Home    General Stuff    General Media
#1

Movies/Games and their sequels

Archive: 53 posts

Three months ago, I created another topic like this, except it was on TV shows and TV channels that are dying out. Although it's still open, this is a similar topic, but only about sequels to movies.

In case if you didn't know, many movies have sequels. First, we have the original. If it gets popular, there's going to be a sequel. Trust me: Any movie with two or movies of the same is a franchise. Movies are fun to watch, but there are plenty movies made for kids that have sequels.

Some movies are good at the start, but like expected, the sequels are better than the original. Take Toy Story for example (bad DLC BTW). I liked the first movie; there's no lying. However, the second movie is better and more exciting, and the third movie of Toy Story is the best. Pixar is really good when it comes to movies, but Toy Story is like the best that came out of Pixar.

Other movies that have sequels are the opposite when it goes on to the second movie. This is what the thread is about. You have probably seen Shrek before, right? Shrek is a very unusual ogre. All he wants is privacy. I think the first movie is a classic, also good. Shrek can get his swamp clear from prisoners if he finds the princess Lord Farquad wants. And this is what he did, except that he fell in love with the princess by the end. The second Shrek movie was appalling. Shrek is a prime example of movie franchises where the sequel is worse than the previous. It looks like the writers lost their creativity when they got there. And by the third movie, it was worse. I didn't even see the fourth movie. The Shrek series is over, but the franchise still lives on. One of the characters, Puss n' Boots, had his own movie. C'mon, they can't stay away from Shrek. I didn't even like the first movie with the character Puss n' Boots, because that was in the second Shrek film.

Are there any other film franchises where the first is the best one as the series gets worse on the next film?		2012-07-14 18:34:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

I think Uncharted did this. Uncharted 1 was amazing, so was Uncharted 2. But Uncharted 3... has good Multiplayer, but had a bad story.2012-07-14 19:11:00

Author:
TheMonkeyBlade
Posts: 687

Toy Story is sequels when you have a good idea Shrek is sequels while the series still makes money.

Looking at the two in a different way in the eleven year gap between Toy Story 2 and 3 we have the entire Shrek series.		2012-07-14 20:58:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728

Simply put, Final Fantasy, which was supposed to be an actual Final Fantasy before it started getting beaten with the sequel stick.2012-07-14 23:16:00

Author:
JamesDNaux
Posts: 757

Do you know what else was overdone? Jimmy Timmy Power Hour. You know that special where Fairly OddParents and Jimmy Neutron get blended in together, right? The first one is the best one. It's a classic. I liked the second one, but not a much as the first one. And the third one was the worst. At least each special in the trilogy has their unique advantage. Jimmy and Timmy earned heroic achivements in the first one, the second one has a good theme, and both main characters finally got along with each other in the third one (like best friends). But that was overdone like Shrek, Ice Age, and Madagascar.

I say out of all the film franchises, Ice Age is the worst when it comes to writing sequels. I didn't even like the first movie. Second one is bad, and the third one was worse. I didn't watch the fourth one, and they came to a fifth one? They also got the events in the wrong order. The third movie was the first event and the second movie was the last event.

And did you notice that Pixar is better than Dreamworks when it comes to sequels?

@Rabid-Coot: You're right. Shrek didn't even come out before the second Toy Story movie. And when Shrek is finally over, there was a third Toy Story movie. At least Pixar is taking time between both movies while movies from Shrek come too fast.		2012-07-14 23:54:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

I know I know!
Spiderman I was a good movie.
Spiderman II was better.
Spiderman III was the best because it had my favourite villain,VENOM !

2012-07-15 03:18:00

Author:
ILOVEMYGF52
Posts: 242

What do you mean? Spiderman III sucked!2012-07-15 05:29:00

Author:
SuperROBO1
Posts: 358

Simply put, Final Fantasy, which was supposed to be an actual Final Fantasy before it started getting beaten with the sequel stick.

I've seen you talk about this on the other topic, but yeah. Some games are only good with one game in the series.

Another problem with movies having sequels is the spin-off issue. Let's say that the movie series is over, but the franchise is popular. If this is true, they'll make a TV show based off the movie. Movies that are based on TV shows are good, but TV shows based on movies are bad. I'm talking spin-off series like Lilo and Stitch: The Series and Out of Jimmy's Head. They are both TV shows that were originally movies. I bet Shrek and Ice Age would have their own TV shows too (ok, now that's bad). What would be even worse is if there was a movie based on a TV show that was already based off of a movie. There's a third Madagascar movie coming out, and if The Penguins of Madagascar has their own movie (yes, I'm actually talking about the TV show), then what do you think will happen?		2012-07-15 05:44:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

What do you mean? Spiderman III sucked!

No ! It was the best.The Venom,bad peter,Harry goblin thing.It was awesome.People just don't know which movies suck and which don't 		2012-07-15 06:33:00

Author:
ILOVEMYGF52
Posts: 242

People just don't know which movies suck and which don't

http://i48.tinypic.com/et9tea.gif

We know.		2012-07-15 08:25:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728

Planet of the Apes (original) is undoubtedly in the top 10 sci-fi films, and in my opinion, one of the best films of all time.

It's sequel, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, is possibly the worst film I've ever seen **shudder**		2012-07-15 10:29:00

Author:
DaSpoony
Posts: 191

People just don't know which movies suck and which don't

Oh yes, but that means you also don't know what films suck and which don't. Just because you say it is the best, does that mean it is the best?		2012-07-15 10:57:00

Author:
FlipMeister
Posts: 631

I don't think I've played a game where the sequel was worse, maybe aspects of the sequel were worse but overall not any less good. But films like Shrek (didn't mind the second one, actually) Spiderman (didn't mind the second one, actually) The Ring, Saw... maybe the concept is what sells it and we no longer care once it's been done. That might be why no one really likes remakes.2012-07-15 13:12:00

Author:
Ironface
Posts: 432

Yeah, there's been a lot of great video game sequels. One of my favorites, being 'Sly 2: Band of Thieves.'

I love the Sly Cooper series, and got the Sly collection late last year to play it for the first time. The first Sly game was fun, but it was all about sly. We saw a bit of Murray here and there, and got to talk a lot with Bentley, but they were like the shadows of Sly's greatness. Nonetheless, the dialogue was funny, and I did in fact enjoy the 3d platforming gameplay. The worlds, enemies, and the story was also fun. Yes, it was simplistic, but it had a nice ring to it, and Sly's calm, thief-y attitude made it a joy to play, and it was great being chased by Carmelita. I remember a friend of mine who recommended the Sly collection to me told me that his personal favorite of the series was the second one, and it seemed like everyone agreed.

When I first played it, I was a bit dissapointed. It was very, very different I have to say. See, I thought it was just going to be in the one city, with the Dmitri being the one enemy. But I think as I wrapped it up, and found myself in the second location, I was amazed. Sly 2 did something great, it brought back the three main characters, Sly, Bentley, Murrary, and threw in Carmelita, with for me, a more favorable voice than in the original. (Not that I had anything against the original voice for Carmelita) Bentley wasn't there just to talk, and Murray was no longer a babling baby. I know people consider him to be annoying, but I have to say, I thought he was great in Sly 2. He had been through so much during it, and I actually liked his lines. It was no longer "just about Sly", yet he still had plenty of original abilities brought back, along with some fantastic new ones like the Paraglider.

With Sly 2, they didn't just ditch ideas from Sly 1. The bottles were back! Sure, there weren't as much, but for a good reason. They introduced ThiefNet, a better health system, coins mattered actually, there were artifacts to steal, and you could even loot enemies! They also brought back the idea of Clockwerk, only now he was scattered in pieces. A new group of enemies emerged, the Klaww Gang, which had some wonderful enemies, like Dmitri, or Rajan, or The Contessa. Seriously, the design for each enemy was great, and it ended up being a more interesting gang than the Fiendish Five in the first game.

Overall, Sly 2 made you feel more of a thief than the first installment ever did. Sure, in Sly 1, you nabbed coins, you were running from the cops, moving stealthily, and taking down guards, while making it in the newspapers. But in Sly 2, you got all kinds of neat gadgets, you stole ancient relics, heck, there was even one point in the game where you made a trade off for rare explosives with some shady people. I loved that mission, because it really brought you into the game. Another element that gave you a sneaky feel was the gigantic missions you pulled off. In Sly 1, it was the same pattern with almost every world. Do some missions, get keys, and unlock a cannon that blasts you to the boss. I didn't really have a major problem with it, but it was repetitive. But in Sly 2, it was so much more inventive, where you had to pull off high-class heists, like Bentley commanding The Contessa's guards by using a voice modulator as Murray manned the tanks while you went to steal the Clockwork Eyes from Neyla. Or, my personal favorite, when you had to distract the crowd and dance with Carmelita while Murray sawed off the Clockwork wings a special saw forged by Bentley from the ruby you stole from the elephants around Rajan's palace.

In the end, it was a fantastic sequel that kept elements from the original, but gave so much new things, with ThiefNet, and giving Bentley and Murray actual roles. New forms of gameplay like commanding tanks and choppers, chasing down targets with the paraglider, or even silently looting people's pockets for keys, made this a true treasure to play. There was a balance between currency and collectibles, a balance between playing sly and his cohorts, ect. This sequel was like the peanut butter and jelly, right in the middle of Sly 1 and 3, becoming the superior title of Sucker Punch's trilogy.

That's why I felt a little disappointed when I played Sly 3. Don't get me wrong, it had plenty of good dialogue, and it could still be fun to play at times, but it went too far. It tried taking a next step in certain ways when it didn't need to. Not only were Sly, Murray and Bentley back, but now you had to play as other characters like Penelope, The Guru, Panda King and Carmelita.It was just. too. much. Every once in a while I kinda liked Penelope, and a few of the RC racing challenges were fun, but I felt Sly 2 mix a bit of serious tones with playfulness. It was about the gang, a trio so wonderful to play as, while Sly 3's story was less exciting, and it felt more childish. I mean, seriously, if Penelope is such an expert mechanic, why is she dressed like Bob the Builder, and why is everything she controls can be handled by a five year old? I don't wanna be rude, but that really irked me. Another annoyance was Carmelita's voice. Characters like the Guru and the Panda King were nice, but like I said, too much. Bottles were also removed, which was sad to see, but I did actually like the challenges given.

I see that SP tried wowing people with more bits of gameplay, and I have to admit, some of it worked. I actually really enjoyed some of the plane battles in World 2, and the boat chases in Venice were great. Still, helicopter battles could be a bit boring, and I wasn't a huge fan of the pirate ship battles, but maybe that's just me. Then again, I did stop playing around that point, with the pirate ship battles. I don't want to seem mean here. I know this is old work for Sucker Punch, but I thought, for the case of sequels, it might've been interesting to refer to these two games.		2012-07-19 17:08:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

Yeah, there's been a lot of great video game sequels. One of my favorites, being 'Sly 2: Band of Thieves.'

I love the Sly Cooper series, and got the Sly collection late last year to play it for the first time. The first Sly game was fun, but it was all about sly. We saw a bit of Murray here and there, and got to talk a lot with Bentley, but they were like the shadows of Sly's greatness. Nonetheless, the dialogue was funny, and I did in fact enjoy the 3d platforming gameplay. The worlds, enemies, and the story was also fun. Yes, it was simplistic, but it had a nice ring to it, and Sly's calm, thief-y attitude made it a joy to play, and it was great being chased by Carmelita. I remember a friend of mine who recommended the Sly collection to me told me that his personal favorite of the series was the second one, and it seemed like everyone agreed.

