Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2020 23:50:08 GMT -5
Often a classic is so good, that what follows pales in comparison. What I want to know though is the opposite. What games' sequels were so good yet stuck to the formula so carefully that there's little reason to play the original? Or what can properly be skipped without really missing much. Any thoughts?
Going through what I own, I'd say these fit the bill:
Racers! Racers are so formulaic, that the original often isn't nearly as good. These include Burnout 3, Need for Speed Hot Pursuit 2, XGIII (or for Ex XGRA), and Road Rash II.
Sports! I don't own that many sports games anymore. They really lost their appeal to me the older I got (opposite of many people I know), but there's little reason to own the original Madden or the original NBA 2K2. For me NBA Street Vol. 2 obviates the need to own Vol. 1. I'm others have their own opinions on other series.
While I never played Thunder Force I, Thunder Force II never really attracted my interest like Thunder Force III and IV.
Streets of Rage 2 and Final Fight 2 mean the originals are unnecessary and a chore to play in comparison.
The original Street Fighter II doesn't compare to Turbo or Super.
Game series to consider: Gauntlet, Golden Axe, Diablo, and Civilization.
No doubt everyone will have their own opinion on this, so what are your picks?
|
|
|
Post by toei on Jul 20, 2020 0:06:36 GMT -5
Streets of Rage is a really good game, IMO, and much more challenging than the first. Also, Final Fight 2 is absolute trash and doesn't hold a candle to the original, as long as we're talking the arcade OG and not the mediocre SNES port. The levels are interminable, enemies don't fight back, it's easily Capcom's worst beat-'em-up.
In general I agree with yearly sports games - unless they were to really mess one up somehow, each entry pretty much seems to make the previous ones obsolete. Racers, too, though Road Rash 1 has great music and is less focused on fighting than 2, so those could be reasons why you'd want to play it.
I think the first Thunder Force only came out on Japanese computers, and from what I heard, it's not very good. Thunder Force 2's a good pick for this, but that's mostly because I don't like the overhead levels at all.
The original Golden Axe is a lot better than Genesis GA2, and significantly different from GA3 or Revenge of Death Adder. Weird pick. I don't have a ton of experience with Civilization or the Sims, but they seem like they probably do fit this topic. Unless an older game offers some cool options that are phased out in later entries, I would generally expect that the latest version of any simulation-type game would become the version to play.
VS fighters! Since the genre depends so much on refining and rebalancing the core gameplay of a given series, and story or single-player progression don't matter much, the first entry in any VS fighters series is often ignored. OG Street Fighter 2 is an important game, but most people would rather play some other SF, and no one wants to play Street Fighter 1. Tekken arguably didn't become good until Tekken 3 (though a lot of people liked 2... I think it still feels a little weak). Etc.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jul 20, 2020 0:08:53 GMT -5
Definitely games that are iterative in nature fit the bill. Fighting games come to mind, where Street Fighter Alpha 3 pretty much eliminates the need to play the prior Alpha games. Capcom vs. SNK 2 does the same thing to its prequel. Tecmo Super Bowl makes playing the original Tecmo Bowl nearly worthless.
While I do think Streets of Rage 2 is fantastic, I don't think it replaces the original in my book. I like them both a lot, and I think the first game's soundtrack is actually better.
I agree with Burnout 3 - fantastic racing game that honestly hasn't been matched in the series.
I'll have to mull things over before I post more.
|
|
|
Post by Ex on Jul 20, 2020 0:34:32 GMT -5
A few specific instances that sprung to mind:
Sonic the Hedgehog 2 is superior to the original Sonic, and remains the best game in the entire series.
Street Fighter II is incredibly better than the original Street Fighter. It set the template that every SF game has followed since, just with slight refinements per generation.
Dragon Quest VIII represented everything great about DQ, and in my experience is the best DQ entry period. To the point that if you only played one DQ, that's the series entry I'd most ardently recommend. (And I mean the PS2 version people, not the 3DS or mobile port.)
Super Metroid is not far removed from the first two entries, but is clearly superior. It's still the defining 2D entry in the series to this day.
Front Mission 4 is superior to the first three FM entries, and is probably even better than FM5 overall. So yeah it counts here.
Phantasy Star IV trumped all three of its predecessors if we're being honest.
Mortal Kombat II was far more polished and balanced than the original MK, and I think MK2 is still the best entry in that series. And yes, I've played the recent entries as well.
King's Field III is superior to its predecessors, and superior to its successor in every way but graphics.
Trauma Team is a brilliant (and criminally ignored) experience, and it outclasses all the Trauma Center entries that came before it.
You're better off just playing whatever the most recent Monster Hunter is, rather than starting with the original entry.
Most people agree Dark Cloud 2 is a lot better than the original Dark Cloud.
Mario Kart and Smash Bros. are both series that generally improve with each new entry.
Ace Combat 5 is THE best entry in that entire series. Easily outclassing the original AC, and is still superior to what's come after it.
