Recently there have been several disappointing sequels that have killed game series entirely. Games this gen are starting to run dry. Next-Gen consoles are on the edge of reality and it’s time for some new series to win gamers’ hearts.
this article made good points....and while I mostly agree I would like to see some next gen sequels....tlou being one of them. but yeah games like AC and cod come out too much some will not like it but mario its getting to much attention and the new wiiu Mario thats coming soon looks to be bland. Nintendo needs a new hero badly. the god of war its also slipping a bit... but I would like another deus ex or crono cross/trigger sequel. its a mixed bag but yeah exciting new heros would be great.
As long as there is high demand for those games, there is no way in hell the publisher will say "alright, I think we milked them too much. lets stop making sequels". especially mario, the series has bin going for +25 years now with great sales. there's no way that train is slowing down.
I could also live without more CoD or AC. Sequels CAN be good but most of the time it's just the same in green. I'm way more interested in new IP's but of course, it's harder to develop something good out of nothing.
I'm not buying a Next Gen Console think thinking about some da** Indie Game! I mean seriously! I want the next greatest game that can be played for months! So, if an Indie game doesn't have the staying power of Minecraft, go away, you're a side show and not a focus of my Next Gen money.
"One of the most disappointing recent sequels is Dead Space 3. It took out everything that made Dead Space scary." That's not because it was a sequel, it's because they made different design choices at the very core of the game, changing its identity (according to this short statement, and others I've heard). The idea for continuing a series is not the problem in this case. Note that I only finished DS1 so I'm not sure just how much they changed DS3, although the demo was kind of dull. "After the sixth or so Call of Duty I feel that there could be more elements on the playing field. I would definitely like to see more innovation in genres all across the board next-gen." There is a difference between saturating the market with a product and a general sequel, in my opinion. I think the Witcher 3 will do great, as well as some other sequels that come out next gen. However, overloading the industry with a specific product year after year could easily hurt it later on (even if you are making a ton of money at present time). "Indie Devs are Being Embraced" Sorry, but a 5-10 dollar downloadable game will in no way stop me from buying a game like The Witcher 3, and I don't think it will for many other gamers either. Not saying such Indie games are bad, far from it (in some cases), but it's a different experience for me and they don't generally compete with each other. "The point I’m trying to get across is that console games need to innovate if they want to keep gamers interested. Why should I buy a video game console when I can just get a PC?" Not sure where this rather divisive piece comes into play. Sequels appear for PC titles just like they do for consoles. Seems like a statement to cause needless arguments, in my opinion.
Or Dead Space 3 was just a shitty game like it is. Scares, and tense moments were forced, the weapon crafting was neat but done so poorly the game was a breeze on any difficulty, any form of survival was mocked and thrown out the window, YOU HAD TO PAY FOR THE ENDING, worst love triangle in the history of story telling, forced co-op (Yes it was, it literally impeded on level design), space exploration was thrown out as one of the fantastic concepts and not once was it ever better than what we were told to expect, or expanded upon, the setting on the planet was horrid, and out of place, the story took a turn for the worse with the scale they shot for(And that scale increase was for the dude-bro crowd. Honestly could have been much simpler and it would have been much better), the cover system and combat rolling was completely broken, micro-transactions, extending grind time with scavenger bots so they could shorten it with a DLC, an obsessive and random fascination with collectibles this time around (of course they serve no purpose than to pad gameplay). Shall I go on? It was a BAD sequel, I wasn't used to the scares from Dead Space 1/2, 3 was just bad. If I was used to it the concept and story in the first two games wouldn't send chills down my spine still. We need to take a stand against these crappy games so we can stop getting this shovel-ware most developers think is acceptable. We do this, the entire community will benefit from it. Stop laying down like sheep and taking these crappy sequels, you can make developers change, even console makers.
I disagree. I'd say that it (regarding DS3) is because it was a sequel. It could have been a great game.. named something completely different. You just don't take what MAKES a game and decide to cut all those features.
