Slashdot Mirror
Unlike Movie-Goers, Gamers Love Sequels?
Thanks to EvilAvatar for pointing to a Seattle Post-Intelligencer article discussing how gaming sequels tower above most movie sequels in terms of desirability and quality. The piece argues of movies: "Sequels suck, right? For every 'Godfather 2' and 'Aliens' there are hundreds of horrendous rehashes clogging the video store shelves. Hollywood wants your money; quality control be damned", before contrasting them with games: "Fans chomp at the bit for a few screenshots from the next installment of beloved games such as 'Half-Life' and 'Halo.' When the games arrive they rarely disappoint. Gaming franchises get better and better while their celluloid cousins go straight to video." Valve's Gabe Newell also comments on feedback for sequels: "We are super-involved in the community that has sprung up around our games. Whether through e-mail, the forums, the fan sites, or calling my house at 3 a.m. in the morning, we have a pretty good idea what they are thinking. And it absolutely factors into our decisions."
"Aliens" (Alien 2) was one of those weak sequels. The first one was a masterpiece of horror and the Giger set design really sets it apart. Compared to this, the second one was a pallid echo that turned into a rehash of "Terminator" at the end. Based on "Aliens", I steered totally clear of the 3rd and 4th movies.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I considered the matrix 2 and 3, as well the star wars prequels to be borderline blasphemous. All the while I'm waiting for the next Legend of Zelda to be released...I'm just finishing up the windwaker now. This will make me sad when the game ends...what will I get?
/* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
The first two are usually very similar, the third is something entirely different/better.
This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
I think first of all it depends entirely on the sequel in question.
Personally, however, I really do not like sequels at all. Unless the studio in question can create a unique addition to the franchise instead of more of the same, I will always shy away from repeated outings under a single title. If I detect that the developer or publisher is being cheap and trying to cash in, they can kiss my money good bye
Like I said at first though, depends on what it is; "Tomb Raider" (and the more recent addition: "Hitman" series) being the worst case scenario, while, say Halflife 2, which is obviously an honest attempt to reach new heights, is an example of a sequel I might buy (too bad about the steam technology).
Alien 1 and Terminator were masterpieces
How do you make "Aliens"? Simple. Mine "Terminator 1". Take the Linda Hamilton character, have Sigourney play her. Take the factory that destroys the Terminator and re-fashion it into a suit. Then finish off the termin... er, monster, sorry.
Now, where can I get Pong 101, the final brain death.
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
When you've got the first game, a lot of the effort can be reused for the sequel - especially the engine and graphics / sound. You've read reviews of the first title and got feedback, so you know exactly what people liked and what they hated. Even just fixing a few hundred lines of code (say, changing the way the player chooses the active weapon) can make the game dramatically better. And it's probably a good game, if a sequel is considered. You know what you need to do to make it at least as good as the first one, and you probably will.
With a movie, you want the same characters in a different setting, with the same feel and a different plot twist. You want it fresh enough so that viewers aren't bored. You can't let them carry over their saved games from the first title.
Bottom line: sequels make more sense for media that relies far more on technology than on artistic merit.
You are probably going to buy Halo 2 because you enjoyed Halo 1 and are expecting a better version of "more of the same". In contrast, you don't go to "Batman 5" expecting a version of "Batman 1" to see the same battle between Bats and the Joker with the latest new effects added that they didn't have in 1989.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Sequels are a great way for developers to take a great existing game and make it even greater - as long as the game itself evolves and doesn't feel like an expansion pack ie. GTA:VC, Advance Wars 2. A sequel needs to bring a lot more to the table than just more missions, and it must fix the most common complaints/bugs from the previous game.
i can't wait for duke nukem: forever...
Take a look at these sequels. They were very similar to their predesessors, with graphical updates or other updates and changes that keep it very similar in overall feel to the winning original's formula. And in doing so, they were hugely fun and entertaining:
Doom 2
Madden Football series (and most other "annual" sports games)
Mortal Kombat 2,3
Warcraft II
Commander Keen games
King's Quest games
Battlefield: Vietnam
Super Mario Bros to SMB: The Lost Levels ("SMB2" in japan - almost identical game but new maps)
When you make a sequal to a program, you can take all the original code and either leave it, or make it better (no programmer purpously makes it worse) (any effing trolls even think of suggesting MS does can go impale themselves on an iron poker) thus making the minimum quality the same as the original. Movie making, you have to start from scratch on the sequal for the story (games in general dont require a story to be good, coughMiyamoto) So the quality can go down unlike programs/games
In an interactive situation(like a game), being in a familiar setting/knowing familiar characters/objects is an advantage, as it reinforces the "I can do this" feeling, important as you start a game. This is especially visible in games with online communities, where each player can build something, either his reputation(most combat games), or some sort of character(Diablo II), or a collection of objects(The Sims and similar games).
Most sequels/expansion packs allow you to improve what you've already built. And since expansion packs reuse game engines, your investment in the expansion usually comes either a little cheaper(you pay less for an expansion) or you get more game for your money(you get the game, AND the expansion, which is less than two games, usually)
Watching a movie isn't a "challenge" except for the odd movie about investigation(where the plot is the challenge, but your actions aren't as much your responsability as in a game(you connect plot elements you're given, but you can't see them in more detail, etc...), and your investment is always a full movie ticket... You don't get a "frequent movie fan" type ticket that costs less if you went to see the other movie. Games also get played longer(not many people still go to a movie that came out the time diablo ii was released, yet the online us east item trading is still doing brisk business)
So basically, it's easier to make a quality game sequel from the point of view of the consumer(who gets value from owning two games) than from the producer(who gets a little bit less from an expansion than a truly new game, but also can find ways to invest less).
The SMB2 in America isn't an SMB at all, but rather a hack of Doki Doki Panic. The real SMB2 is almost exactly like the first one (which, incidentally, is why Nintendo was afraid of releasing it over here).
Rob
A scan through the thousands of postings on the "Half-Life 2" boards at www.gamefaqs.com reveals titles like: "that means im happy," "is it a hoax or is hl2 final almost here???" "Anger ... Rage ... Hate," "Very very VERY ANNOYING BUG!" and "I Feel Like Going Insane!!!!"
Funny stuff. I can almost believe that Pong beat River City Ransom on their "best game ever" poll (not to mention that lamer from Shenmue beating Guybrush Threepwood in their "best character ever" poll some years ago).
Rob
P.S. I had to edit the quotes because of the junk filter. Haw haw haw!
I prefer Aliens (marine vs. Aliens!) over Alien (slower pace and scary), but both movies are awesome.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Fucking every game that comes out anymore is a remake or a sequel. There's nothing TO anticipate except for sequels.
Quite frankly it's annoying, and this gamer hasn't bought a video game in over two years and hasn't played one to completion since 1999.
It's all recycled trite and if you're buying into it then it's your own damn fault.
I reckon people avoid sequel movies because in general they're by a new director, and hence the style and substance will be quite different.
I think the point with video games is that *most* of the time, sequels are produced by the same company / team. You can be fairly sure that if the first game was really good, then the follow-up will be good too.
I think that if Valve decided to produce a game that wasn't called "half-life 2" but with the same gameplay emphasis, then people would be just as eager to play it.
We don't like game sequels, we like good games.
We don't hate movie sequels, we hate bad movies.
When game sequels become nothing more than milking a cash-cow name, we won't like them.
When movie sequels stop being nothing more than milking a cash-cow name, we'll like them.
How much money do these people get paid to give us this "enlightenment?"
Therefore, in movies, we wish to see something fresh, something new, and not the same shit we saw before.
Contrariwise, in games we are happy to see the same successful thing we saw before, only brought up to date with the latest technology.
It would appear that the relatively small game development houses know something that the film industry giants don't.
The Hollywood behemoths can't compete with the gaming company guerrillas because they've forgotten who pays their bills. Fans get a nod at test screenings, but the movie already has been made. The most that's going to happen is a new edit.
Is the author honestly suggesting that movies be made with the same degree of consumer feedback as games? Movies are bad enough when the script has passed through five sets of hands who all think they know best. How could 500 or 5000 possibly be better?
The author misses the point that the vast majority of community feedback on games is about gameplay, not plot or character development. I doubt many people on the WoW boards are upset because the Horde backstory isn't fleshed out enough.
We are super-involved in the community that has sprung up around our games. Whether through e-mail, the forums, the fan sites, or calling my house at 3 a.m. in the morning...
I have emailed Game several times, and recieved a reply almost every time (1 didnt get a reply). He's a really funny guy who delivers information straight out with a good amount of wit. Here's a sample:
Me:
I've noticed lately that you (read: Valve Software) are affiliating with 2 canadian based businesses (Softimage in Quebec and ATI in Ontario). Not to generate a conspiracy, but could this be a sign of things to come (Valve software moving to Canada?), or do canadians just kick ass with the technology playground?
Gabe:
Where do you think the G-Man is from?
Not exactly the information I was seeking - but it made me laugh for a few minutes.
As for calling him at 3am - Its on my todo list.
Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
Then look at the second one 'Aliens'. First 15 minutes of the movie and Marines are going into the base to explore. What happens? About half of them are wiped out... most of which are equipped with pistols... how do they escape? Jump into the car and drive out. Fairly exciting, but not very scary after seeing Predator. The rest of the movie turned into a slow paced 'run-for-your-lives!' type of movie. The (leftover) Marines were armed with assault rifles and the oversized Smart Gun, so there wasn't much fear for the characters when they're holding larger than life guns. And when Ripley met the Alien Queen for the first time? Lets see, heroine of the previous movie armed with a flamethrower, a belt of rifle grenades, and an assault rifle. Yeah, I wonder if she's going to escape that encounter... Oh and lets not forget the final fight scene. Ripley in a power suit as well as the strength to hold her breath against the vacuum of space vs. one Alien Queen.
Personally, I like sequels, as long as it doesn't interfere with original. I'm a little worried about EverQuest II coming out for that reason -- I don't want it pulling away current EverQuest players, making the game less fun to play -- but I'm sure it'll end up like Asheron's Call and AC 2 in the long run.
Besides that though, I look forward to sequels all the time, mainly to reexperience what I first got with the original. The major sequels on my list that I'm currently waiting for are: Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Spiderman 2, and Star Wars 3. If the first thing catches the line, the second is sure to pick up.
"Instant gratification takes too long." - Carrie Fisher
Of course, it is arguable that a game sequel is really a "known quantity," but that's a different discussion...
He decided to just watch the government, and kind of scale it down to size, and run his life that way. --Laurie Anderson
Everytime this guy does an interview, HL2 goes back a month/Alternatly it's not done because all he does is give interviews.
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
Whatever, steam is great! Like any software, it was buggy when first coming out, and they went final too soon, but right now it's pretty damn sweet, with-auto, while you sleep, updates, and lots of great new features. The friends network is still down a lot, but it's a cool ingame feature too. Because of steam, I'll have HL2 the second it comes out, already installed on my computer.
In my opinion computer game sequels are almost always better and movie sequels are almost always worse.
The reasons are obvious to anybody who's played computer games and watched movies for years. In the case of a computer game the developer receives feedback on the original game, gets feature requests, tweak requests, etc. and eventually uses this feedback to develop a second, even better game. Also don't forget that the developers are fans themselves so they want nothing more than to improve on their original game. Plus, of course, the leaps and bounds technology takes on the processing front enables developers to add more eye-candy - which is always better.
In the case of movies well... Technology plays a part but only so much. Better special effects won't help a movie. Movies suffer from the fact that it is the PLOT that needs to develop, not the amount of eye-candy on every printed cell. Sequels are often worse because they're usually a practice of repetition rather any form of development. Unfortunately movie bosses don't see that so they keep churning out crap every year. I really hope that the same doesn't happen to games.
Yuioup
..and applied it to his movies. If he had included even a tenth of the things people wanted to see in the prequels, or thought they would see, or had speculated about...these movies would have been insanely incredible.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Wing Commander
:)
2 was basically the same as 1 so it didn't really get better just consistent 3 hower was the best game of the series, even without Mark Hamill. After that sequelitis set in big time. 4 was a let down, Armada rasised the bar back a little, all and all was little more than a blip.
Diablo
2 was awesome, but really just a very large expansion and extention of 1's concepts.
Warcraft
Just keeps getting better...
C&C
The first is still the best of course after the number of expansions I'm not sure it had anywhere to go.
Quake
Quake 1 still holds a special place in my heart, 2 and 3 didn't really thrill me that much. Of corse its probably because 2/3 never could give me the same excitement as Quake 1 team Fortress 2fort4
Unreal
The Direct sequel Unreal 2 was a complete let down, it didn amanage to capture any of the thrill and excitement that I had in the original. The Unreal tournements have been great I loved the first. 2003 brought some great new game play modes to the table, and so far 2004 is rocking me big time, each is really just an incremental improvment, however I'm excited by where Epic is going next with this. I am kinda hoping that we might see a real Unreal single player Sequel from themsome day that goes back to the original story.
Doom
1 & 2 and the various incarnations were all the same game, 3 remains to be seen is it something truely revolutionary, or Doom 1 with prettier Pictures.
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
is available on DVD (with commentary!) in the cheap DVD bin at my local supermarket. I can understand kid's movies having bunches of direct-to-video sequels ( I think there's something like 8 The Land Before Time movies) but that there's a The Skulls 4 (and by inference, 2 and 3) just boggles me.
You mean like how Doom 1 and Doom 2 are so different, yet Doom 3 returns to its roots in Doom 1? :-)
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!