Insomniac Can't Resist Sequels
Sequel-itis is hitting gaming pretty hard this year with almost all of the big releases having some number at the end of their title (with the exception of Little Big Planet, oh how I love you). With the upcoming release of Resistance 2, Insomniac Games CEO Ted Price spoke out on the virtues of sequels, both for developers and for gamers.
"Developers can hit the ground running with sequels. The game's story and art style have a solid base, the tech and tools are stable and the basic gameplay mechanics have gone through plenty of tuning in the first game.It's certainly a liberating experience when you're no longer arguing over the main character's name, or waiting for basic systems to be implemented. The end result is usually a game that's bigger, more polished and has more innovative features than the original game."
It's true, unlike with movies, game sequels are almost always significantly better than the first one. But at the same time, we need developers to create new IPs. Sure it's usually not as polished as a sequel to an established franchise, but the new gameplay innovations are worth the rough edges. Besides, Insomniac wouldn't be promoting Resistance 2 now if it hadn't put in the effort to create Resistance as a new IP in the first place.
Videogame makers bank on sequels [Reuters]
Via [Destructoid]
NaviFairy
Posted to Video Games on 24 October 2008
· Comments (2)
Other stuff like this: insomniac, Resistance 2, sequels
personally, I'm against new IP-itis. something doesn't haven't to be new or innovative to be good. It just has to be good. By the same token, something doesn't have to build on pre-existing material in order to be good. It just has to be good.
That's a good point Hephaestus, but sometimes developers make a game sequel that has no business being a sequel. Final Fantasy games are a good example, since storylines don't carry over, and the combat system changes between most of them. It's just using the name to sell copies at this point.
I'm also still a little bitter about how Nintendo had Rare turn Dinosaur Planet into Star Fox Adventures. It's obvious at some points that the game was supposed to have a different storyline and characters but instead had the Star Fox license shoehorned in.
The most recent offender is Far Cry 2, which though it's a great FPS, has absolutely nothing to do with the first Far Cry and could easily be a new franchise. But instead they called it Far Cry 2 to up sales through name recognition.
I feel like developers sometimes use a sequel as a crutch, and it gives the impression that the developer doesn't have enough confidence that the game is good enough on its own.