Killiana1a on 12 August 2010
What those of us who voted "yes" are arguing is this:
The original game is the foundation. Each sequel is an iteration of the original game with a new story, new characters, and new features. Henceforth, if the foundation is a good one, then there is no reason any sequel should be worse than the original.
There are sequels worse than the original. The latest is Crackdown 2, which was highly anticipated, but failed to deliver in taking the best from the predecessor and pushing it to new heights.
The question then becomes, how can a sequel be worse than it's predecessor?
