Are there to many sequals and add ons

[jvd]

Am I the only one that feels there are to many sequals to quickly .

I was flipping through the newest game informer and all i see are sequals , new mgs for the gc , new re for the game cube , new jack and dexter , new gta and other games that we really odn't need more sequals for .

Am I the only one that feels its just to much .

Sure I love mario . But if a mario game would come out every year I would get pretty damn bored of it .

Hell i picked up pso 3 and i played 15 mins and now i an't play anymore .

Am I the only one ?

 

[marconelly!]

I don't care really, as long as the game is good. MGS3 is one sequel I'm really looking forward to, though.

 

[cthellis42]

A sequel is pretty much just a "game in the same genre" with characters and/or style that you recognize. On occasion the story does as well. It would hardly matter if you changed names and models--if the game is good it will stand on its own two feet, no matter who it's related to. Heck, some games even gain distinction on how well they "sequelize" at this point, since it's a common habit and often lackluster.

I don't see how it matters anymore--it's been done forever, and not likely to change. And we should all know by now just what makes a game good.

Press-wise, I think you're seeing results like this, because what games are the most apt to get to get sequels? Good ones. Good games attract the most interest and attention--hence, coverage--and are also the most memorable, since we already have a good experience to compare it to.

 

[London Geezer]

If the game is good enough to stand on its own (see: not rely too much on the license, on the name recognition the prequel generated), then i don't see the problem...

If the first game was REALLY good and the sequel is just "more of the same" then i'm cool with it, but only if the first game didn't get old quickly...

If the sequel offers major increases in technology, and new and exciting gameplay features, it just becomes a "new game with the same characters as the old one"... Which is perfect...

 

[V3]

Sure I love mario . But if a mario game would come out every year I would get pretty damn bored of it.

Not me, I like Mario game, Nintendo can put out one every month, and I wouldn't get bored of it. (Not the RPG variant though , I don't like those)

The only problem is Nintendo hardly put any Mario out, and I've been getting rehash on the GBA, which not a bad thing, but I prefer new games.

However, if it is Zelda or any other games, I would get kinda bored. But the Mario formula, just click with me.

The other, is fighting game genre and Beatmania. I don't mind if there are more sequels to some of those more often.

Hell i picked up pso 3 and i played 15 mins and now i an't play anymore.

I never played the first one on DC for more than 15 mins, I got bored when creating the characters, by the first mission, I just gave up. Stupid game.

 

[sytaylor]

Money making requires safe investment.
Safe investment is in established brands.
Game making requires money.

and repeat...

 

[London Geezer]

Money making requires safe investment.
Safe investment is in established brands.
Game making requires money.

and repeat...

Furtunately for everyone, there's more to it than that, otherwise we'd be playing a new Mario game every 6 months, a new Donkey Kong game every month, Sonic, Street Fighter and all the old "gods"...

Of course we still have EA which will milk money out of old franchises until they rot in hell...

 

[sytaylor]

True they do try and excite gamers with what they want every now and then, by responding to age old shouts, or plea's for the odd PC conversion here or there.

 

[London Geezer]

Oh by the way, a new 2D-old-school-with-exactly-the-same-sprites-as-the-old-ones-Street-Fighter game has just been released.... Now THAT is something even EA wouldn't keep on doing...