![]() Final Fantasy VIII is the sequel to Final Fantasy VII. That's subjective, so it's pointless arguing it. I don't think a story connection is a prerequisite. And Zelda 2 wildly differs from its predecessor, more so than BotW differs from most of the Zelda games before it. For what it's worth, Zelda games are all connected in canon. So I agree with the sentiment that ‘sequels are more of the same’…the doesn’t mean we shouldn’t want them to be different (in this case I know you don’t), but because it’s such a rarity the expectation on them being different is probably more of a given…regardless of the different direction 2018 took to god of war 3 I guess maybe resident evil 7 and 8…but then they’re contained in their own story arch within that universe…where as god of war 2018 is still kratos continued story.īasically God of war 2018 was very special indeed. Tbh I can’t think off the top of my head of another game that has a continued story that looks distinctly different (other than texture resolution quality) than the one that came before it. I’d class it’s complete distinctiveness to god of war 3 as a rarity though. God of war 2018 is a continuation of the god of war story. I do expect it to bring new gameplay to the table though. Breath of the wild 2 next year is a direct sequel…I don’t expect it to look like wind waker or links awakening. Wed 7th Sep How are we defining sequels? To me a sequel is a direct continuation of a story - I’m not sure Breath of the wild was that? Zelda iterations are generally their own game …so can differ wildly in art style and gameplay from one to the next.But they don't have to be, and saying "Well, of course it's more of the same - it's a sequel!" is ridiculous when the last iteration completely tore up the established formula. I don't think it's a problem that Ragnarök is more of the same. I like that many sequels are more of the same. I know many sequels are more of the same. There's no written rule to say as such, and belittling people who do expect different is childishly expecting people to adhere to your view on the subject. There's nothing that backs that assertation up except for what exists in your own mind. You then introduce a supplementary argument that "Well, because it shifted recently, and because it was such a massive success, it shouldn't shift again." As an example, you use a franchise where the last iteration was a massive shift in terms of gameplay and in terms of tone. I'm happy if your reaction to that is "Go **** yourself." That's fine.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |