OXCGN:
"Game sequels should always be better than their predecessors. It’s a rule and usually a certainty.
Films must rely on narrative and characterisation for success; two elements that can often be subjective in their effectiveness. If a film has already spent the time introducing the characters and filling in their backstories, a successful sequel can be a daunting task to provide the same intrigue and compelling plotlines.
Games have it a bit easier. Gameplay and usability are the major drawcards, and can be improved much more readily by seeking feedback from the prior game and simply taking out the bad and adding more of the good with some new features sprinkled on top. With each successive title we expect, nay demand, a better experience.
But does this really happen in execution? It’s time to find out as we look at some of the notable games and sequels that have both existed in this generation, and choose our pick of which did it best."
IGN - Assassin's Creed's focus on character-driven storytelling has been buried by its RPG sandbox features, and the series is weaker for it.
A rare W opinion piece from IGN.
IMO, Ubisoft needs to setup two primary AC dev teams. 1 would focus on and release character-driven OG-style AC games for OG fans and the other would continue the current RPG-ified AC style for current fans.
Release by them Bi-annually and alternatively. There'd less fatigue and a boost to quality.
I definitely appreciate 3 more after playing it again in recent years along with the Liberation game. Back when 3 was new I was still riding high on AC2 and Brotherhood so when I played 3 I felt a bit let down. Even the ship battles grew on me.
AC2 - Yes
AC3 - Urm...I don't know
I feel they kind of dropped the ball with AC3 and with the way the story went it just didn't make sense to me at all. I felt it would have made more sense lore wise if they had it so the Red Coats were mostly Assassins and the Templars were mostly the Colonists who wanted this "new world" as a fresh start for their operations, to build a country up they'd have full control of from the start so they manufacture the war as something else while really it's just a front for the Templars vs Assassins.
It just meant that since the Red coats lose the war it explains how the Templars have gained full control of future America and how the Assassins have slowly died out by then. This entire event would have been the turning point of how things went to s**t for the Assassins and how there's not many of them left in the present.
Haythem was a lot more interesting than Connor and he should have been the main Assassin of AC3.
I thought AC2 was the greatest of the series and it is but replaying it recently, I stared to see more flaws in the game. Basically every single mission is an assassination besides a few tailing missions lol. Still, the implementation of all the new mechanics were great. The smoke bombs, disarming guards, story, hidden tombs, swimming, flying machine, multiple locations, etc. it definitely felt a bit more special to me at the time of release though
Dunno about 3, the 1st act was cool, then i couldn't tell you what happens after that. But 2 was so good! The entire acts 1-3 were al memorable, whereas i really couldn't even tell you what happens in any other AC game
Assassin's Creed has been hard done by in the past several years despite its success, and as messy as it could be, it might be time for a reboot.
They already did that in 2017 with origins. I don’t think a reboot is on the cards when Ubisoft is about to go down under lol
I hope the splinter cell remake sees the light of day before the company closes
I doubt they'll be closing, but they are primed to be eaten up by a bigger comp. Also 2017 was nearly a decade ago, it could use another reboot or rather it should just be retired.
Origins was the reboot.
But that also alienated the original AC lovers, abit. Not everybody adores the perma-change of the IP to be vast RPGs.
What I instead propose is, alternate between Valhalla/Shadows type AC RPGs and Mirage/ACII like non-RPG releases.
What is old might feel new again. A new splinter cell with semi open levels but still having a linear structure (not just one giant open world) that have multiple paths to complete the objective but still have stealth be the main priority would feel fresh, especially with modern graphics and military gadgets .
I agree, from anecdotal evidence, all franchises eventually stagnate, it might be a good time to start something new.
"it might be time for a reboot." No it might be time to put this shit to rest for a few yrs. A good 4-5 then come back.
Total franchise reboot. This ac game is basically the hail Mary to keep Ubisoft alive if this fails the share price will be so low they will be forced to sell and likely absorbed into another org as the Ubisoft name carries almost no weight.
Don't get me wrong they will end up selling after ac regardless but it will be the difference of getting the deal they want vs the deal they don't
With many wondering what route the franchise should take next, Assassin's Creed should finally visit the Wild West era.
Tell me how that's going to be significantly different than colonial America. AC is about showcasing different cultures throughout history. They already did Native Americans in AC3, so then just cowboys, outlaws, ranchers, etc? Kinda feel like there's already a game out there that does that really freaking well. Hmmm, maybe the one in the thumbnail?
assassin's creed new york starring luigi as the adjuster taking out bad guys health insurance templars
The comparisons are good and I completely agree with them. It shows that not all sequels aren't always better than their originals.
Some game developers should have thought of a new way to change the game in their sequel and not just make another one to try and make more money.
Why not just make it a different series?
Case in point: the Need for Speed series. The street racing ones are all well and good, but then Shift is something entirely different as is World and the upcoming Hot Pursuit.
The only thing they have in common is cars and 'NFS', probably just to get sales from the name. Especially Hot Pursuit which looks more like Burnout and is by Criterion anyway.
FarCry is another series where the games only share the title and pretty environments.
There are times when it is necessary due to plot changes that have been evolving over time. Such as Splinter Cell.
While many gamers simply wanted another Chaos Theory, that game was really the end of the Sneak/peek/pop style of Sam Fisher.
Things changed in the game world, so the actual game style needed to change as well.
But many gamers can't see that, and simply want repetition, which does not advance any game.
I'll disagree with you on Far Cry REALgamer - the sequel was a completely different beast to the original. There were some really innovative and unique elements added to FC2
Pretty good list, although I think Mass Effect was waaaay better than ME2. But looks like thats just me.