Death Stranding 1 & 2. I mean they are walking simulators anyway. I’m not dissing the game at all. Probably have 500 hours plus in both of them combined.
This entire controversy is from 2020. Spoiler: GOG did not relist the game. Red Candle sold it on their own storefront, and both Steam and GOG retained a tally in the “bends over for CCP” column.
I could not get into Dawn of War 2 and 3 despite pouring thousands of hours into DoW1 and it’s expansions. Why do makers of classic RTS games (looking at you EA) have to f*** with the formula?
Was the same for me too. I remember getting DoW2 and being so disappointed. Then 3 came along… I’ve given up them making a decent game again.
Even that DoW remaster isn’t looking good. I’m holding out until I see the reviews but if they’re only going with AI upscaled textures for £30 then no thanks.
Probably unpopular opinion but Prey is clearly on that list ! Not because the new game was bad, but they just took everything that was interesting and original in the first game, throw it away and just made it another doom-like game :/…
The original Prey wasn’t a GOTY or whatever, it just felt different and something new and original… Something I liked and they just made a total reboot with nothing in common on what made prey original/interesting !
What aspects of the newer Prey make it more like Doom than the older Prey? To me, that’s kinda like saying, “System Shock was just Wolfenstein 3D 🎶 in space 🎶”
I know the atmospheric design is doom like (aliens, weapons, paltforms…etc.) but gameplay mechanics were totally inovative and original (wall walking, portals, spirit walk) and chracter focus was also cool (native american).
I’m not saying Prey 2016 is a Bad game, I just found it sad that they totally changed the franchise spirit 😄
I don’t deny that Old Prey was an innovative game. But stating that everything that wasn’t Doom was stripped out while implying that nothing else was added in feels a bit disingenuous.
I thought the original Prey was boring as hell. It’s not like it didn’t have any interesting features, but the lack of penalty for dying meant that failure is impossible.
Prey isn’t really a franchise at all, just two completely unrelated games with the same name.
The newer one was supposed to be a sequel when it was being made by the original devs, but in the end it’s a completely separate game with no connection to the first.
I don’t think it would be possible for a bad sequel to ruin a game I liked.
Metroid Other M has not ruined previous Metroids for me (its terrible Adam Malkovich depiction doesn’t even register when I’m playing Fusion, since the character has barely any continuity between the two).
Okamiden did not ruin Okami, it just sucked on its own and what little story it tried to change I disregard. I’d replay Okami today in a heartbeat.
Xenoblade Chronicles 2 took a direction I hated, both in style and gameplay, and it made me want to replay XC1. I did. It’s still awesome, though XC3 became my favourite.
And complete opposite of the topic : Baten Kaitos was not bad, but kind of a silly popcorn game to me. Baten Kaitos Origins did not ruin this game : it was so great and flipped the interpretation of the first game so well it made BK better.
You're right that it's hard for a sequel to retroactively ruin a singleplayer game, but they can easily ruin a multiplayer game by killing the original's playerbase.
There are also plenty of cases where the sequel may not ruin the original, but does ruin any future the series could've had. Debatable whether that quite fits OP's question, but it seems to be what most of the replies have talked about.
The first thing is that at one point many years ago we participated in Rocket League’s RLCS. Participation was completely open. We were actually doing quite well until we randomly ran into pro players and got completely demolished. It’s kinda humbling to know that even though you’re part of the top ~1% of players, pro players are still in a totally different league and absolutely unbeatable. Their speed and game sense is so much better than that of any mere mortal, it’s like we weren’t even there. We were probably low Grand Champion around the time, and we got beaten like we would beat Gold ranked players. Personally I don’t mind losing like this, it’s a good learning experience and shows you how much is possible.
At uni I also participated in plenty of LAN parties that had random game competitions. Usually they were games that a lot of us didn’t ever play before. We’d usually start playing the game a few hours in advance to get a feel for it. There I’ve found that I’m quite decent at this usually, but that there are definitely a few people who can get quite decent at a game in 2 hours to the point that they challenge people with casual experience with the game. It as always good fun though, and because I tended to put some effort into it I regularly managed to get into the top 3.
