Wow, the "can't let go of the past" part is really one I hate about modern Doom games, Eternal especially. Like, trying to fit old-inspired designs in the new game (while most of them lack the same feel to them), having to make a weird thing about it being the same Doomguy, which gave Doom Slayer nothing but made the original character worse, contant Daisy right in your face, like I GET IT, THE BUNNY, COOL, CAN WE MOVE ON? Some people like to interprete as "oh yeah we love Old Doom and it's legacy" but too me it feels more like "Do you love old Doom? Well, go and buy our game, it's just like that one!"
@@Igor369 Funny, because even in the original games there were clear indications of Doomguy doing all of this for the humanity, but I guess it's too hard to read for an average Doom redditor, "DoOm dOeSN't nEEd PlOt!11" after all. (Except for the modern one, it's always cool, no matter how bad it is sometimes)
Honorable mention to Unreal 2: The awakening. A "questionable" sequel to a good game. And ye, I find the broken accent on wolf2009 hilarious. "I'll make ur deth kvick!"
1:25 "Now you might be noticing Something That Feels a little off..." Dude how did they change from damn trees and grass to dark and gritty quake-like textures, How the hell would you consider these two being in one franchise
I can think of a few examples. Driver: San Francisco, while still being a driving game going for a Lynchian lucid dreaming thing where the protagonist can transfer their mind between different cars. X-COM going from turn-based tactical combat to a (buggy) space sim with X-COM Interceptor, the sequel to the WW2 multiplayer game Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory being set during the Quake 2 Strogg wars, Heretic going from a first person shooter into a third person platformer. I'm apparently also one of very few who largely liked Deus Ex 2 Invisible War
This trend is really widespread throughout a lot of modern media in general, unfortunately. Back in the day with both movies and games experimentation was rife, which could result in bad products but also meant a great deal of diversity and interesting ideas getting a chance in the mainstream. Nowadays recognizeable IPs have monopolized the mainstream. Corporate overlords love reliable profits and ordinary people have an unfortunate tendency to clap when they see things they recognize.
And it just so happens to be the best in the series. Now, Serious Sam 3: BFE... is also a great game! But would have fit the topic way better, damnit. Like Wolfenstein 2009, it contributed a TON to the formula (the fact you can sprint justifies its existence alone).
@GermanPeter What a rare option. But SS2 is objectively the most hated game in franchise (hated =/= bad). Mostly for atmosphere which would be called «s**tpost» nowadays. Paradoxly the game seems to be the most loved by Croteam since they brought some features of SS4 (double wielding and sprint) to SS2 but not others. While Serious Sam 2 wasn't received well Serious Sam 3:BFE was for being... serious. More realism and actual narrative story only support seriousness.
I am personally not a fan of SS2 being more wacky but it is nowhere as far away from SS1 games than people tend to claim. There are a lot of reasons to groan but there is no faulting Croteam for an attempt to take SS1's own wacky elements further. (seriously, its Ancient Aliens: The FPS. literally. what sort of Seriousness do people expect from that premise? its all Duke Nukem-esque quips and "vicarious badassitude".)
I can't believe the game where you shoot headless guys with bombs in their hands and where almost every secret trolls you would be SILLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! For crying out loud, The Second Encounter began with a Crate Bus filled with the developers crashing into Sam's spaceship. It was ALWAYS over-the-top nonsense. It feels more like people only played the first game, skipped the Second Encounter, and then complained that it wasn't gritty enough.
@@GermanPeter You said it. Everything that was over-the-top silky was kept in secrets in every other game but SS2. And that's convenient that you brought pu Kamikaze. Who would you enjoy to shoot at more: 1) Some headless person, who runs at you with bombs in each hand while somehow screaming and will turn into a flesh paste after you shoot them or 2) A person wearing Soviet heavy athletic uniform with a bomb for head with a face drawn on it with French mustache, who drivers a motorcycle towards you while making clown noises and will turn into a burst of colorful paint after you soot them. Also did you notice enemies from Doom appearing in Serious Sam after TSE? Zombie n@zi from Doom 3 in SS2 which released a year later for example. What a cameo. I never said SS2 is a bad game. I said it wasn't received well for the radical change of pace. Which fits the video's subject if I understood it correctly.
Whatever happened to the good ol days where people were bickering over if Quake 2 was good or not. Why did the world have to devolve into companies being Aholes.
What I don't get about Doom Eternal is that it took 2016's PERFECT artstyle which felt like a natural progression and modernization of the Doom series, replaced it all with that really obnoxious nostalgia-baiting, un-scary, neon-coloured mess, and yet made the core gameplay feel less like Doom with all the movement gimmicks and slower speed. Not to mention the story that was more like some over-the-top fanfiction trying to tie all the Doom lore together, than a simple tool to guide the player through the game... It tries so hard to be Doom but it just falls apart completely for me. I only use 2016 for my nu-Doom fix at the moment
Yeah, that's where it loses me too. It honestly felt more like the devs were trying to create their own game, before Bethesda stepped in and went "Nuh-uh, you gotta make this about Doom, actually. Also bring back the old Caco designs, people liked those". Of course that's not what happened, but what a strange mishmash that game is. Does it want to do its own thing? Does it want to bathe in nostalgia? We shall never know. Here's hoping that Dark Ages will be more consistently original.
