OXCGN:
"Game sequels should always be better than their predecessors. It’s a rule and usually a certainty.
Films must rely on narrative and characterisation for success; two elements that can often be subjective in their effectiveness. If a film has already spent the time introducing the characters and filling in their backstories, a successful sequel can be a daunting task to provide the same intrigue and compelling plotlines.
Games have it a bit easier. Gameplay and usability are the major drawcards, and can be improved much more readily by seeking feedback from the prior game and simply taking out the bad and adding more of the good with some new features sprinkled on top. With each successive title we expect, nay demand, a better experience.
But does this really happen in execution? It’s time to find out as we look at some of the notable games and sequels that have both existed in this generation, and choose our pick of which did it best."
In 2025 Marc-Alexis Côté, the head of the Assassin’s Creed franchise and a 20 year veteran of Ubisoft, abruptly left the publisher following the launch of Assassin’s Creed Shadows.
Bioware writes: "Like you, we’ve heard the rumors lately. You’ve made it clear you care deeply about what’s next. So let’s start by setting the record straight: the next Mass Effect game is in development, and EA and BioWare remain committed to telling more stories in this universe."
I expected nothing and I'm still disappointed
Like with Fallout, it's starting to feel studios are using TV / Film adaptations when they have no game info to talk about.
I feel the same way.
I mean, how difficult would it be for them to release SOMETHING of substance? Another short trailer? A couple of proper hints? A short story set during the original trilogy, but focused on fringe characters?
Hopefully they're working so hard on the game that they don't have time. But still, with every passing year and so little to show, the franchise will be slipping further and further from people's minds.
Yeah agree it's almost a cop out since Dev times are 5 to 10 years just throw out a few seasons instead you get them done in a year
So the TV show will take place after the OG trilogy. I wonder which ending they’ll use?
Should’ve just posted a picture of an Elcor saying “regretfully, we have nothing to share.”
Remakes of the campaigns featured in Xbox Game Studios' Halo 2 and Halo 3 are currently in development, according to a new rumor.
That's Microsoft's gaming division for you...kill off developers making new ip while trying to capitalize off some long lost glory that has no hope of ever being what it once was thanks to recent decision making favoring unrealistic profit goals and greed. What a joke.
So much bitterness. Why be upset over something like this. Just don't buy it and stick with what you prefer.
Give it rest medman..., take a deep breath and try to not sound so invested in something no one is forcing you to read, buy, or play.
"Console war"is over, Sony won, be happy.
@thesoftware730
I'm invested in people losing their jobs and their livelihoods while Microsoft execs tout record profits for their gaming division. Not sure why you wouldn't be invested. Could be you one day. Good luck.
So what’s their solution to having multiplayer? Wait until Halo 7?
That was one of the most memorable parts of Halo..
I'm not sure spending the heavy investment in time to recreate the multiplayer here is the answer either though.
Remaking the campaigns is a great idea to bring the new players up to speed. But if the multiplayer is included in each it'll just fracture the player base of each release.
I think it might be better to turn these campaigns out quicker and have 1 multiplayer game to keep everyone in one place
Maybe having an Halo Online and just release the Combat Evolve maps. And when Halo 2 releases have those maps release. I don’t know but I would like to play a newer version of Halo multiplayer. I know times have changed, and Fortnite is all younger kids really play. But back then it was Halo and you connecting 6 Xbox’s together lol.
I agree. I think that'll segment the playerbase and once 7 comes out, players might realize it sucks and go back to the older games. Especially if 7 is live-servixe, they'll be shooting themselves in the foot on the one good leg they have to stand on.
Kinda surprised they didn't just port MCC.
Maybe more $ to by made with separate remasters
Wouldn't have that problem if it were MCC being released. Gotta wait for 7 to be disappointed with MP all over again cause if they half baked Infinite what makes people think they won't half bake the next game? MP works in past HALO games not cause of nostalgia but because it's MP that isn't concerned with the endless service approach.
There is so much cognitive dissonance over Infinite. People say they didn't like it because it was a live service. Yet if you look at what the criticisms of it were at the time it came out and when the playerbase started falling off, the primary issue people had was a lack of updates. In other words, it wasn't enough of a live service.
Which is really an encapsulation of the problem with multiplayer today. So many people think that they want to go back to the "good old days" of mid-2000s multiplayer (The first few Halos, Socom, the first few Battlefields, CS 1.6, etc), but in reality if a multiplayer game like that came out today, people would whine about the lack of content within a month of launch and go back to a live service with a grindy progression system.
Why not just port the MCC? 🤔 That was the easiest layup ever and you completely missed it
I thought the same thing, then I realized that they wouldn't include the remakes in that edition. We may get a different version of Halo MCC in the future with all of the remakes included. I just want them to include Halo 5 at some point for PC.
I wonder if Microsoft will port Reach over to Playstation I quite enjoyed that game. I played Halo 3 and it was not bad I have Halo 2 on the OG Xbox I just need some cables to hook up to my tv to play it.
The comparisons are good and I completely agree with them. It shows that not all sequels aren't always better than their originals.
Some game developers should have thought of a new way to change the game in their sequel and not just make another one to try and make more money.
Why not just make it a different series?
Case in point: the Need for Speed series. The street racing ones are all well and good, but then Shift is something entirely different as is World and the upcoming Hot Pursuit.
The only thing they have in common is cars and 'NFS', probably just to get sales from the name. Especially Hot Pursuit which looks more like Burnout and is by Criterion anyway.
FarCry is another series where the games only share the title and pretty environments.
There are times when it is necessary due to plot changes that have been evolving over time. Such as Splinter Cell.
While many gamers simply wanted another Chaos Theory, that game was really the end of the Sneak/peek/pop style of Sam Fisher.
Things changed in the game world, so the actual game style needed to change as well.
But many gamers can't see that, and simply want repetition, which does not advance any game.
I'll disagree with you on Far Cry REALgamer - the sequel was a completely different beast to the original. There were some really innovative and unique elements added to FC2
Pretty good list, although I think Mass Effect was waaaay better than ME2. But looks like thats just me.