Summary
Video game sequels allow developers to refine their old ideas, but they are typically reserved for already-great games. There’s nothing wrong with better versions of beloved titles, but developers are wasting their best ideas by ignoring their worst games.
There aren’t many games that can be consideredobjectivelyterrible. Plenty of bad games boast interesting ideas, but are let down by poor execution,questionable monetization, or frequent technical issues. Some of these games are sitting on the verge of greatness and are just waiting for a sequel to iron out their biggest flaws.
The first installment of a game series isn’t always its worst, but it’s usually the most unpolished. Plenty of iconic series debuted with games that haven’t aged perfectly. Series likeFinal FantasyandResident Evilhave added numerous changes and quality-of-life improvements in their sequels, which makes earlier entries difficult to revisit. Just as these classics have paved the way for better games, bad games can also provide a blueprint for more polished experiences.
Even the most notoriously terrible games have the potential to deliver fantastic sequels, but that can only be accomplished if their developers learn from the mistakes of the originals. For example,Mindjackis a third-person shooter in which your character can possess the bodies of his enemies. Unfortunately, between the game’s stiff combat, unresponsive controls, forgettable plot, inconsistent AI, and just about everything else that can go wrong in a third-person shooter,Mindjackbecame one of the worst releases of theXbox 360/PlayStation 3 console generation.
It’s not hard to imagine howMindjackcould have been a better game, and a sequel could turn that possibility into a reality.
Similarly,PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royaleseemed like a guaranteed success with its novel premise of aSuper Smash Bros.-inspired fighting game starring iconic PlayStation characters. This promising concept is let down by the game’s bizarre roster choices and extremely divisive gameplay, resulting in an experience that was loved by some players and hated by others. Despite its many flaws,PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royaleprovides a fantastic foundation that could easily be refined for abigger and better sequel.
Some critically panned games are the victims of troubled productions. Rushed developments and unpolished releases are unfortunately common in the modern gaming industry.Bug-ridden releaseshave done a massive disservice to both critically-acclaimed titles and flawed gems likeAnthemandDays Gone. While there’s no undoing the damage done by their disastrous launches, these games can benefit from sequels that not only improve on their ideas, but also have more development time to make a better first impression.
Less common are games that failed due to their own ambition. The 2003survival-horror gameLifelinepresents an experience in which you usevoice controlsto guide the game’s protagonist through a space station overrun by mutated monstrosities. On the surface,Lifelinedelivers an extremely impressive horror experience with one of the most in-depth inclusions of voice controls in any video game. Sadly, all of its accomplishments are overshadowed by the frustratingly unresponsive voice recognition, making many parts of the game feel borderline unplayable.
Lifelinewas released before voice controls were reliable enough to support a full video game. Since then, both voice controls and microphones have greatly improved, though there still aren’t any games likeLifeline. With the support of newer tech, a sequel toLifelinecan revive its inventive twist on the horror genre without the original’s fatal flaws.
In some cases, games that were widely panned at launch have been recognized years later as misunderstood masterpieces. One game that has received this type of critical re-evaluation isAlpha Protocol, a spy-thriller RPG developed by Obsidian Entertainment.Alpha Protocolfeatures one of the most impressive branching stories in any game, as the choices you make, relationships you forge, and even the clothes you wear all have meaningful consequences. These choices can lead you down dozens of diverging story paths, allowing for every playthrough to feel truly unique. Unfortunately,Alpha Protocol’s severely unpolished gameplay,mediocre visuals, and overwhelming technical issues led to it receiving mostly negative reviews.
Alpha Protocolis certainly not a perfect game, but players willing to look past—or at least put up with—its flaws will find a one-of-a-kind RPG. Between the game’s unique blend of RPG mechanics and modern-day espionage stories, an abundance ofreplay value, and the entertaining—albeit very clunky—combat, there is a lot to appreciate about the game.
However, Obsidian Entertainment has greatly improved as a developer, as demonstrated by its later work onFallout: New Vegas,The Outer Worlds,Pentiment, and the recently releasedAvowed.Alpha Protocolmay have been too ambitious for the Obsidian of 2010, but its years of experience since then have certainly prepared it to deliver on its original vision with a sequel.
Why Second Chances Are Rare
Bad games offer a wellspring of underused ideas and untapped potential, yet very few of these ideas ever receive a second shot. Gaming franchises are often cut short if they debut with poorly-reviewed releases or commercial flops. It may seem like a waste to let some of these series be abandoned, but there are a few reasons why studios are often hesitant to revive their past failures.
