• 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.

What one-off games do you think should stay as one-offs?

mαrkαsscoρ

Mr. SidleInYourDMs
Joined
May 5, 2012
Location
American Wasteland
It's always a shame when a great game comes around but the company that makes it decides to never revisit it again. But what games do you think should just stay as a great one-off experience and not get any sort of follow up? I'm talking good games though, b/c of course if it was bad then it's easy to say why you would't want a sequel to it.
 
In before everyone says The Last of Us.

I'm going to say Bioshock. The first one was great with a really cool design and twist and the other two didn't manage to approach it at all, to the point where they're just unnecessary.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gender
Male
I liked Bioshock 2. I even liked Infinite until I gave it more thought. I really only liked bits and pieces of Infinite, and even then it was cheapened by the fact that none of your choices really meant anything in the long run. I'd be perfectly okay with them never retreading that ground.

I'm gonna say Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice. Even though I think the trailer for the sequel looks cool, I can't help but think the story was fairly wrapped up in the first game. The message was delivered. I'm worried that with the second one it's going to overstay it's welcome.
 

Sheikah_Witch

I just really like botw
Joined
Apr 8, 2019
Location
Sweden
I actually thought of the Last of Us as well, as I had that initial feeling when the Part II was announced. I still feel like the first game stands on it's own but I love Part II so much that I want to come to defeat it's existence, it's almost like I've been proven wrong.

Hellblade is another great example, but I wonder if Senua's Saga might make me feel similarly about the two games.

I'm gonna say Undertale. It's fortunate that Deltarune is it's own thing, because it'd feel honestly a bit tacky if it was a direct sequel.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Chrono Trigger. I've heard Chrono Cross doesn't stand up to it & while a sequel that utilizes the world, the game mechanics and possibly the characters sounds good in theory, realistically I don't know what improvements could be made & turned into a fully fledged sequel.

It's such an outstanding game in it's own right & considering it's set the bar so high already any attempt to further the series would probably do more harm than good.
 

twilitfalchion

and thus comes the end of an era
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Location
Crossbell State
The Mario Galaxy games. I know the second game is nearly-universally praised as the better game and one of the best games of all time, but I can't help but feel that the first was such a unique experience that making a sequel based on the same exact gameplay but with a flimsier story was just Nintendo's way of making quick money.

Galaxy 2 did and still does feel to me like a lazy effort by Nintendo to capitalize on their success with Galaxy 1 (which I honestly can't blame them for; they're a business that needs to make money to stay afloat).
 
I like not to think about them so I completely forgot about them until now but almost every Tales game ever that got a sequel did not need a sequel.

Tales has this bizarre curse where sequel games suck like hell.

This curse is so bad that Tales of Zestiria (released in 2015) is actually a sequel to Berseria (released in 2017), so despite releasing first and becoming a sequel later, it still sucked when it released as a stand alone game. It retroactively got the curse.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
This curse is so bad that Tales of Zestiria (released in 2015) is actually a sequel to Berseria (released in 2017), so despite releasing first and becoming a sequel later, it still sucked when it released as a stand alone game. It retroactively got the curse.
Wait, Zestria sucked (the chronological sequel) or Berseria sucked (the released sequel) ?
 

twilitfalchion

and thus comes the end of an era
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Location
Crossbell State
I like not to think about them so I completely forgot about them until now but almost every Tales game ever that got a sequel did not need a sequel.

Tales has this bizarre curse where sequel games suck like hell.

This curse is so bad that Tales of Zestiria (released in 2015) is actually a sequel to Berseria (released in 2017), so despite releasing first and becoming a sequel later, it still sucked when it released as a stand alone game. It retroactively got the curse.
I've never played it myself, but some guys I chat with on SF have clearly said how they think that Tales of Zestiria is pretty much the worst game in the series. I don't remember specifically why they said that, but it seems to be a common opinion among Tales fans.
 
