they improve on the original).
For me, the thrill in gaming comes from playing a new and original game: the first Tomb Raider will always be the best because at the time it was so ground-breaking.
But having said that, I suppose that every day more and more people are getting into gaming and games like Tomb Raider(5): Angel of Darkness will be (for them) like they are playing the first game (if you know what I mean).
So in this sense, sequels are a good thing, but I prefer to play games with game characters I've never seen before. Having said that, I will be buying Turok Evolution, Crazy Taxi: high Roller, and, if there was one, I'd buy Rez 2 - so what the hell - sequels are great! :)
(as long as they improve on the original).
Do you mean companies working on sequels rather than new games?
Stuff like Tony Hawks and Tomb Raider were new games once, though...and we still get gems like Rez, Halo and Ico, with stuff like Blinx, Ratchett and Clank and Malice to come.
Stuff like Tony Hawks and Tomb Raider were new games once, though...and we still get gems like Rez, Halo and Ico, with stuff like Blinx, Ratchett and Clank and Malice to come.
On the whole, I've nothing against sequels, but just think of all the original games we would have if sequels were limited or didn't exist.
Like cover versions in music, there's a place for them - just not too many.
Like cover versions in music, there's a place for them - just not too many.
I was watching Scream 2 on the TV on Sunday night. In it, they discussed (in a film class) how sequels rarely surpass the originals, movie-wise. A few exceptions were mentioned, such as Godfather Part II (the only sequel to ever win a 'Best Motion Picture' Oscar...damn I'm clever), but on the whole it is agreed. Take a look at recent examples, such as Austin Powers and Jurassic Park. The franchises have never recaptured that magic of the first incarnation. Usually film sequels are just a result of a big box office success, and the makers deciding to milk the cow. But this is nothing new; as I've said, pretty much everyone agrees that sequels seldom live up to the billing. What IS relatively new, however, is the gripe that the video-gaming industry has with sequels.
This was most notable when the Playstation 2 was launched. Ridge Racer 5? International Track and Field 3? Tekken 3.5? Sony's distractors picked apart the launch line-up, complaining that the company is just releasing rehashes of old games, with a few new bells and whistles attached. Companies like EA release sports games every year, often leaving nothing between the copies except for updated rosters and minor graphical improvements. "This is the next generation," people complained. "We want new games, not old games in pretty new DVD cases." You can see their point - you may even be one of them. But one thing many of the detractors might not have done is play the games.
The three titles I gave as examples were the very first batch of PS2 titles, and as you could expect, were pushed heavily as pretty games. When I first loaded up Tekken Tag Tournament my eyes were lit up by real-time shadows, swaying clothing and amazing FMV...as expected. But what I found inside was the same Tekken 3 gameplay, just with four characters fighting where there used to be two. As with Ridge Racer and Track and Field, old games were not tampered with, just made more attractive. But look at the other games on offer, shall we? TimeSplitters, a highlight for sure with its frenetic, fast pased FPS action and multiplayer laughs. SSX, a game that gave you speed, tricks, races and lovely snow effects and was regarded as the best of the bunch, not just as a snowboarding game, but a PS2 game.
Sorry, I digress...or do I? SSX Tricky, the recently released sequel to SSX, gave harder races, bigger tracks, better graphics and more to unlock...just what a sequel should do, right? Yes...but it's there that films and games differ. The industry has become skeptical when they hear that the likes of Men In Black II are arriving. It is expected to bring in the same old faces with the same old gags, but not quite the same magic...and usually, they're spot on. In games, it's expected to be the same as the last one, but bigger and better. So why do they get so much flak?
Let me take Championship Manager as another example. Updates are released every year for about £20, and every four or so they release a totally new version. However, people who buy these new versions resent the fact that within 365 days their disc will be rendered almost useless because it's out of date, and so in order to get pretty much the same game, only with a quick update of teams and stuff, they will have to shell out for a brand new game. Same with owners of Tekken 3 looking at Tekken Tag Tournament, SSX owners seeing SSX Tricky released.
People time and again complain that, essentially, sequels have the same gameplay as the originals. Take Tony Hawk's 3: get number 2's engine, add in a Revert and Bob's your uncle...but why do people hate Bob so much? With stores up and down the country (including SR) offering trade-in services, it's easier than ever to take back your Metal Gear Solids and grab hold of your Sons of Libertys....take in an old game, come out with a new one. More levels. More playable characters. New weapons. Nicer bit-mapping.
Film sequels may not exceed the standards their originals set, but that's not the case with games. Sometimes you go a small step up (Fifa 2002 to Fifa 2003), and sometimes you go a mile (Grand Theft Auto 2 to Grand Theft Auto 3), but you almost always get a better end product. Tony Hawk's 4 is in production with more characters, bigger levels and an overhauled Career mode. TimeSplitters 2 is all-set to be the true sequel to GoldenEye, and the best First Person Shooter ever. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City will let you go into buildings, use machetes and pilot helicopters...forget about the fact that the code hasn't been drastically altered - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. See how the developers have looked at their first release, and put in what was missing, nudging their sequel even closer to The Perfect Game (tm).