I mean, I wouldn't call most of these "bad sequels", more just controversial entries. Especially the last two seeing as a lot of people like both games, and a lot of people dislike both games. You prove the fact yourself by showing how you appreciate and like all these games others consider "bad." I do agree about your end statement though, all modern developers seem to do is redo what they did decades prior, there's no more experimentation, no more trying in the market. I'd say it's been like that since the 7th generation, which yes did have the same copy-paste gritty aesthetic in every other game that came out, but also gave us new franchises like Wii Sports and LittleBigPlanet that went on to shape our concepts of originality in videogames. Unfortunately though, these days companies are too scared to take a chance on something not guaranteed to work, and consumers are too scared to buy something that isn't backed up by a long and popular franchise.
Yeah, that was the point I was making. They're not bad sequels at all, people just call them that, because they wanted more of what they already have. I could have also picked Wind Waker as a "bad sequel", since people HATED the artstyle at the time. However, these days, most people would say it's one of the best Zeldas out there.
Honestly I consider SM the last decent Pokemon game before they shifted to Switch and revealed how bad they actually were at programming. Shadow was just edgy to the point of it feeling like parody.
I'll confirm X-2 and add to the list: Command & Conquer Renegade Quake 2 and I really want to include Dirge of Cerberus, but it needed another year or so in the oven. It's a bad sequel on technical details even if you can get over the gameplay and enjoy that for itself.
IIRC Wolf2009 did this annoying thing where aiming with the mouse was capped to a certain speed like a controller, making it basically unplayable. Given all the recent retro-reviews praising the game, I'm inclined to think I missed something in the options menu when I first played it.
That's only for the few turret sections. But as someone who beat the game on PC twice, I have no idea what the issue is. It plays perfectly fine. On Windows 11, no less!
I always liked Thief: Deadly Shadows, despite the smaller levels and lesser scope. It still had that Thief charm, and the in-between hub levels where you could make the factions fight were pretty fun too. Still haven't touched the reboot game, though.
@cappucci_n0 Oh definitely. I also did enjoy IW, but not as much as Thief: Deadly Shadows, and the original Deus Ex of course eclypses them completely.
first time I've been this early, great video as always Peter :) You mention Wolfenstein taking elements from a previous "bad game" and keeping them around, that could be another fun video topic; Games that kept around elements from their "bad entries"
Ohh, if I can think of some nice examples, I might do that! I can only think about Zelda 2 and SMB2, which heavily influenced later entries, but I already talked about those in the video about experimental sequels. Plus, neither of them are bad in any way.
The Kirby point is- actually quite Fair, i can Tell each game apart but i also played way more that i should, i could point out How It usually get darker in the end but moast of the time you have to go preatty Far for the Creepy stuff with the exeption of 64, that one doesn't hide that It wants to be a bit more spoopy than normal
Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts would a perfect example for this topic. People hate it pretty much only based on it not being a Collect-A-Thon Platformer and being a Vehicle Builder Sandbox instead. Thing is, if you can free your mind from thinking about it as a mainline Banjo game and instead view it as a Spin-Off, then you suddenly realize what a insanely great game it is. You have a lot of freedom when it comes to creating vehicles and you can get very creative with your solutions. It predates the first public builds of Minecraft by a few months, and I am willing to bet that if Nuts & Bolts had released after Minecraft became a runaway hit, that Nuts & Bolts would have had a better reception since it is a fairly creative game too, but focuses entirely on vehicles.
YES! That's one I should have definitely mentioned! Oh, if only I had played it before this video. People just watched Jontron get mad about it not being a collectathon (a genre NOBODY cared about at the time anymore btw) and never actually touched it. And then Tears of the Kingdom does similar building mechanics, and suddenly everyone loves it! I've seen footage, they put a lot of attention to detail into it!
If you're looking for "bad" sequels coming out soon, check out Killing Floor 3. The situation with the fan base is basically what you've described here. The fans of Killing Floor whine because they want a remake/reboot of Killing 1, and the developers instead are trying to push out a new take on the franchise.
