Mario Bros was another game that (at least I) found to be quite a bad one. But I didn’t play it in 83 when it first came out, probably more around 1986/87 after gaming had improved substantially. For me, this was a bad game, others may disagree.

But Super Mario Bros was such a phenomena, redefining platformers as a genre, that it eclipsed the existence of the first Mario Bros game, and it became a forgotten relic. Super Mario Bros 3 was considered one of the greatest games of all time for quite a long time, and probably the greatest release of all time; even DKC fell short; and it was not matched until the GTA franchise’s Vice City or San Andreas, and not exceeded until Wii Sports… Super Mario Bros 3 was somewhat of a phenomena, especially in its time period. After a rather iffy first game (Mario Bros) that felt more like a proof of concept than a full game.

As a note: I considered GTA, but I think it would be far too much of a stretch to call GTA 1 a bad game.

I feel like this thread would have gone better if the OP had set a minimum meta score (critical, not user). Because you just knew subjectivity was going to play a roll. Too many people with different opinions on what's bad.

It was certainly a lot better than the first NES game, but I dunno if it'd call it a sequel. The arcade version of tmnt2 released like a few months after the nes game. So they were really developed in parallel.

Ok... but I dont see the problem with that? We're not doing science here. Ita just for discussion. If people are getting hung up on technicalities thats kind of on them.

People are too subjectively driven, so if you want concrete answers, you have to think ahead and make sure you plan for it. This thread ended up solving nothing. I mean, someone mentioned Sonic the Hedgehog, for crying out loud. EGM gave it literal 9's across the board (and one reviewer scored it above SMW). It, and it's three successors were titanic, industry-changing phenomena. If  that doesn't defeat the purpose of his thread, I don't know what does.

Yeah Sonic does not fit. It was good in 1991 but aged fast and now is not a great game but the sequel still is. However at the time it was a phenom of success out of the gate. Street Fighter was not the case. The genre was young so many did not know what to make of it. Some thought it was ok. Others thought it was broken beyond belief (because it is) and it was a slightly better Karate Champ. Karate Champ as bad as it is, did do a lot for fighting games. SFII comes along and changes the genre and series. I don't see how there is a bigger story than SF.

Yes. Street Fighter was a great addition, and you deserve credit for it. Honestly, it's about the only game I think does truly fit within the spirit of the OP's question.

Just Dance. The first entry had lackluster routines and the music selection wasn't so interesting in general

I like seeing people's thoughts and give people something to talk about. I purposefully left some room for subjectivity in order to not rule out so many franchises that it kills off most discussion before it even starts. Admittedly I'm not closely familiar with all the franchises mentioned here, but I feel like the responses here have generally belonged well enough to this thread, so personally I'm pretty happy with it.

Oh wow, a metascore of 49? No surprise it got a sequel (and then some) with those sales, but that's a great pick for this thread!

What was this thread supposed to solve? How has the purpose been defeated? Do we get paid if we get the "right" answers? And honestly if we just wanted to look for the biggest jump in metascore we dont need to discuss that at all, we could just look it up. So if thats what your looking for have at it.

If you want to debate whether Sonic was a poor game (and honestly I'm inclined to say it was despite what EGM said in the 90s) go for it. Alternatively, if you want to just think "huh thats weird" and move on you can.

OP isnt responsible for micromanaging the conversation. If the "well actually" crowd wants to be nitpicky and argumentative, thats their choice. People are going to be themselves whatever OP does. 

Point is we're all in this thread and we all have equal voice in how it goes. So, how do you want it proceed? Do you want to go back and forth about how the OP should have phrased it? We could do that. Do you want to scold other people about the definition of poor? Also an option.

My advice though is to think about what you'd like to discuss here and discuss it. 

On that note, I'm going to throw in Legacy of Goku 2. The first was borderline unplayable shovelware. The second was still clunky but charming and a pretty damn good DBZ experience given the limitations of the machine it was on. Honestly would still rather play it than DBZ Kakarot.