[dijit]

It’s more interesting to me that so many are.

It’s rare for any product to have more success in later invocations than the first edition, that is where the narrative is fresh and strong- and even in the event sequels are stronger, they tend to increase sales of the first season/movie/etc; because people want the whole experience.

[lolinder]

Video games I feel like reverse this general trend, though. Unless they have a major story component (and sometimes even if they do) many games get iteratively 'better' (better for the purposes of making sales if not of making original fans happy) for various reasons: improvements to the core game loop, polish that makes the game more appealing to new audiences, and most importantly graphics.

Story-based content is what struggles with sequels because it's really hard to both capture the feeling of the original sufficiently to satisfy existing fans while also telling a new story that's interesting in its own right. Being derivative without being too derivative.

[PaulHoule]

At least for a while, technology got consistently better at a high rate for video games. Today I'm not so sure.

[furyofantares]

I remember in the 80s/90s when it seemed every movie sequel sucked. Just cashed in, and not really planned for from the beginning.

I don't think it's ever really been true that video game sequels sucked. Maybe Zelda 2 and to a lesser extent Mario 2 - but game developers seem to break new ground on sequels a lot. In fact I think sequels have been better than originals more often than not throughout game history.

For one thing it may just be more common for the first to not reach its full audience.

But my experience as a game developer is also that, when you start out making a new game, you probably kinda suck at making that game. Games sometimes suck for most of their development until they suddenly get good near the end.

And by the end, you get really good at making that specific game. A lot of game design has to come together to enlighten further game design decisions, and you really come to know what's fun by the end of it. Not to mention the technology you build for it!

[teamonkey]

A lot of game development is trying to find an idea that hits. When developing a new game, there are a lot of unknowns, budgets are tight, a lot of compromises are made, and often there are plenty of rough edges.

A sequel allows the same team to build on the shoulders of the first game, keeping what worked, adding features that players missed and refining those that didn’t work. It’s seen as a safer investment, with an existing fan base to leverage, and so this often leads to larger development and marketing budgets with a focus on growth.

[k__]

Aren't sequels always touted as safe bets?

[dijit]

Yeah but only because there will be a reactivation of x% of people.

I think the margin is usually 70%~ but depends a lot I guess.

You can safely bet that >50% of people who enjoyed seeing/playing the first of something would be interested in the second.