How Soon is Too Soon for a Game Sequel?

The game industry is turning into more of a drug dealer than and entertainment provider -- hookin' gamers up with their fix until something dies.

[kyl277]

1 year

[InTheKnow]

.
A video game is like a television series except condensed into a one release. If you don't like the latest installment, don't buy it. The don't buy comment was for those that like waiting years for another installment.

@Kyl, Sorry, I didn't know you were being sarcastic and thought you agreed with the 1 year you posted.

Multi-player adds numerous hours and can actually last for years as can be seen from games like Halo 3 and MW2. Just because some one is playing a game today doesn't mean they will be playing in a year or 2 or 5. COD is striking gold right now because the same gamers are buying it year after year. It will all come to an end as those gamers move on and the casuals become more hardcore and push another title to the top.

[kyl277]

I never said I didn't like it but 1 year is too little time.

A television series lasts from many many hours while tons of games these days last 6 hours. When Max Payne was released people thought 10 hours was too short and a game like Deus Ex could last you 15-25 hours.

It's funny what gamers think is acceptable these days.

[gypsygib]

Yep, 1 year just means essentially the same gameplay and graphics with different environments and minor tweaks.

The only games I don't mind yearly installments from are sports games because minor tweaks mean completely different gameplay.

[WildArmed]

I think it's important to differentiate between sequel time and development time.

Regardless of what I think of CoD-franchise, it's important to note that each game has at-least a 2 year dev time.
That's why they trade off CoD between Treyarch and IW.

Now, if you consider the franchise Resistance.
R:FoM and R2 were released two years apart.
But it's important to note, that the dev. time and resources were not allocated to R2 alone in those two years.
They were working on Rachet and Clank, which was release between R:FoM and R2.

I'm just trying to make a point that it's not the time between the sequels that matter, it's the resources and time put into them by the developer.

[kookie]

COD

[Etseix]

fixed*

[Schism20]

1 year is fine as long as its quality. Just look at AC brotherhood that game came out a year after and it was great.

[gypsygib]

IMO, I've never played a "great" Assassins Creed. They're always cool for 3-5 hrs (cause it a world you'll never see) then you realize the combat is noob-skilless and the mission are lacking in excitement.

You don't even need to assassinate, you can massacre everyone easily like Rambo. Hitman had better assassination gameplay.

[RedPawn]

I heard this is what really kills Dragon Age 2.

[Kran]

Origins and II were like 18 months apart. :/ Thats long enough.

[WildArmed]

I think he was considering the time between their ME-release and DA-release.

Bioware has been juggling games alot, You get ME or DA every year, heck, this year we got DA2, and in the fall ME3..
both from bioware.

In terms of development time / resources, it does bring up a few questions.

[Sharingan_no_Kakashi]

18 months I think is about right.

[bumnut]

Agreed, but I'd say 2 years for an RPG.

[no_more_heroes]

the polar opposite to how long its taking Kingdom Hearts 3 to get here.

[DelbertGrady]

It completely depends on the quality of the sequel.

[IHateYouFanboys]

theres no time limits for too soon - if the sequel justifies its release by being significantly different and as good or better than the previous game then i dont care if it comes out only 6 months after the previous game. i just care about the game, not how long it took or how quick its development was. but if it took 3+ years then it had better be good.

[xtremexx]

EVERY F**KING YEAR!!!!! *Cough* COD *Cough*

[bumnut]

They would release them every 6 months if they could get away with it.

[xtremexx]

lol

[gypsygib]

2-3 years is perfect. Shorter over saturates the game and longer is just frustrating, especially with unfinished story lines...AHEM...Half-Life.

Where the Fk is the next Half-Life. It like the best SP FPS ever made and it skipped (hid away like a coward) a generation.

All those Steam billions have made Gabe..uh..not fat.... but complacent...yeah. Seriously, I think he's terrified to compete with the current FPS market for some unknown reason. I don't know why either, 1 out of a gazzilion FPS games this gen had a great story (Bioshock) the rest were all MP centric.

Gabe release the next Half-Life, please.

No one is expecting COD sales, that game's popularity just makes no sense - it's McDonalds., Half-Life is filet mignon.

[humbleopinion]

Time not important. Only life important

[madpuppy]

There should be enough time between sequels that DLC and support warrants it's value. Left for Dead 1 and 2 are an excellent example of being way to close together. there were a lot of L4D owners pretty angry when L4D2 was announced and released.