You may hate sequels, but I love them. I look forward to seeing if GTA:VC fixes out that pop-up. I can't wait to roam through THPS4's PROPER interactive environments, not just some people to knock over and buckets to grind. Moan all you want at how Lara's starring in Tomb Raider 6: Final Fantasy is in double figures, and getting better every time. There's nothing wrong with improving your product - it's a small price to pay for a better experience all together.
I'd be happy to debate (read: argue) with anyone about this subject if you wanna leave a message here for me to reply to...or just say how great my hair looks with this new quiff. Snuggly, you can put that in the Quote box if this wins =D
Thanks for reading.
-swander87
This was most notable when the Playstation 2 was launched. Ridge Racer 5? International Track and Field 3? Tekken 3.5? Sony's distractors picked apart the launch line-up, complaining that the company is just releasing rehashes of old games, with a few new bells and whistles attached. Companies like EA release sports games every year, often leaving nothing between the copies except for updated rosters and minor graphical improvements. "This is the next generation," people complained. "We want new games, not old games in pretty new DVD cases." You can see their point - you may even be one of them. But one thing many of the detractors might not have done is play the games.
The three titles I gave as examples were the very first batch of PS2 titles, and as you could expect, were pushed heavily as pretty games. When I first loaded up Tekken Tag Tournament my eyes were lit up by real-time shadows, swaying clothing and amazing FMV...as expected. But what I found inside was the same Tekken 3 gameplay, just with four characters fighting where there used to be two. As with Ridge Racer and Track and Field, old games were not tampered with, just made more attractive. But look at the other games on offer, shall we? TimeSplitters, a highlight for sure with its frenetic, fast pased FPS action and multiplayer laughs. SSX, a game that gave you speed, tricks, races and lovely snow effects and was regarded as the best of the bunch, not just as a snowboarding game, but a PS2 game.
Sorry, I digress...or do I? SSX Tricky, the recently released sequel to SSX, gave harder races, bigger tracks, better graphics and more to unlock...just what a sequel should do, right? Yes...but it's there that films and games differ. The industry has become skeptical when they hear that the likes of Men In Black II are arriving. It is expected to bring in the same old faces with the same old gags, but not quite the same magic...and usually, they're spot on. In games, it's expected to be the same as the last one, but bigger and better. So why do they get so much flak?
Let me take Championship Manager as another example. Updates are released every year for about £20, and every four or so they release a totally new version. However, people who buy these new versions resent the fact that within 365 days their disc will be rendered almost useless because it's out of date, and so in order to get pretty much the same game, only with a quick update of teams and stuff, they will have to shell out for a brand new game. Same with owners of Tekken 3 looking at Tekken Tag Tournament, SSX owners seeing SSX Tricky released.
People time and again complain that, essentially, sequels have the same gameplay as the originals. Take Tony Hawk's 3: get number 2's engine, add in a Revert and Bob's your uncle...but why do people hate Bob so much? With stores up and down the country (including SR) offering trade-in services, it's easier than ever to take back your Metal Gear Solids and grab hold of your Sons of Libertys....take in an old game, come out with a new one. More levels. More playable characters. New weapons. Nicer bit-mapping.
Film sequels may not exceed the standards their originals set, but that's not the case with games. Sometimes you go a small step up (Fifa 2002 to Fifa 2003), and sometimes you go a mile (Grand Theft Auto 2 to Grand Theft Auto 3), but you almost always get a better end product. Tony Hawk's 4 is in production with more characters, bigger levels and an overhauled Career mode. TimeSplitters 2 is all-set to be the true sequel to GoldenEye, and the best First Person Shooter ever. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City will let you go into buildings, use machetes and pilot helicopters...forget about the fact that the code hasn't been drastically altered - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. See how the developers have looked at their first release, and put in what was missing, nudging their sequel even closer to The Perfect Game (tm).
You may hate sequels, but I love them. I look forward to seeing if GTA:VC fixes out that pop-up. I can't wait to roam through THPS4's PROPER interactive environments, not just some people to knock over and buckets to grind. Moan all you want at how Lara's starring in Tomb Raider 6: Final Fantasy is in double figures, and getting better every time. There's nothing wrong with improving your product - it's a small price to pay for a better experience all together.
I'd be happy to debate (read: argue) with anyone about this subject if you wanna leave a message here for me to reply to...or just say how great my hair looks with this new quiff. Snuggly, you can put that in the Quote box if this wins =D
Thanks for reading.
-swander87