How often should developers make sequels?

[agbulls]

I often see people bitching and complaining about one of the two following things:

Game "x" Needs a sequel. Why hasn't "inset company here" made one yet? Ahhhh!
There are just way too many versions of "name game here." They need to stop making them for awhile and start fresh.


So guys, which is it? We can't have both ways. There are a few obvious mentions that come to each of the these categories. How often SHOULD a game get a proper sequel? Once a year? Two or three times a year? Once every 10 years? Which is it...and does it really just depend on the genre?

Too many sequels too fast?
-Megaman (hard to argue)
-Anything from EA
-Final Fantasy
-Mario Party
-Sonic
-Street Fighter II (HD version anyone?)
-Splinter Cell (they just announced ANOTHER one)

Needs sequel(s) a little more often or even ever?
-Chrono Trigger / Chrono Chross
-Titles from Treasure
-Titles from Tim Schaefer
-Ninja Gaiden (stop with the remakes, please)

Just right?
-Metal Gear
-Super Mario
-Smash Bros

Seriously, there's a sequel in the works? Seriously?
-Nights
-Fallout
-Shadowrun
-Starcraft 2

[njiska]

i think it depends on the game, but on average i think 2-3 years between games works best. Gives lots of time to develope the proerty without rushing to market.

[youruglyclone]

final fantasys aren't actually a yearly deal, it's like 2-3 between each one.

SF2 is really just remakes, keep in mind the 15th anniversary of the SF2 kicked in recently so that's why capcom is milking it.

[agbulls]

final fantasys aren't actually a yearly deal, it's like 2-3 between each one.

SF2 is really just remakes, keep in mind the 15th anniversary of the SF2 kicked in recently so that's why capcom is milking it.

More like this is the anniverary of their 15th year of milking it.

[exit]

It depends on the game and how far they can go with it's story, or likability of the characters. It all really depends on how the company treats the characters/games and how long it takes the public to stop caring. Take for example Duke Nukem, who the hell cares about that asshole anymore?

[Rogmeister]

Yes, I definitely feel a few series should be seen more often. I mean, one Mario adventure game over the entire lifespan of the GameCube? I'd have liked less Mario Party and Mario sports and at least one more Mario adventure game, thank you very much. I do think many franchises overdo it. We don't need a new one every year...

[roushimsx]

As often as they want to make sequels. Pushing them to a set timeline (like one per year) is a surefire way to burn out your talent and a great way to diminish the quality of the franchise (anyone else play Ratchet: Deadlocked? Yuck).

I admire 3dRealm's insistence to not put out a substandard Duke game and I LOVE that they quit licensing out the Duke character because they were tired of low quality Duke Nukem games...the unreleased Duke Nukem hunting game being the straw that broke the camel's back, but I'm sure Eurocom didn't help at all. I also like how Remedy decided to not run the Max Payne franchise into the ground with an unnecessary third installment.

[jajaja]

Pokémon is alittle like Mega Man Battle Network, alot of games comming out. I played through (i think, or atleast i played it alot) Pokémon Red for the original Gameboy and Mega Man Battle Network 1 and i enjoyed both games alot. However, i never took the time or found the big interest to play any of the sequels.

From a gaming point of view i dont care about it, but for collecting it can sux. Becomes too many games to buy hehe :)

[Nebagram]

I'd rather have a quality game every 2-3 years than the yearly diarrhoea attack EA seems to have with Madden, NHL, FIFA etc. A release schedule like Metal Gear is just right, keep them playing the games then let them rest before salivating over the next in the series...

[djsquarewave]

I'd nominate Castlevania as another "too many too fast" deal. Instead of three above-average GBA games, we could have had two truly excellent ones. Ones that didn't reuse 15-year-old sprites. Of course, fewer games released means fewer games for customers to buy which means less money for Konami. You put more money into each game to make it better and that's just further diminishing the returns.

I have to admire any company that will push back a release date because they want to make their game better. Even if the game still comes out crap, you can often tell they really were trying. They didn't shove it out the door just to have it off their hands (hi Sonic Team) or bring in an outside team with no emotional investment to bring it to a releasable state.