When I first played it, I was a bit dissapointed. It was very, very different I have to say. See, I thought it was just going to be in the one city, with the Dmitri being the one enemy. But I think as I wrapped it up, and found myself in the second location, I was amazed. Sly 2 did something great, it brought back the three main characters, Sly, Bentley, Murrary, and threw in Carmelita, with for me, a more favorable voice than in the original. (Not that I had anything against the original voice for Carmelita) Bentley wasn't there just to talk, and Murray was no longer a babling baby. I know people consider him to be annoying, but I have to say, I thought he was great in Sly 2. He had been through so much during it, and I actually liked his lines. It was no longer "just about Sly", yet he still had plenty of original abilities brought back, along with some fantastic new ones like the Paraglider.

With Sly 2, they didn't just ditch ideas from Sly 1. The bottles were back! Sure, there weren't as much, but for a good reason. They introduced ThiefNet, a better health system, coins mattered actually, there were artifacts to steal, and you could even loot enemies! They also brought back the idea of Clockwerk, only now he was scattered in pieces. A new group of enemies emerged, the Klaww Gang, which had some wonderful enemies, like Dmitri, or Rajan, or The Contessa. Seriously, the design for each enemy was great, and it ended up being a more interesting gang than the Fiendish Five in the first game.

Overall, Sly 2 made you feel more of a thief than the first installment ever did. Sure, in Sly 1, you nabbed coins, you were running from the cops, moving stealthily, and taking down guards, while making it in the newspapers. But in Sly 2, you got all kinds of neat gadgets, you stole ancient relics, heck, there was even one point in the game where you made a trade off for rare explosives with some shady people. I loved that mission, because it really brought you into the game. Another element that gave you a sneaky feel was the gigantic missions you pulled off. In Sly 1, it was the same pattern with almost every world. Do some missions, get keys, and unlock a cannon that blasts you to the boss. I didn't really have a major problem with it, but it was repetitive. But in Sly 2, it was so much more inventive, where you had to pull off high-class heists, like Bentley commanding The Contessa's guards by using a voice modulator as Murray manned the tanks while you went to steal the Clockwork Eyes from Neyla. Or, my personal favorite, when you had to distract the crowd and dance with Carmelita while Murray sawed off the Clockwork wings a special saw forged by Bentley from the ruby you stole from the elephants around Rajan's palace.

In the end, it was a fantastic sequel that kept elements from the original, but gave so much new things, with ThiefNet, and giving Bentley and Murray actual roles. New forms of gameplay like commanding tanks and choppers, chasing down targets with the paraglider, or even silently looting people's pockets for keys, made this a true treasure to play. There was a balance between currency and collectibles, a balance between playing sly and his cohorts, ect. This sequel was like the peanut butter and jelly, right in the middle of Sly 1 and 3, becoming the superior title of Sucker Punch's trilogy.

That's why I felt a little disappointed when I played Sly 3. Don't get me wrong, it had plenty of good dialogue, and it could still be fun to play at times, but it went too far. It tried taking a next step in certain ways when it didn't need to. Not only were Sly, Murray and Bentley back, but now you had to play as other characters like Penelope, The Guru, Panda King and Carmelita.It was just. too. much. Every once in a while I kinda liked Penelope, and a few of the RC racing challenges were fun, but I felt Sly 2 mix a bit of serious tones with playfulness. It was about the gang, a trio so wonderful to play as, while Sly 3's story was less exciting, and it felt more childish. I mean, seriously, if Penelope is such an expert mechanic, why is she dressed like Bob the Builder, and why is everything she controls can be handled by a five year old? I don't wanna be rude, but that really irked me. Another annoyance was Carmelita's voice. Characters like the Guru and the Panda King were nice, but like I said, too much. Bottles were also removed, which was sad to see, but I did actually like the challenges given.

I see that SP tried wowing people with more bits of gameplay, and I have to admit, some of it worked. I actually really enjoyed some of the plane battles in World 2, and the boat chases in Venice were great. Still, helicopter battles could be a bit boring, and I wasn't a huge fan of the pirate ship battles, but maybe that's just me. Then again, I did stop playing around that point, with the pirate ship battles. I don't want to seem mean here. I know this is old work for Sucker Punch, but I thought, for the case of sequels, it might've been interesting to refer to these two games.

You forgot the clue bottle problem in Sly 3. There are no vaults or clue bottles.

I played two other games made by that same company. The first game was good, but I didn't like the second game as much because of the unfamiliar characters, and one ending is sad.		2012-07-19 17:27:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

definitely looking foward to Sly Cooper: Theives in Time. DEFINITELY OK. I like sly more than you!2012-07-19 17:28:00

Author:
fangsup
Posts: 36

You forgot the clue bottle problem in Sly 3. There are no vaults or clue bottles.

I played two other games made by that same company. The first game was good, but I didn't like the second game as much because of the unfamiliar characters, and one ending is sad.

Hmm, I thought I added that. I guess I had so many things to talk about that I forgot to type that along with everything else. Also, what you're referring to must be Infamous, although I'm not sure why a game should be criticized for having a sad ending.


definitely looking foward to Sly Cooper: Theives in Time. DEFINITELY OK. I like sly more than you!

I do agree that the next installment looks fantastic. It is impressive what Sanzaru has been doing with it to be quite honest. Both themes showed so far are great, and the compass feature could come in handy, as I and many others have in fact had that "building blocking your way" problem in the Sly 2 & 3 with the open world environments. I love how they're actually doing more with items by giving them descriptions this time around. One of the few complaints I had with Sly 2 was that the objects stolen often felt throwaway, but that doesn't seem like it'll be the case with Thieves in Time. Plus the re-appearance of bottles has me excited.

