• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Series That Are Unable to Escape the Shadow of Their Best Work

Mido

Version 1
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Location
The Turnabout
Most well-acclaimed series have one title that stands above the others as the quintessential experience for its series. It hit's the right notes and its positives define for most fans what the series should be. Through its own excellence, the title enhances the legacy of both its series and itself. While certainly a boon in that of itself, the legacy of the individual game can also act in a manner detrimental to its series. Sometimes developers struggle to continue on the momentum established by its series "crown jewel" and falter with succeeding games, potentially leaving space for a shadow that looms over the rest of the series and damaging the overall series legacy in some respects. At least for me, I see this with two of my favorite series: Ace Attorney and Star Fox, the latter of which I think has one of the most infamous examples of this idea in the form of Star Fox 64 (and for once I'll respond to my own thread).

Stealing some thunder from @Castle, I think he stated well the historical state of the Star Fox series after its most iconic title's release (Disclaimer: his words may or may not have broken my poor, little heart):

I'll second StarFox. Ninty never really did know what to do with this franchise.

The series has struggled to find any sort of strong groove since the late 1990s. Adventures, while a good game it its own right, was far too derivative from the series formula for many to consider it a proper Star Fox game. Assault proved to be a step in the right direction, but whether it was its linear story structure, gameplay variety, or its somewhat concerning controls for some fans, the game failed to be the mover and shaker the series needed. Strangely, Command was the title some fans (mostly among some critics) considered the true return to form for the series. The Arwing was the sole focus of the gameplay (among variations of it) and elements of other games (notable among them the cancelled Star Fox 2). However, concerns related to the overwrought narrative, repetitive gameplay, and the DS's overall limitations doomed this title as well. As far as Zero is concerned, it demonstrates best the potency of the shadow left behind by 64. Ultimately, Star Fox has shown itself to be among the most prominent examples of the aforementioned idea (Starlink has given me some level of hope at least. :sweat: ).

As far as Ace Attorney is concerned, it deals with the issue of its "best days" in arguably a lesser capacity than that of Star Fox. Yet for many series fans, the series has struggled to escape the shadow of its original trilogy (those three games have seen releases and rereleases that make Skyrim look like a boy among men). The other titles (at least in the main series), in contrast to Star Fox, don't have issues related to debates on whether _____ is a Star Fox/Ace Attorney game on the grounds of gameplay as the series has largely kept with its formula. Rather, the series has hit a roadblock relating to its story direction with fans mostly being on the same page related to the original trilogy before splitting apart in the series' second main series trilogy with AA4 and AA5 doing much of the damage by way of creating a split fanbase. In a way, the original trilogy represents stability for the series that has not been present arguably since AA4 which is why Capcom seems to milk it so much. Having said all of this, here is the question of the day:

1. Which game series do you find struggling/have struggled to escape the shadow of its best work? Why do you think this to be the case?
 
There can only be one answer for me here... Final Fantasy.

Every numbered FF before 7 was a different number in different places of the world until 7 was christened for the whole world, unifying the series.

Visually impressive for the time, long, deep story with many characters and an enjoyable combat system. The game was unlike any JRPG at the time... and released to major success.

Then FF8 followed and couldn't live up to FF7's cultural significance, nor could FF9. FFX was famous for being the first next gen game but after FF7's success many became apathetic because FFX wasn't FF7.

Then the series lost its identity. It stopped trying to ape 7 and tried to innovate; FF11 was an online MMO, FF12 was like an MMO but without the online multiplayer aspect.
FF13 trilogy was a wreck, FF14 was a catastrophe at launch and needed remade and was another MMO, and FFXV took ten years to release and three years worth of patches and DLC with the second DLC season being cancelled...

Now that FF has lost much of its identity since FFX Square have finally bit the bullet to remake FF7...

If it'll work out remains to be seen. FF7 is lorded by much nostalgia at this point but the remake will play in real time like FF15 which may not wash well with fans of the original.

The episodic releases probably wont help either and if FF7R doesn't set the world on fire or reviews badly then the FF brand could be in big trouble.
 
Last edited:

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
A lot of Nintendo series IMO. SF, Zelda, and Pokemon come to mind. I feel it's because Nintendo tries too hard to change things for the sake of change rather than actually experimenting and trying to improve. It feels like even when they actually hit jackpot with a gimmick and manage to improve an aspect of the series, they also manage to take a massive dump on some other aspect and hurt the game. This would be fine if they simply fixed it in the next installment, but usually the gimmick (for better and for worse) is removed, so we start back from square one.
 

Dio

~ It's me, Dio!~
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Location
England
Gender
Absolute unit
With Zelda it is Ocarina of Time that newer entries will never be able to escape the shadow of. Even if Twilight Princess built on and improved upon OOT in many ways whilst maintaining a similar feel. When you make something groundbreaking which changes the face of gaming forever like OOT then there isn't any way to fully escape its shadow.

Also because the Zelda series does not improve upon its previous releases in a logical way, often taking unusual directions with gameplay rather than refining what it did well previously. Because of this it is often the case that new entries are better in some ways but worse in others.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
When you make something groundbreaking which changes the face of gaming forever like OOT then there isn't any way to fully escape its shadow.

I can't agree with this. OoT really didn't do much of anything new. It pioneered the targeting system, but that's it. It wasn't the first 3D game ever or even close to the first. It came out several years after 3D gaming had already existed and it didn't do much to change Zelda either. Hell, 3D gaming itself didn't have that much of an impact on Zelda, which remained mostly 2D. The only real change OoT introduced to the series was a puzzle focus.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Gender
Feel free to use what pronouns you want. I use both sexed pronoun sets interchangeably.
I also disagree on Zelda, but that's because I think the wrong game was picked; it seems to be ALttP that Zelda cannot escape.