Wait, Zestria sucked (the chronological sequel) or Berseria sucked (the released sequel) ?

Zestiria, the chronological sequel sucked.
Berseria was excellent.

I've never played it myself, but some guys I chat with on SF have clearly said how they think that Tales of Zestiria is pretty much the worst game in the series. I don't remember specifically why they said that, but it seems to be a common opinion among Tales fans.

They're not wrong. There's so much wrong with it. I have a Tales blog going on this site where I'm reviewing Tales games and I can't bring myself to talk about Zestiria because it's so damn bad.
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Location
Australia
Games I feel would work well as a one off and don't need to be sequel milked:

Stardew Valley - Amazing as it is and it's the passion project of the developer. Once he's done with it, he needs to take a break then make something totally different as not to burn himself out.
Cuphead - A great concept and everything about it is great, as a boss rush style game. Without any major changes to the forumula, there's no need for more of the same.
Octopath Traveler - As much as I want a sequel for this game, I think it does not need one. Sure there is no proper end to the story outside the end of the 8 individual character stories. One of the major let downs of the game. Past that, if you can accept the game is 8x short story, it's really amazing. In too many ways to mention here. I think it's good enough as a one off.
Shovel Knight - Assuming it's one game with 3x DLC. Everything has been said and done here. Even Yacht Club want to move on from Shovel Knight. On to bigger and better things.

Games I felt didn't need the sequels they got.

Plants vs Zombies - The first game was amazing. The sequels were all ruined by EA's micro transactions.
Battletoads - The NES original, though the wrong kind of hard, was still an amazing game, from a gameplay and tech point of view. Every single sequel, including the new Xbox game have been and/or look like garbage. Even the crossover games with Double Dragon were alright but honestly didn't need to exist either.
Chronotrigger - I think everyone agrees this is a good game. Not the best SNES game or the best SNES RPG in my opinion but still very good. The sequels, like Chrono Cross were just outright terrible. That's why I just stick with Trigger. Sure it's an overcompllicated mess of a storyline but it manages to just be understandable enough to be a great game.
Shadowgate - The NES original was a bailliant early style point and click adventure game. I played the N64 game and it was honestly terrible. I've not played the remake of the original yet but I do want to. Just remaking old games "because you can", be it in 3D or in prettier colours is honestly a waste of time and money. Sure if you can bring something new and better to the game in a remake/remaster then sure go ahead. However the N64 sequel (of sorts) did not of that.

Galaxy 2 did and still does feel to me like a lazy effort by Nintendo to capitalize on their success with Galaxy 1 (which I honestly can't blame them for; they're a business that needs to make money to stay afloat).
To explain the full story to those who don't know. Nintendo had planned to have DLC for Mario Galaxy. They worked on that. At the end of the process they had so much DLC made that Nintendo made the decision to release all the levels they made as a sequel instead of DLC for the first game.

In my opinion the DLC would have cost $20 less than the original game. It might have required the base game to play or or might have been like NSMBU where the Luigi DLC was standalone or like the Xenoblade Chronicles 2 DLC was also standalone.
Maybe Nintendo should have called it standalone DLC instead of Mario Galaxy 2?
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gender
Male
Now that we're talking about Mario, I can't help but think that we never needed sequels to Luigi's Mansion. Luigi's mansion was amazing, and I really enjoyed the unique ghost characters that made up the boss battles. Especially the last one. King Boo possessing Bowser was awesome. The sequel just didn't do it for me. I haven't played or read anything about the third one, though. Maybe it justifies the whole thing.
 

~Kilza~

The Resting Sun
Joined
Sep 9, 2019
There's really only one answer I can give here, and that's Skies of Arcadia. I love the game, and really, I think it's good that it did end up just being a one-off rather than having any sort of sequels or prequels that wouldn't have lived up to the original, since it was able to wrap up the story and loose ends very well and leave me satisfied without needing any sort of sequel/prequel for it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom