Sequels of sequels are hardly a good thing for gaming. Maybe I was spoiled, but in the '80s/'90s we'd get multiple genre- creating titles every year or so. As good as these sequels are, they're not creating any new genre.
Wasn't it easier to create new genres back when there weren't many yet? In the 80s you were lucky to get hundreds of games a decade. Now we get that in a week. But there are still many innovative indie games.
The sequels still sometimes offer cool things. BG3 is a very big change from BG2, as much as Divinity Original Sin is different from Divinity 2. It's not like the Calls of Duty.
But granted, that's an exception. Diablo 4 is a soulless cash grab. Payday 3 was a bust.
But there are still plenty of innovative games these days that create new or hybrid genres. Bridge Constructor. Portal. Slay the Spire. Frostpunk. Guitar Hero. Dead Cell. Firewatch. Braid. Human Fall Flat. Among Us. Superhot. Stanley Parable. Viewfinder. Rocket League. Surgeon Simulator. Overcooked. Soooo much more...
The sequels still sometimes offer cool things. BG3 is a very big change from BG2, as much as Divinity Original Sin is different from Divinity 2. It's not like the Calls of Duty.
But granted, that's an exception. Diablo 4 is a soulless cash grab. Payday 3 was a bust.
But there are still plenty of innovative games these days that create new or hybrid genres. Bridge Constructor. Portal. Slay the Spire. Frostpunk. Guitar Hero. Dead Cell. Firewatch. Braid. Human Fall Flat. Among Us. Superhot. Stanley Parable. Viewfinder. Rocket League. Surgeon Simulator. Overcooked. Soooo much more...