Tech: Sequel-itis

In a way, it's understandable. With development costs skyrocketing into the millions for video and PC games, it's natural for software companies to re-use entire engines, interfaces, and even creative assets to churn out a sequel or port that isn't very different from what came before. Some companies, like EA, do this every year and even label the newest version - e.g. "Madden 2007" - because without the year on the box, it might be hard for people to tell the difference.

The popular name for this is a "more of the same" sequel. I'm not against them per se, but there is a right and a wrong way to do a MOTS sequel. The wrong way is to slop together an "all-new" story suspiciously using many of the same in-game graphics and sounds. Examples of this kind of sequel are abundant - Fallout 2, KOTOR 2, Soul Calibur 3, etc. Now, these aren't bad games, or even mediocre games (Fallout 2 is arguably one of the best computer RPGs ever made), but they don't feel different.

The right way, IMHO, when making a sequel that doesn't stray far from the beaten path is exemplified by games like "God of War 2" (pictured above) and "Virtua Fighter 5." Instead of trying to shoehorn a new experience onto a player (when the experience isn't new), I feel these kinds of sequels should embrace what made the initial game(s) successful, and refine those elements.

Moral of the story? If you're going to recycle a great game, at least give the people what they want.