Sure, I'm disappointed when I find out a game I'm looking forward to gets pushed from launch to third-generation (hi SSBB), but it makes it all the more exciting when the release finally comes as you know that much more effort went into it.

[exit]

One game that has it's sequels handled nicely is Zelda. Nintendo could easily shoot out sequel after sequel, well knowing that the fans will follow. Only time there were a lot of Zelda games at once was with MM and the GBC games. The GBC games were great, especially with the file transfer feature, but MM was just alright.

Legacy of Kain needs another sequel, at least one that finishes the storyline and helps put fans desires to rest. I also wouldn't mind seeing another Parasite Eve and Eternal Darkness.

[heybtbm]

I'd nominate Castlevania as another "too many too fast" deal. Instead of three above-average GBA games, we could have had two truly excellent ones. Ones that didn't reuse 15-year-old sprites.


Uh-huh.

http://img501.imageshack.us/img501/8387/44hazytraderzr3.jpg

[JSoup]

Depends on the game. Some series are self sustaining enough to handle several sequals in a short amount of time. Look at the Ratchet & Clank series. Up until Deadlocked, we were seeing a new game every year and it worked out great.

Then again, some series have so much depth to them, it's hard to gauge just how much time should pass before the next one comes around. See Paper Mario. Good strategies are still being developed for the first game and we are just now seeing the third (which is comparatively much simpler than it's predicesors).

[youruglyclone]

More like this is the anniverary of their 15th year of milking it.

well considering the crux of your argument is "how often", SF2 doesn't really fit in.

considering the time between the last SF2 installment Super Turbo (1994), and the game which ended that streak Anniversary Edition aka Hyperfighting (2004).

I mean yeah SF hasn't exactly innovated but capcom's too busy churning out other stuff...like megaman games.

and yeah the GBC games that came out at a rapid pace...co-developed by capcom.

still I'm looking forward to Dead Rising 10: Still Rising

[Push Upstairs]

Sometimes a year brings greatness (Sonic 1--->Sonic 2) and sometimes it gives you Mega Man games (hellloooo 4, 5, & 6).

It depends on the talent and the development team...and if Capcom is overdoing it.

[djsquarewave]

Uh-huh.
Are you calling me fat?

Seriously though, I've been completely unable to finish Harmony of Dissonance or Portrait of Ruin simply because they feel cheap and unneccesary. Sometimes these things need to percolate a little longer. Though the 3D ones really need a different person directing them.

IGA jumped from Tokimeki Memorial after the first one because he felt it'd run its course, but he's still making the same Castlevania over and over ten years running. Hmm...

[goemon]

I'd like to see a third Salamander game. I had high hopes that 2006 would be the year (Salamander: 1986, Salamander 2: 1996) but I guess Konami didn't want to do a series with ten years between installments.

[heybtbm]

Seriously though, I've been completely unable to finish Harmony of Dissonance or Portrait of Ruin simply because they feel cheap and unneccesary. Sometimes these things need to percolate a little longer. Though the 3D ones really need a different person directing them.

IGA jumped from Tokimeki Memorial after the first one because he felt it'd run its course, but he's still making the same Castlevania over and over ten years running. Hmm...

To each their own, I guess. I think all three of the GBA Castlevania's are some of the best GBA games ever released. I should clarify that my favorite game of all time is SOTN, so of course I'm going to love its three little handheld clones.


Are you calling me fat?

Congratulations on having a sense of humor...seriously. It's seems to be lacking here on DP as of late.

[djsquarewave]

I should clarify that my favorite game of all time is SOTN, so of course I'm going to love its three little handheld clones.
SOTN is a brilliant game, and certainly in my top five. Aira of Sorrow is probably my favorite of the recent ones (it got the best of my Pokemon Syndrome, that's for sure), but even that one felt like it got pushed out the door a bit too soon.


Congratulations on having a sense of humor...seriously. It's seems to be lacking here on DP as of late.
The internet is serious business, yo. \\^_^/

[Eteric Rice]

In my opinion? Every 3 - 4 years, that way the game has had enough time in the development cycle.

[whoisKeel]

Totally depends on the game and the franchise. Do you really want to wait 4 years for another Gears of War game? I don't. I'd patiently wait 4 years for the next Zelda game though.