From OoT on, you see the series try to innovate and grow beyond its beginnings... and mostly fail, being stuck in a downward spiral. And then it changes with one game: Twilight Princess. A game which, essentially, remade the plot of A Link to the Past, only 3D.

The latest game, BotW, even pretty much copies and expands ALttP's world map.
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Location
Australia
Before Breath of the Wild, Zelda fit in this category. Even though Ocarina of Time was not the best pre BotW game, it was the one most people talked about, and often didn't give the other games a chance.

Why I say OOT and not ALTTP? Both games really did not innovate as much as most people think they did. They were based on their previous work mostly with just a move to a new graphics engine. ALTTP being a 16 bit version of Zelda 1. OOT being a 3D version of ALTTP. It's games like Zelda 2 and MM that innovated more. The added innovation did not translate into more sales though.
Still why OOT? Because to me this is all about the public perception of the games. As in how the people felt and still feel about the games, and not anything about the actual games themselves.

I also think Super Mario World fits this category for 2D mario games. It's often quoted as the best 2D mario game. Personally I like Super Mario Bros 3 much more, but I am in the minority. Despite the long break, people don't seem to like the New SMB games as much. To the point that they didn't have much of a chance. I think people need to think about New SMB as it's own thing. That way they can enjoy it too.
Though I do think the new king of 2D Mario games will be Super Mario Maker 2.

The Donkey Kong Country series also suffers from this. Donkey Kong Country 2 is the best game in the series. Every other DKC game seems to get compared to it. It's either DKC2 quality or crap. Nothing inbetween. Which is not true at all. DKC Returns and DKC Tropical Freeze are both good games in their own right. Both do have major flaws but they don't take away from the fun.
DKC 1 and 3 are not all that bad either. Personally I think of the 5 games, as in 1 - 3, R and TF, I do think R and TF are the weakest of the bunch. But still all 5 are worth playing. I do think DKC fans should play them all.

A more recent example of this is Dynasty Warriors 8. The XL pack I think will take a lot to beat. DW9 flopped and unless DW10 or DW11 are amazing, I do think DW8 will be the standard to which all DW games are judged. It will take a lot for DW to escape the shadow of DW8.

Master of Orion 2
Obvious game to mention here. Not hard to work out why. There have been 4 Master of Orion games. Only the 2nd one was any good. It was quite amazing. I've not played too much of the 4th game though but yeah it's totally under the 1996 2nd game's shadow.
 

Mido

Version 1
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Location
The Turnabout
A more recent example of this is Dynasty Warriors 8. The XL pack I think will take a lot to beat. DW9 flopped and unless DW10 or DW11 are amazing, I do think DW8 will be the standard to which all DW games are judged. It will take a lot for DW to escape the shadow of DW8.

I think that it's interesting that you bring up DW8 as a benchmark game because for years I've used (and still use) DW4 as my series "gold standard." One of the reasons I enjoyed 8 as much as I did is because I thought it was beginning to return somewhat to the form of DW4 while adding its own pizzazz. While I didn't get to experience the Xtreme Legends expansion due to not owning a Sony console, I do like a lot of the additions to the game from what I've seen, especially on the roster end of things. After 9's change in direction didn't work out in spite of the ambitious attempt, I will agree that DW8 will assert itself as the new series benchmark .
 

Sheikah_Witch

I just really like botw
Joined
Apr 8, 2019
Location
Sweden
No mention of Metroid yet? Go on a stroll down a street, it's Prime this Prime that. Not even the direct sequels hit people as hard as the first Prime. Since then, there's been some sort of extensive running gag at how terrible Metroid has been since then. Other M, Federation Force and even Samus Returns being overshadowed by AM2R.

Poor series.
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Location
Australia
No mention of Metroid yet? Go on a stroll down a street, it's Prime this Prime that. Not even the direct sequels hit people as hard as the first Prime. Since then, there's been some sort of extensive running gag at how terrible Metroid has been since then. Other M, Federation Force and even Samus Returns being overshadowed by AM2R.

Poor series.
I think that's a war between Prime One and Super Metroid. Both games have their fans who think each is the best in the series.
I think that it's interesting that you bring up DW8 as a benchmark game because for years I've used (and still use) DW4 as my series "gold standard."
I will agree. 8 is really DW4-2 in the exact way you've said it. As great as 4 was, I just think with two equally brilliant games, the more modern one will become the more popular.
 

Dio

~ It's me, Dio!~
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Location
England
Gender
Absolute unit
I can't agree with this. OoT really didn't do much of anything new. It pioneered the targeting system, but that's it. It wasn't the first 3D game ever or even close to the first. It came out several years after 3D gaming had already existed and it didn't do much to change Zelda either. Hell, 3D gaming itself didn't have that much of an impact on Zelda, which remained mostly 2D. The only real change OoT introduced to the series was a puzzle focus.
It introduced enemy targeting yes and the even more major multipurpose contextual action button. These mechanics have been used in so many 3D games since. Ocarina of time was and I believe still remains the most critically acclaimed game of all time which is why despite its borrowing of elements from ALTTP it will always be the standout Zelda.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Ocarina of time was and I believe still remains the most critically acclaimed game of all time which is why despite its borrowing of elements from ALTTP it will always be the standout Zelda.

That's fair. I just personally think it's because OoT borrowed so much from aLttP that it did so well (and I don't even personally like aLttP).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom