Do sequels make the first installment irrelevent?

apocalypse · Post by **apocalypse** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:02 pm

I'm just curious what you guys think.

I recently got both Donpachi and Dodonpachi, and I've been making sure to keep the hell away from Dodonpachi until I'm done with Donpachi, since I know I won't be able to go back.

So, if there are three games out in a series, do you guys start the first game first? Or do you go ahead to the newest installment?

Alec · Post by **Alec** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:10 pm

NO
There are a lot of games I prefer to their sequels. Many times I would rather play Donpachi than Do Donpachi, however not always. Sometimes I just gotta have the Do Don. Donpachi is a timeless classic in my eyes.

Cyarc · Post by **Cyarc** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:15 pm

Speaking of, this weekend I played all three donpachi's in a row(I don't have DoDonPachi 2 : Bee Storm) and I must say, they all are different and offer something new to the series. So to your question, no.

mulletgeezer · Post by **mulletgeezer** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:05 pm

I would say that quite often they do, especially if the sequel offers most of the features of the original plus some new stuff e.g. Espgaluda 2 and Raiden 2. DP and DDP are a little different as the two games have a very different feel.

Edge · Post by **Edge** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:09 pm

I say No
Every shoot'em up is an experience of it's own. The installments of a series does not rely on another, they are all completely seperate games, even if in some cases the main gameplay mechanics are mostly the same. Still there are all new levels. And I also have no order in which I prefer to play the games, I some cases I might start with the oldest, with the newest or a certain part in the middle of the series.

This question might make more sense if sequels are updates like fighting games or sports games. But yet, I prefer KoF '98 much more than the newer parts of that series. Or Soul Calibur (1) over SC2 and SC3, same goes for a few other fighters where I didn't like the way the updates were going. And I can also play and enjoy Tekken 3 today, even if I like Tekken 5 much better.

EDIT:
Ah, yeah I forgot. there are some shmup updates as well (Raiden 2 / Raiden DX) but yet people may still enjoy the prior version more.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:29 pm

It's a case-by-case thing.

I prefer Donpachi.

shinsage · Post by **shinsage** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:30 pm

I thought at first you were talking about retconning stories.

Anyways, the answer is certainly no...this applies to everything; movies, games, TV series, books, etc.

Klatrymadon · Post by **Klatrymadon** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:42 pm

Course they don't, mate. Would you throw out your favourite band's discography because they released a new record?

There are some games that are arguably improved upon in all areas by their sequels, but games in the same series often have vastly differing artistic ambitions, gameplay 'feels', musical styles and all sorts of other things that make holding onto them forever worthwhile...

Personally, if I get into a series I'd previously skipped over, my first thought is to check out all of the older games. It's something I'm genuinely interested in, and besides, there's nothing worse than a fan who has all these ideas for the betterment of a series, but doesn't understand its foundations.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:49 pm

mulletgeezer wrote:I would say that quite often they do, especially if the sequel offers most of the features of the original plus some new stuff e.g. Espgaluda 2

Irrelevant is the wrong word description of Espgaluda after the release of Espgaluda II.

Espgaluda still is, and will be for the forseeble future, the recommended Cave shooter to cut your teeth on for the 1CC. Espgaluda II is much higher on the Cave difficultly spectrum.

New shooter players will continue to flock to Espgaluda (just look how active the high score thread is) due to how easy it is to obtain on the PS2 vs. getting the Espgaluda II PCB. That in itself makes it relevant.

Also as Edged stated, predecessors of shooter sequels still have unique enemy bullet patterns, bosses, and level designs that can make them favorable over the sequel despite similar or seemingly more advanced gameplay mechanics.

j^aws · Post by **j^aws** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:59 pm

R-Type >>> R-Type 2

Defender 2 >>> Defender

Two of my all time favourite shmups. That should explain everything...

shinsage · Post by **shinsage** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:07 pm

R-Type >>> R-Type 2

I don't know anyone else who agrees with me when that's reversed.
So lonely.

mulletgeezer · Post by **mulletgeezer** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:07 pm

Wanderer wrote:
mulletgeezer wrote:I would say that quite often they do, especially if the sequel offers most of the features of the original plus some new stuff e.g. Espgaluda 2
Irrelevant is the wrong word description of Espgaluda after the release of Espgaluda II.