P.S. More of a Sly fan than me? Most likely since I only played the games for the first time last year, but what, is there gonna be some sort of contest or something to prove it? jk		2012-07-19 17:54:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

Hmm, I thought I added that. I guess I had so many things to talk about that I forgot to type that along with everything else. Also, what you're referring to must be Infamous, although I'm not sure why a game should be criticized for having a sad ending.

The actual reason why I like Infamous more than Infamous 2 is because I'm used to the characters from Infamous more. The city in Infamous 2 looked a lot better than the one in the first game, but the plot in the first game was better. I also hated the evil factions in Infamous 2 more than the evil factions from Infamous (especially the Ice men).		2012-07-19 18:00:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

Nobody mentioned The Matrix yet? That seems the obvious one.

How's about The Descent, Battle Royale, Airplane, Iron Man, X-Men?

I think in most cases, the sequels are worse than the originals.... when talking about movies that is. Obviously, there are exceptions. Some have been mentioned, but you have the likes of Terminator 2, Aliens (debatable - depends on your preferences), Star Wars, The Godfather.

With games, they usually get better. I can't think of many games where the 2nd is worse than the first.		2012-07-19 20:07:00

Author:
Ali_Star
Posts: 4085

I do agree that the next installment looks fantastic. It is impressive what Sanzaru has been doing with it to be quite honest. Both themes showed so far are great, and the compass feature could come in handy, as I and many others have in fact had that "building blocking your way" problem in the Sly 2 & 3 with the open world environments. I love how they're actually doing more with items by giving them descriptions this time around. One of the few complaints I had with Sly 2 was that the objects stolen often felt throwaway, but that doesn't seem like it'll be the case with Thieves in Time. Plus the re-appearance of bottles has me excited.

P.S. More of a Sly fan than me? Most likely since I only played the games for the first time last year, but what, is there gonna be some sort of contest or something to prove it? jk

I've been a fan ever since Sly came out. I have all the series for PS2 and of course The Sly Collection for PS3.
I have played Sly 3 over and over still sobbing at the end. I've seen gameplay for the 4th. It looks so much different from before. I'll have to get used to that somehow :'c

I love Sly so much omg. I even have that little Sly 2 ad from a comic c':

good memories~		2012-07-20 12:37:00

Author:
fangsup
Posts: 36

Toy Story is sequels when you have a good idea Shrek is sequels while the series still makes money.

Looking at the two in a different way in the eleven year gap between Toy Story 2 and 3 we have the entire Shrek series.

I agree I mean it took 11/10 years between all Toy Story Movies, Shrek Was about 2-4 Years. And The Lion King is an Example, First One BRILLIANT, Second Wasnt good, and Havent seen the Third		2012-07-28 19:57:00

Author:
Awesome_Guy
Posts: 167

http://i48.tinypic.com/et9tea.gif

We know.

That is the coolest GIF evaaar. Straight from the most idiotic scene in Spiderman III.


You forgot the clue bottle problem in Sly 3. There are no vaults or clue bottles.

I played two other games made by that same company. The first game was good, but I didn't like the second game as much because of the unfamiliar characters, and one ending is sad.

IMO, both endings for inFamous 2 were a bit sad, in their own ways.
Cole dies. Cole becomes Patron Saint of New Marais.
You kill Zeke. Cole becomes the new beast, screws up the world.
See what I mean? Anyway, the plot of the series as a whole was brilliantly planned out, and both inFamouseseses have their own advantages. inFamous 1 (for me, anyway) was a bit more atmospheric and had a better plot (also, the end credits were way cooler than in inFamous 2), and inFamous 2 had waaaay better graphics and action scenes.

So, yeah. I have no idea what my point is, but yeah. I think you see what I'm getting at. 		2012-07-29 02:19:00

Author:
Kaboosh99
Posts: 359

IMO, both endings for inFamous 2 were a bit sad, in their own ways.
Cole dies. Cole becomes Patron Saint of New Marais.
You kill Zeke. Cole becomes the new beast, screws up the world.
See what I mean? Anyway, the plot of the series as a whole was brilliantly planned out, and both inFamouseseses have their own advantages. inFamous 1 (for me, anyway) was a bit more atmospheric and had a better plot (also, the end credits were way cooler than in inFamous 2), and inFamous 2 had waaaay better graphics and action scenes.

So, yeah. I have no idea what my point is, but yeah. I think you see what I'm getting at.

I thanked your post because of that Xbox signature you always have. But that doesn't matter.

InFamous is way better than Sly Cooper, and you actually reminded me of why I don't like the evil endings on either game. I agree with you on the first game of InFamous with a better plot. The characters are more familiar. New Marais in the second game is better than Empire City in the first game, however. I also like these ice powers because you can actually fly with the powers.

The only ending in any InFamous game I like is the good ending from the first game.

Anyway, what do you think of these spin-off shows based on movies?		2012-07-29 03:15:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

That is the coolest GIF evaaar. Straight from the most idiotic scene in Spiderman III.

You obviously haven't watched all of Spiderman III.		2012-07-29 12:50:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

This is Ghost Recon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hGVHdX83Fk&feature=related) from 2001. Ghost Recon's single player component was all about strategy and not messing up. Once a soldier died, they died for good. It was important not to let a soldier die, since usually their replacement wouldn't be as good. Soldiers could only recover health between missions. A soldier could die in only one bullet no matter how high their endurance rating was. A wound could handicap a soldier in a way, and required anywhere between after 2-4 missions to fully heal, or sitting out one mission to fully heal. (I should mention the game has a 16-mission campaign and two expansion packs each with 8-mission campaigns.) Running and gunning wasn't an option, and the level design was as non-linear as it got. Oh yeah, and there wasn't any cinematic plot twist crap that caused any of your soldiers to die at any point in the campaign. If a soldier died, it was your fault. Did I mention you got to pick your own 6-man squad before every mission in the campaign? What about ROE and commanding your squad to go wherever?

