| a.l.e.x59 said: Why? The first one isn't even that good. Same with that stupid Cooking Mama game, and Killzone. Why sequels? Why the hype? Time will simply repeat itself... |
In videogames it's a common rule for most franchises that sequels are better than it's predecessor. Especially when it's concerning FPS. A few examples:
Halo3>Halo2>Halo1
Quake3>Quake2>Quake1
GT4>GT3>GT2>GT1
Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire>>>Pokemon Diamond/Crystal etc....
the rule even applies to Mario Party. But the sequels never got a higher score because of sequelitis.
Red Steel 1 was obviously in time constraint and didn't get the flaws out in time for release. The concept was there for a AAA game, just a failed execution. It's not that Ubisoft is a crappy developper, it was purely time constraint. They listened to the feedback of part 1. I'm pretty sure they get it right this time. I expect this to score much higher than the first part.
