Why sequels suffer and why they succeed

  • Thread starter Thread starter ShadowSoldier
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 5,133
  • Replies Replies 60
  • Likes Likes 1
Wait... weren't you JUST defending Skyrim?! And pretty much everything you said about it is why I thought it more of a medival FPS then RPG, are you in one of those moods today :P?

I'm defending Skyrim in terms of Oblivion, both games are horrifically flawed. I never said that Skyrim is a god amongst games, I was simply defending it as better than Oblivion. I enjoyed the time put into Skyrim but it seems very bland compared to something like Dragon's Dogma or even Kingdoms of Amalur.

I'm in a mood where if you make a terribly inaccurate statement that you have to defend it.

How is an opinion terribly inaccurate >_>

An opinion is only good if there's reasoning behind it. You can't just state an opinion and not expect to defend it.
 
With regard to the OP, generally sequels are far more grand than their predecessors. Devs have had an opportunity to see what works and what doesn't, where they might be able to add something to the table, and fit in ideas that they wanted to implement in the previous game but couldn't due to lack of time or tech.

I think you're projecting your disdain for the inconsistent mess that the Final Fantasy series has become onto the industry as a whole. In a topic titled "Why sequels suffer and why they succeed" you name one series that has gone downhill and four that got it right. This seems more like yet another "Final Fantasy makes me sad" thread.

As was pointed out earlier, the Final Fantasy games are for the most part separate entities. But, seeing as they are all called "Final Fantasy" (still wondering which of them is actually the Final fantasy...) and numbered...I think they fall into the realm of sequels... It is definitely a series that could be well served by looking back at what worked in the past rather than what could be added in the future, but having said that, I'd rather not see EA Sports Final Fantasy 2013 with updated graphics and rosters...
 
Not sure about this...

However KH II >KHI Metroid Prime 2,3< 1

However this is only opinion based (and I had a hard time telling this about MP1, since I love that game)
 
Wait... weren't you JUST defending Skyrim?! And pretty much everything you said about it is why I thought it more of a medival FPS then RPG, are you in one of those moods today :P?

I'm defending Skyrim in terms of Oblivion, both games are horrifically flawed. I never said that Skyrim is a god amongst games, I was simply defending it as better than Oblivion. I enjoyed the time put into Skyrim but it seems very bland compared to something like Dragon's Dogma or even Kingdoms of Amalur.

I'm in a mood where if you make a terribly inaccurate statement that you have to defend it.

How is an opinion terribly inaccurate >_>

An opinion is only good if there's reasoning behind it. You can't just state an opinion and not expect to defend it.

What says? I cant possibly PROVE my opinion to you and I have already defended it, how much more is there to do.
 
With regard to the OP, generally sequels are far more grand than their predecessors. Devs have had an opportunity to see what works and what doesn't, where they might be able to add something to the table, and fit in ideas that they wanted to implement in the previous game but couldn't due to lack of time or tech.

I think you're projecting your disdain for the inconsistent mess that the Final Fantasy series has become onto the industry as a whole. In a topic titled "Why sequels suffer and why they succeed" you name one series that has gone downhill and four that got it right. This seems more like yet another "Final Fantasy makes me sad" thread.

As was pointed out earlier, the Final Fantasy games are for the most part separate entities. But, seeing as they are all called "Final Fantasy" (still wondering which of them is actually the Final fantasy...) and numbered...I think they fall into the realm of sequels... It is definitely a series that could be well served by looking back at what worked in the past rather than what could be added in the future, but having said that, I'd rather not see EA Sports Final Fantasy 2013 with updated graphics and rosters...

-I used it as an example because it's the most recent title that I experienced.
-The opening post was already long enough, I'm not going to add more.
-Used it as the example because not only is it the most recent title, but because a lot of people here have tried XIII and would understand more what I mean. I'm not going to add a title like Super Adventure Island 2 (which I love) but was completely different from Super Adventure Island 1, a lot of people haven't played those games.
 
What says? I cant possibly PROVE my opinion to you and I have already defended it, how much more is there to do.

An opinion is formulated through copious research in the area the opinion is formed. You didn't defend calling it a "medieval FPS", you simply said "It doesn't feel open world, it feels like a medieval FPS" and have constantly denied giving any reason as to why you would formulate such an opinion. You can't just drop an opinion and simply stonewall from the rest of the argument. If you present an opinion, you should have some reason behind it. You can't just drop in and say "I think X", you have to drop in and say "I think X because". Which you didn't.

Opinions have to be defended. It doesn't matter if it's your opinion, your opinion is shit if you have no evidence.

If you have an unfounded opinion, don't state it next time.
 