A ton of sequels later, this is the joke the Ghost Recon series has become (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu2TjrIwqcE). Scripted set pieces, almost no squad control, modern-day unrealistic regenerative health, linear level design. How about the character you control at the start dying due to a cutscene you have no control over? Inferior enemy AI, and see-through walls equipment to make the game laughably easy.

Future Soldier isn't a direct sequel to Ghost Recon, but it shows the direction the sequels went after Ghost Recon have slowly went. The whole series is an example of a video game series becoming progressively worse with each new game.		2012-08-02 04:39:00

Author:
BIGGamerer
Posts: 182

Final Fantasy is an obvious example so I'll go with another. Halo is a prime example of a franchise that has gotten beat to death with more sequels than it needed. The franchise should have ended with Halo 3. But nope, it makes M$ money. So let's throw out ODST and Reach. And remember how they said there wouldn't be a Halo 4? Jk, Halo 4 isn't even waiting for the next generation console. It's just coming out this December. I am not a fan of Halo and I am most definitely not a fan of their community. But this franchise has overstayed it's welcome. The games which may have once contained quality, are now half baked garbage that cater to none other than the die hard Halo fanboys themselves.

GG Microsft.		2012-08-02 08:57:00

Author:
bigMoose_
Posts: 183

It seems games usually get better, movies get worse.

Bad game sequels:
Crash Team Racing > Crash Nitro Kart.
CTR was awesome, and CNK just didn't have the same fun factor for me. It got decent review scores, but I hated it.
Most likely (99.9%) due to the change in developer. Same deal with Insomniac selling Spyro too I hear, and when ND sold Crash Bandicoot.

Uncharted 2 > Uncharted 3.
U2 was a great, near perfect game for me. (I didn't play the multiplayer for the record)
U3's story was just... not for me. IMO it had terrible pacing (gameplay wise), a cop out ending (regarding Sully), poor final battle, etc...
Super awesome multiplayer though!

Resistance 2 > Resistance 3.
Pretty much the same deal as Uncharted. They put all their effort into the multiplayer and forgot about the story!
Insomniac said it was the final Resistance game they will make, yet they didn't answer any of the fan's burning questions (regarding angels, etc)..
Then again, I found the multiplayer very enjoyable.

Bad movie sequels:
I agree that most 3D animated sequels tend to be worse (Shrek, Ice Age, etc), Toy Story being the exception.
It also seems origin stories are much more enjoyable, and they just so happen to be the first movie.

It's a shame that any decent movie is doomed to have a sequel, due to the potential money involved. 		2012-08-02 09:54:00

Author:
midnight_heist
Posts: 2513

Bad movie sequels:
I agree that most 3D animated sequels tend to be worse (Shrek, Ice Age, etc), Toy Story being the exception.
It also seems origin stories are much more enjoyable, and they just so happen to be the first movie.

It's a shame that any decent movie is doomed to have a sequel, due to the potential money involved.

We both have the same opinion. Shrek was horrible sequel after sequel. When they finally ended the franchise, they continued it by using a spin-off character having his own movie. Ice Age was bad at the beginning, and they are still going on. I'm guessing they could either have a sixth film, featuring the Middle East in ancient times (Mesopotamia), or they could come up with a TV show. If either one is true, then Ice Age will be so unbearable to watch. While movies go bad in one way, Toy Story is going the opposite. The first one (good, and classic) was the worst. Just like the saying "first is worst, second is best, and third is the one who gets the treasure chest", Toy Story is a good example of this.

I hope they don't make a Toy Story 4, but there is a possibility that they will. I have some clues, but you may never guess them.		2012-08-02 14:37:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

While movies go bad in one way, Toy Story is going the opposite. The first one (good, and classic) was the worst. Just like the saying "first is worst, second is best, and third is the one who gets the treasure chest", Toy Story is a good example of this.

I hope they don't make a Toy Story 4, but there is a possibility that they will. I have some clues, but you may never guess them.

Am I the only person who enjoyed Toy Story 3 less than the original two? Don't get me wrong, I still thought it was a great movie, I just thought the original was better in certain ways, (I'd say the same for the 2nd, but it's been so long since I've seen in) but I'm not trying to be one of those people, who are blinded by nostalgia.		2012-08-02 15:44:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

Am I the only person who enjoyed Toy Story 3 less than the original two? Don't get me wrong, I still thought it was a great movie, I just thought the original was better in certain ways, (I'd say the same for the 2nd, but it's been so long since I've seen in) but I'm not trying to be one of those people, who are blinded by nostalgia.

So according to you, it gets worse after every Toy Story movie, but the third is great. Either way, every single movie in the Toy Story trilogy was good.

I know this isn't on-topic, but is that forum avatar of yours from The Legend of Korra?		2012-08-02 16:00:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

So according to you, it gets worse after every Toy Story movie, but the third is great. Either way, every single movie in the Toy Story trilogy was good.

I know this isn't on-topic, but is that forum avatar of yours from The Legend of Korra?

Like I said in my post earlier, I haven't watched Toy Story 2 in a long, long time, so I can't judge it. Also, worse is a harsh word. (at least in this scenario it is) I still enjoyed the third installment, I just enjoyed the original better, that's all. It's just a matter of opinion.

(Also yes, it's Amon from TLOK.)		2012-08-02 16:10:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

Same deal with Insomniac selling Spyro too I hear, and when ND sold Crash Bandicoot.


Thats the way the games industry works unfortunatly. You have to sacrifice ownership of your IP in exchange for the funding and support needed to get it it made.