The asset recycling in DA2 was absolute madness. I really tried to like DA:I and finished it once but it was painful at times. Has nothing on common with Dragon Age but its name.
Viconia and Sarevok had no reason to be in BG3 and by choosing to use WOTCs deplorably terrible supplemental product lore as canon Larian has now cemented those character portrayals forever, which was just pure character assassination.
Is it possible that WOTC just utterly suck? Like even playing D&D for real at a table I always thought the wizard’s stuff was kinda boring. Every time our DM did something himself it was awesome.
I don’t play D&D - in fact I don’t play any TTRPG anymore (imagine having friends) - but I’ve heard a lot of criticism about WOTC’s products, yes. A lion’s share of it is about how unhelpful the official adventures are for DMs, but I’ve also heard the writing criticised from time to time.
I’ve heard good things about Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Curse of Strahd remake though.
Creating a d&d campaign is difficult, and publishing it in a way that communicates what needs to be known is tricky. It’s almost the opposite of a novel. In a novel you need to save twists and turns until the end. In a d&d campaign the DM needs to know them all from the start. But you also don’t want to overwhelm someone with too much information. But you don’t want someone who is following the module closely instead of using it as inspiration to “write” themselves into a corner because they didn’t know something would happen in a specific way later.
The main published modules for 5e are all a little different in how they present everything. Some may be better than others for certain DMs and certain groups.
I adore BG3 but yeah. Viconia in particular felt like a big middle finger to fans of the original games. If they wanted to bring back an OG character to be irredeemably evil, Edwin is right there!
Well, canonically Edwin gets punked by Elminster and lives out his days as a bar wench. And since they decided from the get-go to set BG3 a hundred years after the originals he’d be long dead, along with any other human NPC from the older games. Which, the fact that they started from the point of “let’s set it 100 years later” tells you enough of how much they wanted to deal with the older games. Viconia is not the only thing in BG3 that gives vibes of disdain at worst and disinterest at best for the originals. Flail of Ages is a useless trash weapon randomly sold by a vendor, for fucks sake!
I wonder how many at Larian even played BG1&2. I get such a Wiki-research vibe from a lot of the callbacks.
4 and 5 didn’t ruin anything for me. There’s stuff I genuinely like about them that got me excited for the next game. Plenty I didn’t like about them too.
Then there’s Infinite… it feels like the DLC or post-game content to a game we never got. And the multiplayer was unplayable last I saw. It made me no longer excited for the next game.
I still do Halo game nights a couple times a year though.
How much baggage do you have to address? Evil Cortana, Guardians, and Prometheans. The rest can be managed around.
If Infinite didn’t have to wrap up the previous games, it wouldn’t have that stink on it. But then it would have had even less substance. And the shitty open world wouldn’t have been any better.
It would have been better if they just used Cortana and the Guardians to wrap up the Promethean saga. But then they’d still have to write a decent story, which apparently they are incapable of.
It’s more that they wrote themselves into a corner with Cortana’s state/loss, all the forerunner lore being out in the open now, the weird Guardians stuff…
Infinite could have been a much more subtle expansion on the forerunners, keeping them enigmatic like the trilogy, and kept Cortana. That’s much more straightforward and “Halo”
The open world stuff wasn’t awful. I loved the marine encounters. But yeah, it felt half baked.
Watched a recent video on magic and writing and it applies for scifi too. Every time you add to the lore you now have to remember and support it forever. 4 just added so much that they clearly didn’t think through like that. Bungie dishes out lore in small bits from 1-3, and it was so exciting when you got just the small tiny bit of backstory. 4 and 5 then just dumped in on your plate in healing portions.
Librarian, Didact, people they didn’t even take the time to introduce well and we were supposed to just jump on board with it. Buck was literally the only saving grace for Halo 5 in my opinion - and they introduced him in ODST
To be fair, they probably had a mandate to go for a mainline chief story. That could’ve worked.