I find that the best sequels (in games or any other medium) are the ones that build upon the foundation set by the original instead of simply working within its confines. Take the leap from Portal 2 to Portal, Terminator 2: Judgement Day to The Terminator, Arkham City to Arkham Asylum, or The Evil Dead to The Evil Dead 2 to Army Of Darkness.
 
I find that the best sequels (in games or any other medium) are the ones that build upon the foundation set by the original instead of simply working within its confines. Take the leap from Portal 2 to Portal, Terminator 2: Judgement Day to The Terminator, Arkham City to Arkham Asylum, or The Evil Dead to The Evil Dead 2 to Army Of Darkness.

Exactly, they don't try to change it at all and become it's own game. They improve on the previous ones. And, as I stated in the OP, the final fantasy games don't do that. But there are exceptions to that rule, such as the Mario games for example.
 
This is more like, "Why does Final Fantasy Suck Now [if it was ever good]?" than, "why sequels suffer". If you're going to pick X as the point of departure, I'll just fall back on the common belief that SquareEnix ruined everything (IX was Squaresoft's last FF game).

But just because I don't completely understand what you're getting at, let me pick at your main statement:
Final Fantasy, I believe, is no longer Final Fantasy. I believe that Final Fantasy was all about exploring dungeons, going to towns, getting lots of weapons and armor, playing mini games, and have a simple turn based battle system. That's what it was like up until FFX, then they changed it all, and look what happened. We no longer have stories about the characters growing from some "I don't want to help nobody" asshole to "I'll die saving this planet".

1. All about exploring dungeons
-FFXII had dungeons in spades

2. Going to towns
-FFXII had tons of towns, the biggest in the franchise

3. Getting lots of weapons and armor
-This is every FF game, except for FFVIII. I wouldn't call the reduction in redundancy of weapons (beginning with FFVII) a bad thing, considering they largely only affect your attack and hit% in FF games, but whatever. Consider this the same as the streamlined inventory between Mass Effect 1 and 2.

4. Playing mini games
-Not many mini games in I-V, or XIII, the rest had a bunch

5. Simple Turn-Based Battle System
-This ended with XI (and by extension, XII). FFX's battle system was not only simple, it was revolutionary. It's one of the few JRPGs I can name where your vanilla attack is NOT always the best option for defeating enemies in a timely manner. Up until that point, it was 'equip the best weapons, grind your attack stat, use attack -> win'. Any deviation from this pattern would cause you to lose turns, time, health, and eventually, the entire battle. 90% of magic spells were useless. On the other hand, FFX actually gave enemies specific status weaknesses in addition to elemental weaknesses, the effectiveness of which were increased over 2-fold, so that it was smarter to blind a bunch of flying enemies and throw lightning at them than it was to constantly mash 'attack' with your heavies. But I digress, most people can't get past the story, inability to skip cutscenes, lack of a world map, etc. etc.

6. Story (?)
I don't know how you concluded that a change in gameplay resulted in a change in story development, but look no further than Motomu Toriyama and Daisuke Watanabe, who led the scenario and script writing on X, XII, and XIII (while their roles were minor or non-existent in previous entries).

Basically I think your argument boils down to, "Final Fantasy XIII is terrible", and I agree. The battle system is actually pretty fun and entertaining, but you don't really get to use it until you've crawled over 40 hours of absolute garbage. Then the game becomes a real Final Fantasy game, albeit without interesting environments, the ability to use all of your characters, and any real goal other than some mediocre side-quests. I chalk all this failure up to the inability of Japanese developers to utilize current-gen hardware. FFXIII feels like they spent more time on the graphics than anything else (and the graphics aren't even that good).

But whatever, a lot of people made the same exact arguments when FFVIII came out, and now it's regarded as a classic. For those who were still upset by VIII, Squaresoft created IX, which was a big throwback to the SNES titles, as well as homage to the entire series, including VIII. SquareEnix's problem is that they never really responded to the ire of fans after XIII. Instead they took the G.W. Bush route and said, "We can either admit that we screwed up, or stick to our guns and make things worse. Because sticking to your guns shows character, and people would rather have character than quality." Of course now there are FFXIII fans who were pissed off at FFXIII-2, which, in an uncharacteristic gesture, SE is apologizing for with yet another sequel. But this is another digression... I've stopped hyping myself up for each new entry, at least until they give up on all the Ivalice and Fabula Crystal whatever crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
@[member='DS1']

I thought his argument was that sequels more often then not are worse then their predecessor. The Final Fantasy series is a prime example of that.