Espgaluda still is, and will be for the forseeble future, the recommended Cave shooter to cut your teeth on for the 1CC. Espgaluda II is much higher on the Cave difficultly spectrum.

New shooter players will continue to flock to Espgaluda (just look how active the high score thread is) due to how easy it is to obtain on the PS2 vs. getting the Espgaluda II PCB. That in itself makes it relevant.

Also as Edged stated, predecessors of shooter sequels still have unique enemy bullet patterns, bosses, and level designs that can make them favorable over the sequel despite similar or seemingly more advanced gameplay mechanics.

Everything you say here is true, but apocalypse's original question was talking more from a personal point of view, as was my reply - I don't doubt that Espgaluda is still an important game, but I pretty much totally lost interest in it once I started playing the sequel.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:25 pm

mulletgeezer wrote:
Wanderer wrote:
mulletgeezer wrote:I would say that quite often they do, especially if the sequel offers most of the features of the original plus some new stuff e.g. Espgaluda 2
Irrelevant is the wrong word description of Espgaluda after the release of Espgaluda II.

Espgaluda still is, and will be for the forseeble future, the recommended Cave shooter to cut your teeth on for the 1CC. Espgaluda II is much higher on the Cave difficultly spectrum.

New shooter players will continue to flock to Espgaluda (just look how active the high score thread is) due to how easy it is to obtain on the PS2 vs. getting the Espgaluda II PCB. That in itself makes it relevant.

Also as Edged stated, predecessors of shooter sequels still have unique enemy bullet patterns, bosses, and level designs that can make them favorable over the sequel despite similar or seemingly more advanced gameplay mechanics.
Everything you say here is true, but apocalypse's original question was talking more from a personal point of view, as was my reply - I don't doubt that Espgaluda is still an important game, but I pretty much totally lost interest in it once I started playing the sequel.

Personally, there is just too much greatness in Espgaluda for it to be relegated to irrelevant status, but I just started to play Espgaluda II, so who knows, maybe I'll lose complete interest as well in a month or so.

JBC · Post by **JBC** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:37 pm

Thunderforce IV > Thunderforce III > Thunderforce V > Thunderforce II > Thunderforce I

Raystorm (2) > Rayforce (1) > Raycrisis (3)

Gradius V > Gradius III > Gradius II > Gradius > Gradius IV

R-Type II > R-Type Leo > R-Type > R-Type III > R-Type Final > R-Type Delta

So it's not exactly the same for all series. A later Thunderforce is better than an earlier Thunderforce whereas an earlier R-Type can be better than the newest iteration. I would just try to think of each game individually any way, otherwise you'll end up disappointed.

Like how i think Terminator 1 is leagues greater than T2 and both absolutely destroy T3. You could watch T3 and maybe (but probably not

) like it and then watch the original 2 and be blown away.

Ganelon · Post by **Ganelon** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:54 pm

shinsage wrote:
R-Type >>> R-Type 2
I don't know anyone else who agrees with me when that's reversed.
So lonely.

I'm with you, shinsage. R-Type II probably gets less respect because it's more of the same, except shorter and harder.

Anyway, for modern shooters (past the Space Invaders-esque era), I can't think of any game that has been rendered totally irrelevant by a sequel. It's arguable that any game where the sequels aren't simply upgrades has some value.

iatneH · Post by **iatneH** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:20 pm

I don't understand why all the rage for Shikigami no shiro II.

I still prefer the first one. Though I haven't had a chance to play part III yet.

Arvandor · Post by **Arvandor** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:54 am

I think it's a case by case thing too, not to mention differences in taste =P

For me, Dodonpachi makes Donpachi mostly irrelevant, though they are different enough that it's more of a DDP fits my tastes better than being THAT much better of a game. Also, Dodonpachi and Dodonpachi Dai Ou Jou are totally interchangeable for me. I love and play both =/

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:12 am

I don't get this question. Unless the sequel offered everything the original does plus more, how could it? Every shooter is a unique experience.

DJ Incompetent · Post by **DJ Incompetent** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:22 am

applies to fighting games only.