Great video as always! I totally agree with the 2009 Wolfenstein being peak Wolfenstein. There were definitely a lot of call backs to Modern Warfare as you say.
really wish they made Bomberman in first person, like actual First Person Bomberman, the walls cover your sight and you'll never know outside of sound or watching the fire chain comming onto your dog ass when someone else's bomb is about to blow
I feel like Doom 3 is not entirely unfaithful to Doom 1 depending on your interpretation. The original Doom made frequent use of lighting techniques and ambushes too [dare I call them scares?], albeit with far more primitive technology which we take for granted today. After Half-Life dropped, HL1's style became the new gold standard for singleplayer games - a cohesive narrative journey. Making "Doom 2 But More" on Idtech 4 just wouldn't make sense because it would have been antithetical to the late 90s - mid 2000s push to innovate the FPS genre, something ID Software was big on doing. Slaughtermap style content just wasn't in vogue and was relegated to more niche titles like Painkiller or Serious Sam. Personally I'm grateful that Doom 3 exists because on its own merits and with the original flashlight mechanics : it's atmosphere and tension building is absolutely phenomenal, the paranoia of what could lurk behind the next corner, the constant creeping dread and the contrast of relief and excitement of finding a stash of supplies. It's a slower experience than Eternal and I like that. I feel preferring either direction is completely valid, thankfully both flavors of Doom exist.
I feel the same. And Doom3's original flashlight or weapon mechanic is a hill I will die on defending. See things or defend yourself, pick one. It's brilliant for amping up tension and making light a resource unto itself.
Doom 3 is a great game, but it really didn't build on previous Doom games. Doom was never just about the shooting, but also about exploration and puzzle-solving. All things that Doom 3 really lacked. I mean, it is INSANELY linear, for starters. And going from Doom 2's massive stages to Doom 3's claustrophobic corridors felt more like a step back. It's also why I find Doom 64 less interesting. In the end, it all worked out, and the game is good, but to say it's like the older Doom games is not true. If you stopped playing after Doom 1, sure. But not if you consider Doom 2 and even Doom 64 to an extent.
@@GermanPeter I agree, and I feel Doom 2 is a vastly different experience/design philosophy in contrast to Doom 3, one built more on Doom's gameplay and just being a bigger, meaner sequel with more demons to fight and fantastic new additions like the SSG among other QoL improvements. Doom 3 is more of an extrapolation of the horror elements. I am ultimately glad both the horror and action directions exist, though I cant speak of Doom 64, because Doom 64 to me is in this uncanny valley of fine. Doom 3 however is definitely the victim of some terrible design philosophies of its time like the clown car spawning, along with some lame enemies, repetitive encounter designs and a lame end boss; but that Plasmagun in Doom 3 just elevates the game into my heart. Nevertheless, I love the video and your style of analysis, I feel it explores the games and their designs in ways that are thought provoking while being fun and concise.
honestly? this video made me want to give Doom 3 a try! the general ambience feels more attractive (and accessible) than the later Doom entries, which are too fast paced for my brain to process @~@ and yeah, completely agree with the point of the video. franchises like Pokémon have beaten their dead horses for so long, that the moment we get a crumb of something different it really feels like a breath of fresh air. at least that's how i experienced Pokémon Legends: Arceus! shows you how just a new take on mechanics and story can rejuvenate decade-old franchises. the only downside to it... looks like the Pokémon Legends game is just gonna be a spin-off....biiiig sigh. i'm at least hoping that playing with new ways to approach their games encourages them to shake up the mechanics of the mainline games at some point... :/ great video!!
Starfox Adventures is the sequel to Starfox 64/Lylat Wars. It is a bad game, but it did attempt to do something different with the series and for some reason it’s a guilty pleasure of mine. Also, we got Krystal as main character (or nowadays a potential returning main character) out of it. Even if it is a bad game, Fox did get a girlfriend and that is worth something.
I have many opinions here, but I'll talk about the most notable (and most objective) one: Why aren't games experimenting like they used to? Simple: Game development costs have spiraled out of control. Sure, games developed during the times of these examples weren't exactly cheap, but with the standards of a modern AAA game being what they are, very few studio is going to want to risk spending tens of millions of dollars on a deviation from the established formula, and will only do so if they're losing sales. Even then, it will probably be to trend chase. Go with what's selling, right? It's unfortunate, but it's the reality of modern gaming. New franchises will often have some of this mentality affect their gameplay, too. When making a game, they'll try to cast the widest net with their gameplay and make something that appeals to as many people as possible because that's the best way to make sales. Honestly, the place for innovation is in the indie scene. These games are made by small teams working on a passion project with a shoestring budget. They may never be profitable, but they also have less on the line if they fail. Why not try something unique to stand out from the herd? It's indies that are pushing the industry forward. Often, when you see a big new gaming craze or paradigm shift in game design, it's because some indie game struck it big with an idea that nobody else was trying.
Wanna give a shoutout to Deus Ex Invisible War which despite being an inferior game to Deus Ex still is a lot of fun and has a VERY unique style to it from the rest of the series. I consider it much the Doom 3 of the Deus Ex franchise.
