There is a difference between a bad game and a bad sequel.

A bad game is a game which is not fun.

A bad sequel is a game which does not carry enough elements of its predecessor or live up to its predecessor's reputation.


Chrono Cross and B&K: Nuts and Bolts were bad sequels but not bad games.

In that case, every video game sequel is bad.

You should be severely penalised for saying "Chrono Cross" and "B&K:N&B" in the same sentence.

Neverthless, I repeat... CC is what all sequels should be.

Would you explain that for me?

The game in it self is good but atleast I when I bought that game sooo many years ago actually thought it was going to be a direct sequel for Chrono trigger.

That's why it's number one for me atleast.

(well it's really FFXII but they are always stand alone until X-2)

WTF... chrono cross is one of my favorite games of all time, and im not being exagerated..

Mario Bros 3, God Of War 2, Gears of War 2, Megaman x2, Warcraft 3 are excellent sequels.

Well according to wordofwisdom's logic they are bad sequels because they evolved from their former glory.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm being sarcastic and trying to prove a point.

... What are you talking about? When did he ever suggest something like that?

g4 is a total disaster. Always were, always will be. Only ******** like g4, and that says alot.