I could think of a whole lot more subjective opinions to add.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2020 0:36:14 GMT -5
All good suggestions! Streets of Rage is a really good game, IMO, and much more challenging than the first. Also, Final Fight 2 is absolute trash and doesn't hold a candle to the original, as long as we're talking the arcade OG and not the mediocre SNES port. The levels are interminable, enemies don't fight back, it's easily Capcom's worst beat-'em-up. Yeah, I was thinking about the SNES game, not the arcade game. The original Golden Axe is a lot better than Genesis GA2, and significantly different from GA3 or Revenge of Death Adder. Weird pick. It wasn't my pick. It was an idea for others to talk about if they so choose. I don't have a ton of experience with Civilization or the Sims, but they seem like they probably do fit this topic. I think the original Civ is eclipsed, but I think people can make the argument that it has charms that the successors do not. It's not my argument though. I disagree on SimCity, though. While sometimes I'm drawn to later SimCity games, the original, unless you're playing in a hyper-formulaic way, is still a blast to play. VS fighters! Since the genre depends so much on refining and rebalancing the core gameplay of a given series, and story or single-player progression don't matter much, the first entry in any VS fighters series is often ignored. OG Street Fighter 2 is an important game, but most people would rather play some other SF, and no one wants to play Street Fighter 1. Tekken arguably didn't become good until Tekken 3 (though a lot of people liked 2... I think it still feels a little weak). Etc.[/quote] While I do think Streets of Rage 2 is fantastic, I don't think it replaces the original in my book. I like them both a lot, and I think the first game's soundtrack is actually better. I remember struggling to go back to SoR1 after SoR Remake was made, but I haven't bothered with either in a decade. I don't even own SoR1 anymore, but SoR2 I liked enough to keep. I'll have to go back and play 2 and then 1 again one day to see if that opinion still holds. Sonic the Hedgehog 2 is superior to the original Sonic, and remains the best game in the entire series. Super Metroid is not far removed from the first two entries, but is clearly superior. It's still the defining 2D entry in the series to this day. But can you still play Sonic 1 and Metroid? I can, at least. The sequels are superior, but I still love playing the originals. Same for Zelda, though Link to the Past is beat it in every way. Mortal Kombat II was far more polished and balanced than the original MK, and I think MK2 is still the best entry in that series. And yes, I've played the recent entries as well. Agreed! This is the only entry I own. Mario Kart and Smash Bros. are both series that generally improve with each new entry. I don't care for Smash, but Mario Kart 64 is the epitome of the series. I still sometimes play the original though, just for kicks. Phantasy Star IV trumped all three of its predecessors if we're being honest. Funny enough, this was one of the reason I started this thread. Actually getting into these games showed a lot of disappointments in the originals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2020 3:30:27 GMT -5
Second verse better than the first?
Well, it's true Diablo 2 is generally considered the strongest entry in the series, but I prefer the original game. The focus on co-op did nothing for me.
Resident Evil 2 is generally considered better than the first game and I agree, although the GameCube remake changes things. Resident Evil 4 is often considered the strongest entry in the series and I disagree, unless you count only the entries featuring over-the-shoulder camera view (and even then, I still got to play RE6, Revelations 2 and the recent remakes, so who knows).
Silent Hill 2 is generally considered the strongest entry in the series and I agree. Even better story, less obtuse puzzles.
Gothic 2 is generally considered the strongest entry in the series and I, uh, not really agree. I prefer the original Gothic but it's close.
Warcraft 2 is generally considered better than Warcraft and Warcraft 3 is generally considered better than Warcraft 2. I agree.
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind is the first entry in the series that really matters for most fans of the series, as Arena and Daggerfall are considered too 'archaic'. I sorta agree.
Star Wars: TIE Fighter is generally considered better than X-Wing and I agree. Fixes rough edges and lets you play as the best faction.
Age of Empires II is considered the strongest entry in the series and I agree.
Devil May Cry 3 is generally considered the strongest entry in the series and I disagree. I prefer the first and fourth games.
HeXen 2 is better than the previous game. Not so much for the 3D graphics, just because its puzzles and hubs aren't as annoying.
Kane & Lynch 2 is much better than the previous game.
Front Mission 4 is the best entry in the series - story and gameplay-wise.
King's Field 3 only gets trumped by King's Field 4.
Fire Emblem received a SNES and DS remake. They're both better ways to play through the original game than to suffer through the Famicom version, not to mention all the other entries in the series.
Hitman: Codename 47 is generally considered weak compared to Hitman 2 and the other games. I agree.
I prefer Knights of the Old Republic 2 to the original game.
Rayman 3 is often considered the best entry in the series and I agree.
Persona 1 is generally considered the weakest entry in the series, most people preferring the third, fourth and now, I imagine, fifth game. I disagree, but I haven't played Persona 4 and 5 yet. Generally speaking though, all the 'highschool social stuff' isn't for me, so that isn't likely to change.
|
|
|
Post by toei on Jul 20, 2020 4:07:10 GMT -5
I think the topic was more "sequels that eliminate any reason to play the original", not just "series were the second game is better than the first".