We could probably twist that one into being a bad tie-in game for the 1993 Mario Bros. Movie and therefore forcing it into being a bad Super Mario World Sequel.
Honorable mention - The Last of Us Part II, a game so bandwagoned to death you could make a stable micronation out of its haters. Until those posers moved over to hating Silent Hill 2 Remake anyway.
@@GermanPeter TLOU2 has an incredible story that feels like it was written for television and then adapted into a game (in a good way) It isn't uncommon to follow characters you don't like in film and tv, but definitely was a gutsy choice to make you _play_ as said character; I think "Gamers TM" at large weren't ready to _play_ a narrative spin like that yet I guarantee people who have only seen the show will respond to s2 a whole lot better than gamers did
I find it really funny they tried to grift against the Silent Hill 2 remake, despite the fact it's overwhelmingly positive and loved practically universally.
Honestly it wasn't the story that made me dislike TLOU 2 overall, it was the _pacing..._ That game is 25-30 hours long and towards the end I was just growing tired of it, felt like they could have trimmed the fat somewhere. Still a decent game, but I haven't played it since I beat it back when it released.
DMC Devil May Cry, by gameplay standpoint was better in my opinion. Instead of switching weapon on the fly like mainline game, it uses a dedicated buttons for different weapons, so combos were a bit more easier to do (It's been a while since I played DMC, so I might be slightly wrong about the combo system). The only terrible thing about DMC was Vergil characterisme was drastically changed. Sure he has the motivation for control and power, but he uses cunning tactics and the worst part; using a gun.
Quake 4 kinda followed the trend, but unlike the others, it actually worked, because Quake always was a dark gritty game, it only served to enhance the good parts and make them great!
Quake 4 is on the same level as Doom 3, being more gritty, realistic and slow compared to previous games, that's true. However, the jump from Classic Doom to Doom 3 was a lot greater than from Quake 2 to Quake 4. And unfortunately, that was the last Quake game we ever got :P so it's not like they could learn anything for future games.
I miss the bad sequel's for their prices . By the time it comes out the first game is like 1/5 price and the sequel is 1/3 soo you can experience them both . Oh and I'm not saying fallout 4 and Skyrim are bad sequels to fallout 3 and oblivion ( witch were bad sequels to fallout 2 and morovind ) but when on a sale they can be bought for basically a price of a large pizza ( at least where I live)
Here is my list of “bad” (I say but bad I should really just be saying generally seen as the worst in the series by the public) games that I think are amazing Quake 2. Sniper Elite V2. Super Mario Land 2. Zelda 2. Doom 64. And finally Castlevania 2.
Heroes IV of might and magic and Assassins creed black flag are both great examples of that. Both are disliked as a game of the series but if considered a standalone title they are amazing games. I've noticed that's often the case for the 4th game in the series. I guess 4th instalments get boring for the developers.
@@GermanPeter when it came out it was considered a solid game, but AC fans were disappointed with it as an AC game, it did make up for it enough to be liked as a game by even AC fans.
The “Crafted Mario” trilogy era is refurring to Sticker Star, Color Splash, & The Origami King. Reason why is because if you look at one of the 6277373746363 video essays on the Paper Mario series they all seem to hate this era for being a drastic change in not only gameplay but the fact that it got WAY more restrictive in character designs. I this this comment was wondering after watching this video that what you said about these “bad” entries being more interesting in retrospect because of how buffet they are. And this ties into the recently released TTYD remake, because it’s now more likely that the series is going back to it’s roots (as evidenced by the good reviews and it even selling a hair better the the original game) There could be the fact that if the series goes back to its roots it could become more nostalgia pandering to the first 2 games. Not saying it has to be a bad thing but what if the games get more formulaic after the remake? For example It could have character, locations, and heck even the main story being way too similar to TTYD. Or heck even good in the opposite direction in terms of critics and have too much story (that tries to give Kingdom Hearts a run for it’s money) and character designs that while yes alter existing Mario enemies/species to make the game’s own OCs completely over designs them or just make the new characters feel like they don’t fit in the Mario World (with the exception being if it takes place in another dimension of course) Though that’s just my response
About Wolfenstein TNO, I actually hated its grittiness (just the writing, to be exact, the graphics are really nice especially for 2014), granted I only played it recently. It feels way too over the top and "american" in its presentation if that makes sense. It feels as if the game was written by a 14 year old who just learned about WW2 and the nazis. But again otherwise the gameplay and graphics are great, though the final boss sucked.
Well, when AAA games cost a quarter billion to make now (for some illogical reason), I can't imagine why a mega-corpse company would want to take a risk. Also, saying all the Kirby games blend into one-another clearly tells me you haven't played Kirby games beyond the first few...