A critically-panned first entry can be the death knell for any new series. If the first game in a potential franchise fails to deliver on its promises, players will not only turn on the game, but may also disregard any potential sequels. Whereas terrible sequels likeDevil May Cry 2, Sonic the Hedgehog(2006), andDynasty Warriors 9still received follow-ups thanks to the popularity of their predecessors, players are less likely to support the continuation of a franchise that hasn’t ever released a good game. Even if the sequel is significant, people familiar with a bad game’s reputation will likely stay away from anything associated with its franchise.
With the lasting impact that a failed debut can have, sequels to bad games are a massive risk for developers. Not only do these sequels face the challenge of overcoming their predecessor’s reputation, but they also risk repeating the mistakes that sunk the previous games. In most cases, developing a new series or continuing an already-successful franchise can seem like the safer option.
The growing costs and complexity of game development have also contributed to the lack of recent sequels to bad games. MostAAA gamescost millions of dollars to develop, sometimes requiring teams with hundreds of employees. Depending on the developer, a single financial flop can lead to mass layoffs or the closure of an entire studio. There’s a lot riding on every new AAA release, which is why manyprominent studios rarely take risks, especially on ideas that have already failed once before.
Even when developers are willing to create a sequel to one of their previous flops, that decision isn’t always in their hands. This was the case forAlpha Protocol. Obsidian Entertainment has repeatedly expressed interest in working onAlpha Protocol 2, but has never been able to proceed due to a lack of approval from the game’s publisher and rights-holder, Sega.
Many of these issues also affectbeloved gaming franchises, but their impact is even more severe on bad games. Without positive critical reception, sales numbers, or fan support to motivate a sequel, most forgotten games aren’t likely to ever make a return.
Risky Sequels Can be Revolutionary
Although studios are often hesitant to give old ideas a second chance, there have been numerous successful sequels that arose from these risky decisions. In a few cases, these unexpected follow-ups have gone on to become some of the most influential games of all time.
Some sequels have turned mediocre games with interesting concepts into modern gems. BothJust CauseandSaints Rowdebuted as forgettableGrand Theft Autoclones, but expanded their unique ideas and established their own identities in later entries. Similarly, the originalMega ManandAssassin’s Creed—while not terrible games—paved the way for their drastically superior sequels and kick-started two undeniably iconic gaming franchises.
Some sequels take the premise of their lackluster predecessors and place these ideas in a much more fitting genre. TheDynasty Warriorsfranchise is best known for its hack-and-slash games and spin-offs, but even hardcore fans of the series often forget that it began as a 3D fighting game. The originalDynasty Warriorsreceived mixed reviews, but its flashy combat and historical setting paved the way for the genre shift of its sequels.
Likewise, theTouhouseries—one of the most iconic and longest-running series in thebullet hell genre—started out as a clone of Atari’sBreakout. The first game’s repetitive gameplay was supported by a creative story and a few unique twists on theBreakoutformula, which were eventually reworked into the more recognizable bullet hell levels introduced in the second installment,Touhou Fuumaroku ~ the Story of Eastern Wonderland.
There’s no better example of the importance of risky sequels than Capcom’sStreet Fighter. The originalStreet Fighterfollowed the formula established by other one-on-one fighting games from the 80s, such asKaratekaandKarate Champ, but set itself apart with its detailed character sprites and pressure-based “punch pad” controls. The impressive presentation and gimmicky arcade cabinet didn’t make up for its repetitive levels and tediously slow combat. If Capcom had ended theStreet Fighterseries with its first game, it wouldn’t have been remembered as anything more than a half-decentKarate Champclone.
Instead, the series continued with thegenre-definingStreet Fighter II. The game redefined the fighting game formula with an array of major improvements and monumental additions. Each character in the game’s roster possesses a unique move-set, with multiple combos and special moves that dictate their playstyle.
In general, combat was faster and more responsive, encouraging you to learn your favorite character’s moveset instead of mindlessly mashing buttons. It may seem basic by modern fighting game standards, but there was nothing quite likeStreet Fighter IIwhen it launched in 1991.
There are countless games that have tried to bring something new to the table, only to fumble these ideas with spectacularly disastrous results. Some of the best ideas in gaming are still trapped in awful games, but that doesn’t mean they should go to waste. We’ll never know if a developer is sitting on the next big franchise until they give their previous failures a second chance.