"You just don't take what MAKES a game and decide to cut all those features" That's pretty much what I was saying when I wrote "it's because they made different design choices at the very core of the game, changing its identity"... That doesn't necessarily have to do with the fact they made a sequel. It has to do with the fact that the sequel happened to be a different style of game.
Next article. 4 reasons why sequels will sell well on next gen consoles.
This made me lol, because it's so true XD +Funny
David Jaffe went on a rant via Twitter recently about pandering to the macho/bro audience. It didn't work for any of the games that tried to do that. Why do developers keep trying that? When a game embraces what it truly is, then it grows an audience. Just look at Skyrim.
you know most of these franchises that go on to be stupidly successful start on pc. To me it states that it was never created to appeal to a wide audience but to a niche hardcore audience. Some developers continue to build on what made it successful. Some lose their way completely and take the franchise with them. Call Of Duty Battlefield Elder Scrolls Grand Theft Auto Rainbow Six The Witcher Fallout Metro
You're very incorrect on some of those. Call of Duty is more popular on 360, GTA got its start on Playstation 2, and then don't forget that the PS3 also has many more exclusives, and high sellers such as Assassins Creed series are higher sellers on PS3. And Halo and Gears of War are examples of series started on 360. The point is that tons of games start on PS3 and 360.
Actually you're both wrong about GTA, it started on PS1. PS1 had 3 GTA games, GTA, GTA 2, and GTA: London 1969
Only call of duty and metro lost their way imo.
self correction: GTA 1 started on both pc/ps1 so that made all of us wrong. All the other titles started off exclusive to PC
The 2 sequels that will sell me on next gen would be beyond good and evil 2 and prince of persia 2
2 reason because list sucks: - List. - Sucks.
Cod will prove you wrong year in and year out...
Sad but true.
The thing about COD, though, is that is still stays true to what it is.. Most sequels try to change what they are and just damage themselves.
Call of Duty is Call of Duty, it doesn't try to pander to new demographics, it doesn't shake things up for the sake of shaking things up, it doesn't alienate a chunk of its fan base in order to try new things. Call of Duty will adapt and change when its target demographics stops buying it, until then, it will continue to be what it currently is; an arcade arena twitch shooter set in a modern setting, outfitted with a serviceable 6-8 hours long action packed campaign, that sells millions of copies every single year. People on the internet often say that Activision should stop Call of Duty, or skip a year, for every year skipped, it would mean around a billion dollars in sales. Other say that Activision should completely change Call of Duty, but that would only anger its current fan base. Believe it or not, there's a reason Call of Duty sells so well, and it's not only advertising; it's a particular game, that some this generation have tried to emulate, and failed miserably at doing so. So yes mafia, Call of Duty, among other series, will prove that sequels can still sell next-gen, for as long as they stay true to their roots and their fan's expectations.
Nailed it, bro. Couldn't have said it better myself :) +Well Said
Agreed. I hate when people say COD should be more like bf. It would no longer be COD and I would stop buying it like I stopped buying bf.
The same could be said about Assassins creed. Six games in six years.
one game doesn't prove your point
Assassins creed BF 4,5 6 Uncharted 4 Infamous Second Son killzone Shadow Fall TLOU sequel Dead rising 3 Halo 4 Arkham series Should I go on? or are you satisfied sir?
Of course sequels will sell well next gen. Complete rubbish.
Um. As disappointing as M:OM was, the Metroid franchise has a much better chance at making a comeback than Dead Space and Dragon Age. The Wii U might have some new ideas for Metroid.
I hope COD doesn't sell well.
Even if COD stops selling, it doesn't mean that the more "creative" games are all of a sudden are gonna get attention. The industry will just look for another IP (at least one with a decent shot at being the next big thing) to popularize. Besides, "creative" games have historically suffered from poor marketing and appeal.
I'd say there have been a few exceptions in the past couple of years (I.E: Journey), but you're right.
Maybe most 3rd party games sure but Sony 1st and 2nd party games will sell just fine. GT7, Uncharted 4, If ever a Last of Us 2, Beyond 2 if ever and so on.