That's kind of an argument against spending billions on video game development, then. As we've seen time and time again, video game companies are insanely out of touch with what players want (e.g. Concord). So maybe they'd be better off actually making smaller, more experimental games that capture different audiences, rather than trying to appeal to everyone and failing. Also, I quite literally said in the video that I hadn't played a Kirby game in decades (it was the NES one). My point was that when every game looks like the last one, it's difficult to know where to even start. So saying I should play more is exactly what I'm talking about.
@@GermanPeter Yeah they seem to be more interested in making the shareholders happy rather than the players who actually prevent them from having a net loss due to pleasing the shareholders. Also, apologies about the Kirby thing, guess I didn't hear some of it correctly. I can recommend Planet Robobot for 3DS or Forgotten Land for Switch if you are interested in how the series has changed.
Mentioned that in my "Experimental Sequels" video :) That one doesn't really count though, as they weren't chasing any trends or trying to show off hardware or whatever. The Zelda series hadn't even been established at that point.
Gta7 is going to be a point and click adventure now Peter what have you done/j
Hey, that might actually get me to play it!
Honestly, I would love it if we got another top-down 2D GTA like 1 and 2.
😦
Wow, the "can't let go of the past" part is really one I hate about modern Doom games, Eternal especially. Like, trying to fit old-inspired designs in the new game (while most of them lack the same feel to them), having to make a weird thing about it being the same Doomguy, which gave Doom Slayer nothing but made the original character worse, contant Daisy right in your face, like I GET IT, THE BUNNY, COOL, CAN WE MOVE ON?
Some people like to interprete as "oh yeah we love Old Doom and it's legacy" but too me it feels more like "Do you love old Doom? Well, go and buy our game, it's just like that one!"
Every other comment on doom subreddit is "AnD He DOeS iT ONlY BecAuSe Of DaiSy!11!"
@@Igor369 Funny, because even in the original games there were clear indications of Doomguy doing all of this for the humanity, but I guess it's too hard to read for an average Doom redditor, "DoOm dOeSN't nEEd PlOt!11" after all.
(Except for the modern one, it's always cool, no matter how bad it is sometimes)
nah man fuck that I wanna see bunny for the 6th time
Honorable mention to Unreal 2: The awakening.
A "questionable" sequel to a good game.
And ye, I find the broken accent on wolf2009 hilarious. "I'll make ur deth kvick!"
Damn.
1:25 "Now you might be noticing Something That Feels a little off..."
Dude how did they change from damn trees and grass to dark and gritty quake-like textures, How the hell would you consider these two being in one franchise
The first sequel to Bomberman was actually an experimental sequel: Bomberman 3D in first person.
My little sister grew up with smash bros brawl and yeah it was just perfect for a dudette of her age skills-wise. I grew up on the og n64 game myself.
Alright, when I finish my platformer I'll make it a puzzle game as a sequel
Even better, make It a preaquel!
@ ooo brilliant idea, and maybe a mobile game as well 😝
@@scrubsandwich1050 With a complete tonal shift to the game aesthetic.
@ so instead of beaches and palms trees, the game should be set in the USSR. Got it
I can think of a few examples. Driver: San Francisco, while still being a driving game going for a Lynchian lucid dreaming thing where the protagonist can transfer their mind between different cars. X-COM going from turn-based tactical combat to a (buggy) space sim with X-COM Interceptor, the sequel to the WW2 multiplayer game Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory being set during the Quake 2 Strogg wars, Heretic going from a first person shooter into a third person platformer. I'm apparently also one of very few who largely liked Deus Ex 2 Invisible War
Driver San Francisco wasn't bad
@@Mahoromatic I liked it a lot, but I do know that fans of some of the previous games (particularly the GTA-esque ones) hated it.
This trend is really widespread throughout a lot of modern media in general, unfortunately. Back in the day with both movies and games experimentation was rife, which could result in bad products but also meant a great deal of diversity and interesting ideas getting a chance in the mainstream. Nowadays recognizeable IPs have monopolized the mainstream. Corporate overlords love reliable profits and ordinary people have an unfortunate tendency to clap when they see things they recognize.
Serious sam 2 fits to this list by doing the opposite of the most games in the list.
And it just so happens to be the best in the series. Now, Serious Sam 3: BFE... is also a great game! But would have fit the topic way better, damnit. Like Wolfenstein 2009, it contributed a TON to the formula (the fact you can sprint justifies its existence alone).
@GermanPeter What a rare option. But SS2 is objectively the most hated game in franchise (hated =/= bad). Mostly for atmosphere which would be called «s**tpost» nowadays. Paradoxly the game seems to be the most loved by Croteam since they brought some features of SS4 (double wielding and sprint) to SS2 but not others.
While Serious Sam 2 wasn't received well Serious Sam 3:BFE was for being... serious. More realism and actual narrative story only support seriousness.