I guess the fundamental issue was they read the novels and such but didn’t “understand” the Halo trilogy’s feel (going for operatic sci fi drama instead of the quieter feel), and quickly wrote themselves into a corner.
Everything after 3 is poorly written fan fiction to me. It still is one of my favorite franchises of all time, but it’s never going to be the same again. Halo Wars 2 was all right though.
It’s okay but Halo 5 makes the whole story worthless and fighting the promethean enemies in 4 is horrible. All of them are bullet sponges and there isn’t enough ammo to kill them.
I don’t think 5 ruined 4. By the end of 5 it’s established that this Cortana is not the same Cortana. For all intents and purposes, the old Cortana is gone.
Infinite however, gave her a sympathetic send-off which undid that.
CE, Reach, and ODST are my top 3 games in the franchise. I think i have a special appreciation for the self-contained stories.
Actually, I had REALLY hoped Infinite would use ODST as a template for their open world. Because IMO, Infinite implemented it terribly in just about every way they could.
MMOs and live service ruin lore. They’ll twist the existing story into knots so that players can fight or recruit every popular character from the series, even if it makes no sense. Even if they’re dead. Gotta keep those players engaged, even if it comes at the expense of the integrity of the world and writing that drew them in in the first place!
Renegade on the ZX Spectrum was good, the sequel Target: Renegade was one of my favourite games for years, but the third game was a cynical cash grab, badly executed, barely playable.
Red Candle Games said that “in the aftermath of the incident, some still possess different speculations about Devotion. As regretful as the incident was, we have to bear its full consequence.
I don’t know if this was an honest mistake, but… 😂
yes! the old Nintendo World Championships! various pokemon and smash bros tournaments, and will be going to my first EVO this year!
it’s fun as long as you’re passionate about it and don’t fret too much about winning or losing. just have fun with other ppl who also enjoy this hobby and try to learn and keep growing!
For me Just Cause 4 is the worst one for too many reasons to list. Also, I'm still not sure about Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, but that could have a lot to do with not being ready to play a middle aged, yolked Henry lol
(Edit: Oh and Sniper Elite 6 seems like a contender too. Although SE5 was very poorly received at the beginning until they fixed the issues and then it turned into one of the most awesome games ever so who knows...)
4 was janky, and jumped the shark too many times in the story.
But damn did I have a fun time playing it. The weather guns are stupid, but they’re fun. Just like the jetpack and weather guns from the DLC for 3. We’re not playing these games for realism; at least I’m not. I wanna glide around over a base and bomb the shit out of it and watch everything explode.
100% agree which also leads to one of the biggest disappointments in JC4 for me; re-spawning enemies... It was so satisfying to conquer bases in JC3 and you knew that was it then. That base belonged to the rebellion for good. Also they changed Rico's ethnicity and bodyshape. Here's the hero you love except he's South American now and his muscles are gone. He's meant to be an ironic cliche "Thees could be traaable". That was the whole point. It was fun. I think the thing that ticked me off the most though was that all they had to do was make a graphically updated clone of JC3 with another land to fight over and they could have spawned an endless amount of sequels. I've played through JC3 so many times and the second that Firestarter soundtrack comes on it's just so. damn. perfect 😎🍷
I got 2 on my Xbox 360 as a hand me down from a family friend in maybe early 2010s cus I also got oblivion from them and remember looking up guides and Skyrim stuff popping up left and right for
Anyways I have 240 in jc3 and find it just fun. And then I have 130 hours in 4
Ngl give me a small graphic upgrade, give me the ammo economy and wingsuit of 3 as well as a new map and I’d be happy
I followed this game like crazy even pre ordering (lesson learned) some upgrade edition that was later released as dlc so yeah I was excited for this
Don’t get wrong definitely disappointed (bought into the hype so that didn’t help) but I occasionally jump back into the game and have some fun
My complaint is the story just wasn’t good. Like no one’s playing just cause for the story but something about it my casual ass didn’t like it
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze