>If it ain't broke, don't fix it

File: ealogo-ig.jpg (21KB, 690x388px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 690x388px

>so step one, obviously, we break the game so we can fix it

>>322891125
You mean they change it in the slightest possible way

>>322890295

Is there a problem with maintaining a formula? Or do you think a dev need to change the concept for a sequel?

Sonic is a great example of trying to come up with new ideas and fucking up every single time.

I'm guessing you think Zelda 2 is a better game and the right direction for the series and A Link to the Past is the black sheep, a shit game that just recycles the same concept from the first Zelda.

Fucking hipsters

>>322894362
If you're not going to change anything, why are you making another game already?

>>322894362
Revisiting trodden ground is what got games to devolutive state they're in today.

>>322894521

Because there is always space for improvement. To add new ideas and expand what is already a good game.

There is always things that aren't added for time or budget restrictions or simply because the devs love to come up with new concepts and gimmicks.

See portal 2

>>322895362
>don't want to change anything
>want to make improvements

Pick one.

>>322895461

No game is perfect. Galaxy 1 wasn't perfect. Galaxy 2 perfected it

>>322895362
If you merely 'add' that means you're not trying to find something new and exciting for fear of failure, therefore devolving your work. Enjoy your cosmetic DLC.

>>322895640
Without making any changes?

I think not.

>>322895640
What is your favourite EA Sports game? They get perfected yearly.

>it just works

>>322895738

Galaxy 2 is a better game.
Portal 2 is a better game.
Thief 2 is a better game
Chaos Theory is a better game.
DMC3 is a better game.
Sonic 2 is a better game.
Assassins Creed 2 is a better game.
MGS3 is a better game.
Super Metroid is a better game
...
...

Sequels aren't a problem. When done properly.


>>322895818
There are good and bad sequels. Poorly managed franchises.

>>322896241
All of those games made changes to the original, you are attempting to prove that you can improve a game in a sequel without changing anything.

>>322896241
MGS 3 is not a better game than MGS 2 from a mechanical / AI standpoint. It's fine to tinker with a formula once, but when you start shitting out similarly improved iterations you start devolving the medium.

>>322896382

They kept the same mechanics. They followed the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" saying.

The devs worked on what was already established and built in the previous game/games.
All they did was adding new mechanics, new gimmicks and improve what was flawed.

The mechanics, gameplay, the style remained the same.

>>322896764

Well, MGS2 is a better game so my point still stands.

>>322897545
MGS 2 was a forced sequel whose main plotline was Kojima hating the fans wanting more of the same. Its protagonist was a parody of 'better games'.

>>322897846

>MGS2
>forced sequel

Alongside with MG2, MGS2 was probably the second MGS sequel Kojima truly wanted to make.
Everything past that was just Kojima being Konami's bitch and shitting out MGS games to please his bosses