I am personally not a fan of SS2 being more wacky but it is nowhere as far away from SS1 games than people tend to claim. There are a lot of reasons to groan but there is no faulting Croteam for an attempt to take SS1's own wacky elements further. (seriously, its Ancient Aliens: The FPS. literally. what sort of Seriousness do people expect from that premise? its all Duke Nukem-esque quips and "vicarious badassitude".)
I can't believe the game where you shoot headless guys with bombs in their hands and where almost every secret trolls you would be SILLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For crying out loud, The Second Encounter began with a Crate Bus filled with the developers crashing into Sam's spaceship. It was ALWAYS over-the-top nonsense. It feels more like people only played the first game, skipped the Second Encounter, and then complained that it wasn't gritty enough.
@@GermanPeter You said it. Everything that was over-the-top silky was kept in secrets in every other game but SS2. And that's convenient that you brought pu Kamikaze. Who would you enjoy to shoot at more:
1) Some headless person, who runs at you with bombs in each hand while somehow screaming and will turn into a flesh paste after you shoot them
or
2) A person wearing Soviet heavy athletic uniform with a bomb for head with a face drawn on it with French mustache, who drivers a motorcycle towards you while making clown noises and will turn into a burst of colorful paint after you soot them.
Also did you notice enemies from Doom appearing in Serious Sam after TSE? Zombie n@zi from Doom 3 in SS2 which released a year later for example. What a cameo.
I never said SS2 is a bad game. I said it wasn't received well for the radical change of pace. Which fits the video's subject if I understood it correctly.
Whatever happened to the good ol days where people were bickering over if Quake 2 was good or not. Why did the world have to devolve into companies being Aholes.
What I don't get about Doom Eternal is that it took 2016's PERFECT artstyle which felt like a natural progression and modernization of the Doom series, replaced it all with that really obnoxious nostalgia-baiting, un-scary, neon-coloured mess, and yet made the core gameplay feel less like Doom with all the movement gimmicks and slower speed. Not to mention the story that was more like some over-the-top fanfiction trying to tie all the Doom lore together, than a simple tool to guide the player through the game... It tries so hard to be Doom but it just falls apart completely for me. I only use 2016 for my nu-Doom fix at the moment
Yeah, that's where it loses me too. It honestly felt more like the devs were trying to create their own game, before Bethesda stepped in and went "Nuh-uh, you gotta make this about Doom, actually. Also bring back the old Caco designs, people liked those". Of course that's not what happened, but what a strange mishmash that game is. Does it want to do its own thing? Does it want to bathe in nostalgia? We shall never know. Here's hoping that Dark Ages will be more consistently original.
I mean, I wouldn't call most of these "bad sequels", more just controversial entries. Especially the last two seeing as a lot of people like both games, and a lot of people dislike both games. You prove the fact yourself by showing how you appreciate and like all these games others consider "bad." I do agree about your end statement though, all modern developers seem to do is redo what they did decades prior, there's no more experimentation, no more trying in the market. I'd say it's been like that since the 7th generation, which yes did have the same copy-paste gritty aesthetic in every other game that came out, but also gave us new franchises like Wii Sports and LittleBigPlanet that went on to shape our concepts of originality in videogames. Unfortunately though, these days companies are too scared to take a chance on something not guaranteed to work, and consumers are too scared to buy something that isn't backed up by a long and popular franchise.
Yeah, that was the point I was making. They're not bad sequels at all, people just call them that, because they wanted more of what they already have. I could have also picked Wind Waker as a "bad sequel", since people HATED the artstyle at the time. However, these days, most people would say it's one of the best Zeldas out there.
some of my favorite "bad" entries/sequels that I enjoyed
- Pokemon Sun/Moon
- Mega Man X5 and X6
- Final Fantasy X-2
- Shadow the Hedgehog
Honestly I consider SM the last decent Pokemon game before they shifted to Switch and revealed how bad they actually were at programming.
Shadow was just edgy to the point of it feeling like parody.
I still think the whole Mega Man X series is great. Well, except you-know-which-one
Ffx-2 is good
I'll confirm X-2 and add to the list:
Command & Conquer Renegade
Quake 2
and I really want to include Dirge of Cerberus, but it needed another year or so in the oven. It's a bad sequel on technical details even if you can get over the gameplay and enjoy that for itself.
IIRC Wolf2009 did this annoying thing where aiming with the mouse was capped to a certain speed like a controller, making it basically unplayable. Given all the recent retro-reviews praising the game, I'm inclined to think I missed something in the options menu when I first played it.
That's only for the few turret sections. But as someone who beat the game on PC twice, I have no idea what the issue is. It plays perfectly fine. On Windows 11, no less!
@@GermanPeter Who knows! It was 15 years ago, after all.
I always liked Thief: Deadly Shadows, despite the smaller levels and lesser scope. It still had that Thief charm, and the in-between hub levels where you could make the factions fight were pretty fun too.
Still haven't touched the reboot game, though.