It's only recently that we've started seeing alternative funding methods emerge.		2012-08-02 17:21:00

Author:
Rabid-Coot
Posts: 6728

When I said Toy Story was the exception to sequelitis, I meant that it did not decline in quality.
But I didn't say it got any better.


Am I the only person who enjoyed Toy Story 3 less than the original two? Don't get me wrong, I still thought it was a great movie, I just thought the original was better in certain ways, (I'd say the same for the 2nd, but it's been so long since I've seen in) but I'm not trying to be one of those people, who are blinded by nostalgia.

IMO....

TS1:
Obviously TY1 has that magic factor due to the fact it is the first time the audience is discovering the world(/gimmick).
This goes back to what I was saying before about the origin stories being more enjoyable.
I feel this has the best replayability factor of the three.

TS2:
I haven't seen this in a while, because I guess I didn't enjoy it as much as the other two.
Just not as memorable imo.

TS3:
An interesting beast.
I loved some bits, but disliked others.
-The bear. Same deal as the prospector in TS2. You could see "the twist" coming from a mile away. At least they explained his motivations.
- Spanish buzz. To me this just feels like dancing animals from lesser movies.
+ The breakout. Could have been better, but good enough.
+ Bittersweet ending. Great ending (despite the slight Deus ex machina beforehand, I knew they kept the aliens around for something other than parent/kid jokes!) to the trilogy.
That moment when SPOILER Andy is giving away his toys SPOILER is one of my favourite parts of any pixar film (excluding Incredibles, cause that movie is awesome).

I feel the Toy Story movies are of similar quality, and it comes down to personal preference.
#1 > #3 > #2 for me. All very close margins though.


On the subject of..
Shrek:
I didn't see this movie until I rented the DVD. Big hype, but it was so overrated imo.
Don't get me wrong, it is funny and I would watch it again, but nothing on the level of Pixar at the time.
The sequels.. #2 was bearable, #3 was bad, and #4 was terrible.
Puss in Boots on the other hand, was rather enjoyable. I liked that more than Shrek #1.

Ice Age:
#1: I enjoyed the first, have watched it a few times, an enjoyable story. Nice character interaction.
#2: Enter the female mammoth and her smaller brothers. Did not enjoy.
#3: DINOSAURS. Was decent imo. But I do love my dinosaurs. I WISH they would put the correct teeth on the ankylosaurus. IT DOESN'T EAT MEAT PEOPLE. Why not show the power of his armour/tail?! My #1 pet peeve in dinosaur movies (portraying herbivores as carnivores)...anyway... despite that, and the annoying expanding cast (girl mammoth and the brothers do not do it for me) the new character of..that guy, with the nice animation and the eyepatch? He was cool.

Major flaw in Ice Age sequels imo: Not spending enough time/energy on the core cast.
Yes, an expanded universe is beneficial, as long as you keep developing the core characters!
Adventure Time is a good example of this.

That' all for now.
Regarding AVENGERS...
Avengers did very well, and I assume a sequel is in the works, but how they heck are they going to top the previous effort?
Is it even possible to top a origin story? (perhaps fans of the recent Batman movies would say yes..?)
D:		2012-08-03 02:07:00

Author:
midnight_heist
Posts: 2513

IMO....

TS1:
Obviously TY1 has that magic factor due to the fact it is the first time the audience is discovering the world(/gimmick).
This goes back to what I was saying before about the origin stories being more enjoyable.
I feel this has the best replayability factor of the three.

TS2:
I haven't seen this in a while, because I guess I didn't enjoy it as much as the other two.
Just not as memorable imo.

TS3:
An interesting beast.
I loved some bits, but disliked others.
-The bear. Same deal as the prospector in TS2. You could see "the twist" coming from a mile away. At least they explained his motivations.
- Spanish buzz. To me this just feels like dancing animals from lesser movies.
+ The breakout. Could have been better, but good enough.
+ Bittersweet ending. Great ending (despite the slight Deus ex machina beforehand, I knew they kept the aliens around for something other than parent/kid jokes!) to the trilogy.
That moment when SPOILER Andy is giving away his toys SPOILER is one of my favourite parts of any pixar film (excluding Incredibles, cause that movie is awesome).

I feel the Toy Story movies are of similar quality, and it comes down to personal preference.
#1 > #3 > #2 for me. All very close margins though.

I agree, the breakout scene was great, as were the final moments before the ending. (even if it dragged on a little) The ending was really awesome as well, and the look of it all was nice and polished. I just wasn't a big fan of most of the new characters introduced, including Barbie and Ken, and there was something I enjoyed more about the settings used in the original Toy Story, no offence. With TS1, there was that gorgeous arcade, with popcorn and arcades galore, and the green alien game. There was also the ending scene with the moving truck, or the creepy neighbor's home, just so many great places, it really came alive, despite the graphics not being on par with today's standards. (yet I still enjoy watching those late 90's animated graphics though ^^)

With TS3, there was the daycare, and Molly's or whoever her name was' house. Now, my memory of the movie isn't the greatest, but I thought, while enjoyable, the set locations didn't have the same level of excitement (excluding some of the final scenes probably) There was still a certain feel to it which I loved. Seeing Buzz (or Woody, I forgot which one) launch over to spy on the other toys was great. I loved seeing all the contraptions work together in the original, as it was one of many "minor details" that simply worked. So to see those kind of things again are great.		2012-08-03 02:25:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

Yup totally agree.
Come to think of it, the toys and atmosphere in Sid's room was probably my favourite part of TS1.
Doll's head + spider legs = best character ever. And that reveal of him was awesome.
2012-08-03 09:08:00

Author:
midnight_heist
Posts: 2513

I hate when people complain about a game changing - not necessarily for the worst. "Oh my God, it's not the exact same thing as the original, I hate it! See!? This is what happens when you leave Americans to make a Japanese game!" It's the most obnoxious thing in the world. Because something is different, doesn't make that something worse than its predecessors. People criticized Silent Hill: Downpour, because it wasn't exactly the same as the first one. I don't want another Silent Hill 1. I want a new game. If you like the originals... play them, don't find fault with something new, simply because it's new.

