Top
210°

4 Reasons Sequels Won’t Sell Well Next-Gen

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.

Read Full Story >>
gamenacho.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Kingthrash3601505d ago

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.

elhebbo161504d ago

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.

ZodTheRipper1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

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.

otherZinc1504d ago

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.

Dr Pepper1505d ago

"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.

UNGR1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

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.

No Way1505d ago

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.

Dr Pepper1505d ago

"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.

BABY-JEDI1505d ago

Next article. 4 reasons why sequels will sell well on next gen consoles.

KillrateOmega1505d ago (Edited 1505d ago )

This made me lol, because it's so true XD

+Funny

WeAreLegion1505d ago

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.

papashango1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

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

KabalsHookblades1504d ago

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.

PSN_ZeroOnyx1504d ago

Actually you're both wrong about GTA, it started on PS1. PS1 had 3 GTA games, GTA, GTA 2, and GTA: London 1969

dcj05241504d ago

Only call of duty and metro lost their way imo.

papashango1504d ago (Edited 1504d ago )

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

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1504d ago
pr0t0typeknuckles1505d ago

The 2 sequels that will sell me on next gen would be beyond good and evil 2 and prince of persia 2