uncle bob1405241504 0 Report post Posted July 8, 2005 Has anybody else noticed that sequels seem to be rip-offs of the originals? They offer just a small difference compared to a totally new game. I'm not talking about all sequels, just most of them. Roller Coaster Tycoon Series I love this game, but it seems that you only get a couple of different functions and rides each time you buy the new one. More like expansion don't you think? Age of Empires Again, just a few different buildings, same gameplay nothing different. Driver Two main differences between Driver one and Driver 2 and that is new objectives and you can steal cars. Why doesn't someone bring out an awsome game and 5 expansion packs that introduce some BIG difference in each? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mahanon 0 Report post Posted July 9, 2005 Well sequals of games are usually improvements on the original versions of the game with a few changes to the gameplay, bringing also to the game you might find what you already have listed I is kinda hard to find a sequal to the games you have listed with drastic changes to their sequals unless for intance it is a MMORPG, now these games do constantly get upgrades, expansions, as well as drestic changes, for instance a new continent or new characters. However most of the time you will only see small changes to games because the companies know that it works and people will buy it.Yeah that sums it up... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bl0ckbust3d 0 Report post Posted August 28, 2005 Has anybody else noticed that sequels seem to be rip-offs of the originals? They offer just a small difference compared to a totally new game. I'm not talking about all sequels, just most of them. Roller Coaster Tycoon Series I love this game, but it seems that you only get a couple of different functions and rides each time you buy the new one. More like expansion don't you think? Age of Empires Again, just a few different buildings, same gameplay nothing different. Driver Two main differences between Driver one and Driver 2 and that is new objectives and you can steal cars. Why doesn't someone bring out an awsome game and 5 expansion packs that introduce some BIG difference in each? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The BIG difference you're missing is the fact that they have different things to beat! Roller Coaster Tycoon Series - New maps, rides, stalls, peeps... Driv3r - New cities Age of Empires - Umm... haha nothing really... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
heimdall99 0 Report post Posted October 5, 2005 If you looking for sequels, good examples would be Xenosaga, Devil may Cry, Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil series. Basically a game that uses the same characters and advances the plot from one game to the next, while refering to things that happened in the past games. Games that you listed are more like different versions rather than true sequels. RCT v1, v2, v3, etc. They keep everything the same, just add a few new features, not much different from a regular non-game program.Another type of beast would be FF series, where they might change the number, but change games completely and cannot be called versions, while changing plotlines and characters make them not true sequels either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unimatrix 0 Report post Posted October 5, 2005 I think Spaceballs summed it up with, "Spaceballs 2: the Quest for more money".That pretty well sums up all sequels in any media. Typically in sequels you'll see additions and features that were often stripped from the orginial along with more tweaked and refined systems. Take the first Rainbow 6 game, then Rogue Spear, the RB6-3 on the PC (not the arcadish console versions). Rainbow 6 got the basics right, Rogue Spear expanded and refined graphics, AI, character movements, and the same with RB6-3. Now Halo vs. Halo 2. Let's just say I don't own an xbox to begin with, by one of my co-workers and I will swap Xbox for PS2 for a couple weeks every once in a while. Halo 2 felt like Halo 1 with better graphics and dual weilding. With the weapon changes and in MP, I still like Halo 1 better. Finallly KOTOR 1 was an excellent game. KOTOR 2 felt like it was released about 3 months too early, weak story, buggy as hell. KOTOR 2 defineately had the "Get it out by Christmas" feel. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
abhiram 0 Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Well, some games in which I was really happy with the sequels are: Grand Theft Auto Seriously, Rockstar really improved the game a lot from GTA III to GTA SA. The gameplay, the features and everything are absolutely stunning in SA... makes playing it worth every minute. Half-Life Ok, when I finally got my hands on the complete version of the first Half-Life (that was more than a year after I played Half-life:Uplink) I played it non-stop for 2 complete days. But Half-Life 2 didn't disappoint me either. It was simply great and this time it took me about 4 days. Doom How many people here haven't played the original Doom ? When that game was released, it was a masterpiece. Doom III is in no way similar to the original Doom, but it was fun. Great effects and amazing detail. Castle Wolfenstein Now, this is another one of the orignal Doom era ... remember Wolfenstein 3D? Return to Castle Wolfenstein was cool. It's kinda based on the same plot of Hitler and World War II but still, it's definitely fun playing. No feeling of 'deja vu' in this game But on the other hand .... Max Payne Now, this is one game which I feel was released in a hurry.... Max Payne 2. Of course, the 3D realism and the surround sound places the game miles ahead of the original Max Payne, but overall, it's just the same thing again.... bullet-time, dodge-time and a creepy love story. The ending in the first part was very dramatic, but in the sequel it was terrible. This is one game I felt could have been better. After all, the first part created history with it's slow-motion effects. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sarah81 0 Report post Posted October 6, 2005 Many developers get away with putting out pathetic, barely-changed sequels because we consumers will buy almost anything. So, if we don't want to see really sad and blatant ripoffs anymore, we should rent before we buy, then just not buy the really sorry games. It would take COUNTLESS people doing this (refusing to buy) before developers got the hint, of course, but at least it would save you and me the $49.99 retail price of Yet Another Dumb Game.However: many developers have also come up with some pretty sweet changes/improvements. Rockstar Games as a whole is usually really good about doing something new, instead of repackaging the same old junk and calling it an improvement.Speaking of Rockstar Games: anybody know when "Bully" is supposed to come out? I've been drooling over the potential of that title for MONTHS now! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeigh1405241495 0 Report post Posted October 6, 2005 Completely depends on the game... but then again it would also depend on each person idea of what makes a sequel... personally I consdier most sequels to be more like the expansion packs that we dont see much of anymore... they slowly tricked us into either accepting EP's as 'sequels' or they release tiny packs super often (*cough sims cough*) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted October 6, 2005 Sequels aren't usually suppose to be different from their first one. That's like saying "Oh, this world is first planet Earth. Lets make the sequel planet Pluto for no reason, and make new characters. And while we're at it, why bother calling it a sequel at all?" That's the statement I'd say if something like that were to happen and not make sense. A sequel should always be related to the game in many ways, but give off that excitement you crave for. I don't see anything wrong with a sequel that's like the first part, but slightly different and new storyline if the genre requires it to be so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