To contradict myself, the non Naughty Dog Crash Bandicoots are trash... Trash Bandicoots. There, I rhymed. I'm a fun guy, surely!		2012-08-03 10:52:00

Author:
Ironface
Posts: 432

The problem with crappy sequels isn't them being different than the original game. It's the fact that they cast aside the features that made the first game great.

Like someone said about Ghost Recon: it was a series about tactical combat and squad interaction and became another generic shooter. If you were a fan of the first game, you'd expect to see its trademark elements incorporated in the sequels. If Ghost Recon fans wanted a linear, dumbed down shooter they'd buy COD.

People are criticizing Downpour because Silent Hill is dead. It has been dead since SH3. They have tried everything with this series, and they alway fail to make it as fresh and exciting as the first games. The mystery and horror are long gone: everyone knows Silent Hill is a place where dark horrible things have happened and anyone who visits it is screwed. Come on Konami, stop beating the dead horse and create a new IP.		2012-08-04 02:23:00

Author:
SnipySev
Posts: 2452

To contradict myself, the non Naughty Dog Crash Bandicoots are trash... Trash Bandicoots. There, I rhymed. I'm a fun guy, surely!

Ha! Great rhymed words . But not all of the non Naughty Dog CB games are trash. I found "The Wrath of Cortex" to be as fun as the original trilogy. And don't call us Shirley.		2012-08-04 02:31:00

Author:
JustinArt
Posts: 1314

The problem with crappy sequels isn't them being different than the original game. It's the fact that they cast aside the features that made the first game great.

Like someone said about Ghost Recon: it was a series about tactical combat and squad interaction and became another generic shooter. If Ghost Recon fans wanted a linear, dumbed down shooter they'd buy COD.

People are criticizing Downpour because Silent Hill is dead. It has been dead since SH3. They have tried everything with this series, and they alway fail to make it as fresh and exciting as the first games. The mystery and horror are long gone: everyone knows Silent Hill is a place where dark horrible things have happened and anyone who visits it is screwed. Come on Konami, stop beating the dead horse and create a new IP.

The way I see it, people sometimes hate a great game simply because it's not like another, if an awesome game becomes a generic waste of a disc then by all means, said game must be verbally assaulted! (I thought Downpour was great, I'd of course have done it somewhat differently but I didn't compare it to what has been, only to what could have been, if you get me..)

And I forgot about Wrath of Cortex.. that was fantastic, I didn't mind Twinsanity too much.. but the games shouldn't be linear, the warp rooms were the way to go. (And I'm sorry about that Shirley remark!)		2012-08-04 09:07:00

Author:
Ironface
Posts: 432

The way I see it, if you want to make a game that's just different than your previous work, create a new IP instead of a sequel. That way you don't dilute the formula of a series, you won't anger fans and people won't expect your game to be a certain way.

But most devs prefer to make a sequel because it'll sell better. It's a safe bet. Anything that has a big fandom will sell, even if its glory days are long past. Sonic games have been complete garbage since the start of the new millenium and everyone knows it. Yet Sonic Unleashed sold a lot more copies than a fresh new masterpiece like Bayonetta.		2012-08-04 10:57:00

Author:
SnipySev
Posts: 2452

And I forgot about Wrath of Cortex.. that was fantastic, I didn't mind Twinsanity too much.. but the games shouldn't be linear, the warp rooms were the way to go. (And I'm sorry about that Shirley remark!)

I forgot about Twinsanity. Yeah, I found Twinsanity to be completely unpolished in terms of gameplay, and the visuals looked way too weird. Oh well, the original trilogy, CTR, and "The Wrath of Cortex" are the only great CB games, while the Gameboy Advance ones are decent. At least I managed to beat that game.


But most devs prefer to make a sequel because it'll sell better. It's a safe bet. Anything that has a big fandom will sell, even if its glory days are long past. Sonic games have been complete garbage since the start of the new millenium and everyone knows it. Yet Sonic Unleashed sold a lot more copies than a fresh new masterpiece like Bayonetta.

I kinda agree with the recent Sonic games. The big problem with them is that the 3D versions is not a good formula for the blue hedgehog. Well, to me not all the 2K sonic games are unpolished. The 2D platformers from both GBA and DS are fun, while I really enjoy playing the first two "Sonic Adventure" games in Gamecube when they first arrived. I managed to go through "Seven Secret Rings", "Black Knight", and the 2006 "Sonic" game, but they are not worth replaying, along with the Gamecube ones I mentioned.

Yeah, some video game sequels surpassed the originals, or they are just as good as the originals, because of the formula they kept and improve it with something new. "Kingdom Hearts 2", the "Ratchet and Clank" PS2 and PS3 sequels, The "Megaman" sequels, "Super Mario Bros." sequels, and "Uncharted 2 and 3" are among the great examples of the great sequels. Sometimes the sequels don't match the greatness of the originals because of the wrong formula. The sonic games, which SnipySev and I mentioned, are one of the examples. Another example of a unnecessary sequel I like to point out in one of my favorite game series is "Megaman X7". Sure, X7 is a fun game, but the 3D platforming shooter is not a good idea for the series. At least Capcom fixed that in X8.		2012-08-04 18:33:00

Author:
JustinArt
Posts: 1314

Am I the only person who enjoyed Toy Story 3 less than the original two? Don't get me wrong, I still thought it was a great movie, I just thought the original was better in certain ways, (I'd say the same for the 2nd, but it's been so long since I've seen in) but I'm not trying to be one of those people, who are blinded by nostalgia.