'cept...maybe Worms..and possibly Megaman.

teetu · Post by **teetu** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:59 am

i prefer the first gunbird to the second

Pirate1019 · Post by **Pirate1019** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:46 am

Would only matter to me if it was something which had a cohesive, continuing story that I wouldn't understand if I jumped in halfway. Guess that excludes most if not all shmups.

Stormwatch · Post by **Stormwatch** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:25 am

circuitface wrote:Like how i think Terminator 1 is leagues greater than T2 and both absolutely destroy T3. You could watch T3 and maybe (but probably not ) like it and then watch the original 2 and be blown away.

I wish I hadn't watched T3.

What about First Blood (aka Rambo)? The original was great, a drama about a war veteran disguised as an action movie; that ending was chilling, very moving. The sequels were stupid in comparison.

And the bottom of the barrel... the Highlander sequels. There should have been only one, damnit!

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:37 am

Neon wrote:It's a case-by-case thing.

Why are there so many of these topics that are answered in this way all of a sudden?

Of course it's a case by case thing.

WHITE PEOPLE: DO THEY ALL LIKE POLKA BANDS? I MUST KNOW BECAUSE THIS ELUDES ME.

Jesus. Hate to be antisocial but this is just common sense.

Arvandor · Post by **Arvandor** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:39 am

Perhaps because there are suddenly a lot of topics that are asking "Is this OPINION correct? Is it really true?!" ... There's just... No appropriate way to answer really =P

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:42 am

Arvandor wrote:... There's just... No appropriate way to answer really =P

(Well, there's actually only two I see, which is good. Gotta get the blood pressure back down, after all.)

There IS a way to answer: "Hello friend, make your own opinions. We are not gods." Or, in 4chanspeak, "Lurk Moar." Or, in politicianeze, "Vote yes on Prop four! It's a great thing for the whole family!"

PFG 9000 · Post by **PFG 9000** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:55 am

I think the only time a sequel makes the original irrelevant is when the original is included with the sequel. Because even if the original is fairly crap and the sequel is quite good, the original could offer some little things that the sequel did not.

Let's assume Gradius Gaiden is utter perfection in hori shmupping. Playing the game makes you crave more Gradius, so you'll go and pick up Gradius III SNES and the Gradius III/IV PS2 pack and Gradius on the NES and Gradius V and Gradius Galaxies and Nemesis and Gradius the Interstellar Assault and the Gradius deluxe pack and Gradius mobile and Gradius Imperial and Gradius Neo...

Even if every other game in the series is inferior, they might offer more of a (nearly as) good thing. So no, of course a sequel doesn't make a game irrelevant.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:06 am

Ed Oscuro wrote:
Arvandor wrote:... There's just... No appropriate way to answer really =P
(Well, there's actually only two I see, which is good. Gotta get the blood pressure back down, after all.)

There IS a way to answer: "Hello friend, make your own opinions. We are not gods." Or, in 4chanspeak, "Lurk Moar." Or, in politicianeze, "Vote yes on Prop four! It's a great thing for the whole family!"

You are absolutely right and this topic is moronic of course. However, I had given too many cynical answers lately, so I decided to skip this one

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:09 am

Look at the last thread, I guess I (unwisely?) was filling in a bit ;) Don't like being cranky. Actually my original response was pretty surreal, so I decided to go on-topic a bit. Might as well be friendly to the newbies, even if they're asking us to do their thinking for them.

And it can't be as bad as the glut of "Should I collect ALL THE (X Console) GAMES EVER MADE" type threads on Digital Press. MONEY! BEGONE FROM MY SIGHT

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:19 am

Admittedly, it's becoming increasingly hard to come up with topics that haven't been discussed over and over before; epsecially for new users, who understandably feel the urge to post something. Apparently the general boredom level is quite high at the moment; otherwise a topic like this wouldn't get any responses.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:35 am

Ceph wrote:Admittedly, it's becoming increasingly hard to come up with topics that haven't been discussed over and over before;

Would it really hurt if there was only a few new discussions in shmups chat a week? It could even be almost all talk of new releases or an occasional neglected classic (like Bio Metal or something). That would be better.