Do we even need sequels? I mean, I'm all for them, but are they good for the industry? Sequelitis stifles creativity in a bad way imo.
Sometimes things should just END.
Franchises tell gamers what to expect. Ideally, they provide more of a good thing, while presenting a chance to fix issues players had with the original. In that sense, they're usually good for the industry.
Personally I love a good series. Assassin's Creed is a good example for me. I like that from game to game they change the setting and add or expand on certain things. They even alternate between two different development houses between games in the series.
Same here. While I don't think every franchise needs sequels, most do benefit. It's not as simple as sequels = lacking creativity. If your story is done and you have no ideas, then don't force it (hello, Mass Effect Andromeda). But otherwise, a sequel is up for consideration.
Sometimes, franchises use a serialized narrative that necessitates sequels (Trails, Shenmue, Yakuza, Resident Evil).
Others use the franchise to give players a general genre expectation, while changing their setting and subtly tweaking mechanics with almost every new game to keep things fresh (Fire Emblem, Tales).
The worst sequels are those that have become unrecognizable due to lack of confidence in the franchise formula itself. How did Shining go from a legitimate strategy RPG to a C-list action JRPG? What the fuck was Banjo and Kazooie Nuts and Bolts? Trend-chasing kills franchises.
It is like channel drift on new TV stations, the WoW template for MMOs, starting subscription or B2P and ending up F2P, the way AC has moved away from its unique gameplay to bring in what might be called more RPG like elements. It revolves around the idea that there is a best way to entertain, one which will please the most audience. That idea works fine when making cars, not entertainment, you end up with a mishmash of styles or sterility of innovation.
I'm not exactly in love with ACs new open world RPG style. That said, I think any genre can benefit from RPG mechanics, intelligently applied.
I just think that ACs RPG mechanics needed to be less combat/damage and more utility/stealth oriented. It worked for Deus Ex - there's no reason why it shouldn't have worked for AC.
I agree with you indeed any game could potentially benefit from the gameplay mechanics of any genre. The problem is that we don't have a free form, experimental approach. What we have is decisions based on what seems to work well in other games, or gaming genres, which are then shoe horned into every game. AC was not a RPG at all, action adventure perhaps, with a unique and much copied playstyle.
And taking up what you said, what would fit AC better in gameplay development, combat or stealth? AC obviously leans to stealth, its not Warriors Creed after all!
I wouldn't go that far. I'm not a fan of forced stealth segments in non-stealth games, forced platforming segments in non-platforming games, or forced racing segments in non-racing games. A lot of my worst gaming memories are of my progress being locked behind my competence in a completely unrelated genre.
Hell, recently, I got really mad at Trails in the Sky 3rd Chapter for making my 100% completion run impossible just because I'm not good at Poker. Not cool, game. Not cool.
Would it not be better to have all sorts of gameplay keeping the game fresh rather than worrying about achievements (at least I think that's what you mean). That said, some gameplay can feel totally out of place with the rest of the game so you can go too far.
Do we even need sequels? I mean, I'm all for them, but are they good for the industry? Sequelitis stifles creativity in a bad way imo.
Sometimes things should just END.
Franchises tell gamers what to expect. Ideally, they provide more of a good thing, while presenting a chance to fix issues players had with the original. In that sense, they're usually good for the industry.
Personally I love a good series. Assassin's Creed is a good example for me. I like that from game to game they change the setting and add or expand on certain things. They even alternate between two different development houses between games in the series.
Same here. While I don't think every franchise needs sequels, most do benefit. It's not as simple as sequels = lacking creativity. If your story is done and you have no ideas, then don't force it (hello, Mass Effect Andromeda). But otherwise, a sequel is up for consideration.
Sometimes, franchises use a serialized narrative that necessitates sequels (Trails, Shenmue, Yakuza, Resident Evil).
Others use the franchise to give players a general genre expectation, while changing their setting and subtly tweaking mechanics with almost every new game to keep things fresh (Fire Emblem, Tales).