Sales (From Wikipedia):

Final Fantasy XIII: approx. 6.2 million
Final Fantasy XIII-2: approx. 2.5 million

Final Fantasy X: approx. 6.6 million
Final Fantasy X-2: approx. 1.85 million

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune - approx. 2.6 million
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves - approx. 5 million
 
Well sales really don't reflect quality. It's very rare that true sequels outsell their predecessors. For this I mean story-based sequels, not gameplay based sequels like NSMB DS to NSMB Wii or NSMB2.

I mean you can only lose people as a story goes on. Like your example, not everyone who buys Uncharted will like it. Those people won't bother with a sequel and not a lot of people will buy a sequel without playing the previous game first. It just filters down honestly.

I think there are some rare instances where this is reversed, I thought Mass Effect had this where the sequels outsold their predecessors. Which is odd because I can't imagine playing the series without starting at square one.
 
Why do people hate so hard on XIII?
I bet most of the people who do found it too hard and are venting frustration. Sure it was a bit linear but damn it wasnt as bad as people say,
Theres a right to say XIII-2 was much worse than XIII coz it was, but people write off the whole series so quickly and say the 'retro' ones are better. Have any of you 'retro' fans played a range of the FF games? Coz I have a sure bet you've only played one.

/rant over
 
Why do people hate so hard on XIII?
I bet most of the people who do found it too hard and are venting frustration. Sure it was a bit linear but damn it wasnt as bad as people say,
Theres a right to say XIII-2 was much worse than XIII coz it was, but people write off the whole series so quickly and say the 'retro' ones are better. Have any of you 'retro' fans played a range of the FF games? Coz I have a sure bet you've only played one.

/rant over

Hipsters gonna hip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Why do people hate so hard on XIII?
I bet most of the people who do found it too hard and are venting frustration. Sure it was a bit linear but damn it wasnt as bad as people say,
Theres a right to say XIII-2 was much worse than XIII coz it was, but people write off the whole series so quickly and say the 'retro' ones are better. Have any of you 'retro' fans played a range of the FF games? Coz I have a sure bet you've only played one.

/rant over

I've played every single non-MMO FF game from start to finish (a few of them several times over), and honestly XIII is as bad as most people make it out to be. The problem I have with the game is that you have to go through a fairly long and poorly written story before 'unlocking' the entire battle system. Linearity isn't the issue, but the fact that freedom in battle and your party choice is choked off completely. After that, I have to say the game is pretty damn good and I really like the battle system. Getting to that point is such a slog though, and the payoff isn't big enough for most people. Compare this to Suikoden V, which took around 10 hours to really get going, but after that it was a solid 40 hours of great gameplay and story. There is only so much BS I will tolerate to get to 'the good parts' of a game.

When I first played XIII, it was on my friend's completed save file, where he was just running around doing sidequests and collecting materials and stuff. Based on that alone, I thought the game was way better than people were making it out to be! But a while later, when I started my own new game, I quickly figured out exactly why everyone was complaining. My friend, another die-hard FF fan, admitted he'd skipped the majority of the cutscenes. Considering how many dang cutscenes there are during the main game, I'd say that's a pretty serious detractor. But hey, he completed the game 100%, so no, it's not all bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Why do people hate so hard on XIII?
I bet most of the people who do found it too hard and are venting frustration. Sure it was a bit linear but damn it wasnt as bad as people say,
Theres a right to say XIII-2 was much worse than XIII coz it was, but people write off the whole series so quickly and say the 'retro' ones are better. Have any of you 'retro' fans played a range of the FF games? Coz I have a sure bet you've only played one.

/rant over
I haven't played all of them but I've played and finished 1 to 7, played a little bit of 8, 9 and 12 as well as the spinoffs Tactics, Tactics Advanced, Tactics A2, Crisis Core, Dissidia, Dissidia 012 and watched through the anime and Advent Children movie and i'm not even a fan of the series and even I know XIII was crap. If a game has to drag on and on before it really grabs you and makes you want to play more then it is shit just compare it to another JRPG like Persona 3 it grabs you in the first few minutes not in the first few hours of playthrough and thats why alot of people complain about the lastest installments in the FF series and why alot of people reguard the so called "retro" games better because it has everything the newer FF lacks.
 
I always do get annoyed at the tendency for people to say that an older game is better than a newer game simply for nostalgic or "retro" purposes. Like Ocarina of Time was a great game... 15 years ago. Nowadays though Twilight Princess was just so much better. Frankly I can't sing as many praises for the Zelda franchise as others do but Twilight Princess is a fantastic game and it was a surprisingly bolder direction for the series than people want to admit.
I agree with the jist of what you're saying here, but I find it a bit ironic that you use Twilight Princess as an example of a Zelda game better than Ocarina of Time. Mostly because, despite the fact that I liked Twilight Princess, my main problem is that it felt too much like "Ocarina of Time 2" (and from what I've seen said elsewhere, I'm not the only person who thinks that either). But most importantly, I don't feel like there's anything that truly sets it apart as unique from any previous Zelda titles. I mean, take a look...