Well the second Toy Story is My favourite, But mainly because i watched it A lot when i was really young.

Btw in TS3 Sid is The Garbage Man =O		2012-08-04 21:21:00

Author:
Awesome_Guy
Posts: 167

Btw in TS3 Sid is The Garbage Man =O

No way... o-o what makes you think that? (seriously, I'm not being sarcasm)

(..and I'm not trying to be reverse sarcastic or anything like that either.. <.<)		2012-08-04 22:30:00

Author:
Dragonvarsity
Posts: 5208

No way... o-o what makes you think that?

He has the same T-shirt with a skull on it.

Easter eggs in Pixar movies are really cool. The Pizza Planet truck appears in almost every one.

Want to know something mindblowing? Since Monsters Inc. their movies always have in-jokes that reference the movie they're going to make next (http://www.cracked.com/article_19210_7-insane-easter-eggs-hidden-in-movies-tv-shows.html). That's right, referencing past movies is too easy for them.

Nemo appears as a fish in a sushi shop and as a toy in Monsters Inc. A boy is reading a Mr. Incredible comic book in the dentist's waiting room in Finding Nemo. Doc Hudson from Cars appears as a normal car in The Incredibles. When Remy from Ratatouille is scared off by a dog, the dog's shadow has the same shape as Dug from Up. Lotso from Toy Story 3 appears in a little girl's room in Up. And so on.		2012-08-05 21:52:00

Author:
SnipySev
Posts: 2452

you know there was a titanic 2? it was made by different people. they build another big ship and named it titanic. ended up like the first one...


EDIT: the only thing that got better for sequels was ratchet and clank ps2 trilogy. (deadlock is a spinoff so it does not count) 1. was great. 2. was better and now can strafe,upgrade weapons, and upgrade your health. 3. the best ever. better than ps3 R&C. it had what 2 had but expands it + best ps2 multiplayer ever. too bad no one plays it online anymore. hoping the collection for ps3 will bring back some R&C 3 people.		2012-08-06 18:01:00

Author:
Sunbunny23
Posts: 995

Want to know something mindblowing? Since Monsters Inc. their movies always have in-jokes that reference the movie they're going to make next (http://www.cracked.com/article_19210_7-insane-easter-eggs-hidden-in-movies-tv-shows.html). That's right, referencing past movies is too easy for them.

My GOD, you read Cracked?! Wow. If you were a female, and you also read The Oatmeal, I would marry you on the spot.

No, not really.

Anyway, why is Toy Story such a massive topic here?		2012-08-07 05:50:00

Author:
Kaboosh99
Posts: 359

I do actually check the Oatmeal from time to time. Funny stuff.

I think Toy Story is a topic here because it's the perfect example of a series whose sequels mantain the quality of the original movie. Which is pretty amazing, because the original movie is top notch.

Making a good sequel is difficult. Heck, making a good movie is already a challenge. If the first movie was already one of the greatest films ever made, making a sequel that's just as good is very, very rare. But a trilogy of universally acclaimed movies? That's almost a miracle.		2012-08-08 21:33:00

Author:
SnipySev
Posts: 2452

on the topic of origins stories I think a good example is heroes the t.v. series. after season 1 the writers realised that the origins and discovery of the heroes powers were the most interesting bits so brought in new cast members to allow them to continue writing origins tales. they also cut back on the use of characters whose powers were mostly un-interesting once their origins were explained, such as niki sanders. I'm not saying doing this payed off, the first season is easily still the best but it shows how that theory works2012-08-09 19:57:00

Author:
Smudge228
Posts: 533

Movies, specials, and video games aren't the only ones that are overdone. There was something else I was thinking about earlier - Charlie the Unicorn. The whole thing is pretty stupid, but parts 2 and 3 are more un-epic than part 1. I forgot what part 3 was about (although I remember a sea goat and the loss of the horn), but I know part 2 is the banana king one. And the first one is candy mountain. What do you guys think of Charlie the Unicorn?2012-08-14 02:59:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

Movies, specials, and video games aren't the only ones that are overdone. There was something else I was thinking about earlier - Charlie the Unicorn. The whole thing is pretty stupid, but parts 2 and 3 are more un-epic than part 1. I forgot what part 3 was about (although I remember a sea goat and the loss of the horn), but I know part 2 is the banana king one. And the first one is candy mountain. What do you guys think of Charlie the Unicorn?

I thought the first was pretty funny, but after a thousand unicorn quotes it became rather stale, and the idea's been done, the creator is wringing a completely dried up sponge for ideas. Should've quit while he was ahead... if you can get ahead by making animations about unicorns...		2012-08-14 14:13:00

Author:
Ironface
Posts: 432

I thought the first was pretty funny, but after a thousand unicorn quotes it became rather stale, and the idea's been done, the creator is wringing a completely dried up sponge for ideas. Should've quit while he was ahead... if you can get ahead by making animations about unicorns...

Charlie the Unicorn is another example that's better if there was only one short. I didn't even like the banana king.

Imagine if you live in a time where every movie and video game has at least one sequel (examples include Gone with the Wind and South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut). That is the time when creativity (and originality) is extinct.		2012-08-14 17:38:00

Author:
Apple2012
Posts: 1408

Well SecretAgentBob's Llamas With hats Got Better,l The Only One I didnt like was the 3rd, but they he made up for it with the 4th. Btw SecretAgentBob is the Person who made Charlie The Unicorn2012-08-14 19:52:00

Author:
Awesome_Guy
Posts: 167

I love the Halo series, and I can't wait for Halo 4.2012-08-16 23:25:00

Author:
Xero Space
Posts: 249


LBPCentral Archive Statistics
Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Datenschutz
Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.