@cappucci_n0 Oh definitely. I also did enjoy IW, but not as much as Thief: Deadly Shadows, and the original Deus Ex of course eclypses them completely.
first time I've been this early, great video as always Peter :)
You mention Wolfenstein taking elements from a previous "bad game" and keeping them around, that could be another fun video topic; Games that kept around elements from their "bad entries"
Ohh, if I can think of some nice examples, I might do that! I can only think about Zelda 2 and SMB2, which heavily influenced later entries, but I already talked about those in the video about experimental sequels. Plus, neither of them are bad in any way.
The Kirby point is- actually quite Fair, i can Tell each game apart but i also played way more that i should, i could point out How It usually get darker in the end but moast of the time you have to go preatty Far for the Creepy stuff with the exeption of 64, that one doesn't hide that It wants to be a bit more spoopy than normal
Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts would a perfect example for this topic. People hate it pretty much only based on it not being a Collect-A-Thon Platformer and being a Vehicle Builder Sandbox instead.
Thing is, if you can free your mind from thinking about it as a mainline Banjo game and instead view it as a Spin-Off, then you suddenly realize what a insanely great game it is. You have a lot of freedom when it comes to creating vehicles and you can get very creative with your solutions. It predates the first public builds of Minecraft by a few months, and I am willing to bet that if Nuts & Bolts had released after Minecraft became a runaway hit, that Nuts & Bolts would have had a better reception since it is a fairly creative game too, but focuses entirely on vehicles.
YES! That's one I should have definitely mentioned! Oh, if only I had played it before this video.
People just watched Jontron get mad about it not being a collectathon (a genre NOBODY cared about at the time anymore btw) and never actually touched it. And then Tears of the Kingdom does similar building mechanics, and suddenly everyone loves it! I've seen footage, they put a lot of attention to detail into it!
Surprised he never mentioned Resident Evil 6
If you're looking for "bad" sequels coming out soon, check out Killing Floor 3. The situation with the fan base is basically what you've described here. The fans of Killing Floor whine because they want a remake/reboot of Killing 1, and the developers instead are trying to push out a new take on the franchise.
Great video as always! I totally agree with the 2009 Wolfenstein being peak Wolfenstein. There were definitely a lot of call backs to Modern Warfare as you say.
really wish they made Bomberman in first person, like actual First Person Bomberman, the walls cover your sight and you'll never know outside of sound or watching the fire chain comming onto your dog ass when someone else's bomb is about to blow
I wish they'd do that for Pac-Man... I know there have been plenty attempts (most of them terrible horror games), but nothing concrete.
3:25 this was actually because graphics weren't much better, so they had to instead try and make it realist, unlike their more charming looking games
I feel like Doom 3 is not entirely unfaithful to Doom 1 depending on your interpretation. The original Doom made frequent use of lighting techniques and ambushes too [dare I call them scares?], albeit with far more primitive technology which we take for granted today. After Half-Life dropped, HL1's style became the new gold standard for singleplayer games - a cohesive narrative journey. Making "Doom 2 But More" on Idtech 4 just wouldn't make sense because it would have been antithetical to the late 90s - mid 2000s push to innovate the FPS genre, something ID Software was big on doing. Slaughtermap style content just wasn't in vogue and was relegated to more niche titles like Painkiller or Serious Sam.
Personally I'm grateful that Doom 3 exists because on its own merits and with the original flashlight mechanics : it's atmosphere and tension building is absolutely phenomenal, the paranoia of what could lurk behind the next corner, the constant creeping dread and the contrast of relief and excitement of finding a stash of supplies.
It's a slower experience than Eternal and I like that.
I feel preferring either direction is completely valid, thankfully both flavors of Doom exist.
I feel the same. And Doom3's original flashlight or weapon mechanic is a hill I will die on defending. See things or defend yourself, pick one. It's brilliant for amping up tension and making light a resource unto itself.
Doom 3 is a great game, but it really didn't build on previous Doom games. Doom was never just about the shooting, but also about exploration and puzzle-solving. All things that Doom 3 really lacked. I mean, it is INSANELY linear, for starters. And going from Doom 2's massive stages to Doom 3's claustrophobic corridors felt more like a step back. It's also why I find Doom 64 less interesting.
In the end, it all worked out, and the game is good, but to say it's like the older Doom games is not true. If you stopped playing after Doom 1, sure. But not if you consider Doom 2 and even Doom 64 to an extent.
@@GermanPeter I agree, and I feel Doom 2 is a vastly different experience/design philosophy in contrast to Doom 3, one built more on Doom's gameplay and just being a bigger, meaner sequel with more demons to fight and fantastic new additions like the SSG among other QoL improvements. Doom 3 is more of an extrapolation of the horror elements.
I am ultimately glad both the horror and action directions exist, though I cant speak of Doom 64, because Doom 64 to me is in this uncanny valley of fine.
