Debate thread #1

[naronic]

First attempt at a debate thread, behave yourselves, this will be looked over by an admin!

Alright so this is the topic

"How long after a game is released, should it's sequel come out? Should the wait differ depending on the genre of the initial game? How loyal should the sequel be to the original game in terms of gameplay, story or multiplayer?"

2 people may be chosen for this debate, depending on who applies first.
Applications below OP's post.

[Anti-pie]

At 10/12/11 04:46 PM, naronic wrote:

"How long after a game is released, should it's sequel come out? Should the wait differ depending on the genre of the initial game? How loyal should the sequel be to the original game in terms of gameplay, story or multiplayer?"

I think 2-3 years is good for another sequel gives people time to fully enjoy a game before it becomes dull. When it comes to a genre of games I can see the length of the sequel being different like sports game always coming out after a year after the other one since stats for Professional Athlete players change. Shooters I can see between 2-3 years before it becomes boring of playing the same old game. RPGs should take 2-4 years since RPGs usually have more content for single player like exploration, loot, leveling up, quest, side quest, and DLC that make the game even longer.

Talking about how the sequel should be loyal to the first I would have to say that of course it would have to fix the errors of the one before it. Adding new ideas and content to make the game better and more enjoyable to play. Multiplayer can either be a good thing or a horrid thing depending on how the company decides to create the multiplayer.

[Crink]

At 10/12/11 04:46 PM, naronic wrote: First attempt at a debate thread, behave yourselves, this will be looked over by an admin!

Alright so this is the topic

i don't think there is much leeway for a debate on that topic because

"How long after a game is released, should its sequel come out?

however long it takes for the sequel to be developed, made and actually be a good a game regardless of the fact that it is a sequel

Should the wait differ depending on the genre of the initial game?

not really

How loyal should the sequel be to the original game in terms of gameplay, story or multiplayer?"

it should be reasonably loyal in terms of gameplay and story. there is no point in releasing a sequel if it has completely different story and gameplay

[POTaTOS]

No less than 2 years. Depending on the type of game it is. If it's a massive sandbox game like LBP, it should take 2 1/2-3 years. If it's an RPG like Mass Effect/Fallout it should be 3-4 years.

[Makeshift]

Why don't we just make threads and talk and let the debates come naturally? I don't want to be told I can't join the conversation.

[SlipperyMooseCakes]

And so the debate about the debate thread begins :)

I was thinking about a thread similar to this a little while ago. I don't know if this is a sturdy enough topic to begin with and I wouldn't just have it between two people. Let people form teams and sides and let them work it out. You're going to need a moderator and a host of some sort to keep things clean and to keep the conversation on track and going.

[naronic]

At 10/12/11 05:35 PM, SlipperyMooseCakes wrote: And so the debate about the debate thread begins :)

I was thinking about a thread similar to this a little while ago. I don't know if this is a sturdy enough topic to begin with and I wouldn't just have it between two people. Let people form teams and sides and let them work it out. You're going to need a moderator and a host of some sort to keep things clean and to keep the conversation on track and going.

So far we have 2 people with similar view points.
Nobody's applied yet.

just say that you want to take part and you'll be one of the debaters

[Bobbybroccoli]

If the game sells well, and is fun, then a sequel should not even be in developement until at least a month of release of the original.

What I recall happened with the original Mario Galaxy was that the devs had an insane number of ideas for gameplay, but the first game would end up being too big for it's own good.

What I liked is that the devs kept what made the original great, and added lots of new ideas, that weren't overused throughout the sequel.

The game ended up feeling like a Galaxy game, but felt new and exciting at the same time.

A minimum of two years should be between each entry in a series. Sports games really annoy me because there are very little improvements form year to year. Why not make new player and team statistics availabe as DLC?

[naronic]

At 10/12/11 07:27 PM, Bobbybroccoli wrote: stuff

debate has commenced
Bobbybroccoli
vs
________

[naronic]

At 10/12/11 08:14 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/12/11 07:47 PM, naronic wrote: debate has commenced
Bobbybroccoli
vs
________

Why don't you hop into the ring?

I want to see how this goes before I take part in my own threads,
besides I agree with him, (somewhat)

[jeeshwa123]

As long as it takes to be as good as the first.
My primary example is Kingdom Hearts. They finally released their sequel 4-5(?) years later, but it was actually BETTER than the first! It expanded on the original, fixed old problems, offered fresh and new gameplay...it was fantastic. The best sequel one could ask for.

Now I sit and wait for KH3. and it annoys me how long its taking. But I'm willing to wait much longer if it means the 3rd installment will be the best game it can possibly be. :)

[djack]

At 10/12/11 08:17 PM, naronic wrote:

At 10/12/11 08:14 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/12/11 07:47 PM, naronic wrote: debate has commenced
Bobbybroccoli
vs
________

Why don't you hop into the ring?

I want to see how this goes before I take part in my own threads,
besides I agree with him, (somewhat)

I'll throw my hat into the ring.

I have no hat and there is no ring but apparently that won't stop me from trying.

It depends on the game and how popular it is. Assassin's Creed for example is extremely popular but a little on the short side plus they already have somewhat of a plan for the overall story line so it wouldn't be too much to expect them to get to work on the sequel ASAP and pop out a sequel in the next 1-2 years. The Elder Scrolls series on the other hand is much larger and each game has it's own storyline for the most part so waiting to get a lot of feedback on the game and taking a few years to make the game and fully utilize any new advances in tech that could improve the game. Of course any game that gets trapped in development limbo for too long is almost guaranteed to be crap (I'm looking at you Duke Nukem) so I would say that more than 7 years and the game probably wouldn't be worth finishing. For less popular games or simpler games (the latter usually being handheld games especially for older generations) a shorter time period before the release of the sequel can help increase awareness of the series but too short and the next game won't have enough time to utilize feedback so 6 months to a year.

[chipotleaway]

Depends if mod tools.

[alfraydo]

an interesting concept. a controlled debate between two parties should be worth viewing.