Gears of War 1/2 AND Unreal Tournament 3 use the same engine. So are they all just expansions of UT3?

Uncharted 1/2 use the same engine.

Modern Warfare 1/2 use the same engine.

Devil may cry 4, Lost Planet, Dead Rising and Resident Evil 5 use the same engine, are they all expansions?

If L4D2 is to be considered an expansion then there are...many...other sequels that should count as expansions as well.

well I won't say if it's an expansion or not..but the feeling that MS said that Halo: ODST and Left for Dead 2 were going to be expansions but then turn out to be full retail priced games, then 360 fans trying to prove/justify that it's a full game/sequel seems odd to me. we don't fully know if MS and it's devolpers actaully added anything in to actaully make it a full retail price game, all we have are peoples "trusted opinions"

lfd2 is a full priced game and the content is alot more than the 1st game, and i think its a more overall balanced game as well. if ppl out their consider lfd2 a expansion, then u have to consider a ton of the best games made this gen a expansion as well.

Let's face it it's not limited to just the same engine, but the gameplay as well.

Of the ones I listed the game play is significantly different and I do mean significantly. What the HELL is the difference between GoW1 and 2? UC 1 and 2? Yeah... I thought so.... Instead of wasting their time with making more of the same developers should be innovating. Look at how long SC2 and Half-Life 3 are being made. That's how sequels SHOULD be, instead of this rehashing crap that most developers pull, even Valve now....

If you are also going to argue the whole "but they have improve graphics and gameplay" then please look at WoW, each expansion really changed gameplay, improved graphics, AND they had hell of a lot more content than any of the "sequels" you just mentioned.

Engine or no engine. The game dosen't have a story, unlike Gears, U2 etc. Its just L4D1 with new skins. Its not like you get the feeling of finding out how the zombies became zombies or whatnot in L4D2. Its just zombies, and you shoot them. In the first one you shot them with guns, now you can smack em around a bit aswell in a new scenery.

3 out of the new special infected were cut from the first game. So its more weapons, skins and a much less "scary" enviorment for 60 bucks. Im such an idiot for playing L4D2. But atleast im not that mentaly retarded to be spending 60 bucks on it.

Indeed, I miss the days when innovation was the only way to get above a 7. It seems only like yesterday when "Diablo Clones" or in fact any "X Clones" were graded down just because they copied and didnt innovate. Now it seems you can copy the same thing over and over and still make millions and garner tons of praise....

You just can't innovat as much on a console as you can on the PC. The hardware is locked and your control are limited, how can anyone expect innovatoin in such an environment? Add the lower standards of console gamers and you end up with a recipe of repeating games and milking from developers who don't deserve the money they are making.

Respectfully whilst you may value innovative and fresh approaches the market dictates similartude and most people either don't care or prefer to play games they know they'll like.

You mean the console market, funny how diablo clones got knocked around for being exactly that  clones, and too similar to a given game to be considered worth something more than mediocre games. I'm also sure it's pure coincidence that the feeling did a 180 turn when consoles became more dominant.

Im pretty sure it happened because of Direct X 9. Before Direct X 9 games were generally innovative. After Direct X 9 and onto 10 and 11 the games just started becoming clones of one another. Obviously it was Microsofts fault, they should have never released a new Direct X version!