The worst sequels are those that have become unrecognizable due to lack of confidence in the franchise formula itself. How did Shining go from a legitimate strategy RPG to a C-list action JRPG? What the fuck was Banjo and Kazooie Nuts and Bolts? Trend-chasing kills franchises.
It is like channel drift on new TV stations, the WoW template for MMOs, starting subscription or B2P and ending up F2P, the way AC has moved away from its unique gameplay to bring in what might be called more RPG like elements. It revolves around the idea that there is a best way to entertain, one which will please the most audience. That idea works fine when making cars, not entertainment, you end up with a mishmash of styles or sterility of innovation.
I'm not exactly in love with ACs new open world RPG style. That said, I think any genre can benefit from RPG mechanics, intelligently applied.
I just think that ACs RPG mechanics needed to be less combat/damage and more utility/stealth oriented. It worked for Deus Ex - there's no reason why it shouldn't have worked for AC.
I agree with you indeed any game could potentially benefit from the gameplay mechanics of any genre. The problem is that we don't have a free form, experimental approach. What we have is decisions based on what seems to work well in other games, or gaming genres, which are then shoe horned into every game. AC was not a RPG at all, action adventure perhaps, with a unique and much copied playstyle.
And taking up what you said, what would fit AC better in gameplay development, combat or stealth? AC obviously leans to stealth, its not Warriors Creed after all!
I wouldn't go that far. I'm not a fan of forced stealth segments in non-stealth games, forced platforming segments in non-platforming games, or forced racing segments in non-racing games. A lot of my worst gaming memories are of my progress being locked behind my competence in a completely unrelated genre.
Hell, recently, I got really mad at Trails in the Sky 3rd Chapter for making my 100% completion run impossible just because I'm not good at Poker. Not cool, game. Not cool.
Would it not be better to have all sorts of gameplay keeping the game fresh rather than worrying about achievements (at least I think that's what you mean). That said, some gameplay can feel totally out of place with the rest of the game so you can go too far.
If I buy an action game, I don't want a stealth segment, much less a mandatory one.
If I want a change of pace, I'll swap games. Individual games don't need to change genres to "keep things fresh."
Do we even need sequels? I mean, I'm all for them, but are they good for the industry? Sequelitis stifles creativity in a bad way imo.
Sometimes things should just END.
Franchises tell gamers what to expect. Ideally, they provide more of a good thing, while presenting a chance to fix issues players had with the original. In that sense, they're usually good for the industry.
Personally I love a good series. Assassin's Creed is a good example for me. I like that from game to game they change the setting and add or expand on certain things. They even alternate between two different development houses between games in the series.
Same here. While I don't think every franchise needs sequels, most do benefit. It's not as simple as sequels = lacking creativity. If your story is done and you have no ideas, then don't force it (hello, Mass Effect Andromeda). But otherwise, a sequel is up for consideration.
Sometimes, franchises use a serialized narrative that necessitates sequels (Trails, Shenmue, Yakuza, Resident Evil).
Others use the franchise to give players a general genre expectation, while changing their setting and subtly tweaking mechanics with almost every new game to keep things fresh (Fire Emblem, Tales).
The worst sequels are those that have become unrecognizable due to lack of confidence in the franchise formula itself. How did Shining go from a legitimate strategy RPG to a C-list action JRPG? What the fuck was Banjo and Kazooie Nuts and Bolts? Trend-chasing kills franchises.
It is like channel drift on new TV stations, the WoW template for MMOs, starting subscription or B2P and ending up F2P, the way AC has moved away from its unique gameplay to bring in what might be called more RPG like elements. It revolves around the idea that there is a best way to entertain, one which will please the most audience. That idea works fine when making cars, not entertainment, you end up with a mishmash of styles or sterility of innovation.
I'm not exactly in love with ACs new open world RPG style. That said, I think any genre can benefit from RPG mechanics, intelligently applied.
I just think that ACs RPG mechanics needed to be less combat/damage and more utility/stealth oriented. It worked for Deus Ex - there's no reason why it shouldn't have worked for AC.
I agree with you indeed any game could potentially benefit from the gameplay mechanics of any genre. The problem is that we don't have a free form, experimental approach. What we have is decisions based on what seems to work well in other games, or gaming genres, which are then shoe horned into every game. AC was not a RPG at all, action adventure perhaps, with a unique and much copied playstyle.
And taking up what you said, what would fit AC better in gameplay development, combat or stealth? AC obviously leans to stealth, its not Warriors Creed after all!
I wouldn't go that far. I'm not a fan of forced stealth segments in non-stealth games, forced platforming segments in non-platforming games, or forced racing segments in non-racing games. A lot of my worst gaming memories are of my progress being locked behind my competence in a completely unrelated genre.
Hell, recently, I got really mad at Trails in the Sky 3rd Chapter for making my 100% completion run impossible just because I'm not good at Poker. Not cool, game. Not cool.
Would it not be better to have all sorts of gameplay keeping the game fresh rather than worrying about achievements (at least I think that's what you mean). That said, some gameplay can feel totally out of place with the rest of the game so you can go too far.
If I buy an action game, I don't want a stealth segment, much less a mandatory one.
If I want a change of pace, I'll swap games. Individual games don't need to change genres to "keep things fresh."
I like games that have different styles of play as long as they're optional styles of play. For instance, Deus Ex games let you choose to either run and gun or sneaky sneak throughout the game. But say, slapping a mandatory stealth level in a DOOM game for example would just break it for me.
Deus Ex kind of falters a bit though when it comes to boss fights. (Or it did with Human Revolution, anyway).
I'm not talking about multiple playstyles though. Multiple approaches to tackling a situation is good.
I'm talking about complete changes in gameplay style for pacebreakers, like the flying courses in Spyro, the motorcycle races in Crash Bandicoot, or mandatory stealth segments in many action games in which you should have no issue taking on all of those enemies. Not a fan.
Yes please, I can almost go back and play them now. I would even just love a good game in the Dragonlance setting.
I would love a modern remake of the Ravenloft games and Pool of Radiance and Curse of the Azure Bonds and Secret of the Silver Blades. Even a modern take on Dungeon Hack would be great.
Wow, Dungeon Hack, now there is a game I have not heard in forever.
Ya know, I could get behind this.
But truth be told, if they made a Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Online (DDO-2) game, that marketed to be based on Original Old School AD&D rules, they could put all that into one very vast, and enjoyable MMO.
I think what killed DDO, was a few factors.
The first was that it was launched into Litigation and IP dispute legal hell. So they started off with almost no traction, and swamped by legal BS.
Then they built the game world in Eberron, which, while not a bad setting it was not as well received as some of the other, more widely known settings.
I think if it got it's chance as a re-make it really could have been a amazing game that would have truly been a contender.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Comments
If I want a change of pace, I'll swap games. Individual games don't need to change genres to "keep things fresh."
I'm not talking about multiple playstyles though. Multiple approaches to tackling a situation is good.
I'm talking about complete changes in gameplay style for pacebreakers, like the flying courses in Spyro, the motorcycle races in Crash Bandicoot, or mandatory stealth segments in many action games in which you should have no issue taking on all of those enemies. Not a fan.
Ya know, I could get behind this.
But truth be told, if they made a Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Online (DDO-2) game, that marketed to be based on Original Old School AD&D rules, they could put all that into one very vast, and enjoyable MMO.
I think what killed DDO, was a few factors.
The first was that it was launched into Litigation and IP dispute legal hell. So they started off with almost no traction, and swamped by legal BS.
Then they built the game world in Eberron, which, while not a bad setting it was not as well received as some of the other, more widely known settings.
I think if it got it's chance as a re-make it really could have been a amazing game that would have truly been a contender.
Total Annihilation
SHOGO: MAD
Daikatana (JUST KIDDING! That game needed to die the death BEFORE it was released)
Unreal needs a better sequel than Unreal 2
Redneck Rampage
Rise of the Triad
Marvel Heroes
The world is going to the dogs, which is just how I planned it!
Sanity: Aiken` s artefact
Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II
Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy
Jedi Knight: Mysteries of the Sith
These 3 games are a highlight for me. You can play couch coop with friends besides being an awesome series.