What Soleron says is true, it should be reviewed like an expansion.

BO shouldn't be compated to MW3 because is of a different timeline as well as having certain gameplay elements (such as zombies) which sets it apart from the MW series.

Now do I think MW3 could be an expansion pack for MW2? Most definitely. But you have to wonder exactly how much content is going to be inside that expansion pack as well. For MW3 it would be an entire new campaign (since you aren't going through the same levels as in MW2's campaign and its a new narrative), 16 spec ops missions, 15 multiplayer maps, survival mode and a gun pack for the newer guns online/offline. All this assuming that any tweaks made to the gameplay mechanics would be included as free to everyone buying the pack.

Would this DLC pack cost significantly less than $60 because if it does then it should be released as DLC. If it costs about the same as a full priced game or more then it should be released as a full priced retail game. Now as for the value of the product, that is the hard part to discern and is mostly left up to the individual consumer. What would have been nice was if they had separated out the SP, MP and SO/Survival. Then the consumer could choose what they want, but unfortunately rarely do we get such liberty or choice.

All this said, I have played every iteration of pokemon ever released (and play competitively), but the tweaks to BW2 are very little to warrant a new release. It isn't a matter of simply the gameplay mechanics remaining the same (which I myself wouldn't want changed), but this is a problem of you going through the exact same areas, doing the exact same battles and following a narrative that is very similar to the previous games (the last we have been excusing in the name of nostalgia for almost 2 decades now). I personally hope that since dlc is now an option for nintendo in all their consoles, they will make full use of it to release expansion packs rather than charging full price for games where huge chunks are copied from the previous iteration. Mario atleast has new levels and no repeat ones, so if you are tired of the formula then don't buy the game. It would have been somewhat fine if they released BW2 on 3DS and called it a remake with newer assets/models/animation, but as it is, it's simply inexcusable since it's a matter of content being the same, not just the gameplay mechanics (the latter being the case for many games such as Mario, COD, etc). We should be very clear on distinguishing between the two.

That makes sense. I kind of felt that way with The After Years, and that was DLC. Sadly I'm a sucker for the series, so I still am paying 5$ per story, with 8 stories in total plus it was 8$ for the game, so I'm playing a full game for almost the whole thing being a revisit of the FFIV worlds with very little new content to fill the gaps. And a new script to boot.

If that's what B/W2 is, then paying 40$ isn't worth it. But if people are paying for it, is it the consumer's fault for overspending, is it Nintendo overpricing, or is there a legit market for that content at 40$? I think I'm leaning more on your line of thinking, as I do feel ripped off when playing the after years, even if I will pay for it like a sucker.

Finally someone has take the words out of my mouth. People say ridiculous things like change the gameplay mechanics of pokemon from turn-based to real time. That would be HORRIBLE since the turn based system is what makes pokemon pokemon. I would never want that completely overhauled, but would much rather like a refinement to them. In this case they have done so by adding in double battles in gen 3, triple battles in gen 5 (as well as variations such as laucher and rotation battles). Unfortunately they don't leverage these changes enough in the main storyline. Any major changes to gameplay mechanics should be released in different titles such as mystery dungeon and conquest, which is also what they did right.

What should be changed mainly is as you said, the narrative. I was amazed by how great a narrative pokemon mysery dungeon explorers of time/darkness/sky presented. It was simply amazing to see such amazing character developement and a plot that engages you so greatly that you actually care for the characters in game. Plus the intrigue and unpredictability just wants to make you keep on going to find out what happens in the end. It was truly an emotional roller coaster where you rejoice the wins that you get with your team and feel the sorrow of losing a partner that you have fought alongside. In the you even find out about your true indentity and gives your journey a purpose. I want that to be in the mainline games as well. They should really take a note of this because pokemon is capable of such achievements, as is shown by the mystery dungeon games.

I dunno, I kind of see a difference. Call of Duty is primarily a multiplayer game, whereas Pokémon is a JRPG. In a new CoD, people are looking for a refinement of the multiplayer experience. People expect more "new" in a JRPG, especially in the story. Black and White in particular were praised for telling a great story within a Pokémon game, pretty much a first. If BW2 doesn't live up to its predecessor where plot is concerned, I'm not surprised it's receiving a lukewarm reception.

That said, White 2 is going to be my first Pokémon game since Crystal, so I don't care how similar it is to White. It'll (almost) all be new to me. But of course, you should focus on the reviews themselves rather than the scores. Generally, even if Pokémon gets a low score, it's for being too similar to a previous iteration, not for being a bad game.

You said you didn't play the original BW, in which case BW2 is perhaps one of the greatest deals you can find right now for the DS. If I were you I would grab it in a heartbeat since pretty much everything will be new to you as you haven't played the original (as the_dengle above me said).

It's only a horrible deal for someone like me who already has the original games. Nonetheless, it is the consumer in the end who makes the decision. If you think it's copied too much, then just ignore it I suppose. The only reason I say this is because I would like it for Nintendo to atleast give the old consumers a bit more opportunity to get a better deal by releasing these changes as expansion packs. This release is very much akin to releasing a GOTY edition, but only that it is named a sequel/new release to make more money at full price.

B/W 2 is clearly a sequel, not a new game. Should Uncharted or Gears of War be criticized for not being different? If the fans want the same thing, let them have it.

My core issue with Zelda is the items.

In OoT you had cool weapons, like Din's Fire and the Ice Aroow. In subsequent games, they just became tools to solve specific puzzles.

I kinda agree with you, but come on the ice arrows were useless in OoT

Turning enemies into ice was fun. After I got it, I used it more than the flame arrow to kill foes quickly from far.