Last few years I’ve been excitedly waiting for sequels from several small-to-medium sized studios that made highly acclaimed original games—I’m talking about Cities: Skylines, Kerbal Space Program, Planet Coaster, Frostpunk, etc.—yet each sequel was very poorly received to the point I wasn’t willing to risk my money buying it. Why do you think this happens when these developers already had a winning formula?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] frank@sopuli.xyz 11 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Frostpunk 2 is a really interesting one to me.

I LOVED the first game. Soundtrack on in the background sometimes, liked the board game (just manual meh balance FP1), got all the achievements, really enjoyed it.

The second IS a good distinction from it, it's not just rinse and repeat the same game. Great story, epic music, different scale and problems. It's just like... They took the second tier of ideas they had for FP1 and implemented them. It actually probably would have been a good game if it didn't have those footsteps to follow in.

Surprisingly, a few recent sequels have been amazing. Shapez2 is an unbelievable follow up to the OG. Hades II is the same imo. Massive, beautiful, fun distinction in gameplay, but still great ideas and balanced and such.

Monster Train 2 is great in demo, Kingdoms 2 crowns is a bit less recent but is such a great follow up to what's effectively an arcade game in the first. It's not all downhill or anything

Also silksong wen

[–] TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

So excited for monster train 2.