RE2 is better than 1, but 1 is still good, and different enough that they're both worth playing. Same for Silent Hill, and probably most of those other games.
|
|
|
Post by Xeogred on Jul 20, 2020 6:52:31 GMT -5
This is against my philosophy when I approach a large series I'm interested in. I usually want to play them all and I often think there's still some charm in the earlier games with their simplicity and setting the blueprints. Even if I agree with some opinions in this thread like Super Metroid being better than Metroid, that takes away absolutely nothing from Metroid for me and is still a must play masterpiece in my book. And I have friends in person that do this, they pick and choose only one game or two from a large series and end up loving them, yet then seemingly avoid the rest of the series for whatever reason... I don't understand that at all. This thread almost seems to encourage that!
Now I don't always care to play things in order when the sequels are their own thing. Like my journey through Dragon Quest in recent years, I started with DQ5 since it sounded like a fan favorite. I liked it, but it was DQ4 after that one that made me a real fan and want to play them all. I'm glad I played through DQ1-3 now, I think DQ3 is tied with DQ4 as my current favorite.
One I won't go to bat for I guess would be Mega Man 1. The 6 NES games are very much the same format and MM2 is way more refined and perfected than MM1. I still run through MM1 when I do a binge replay of them all, but it's never been one I love. I still play it though and would say any Mega Man fan should see its humble beginnings. And I'm sure there's people out there that think it's their favorite, just as I look at some mentioned games here and still think the first is worth playing. And like some others said, sometimes the sequels are actually just straight up worse and a downgrade.
|
|
|
Post by anayo on Jul 20, 2020 7:25:27 GMT -5
I love Virtua Cop 2 but have always felt it outdid Virtua Cop 1 a little too well. For me, Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 1 was so good that I never felt any of the sequels did much to demand my attention. I liked THPS 2, but all the later entries make me want to do is replay THPS 1. I loved Road Rash so much that it had the unfortunate consequence of making me no longer play Super Hang On. I loved Streets of Rage 2 so much that it made me no longer want to play Golden Axe. Ex Agreed. I beat Super Metroid around 2005 or so and quite liked it even though it was hardly a modern game by then. When I beat Metroid in 2019 it felt like I had to work extra hard to put myself in the mindset of the time. I almost couldn’t. Ex I can’t comment on the arcade versions but I own both Sega Genesis versions. MKII blew it out of the park in the graphics and sound department but it CPU controlled fighters felt like they were directly from a quarter eating arcade game. They would read my button inputs and just weren’t fun or satisfying to fight. As a result I still find MKI to be slightly more playable. I’ve always reserved that distinction for SK&3, but I think this owes itself to when I got a Genesis (1995). I’ve noticed people who are old enough to remember when the Genesis came out in ’89 tend to prefer that earlier crop of Genesis games. (Although strangely enough I do esteem Revenge of Shinobi over Shinobi III.) Generally yes but there are some cases where earlier entries do things that later ones don’t. I am aware there is a very committed group of people who will play Smash Bros. Melee for the Gamecube and nothing else. I’m not 100% familiar with how that version of the game works but apparently there are people whose gameplay style relies on wavedashing and other odd quirks of the game engine. Empirically speaking the later entries have more input latency. I think the most recent one has about 90 ms (and that doesn’t factor in wireless controllers or your TV, it’s just the game engine) whereas the Gamecube one was 20 ms. This probably isn’t something average players would care about, but savant-level experts can apparently pick up on that and it makes them turn their nose at the newer ones. I’m slightly more qualified to talk about Mario Kart Double Dash for the Gamecube. Although I’ve never competed in a MKDD tournament or anything I’ve probably put a few hundred hours into that game. In MKDD it’s possible to accelerate far, far beyond the CPU controlled players by power sliding endlessly in a sustained chain, which is called “snaking”. Snaking is probably an unintended game mechanic because they removed snaking in later Mario Kart entries by limiting your kart’s power sliding abilities, probably to make Mario Kart more approachable to everyone. But when you have two players who know how to snake properly it makes MKDD a very different game. It’s incredibly cutthroat, competitive, and unforgiving. No other Mario Kart game since quite lives up to it. @tsumuri Thanks, I’ll have to keep that in mind. I earnestly wanted to enjoy Hexen 1 and just couldn’t.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2020 7:32:24 GMT -5
I slightly misunderstood the aim of this topic, but I still think there's often no clear-cut line between "sequels that eliminate any reason to play the original" and "series were the second game is better than the first", it's subjective and depends on the player. For instance, I think there are a lot of reasons why a DMC fan should play the first video game and I don't see how DMC 3 eliminates any reason to play the original, yet there are many fans that would never play it, mostly because of the fixed camera.
As for me, I always try to play video games series in their entirety and in order of release and I definitely don't recommend skipping Resident Evil 1 or Silent Hill 1 of all games.
|
|