Ocarina of Time: First truly 3D Zelda game. Pioneered the core of the elements that would become mainstays for future main Zelda installments. Though essentially very similar to A Link to the Past storywise (in many ways), it still introduced its own twists and plot elements that have become mainstays of future Zelda plots, for better or for worse.

Majora's Mask: A sequel to Ocarina of Time with the same graphical style and game engine (though updated a bit), but with a wildly different story and ways to play. Introduced an interactive time-based world with tons of colorful characters who truly mean something to the plot and gameplay, and has arguably the darkest story to date.

Wind Waker: Took place on an open sea with tons of islands to explore, and required sailing to get anywhere. Featured a unique cell-shaded graphical style that still looks pretty today. Introduces special action commands in battle

Twilight Princess: After the backlash over Wind Waker's graphical style, Nintendo retreated a bit and basically said "let's make Ocarina of Time HD!" Features an older Link (like Ocarina of Time) a more "realistic" graphical style (like Ocarina of Time), a Hylian shield that looks identical to the one in Ocarina of Time, a horse (like Ocarina of Time), a more "classic" Zelda story where Link saves Princess Zelda and Hyrule from Ganon (like Ocarina of Time), and travels into a dark world which transforms him into an animal (like a Link to the Past). Introduces the concept of "tear collecting" and refines the action commands previously seen in Wind Waker. Featured tacked-on motion controls in the Wii version.

Skyward Sword: Takes place in the open sky, and pioneers TRUE motion controls as an integrated part of gameplay. Introduces an RPG-like weapons and items upgrade system requiring money and mixtures of different materials, as well as a limit to the carryable amount of items and breakable shields. Adds stamina as a part of gameplay. Also introduces slightly more extensive dialog choices (though they usually don't affect the game or story much) and greatly refines the tear-collecting and action commands from Twilight Princess.

So, you see what I'm saying? Twilight Princess brought very little that was new to the table, and not much that truly sets it apart from other games. Sure, it was cool to play a more "Realistic" OoT pseudo-sequel with better graphics, it was really cool to be a wolf and ride Epona again, and it was cool to alternate between light and twilight realms, but none of those are really unique to Twilight Princess at all. Really, the only thing Twilight Princess seemed to do that influenced the next installment is tear collecting, pseudo-motion controls (neither of which were truly perfected until Skyward Sword, imo), and the names of certain areas in Skyward Sword (such as the different provinces).
 
Why do people hate so hard on XIII?
I bet most of the people who do found it too hard and are venting frustration. Sure it was a bit linear but damn it wasnt as bad as people say,
Theres a right to say XIII-2 was much worse than XIII coz it was, but people write off the whole series so quickly and say the 'retro' ones are better. Have any of you 'retro' fans played a range of the FF games? Coz I have a sure bet you've only played one.

/rant over

XIII sucks. Honestly, I liked FFV and FFVI the best. 1 and 2 were okay, but the series didn't start kicking ass until later on. And by VI I mean 3 for North America. But still. XIII sucked compared to every other final fantasy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
XIII sucks. Honestly, I liked FFV and FFVI the best. 1 and 2 were okay, but the series didn't start kicking ass until later on. And by VI I mean 3 for North America. But still. XIII sucked compared to every other final fantasy.
Only one person has given me legit reasons besides just blindly saying 'it sucks derp'
And most people dont get the full experience because watching nicely done cut scenes is somehow tedious?
Gaming of today has become too impulsive and impatient. and thats why gems like XIII which require patience will never be liked.

Also, every other FF? Have you played every other in depth? I doubt you're qualified to make that decision.
Coz you've clearly overlooked the bullshit which was XI
 
XIII sucks. Honestly, I liked FFV and FFVI the best. 1 and 2 were okay, but the series didn't start kicking ass until later on. And by VI I mean 3 for North America. But still. XIII sucked compared to every other final fantasy.
Only one person has given me legit reasons besides just blindly saying 'it sucks derp'
Lol, everyone else gave a legit reason but only you think it isn't and whether that is plain ignorance or trolling who knows.


And most people dont get the full experience because watching nicely done cut scenes is somehow tedious?
Gaming of today has become too impulsive and impatient. and thats why gems like XIII which require patience will never be liked.
Watching cutscenes are fine and I don't think anyone has a problem with that in fact it may be hard to believe but other successful JRPGs has cutscenes and they're selling very well even with more sequels and so forth on the way.
MegaTen games need more patience than XIII and is alot more irritating to play than XIII but they aren't getting hated in fact they're getting more and more popular, its just XIII that sucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum