StormHammer Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 I just read another article at GS where they give a brief insight to Warren Spector's view on these issues. It's an interesting read, and it raised some questions in the dank, detritus-filled alleyways of my mind... Considering the wealth of sequels in development...and the number of sequels dominating the charts...do you think sequels should continue to be developed? I mean...should there be a point at which a developer/publisher should turn around and say...we made games X, Y and Z about these particular characters in this universe...and now it's time to move on? Final Fantasy is on number 11...the Sims seems to have an expansion pack every week, and most sports titles seem to have a yearly edition...and Lara Croft keeps coming back. Should that kind of trend continue? In the article they highlight the risks in new ventures, and the current market trend of 'going safe' with stuff that sells. Does it stifle creativity? I think it must, to a certain extent, if you are working within some fixed parameters. For example, if you buy game A, then I know I as a gamer expect certain features and gameplay elements to be carried over into game B in that series. At the same time...there has to be something innovative to capture the imagination... Lastly...but in the same vein...should more developers pursue licenses to make games within the framework of existing Intellectual Properties (IP's)? For example, we've seen a lot of crossovers from comic-book heroes and movies to computer games. Should that trend continue, and become a main focus of game developers? Or should they still strive to develop and market IP's of their own, which may make the crossover to other media? All of these issues are pertinent to the survival of the game industry, and I was wondering if anyone else had any thoughts on it... EDIT - added the link to the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katarn07 Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Take the DF/JO series. I loved the first one. Loved the next one and its expansion. Pissed at LEC for their failure at JO. Hope they make one more and correct their wrongs, then come up with something new and close the story of Kyle. Games with a story and having the characters continue is what makes a sequel good. But after they ruin it with new engines and characters and poorly written stories, either move on, or make one last one to correct their wrongs from all the feedback people give on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 I dont like sequal. Every first game of series is usually great, because there's total artistic freedom. Most sequal usually, not always though, dont have much artistic freedom,and so it usually becomes a rehash of the previous game(JO comes to mind in a bad way, Baldurs Gate II though was a successful sequal,though, but then again,Bioware is great at making stories..). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nova_wolf Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Unless the seuqel is far from a sequel (FF series, Quake series), then your options are kinda limited, and os it can be tough to beat what may well have been rocking to begin with. But that is not to say that it is not impossible... Eg:..... Err.... someone elp me out here..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoguePhotonic Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 I like to see another when it's a good game...like resident evil...I have always liked those games....I buy all of them..... as long as the game stays good they should make more...but games like tomb raider went down hill...1 and 2 I loved then all downhill....they stopped having mostly tombs and more city's and ****...I hated that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.