Doom 3 however is definitely the victim of some terrible design philosophies of its time like the clown car spawning, along with some lame enemies, repetitive encounter designs and a lame end boss; but that Plasmagun in Doom 3 just elevates the game into my heart.
Nevertheless, I love the video and your style of analysis, I feel it explores the games and their designs in ways that are thought provoking while being fun and concise.
@@micuu1 cruelty squad also does this, and the catacombs in paradise, and darkworld always freak me out when i do them early on
I really enjoyed the wolfenstein with magic powers. Game was wild.
Love the experimentation games were doing around this time. A far cry from today.
Brawl is just the best one because of the story mode. It felt exactly like what was needed at the time.
honestly? this video made me want to give Doom 3 a try! the general ambience feels more attractive (and accessible) than the later Doom entries, which are too fast paced for my brain to process @~@
and yeah, completely agree with the point of the video. franchises like Pokémon have beaten their dead horses for so long, that the moment we get a crumb of something different it really feels like a breath of fresh air. at least that's how i experienced Pokémon Legends: Arceus! shows you how just a new take on mechanics and story can rejuvenate decade-old franchises. the only downside to it... looks like the Pokémon Legends game is just gonna be a spin-off....biiiig sigh. i'm at least hoping that playing with new ways to approach their games encourages them to shake up the mechanics of the mainline games at some point... :/
great video!!
Das war ein sehr schönes Video :-) ich habe es sehr genossen
Starfox Adventures is the sequel to Starfox 64/Lylat Wars. It is a bad game, but it did attempt to do something different with the series and for some reason it’s a guilty pleasure of mine. Also, we got Krystal as main character (or nowadays a potential returning main character) out of it.
Even if it is a bad game, Fox did get a girlfriend and that is worth something.
I have many opinions here, but I'll talk about the most notable (and most objective) one: Why aren't games experimenting like they used to? Simple: Game development costs have spiraled out of control. Sure, games developed during the times of these examples weren't exactly cheap, but with the standards of a modern AAA game being what they are, very few studio is going to want to risk spending tens of millions of dollars on a deviation from the established formula, and will only do so if they're losing sales. Even then, it will probably be to trend chase. Go with what's selling, right? It's unfortunate, but it's the reality of modern gaming. New franchises will often have some of this mentality affect their gameplay, too. When making a game, they'll try to cast the widest net with their gameplay and make something that appeals to as many people as possible because that's the best way to make sales.
Honestly, the place for innovation is in the indie scene. These games are made by small teams working on a passion project with a shoestring budget. They may never be profitable, but they also have less on the line if they fail. Why not try something unique to stand out from the herd? It's indies that are pushing the industry forward. Often, when you see a big new gaming craze or paradigm shift in game design, it's because some indie game struck it big with an idea that nobody else was trying.
Wanna give a shoutout to Deus Ex Invisible War which despite being an inferior game to Deus Ex still is a lot of fun and has a VERY unique style to it from the rest of the series. I consider it much the Doom 3 of the Deus Ex franchise.
It definitely looks a whole lot better.
Can we call Plumbers Don't Wear Ties a bad sequel to...to uh...?
We could probably twist that one into being a bad tie-in game for the 1993 Mario Bros. Movie and therefore forcing it into being a bad Super Mario World Sequel.
Honorable mention - The Last of Us Part II, a game so bandwagoned to death you could make a stable micronation out of its haters.
Until those posers moved over to hating Silent Hill 2 Remake anyway.
That one too! I love how they actually killed off a main character and went into a different direction entirely. Like, that takes guts to pull off.
@@GermanPeter TLOU2 has an incredible story that feels like it was written for television and then adapted into a game (in a good way)
It isn't uncommon to follow characters you don't like in film and tv, but definitely was a gutsy choice to make you _play_ as said character; I think "Gamers TM" at large weren't ready to _play_ a narrative spin like that yet
I guarantee people who have only seen the show will respond to s2 a whole lot better than gamers did
I find it really funny they tried to grift against the Silent Hill 2 remake, despite the fact it's overwhelmingly positive and loved practically universally.
I mean TLOU2 deserved it compared to silent hill 2
Honestly it wasn't the story that made me dislike TLOU 2 overall, it was the _pacing..._ That game is 25-30 hours long and towards the end I was just growing tired of it, felt like they could have trimmed the fat somewhere. Still a decent game, but I haven't played it since I beat it back when it released.
Gimme a sequel to all those weird one off games that came out of nowhere, teased a sequel, and did nothing afterwards
DMC Devil May Cry, by gameplay standpoint was better in my opinion. Instead of switching weapon on the fly like mainline game, it uses a dedicated buttons for different weapons, so combos were a bit more easier to do (It's been a while since I played DMC, so I might be slightly wrong about the combo system). The only terrible thing about DMC was Vergil characterisme was drastically changed. Sure he has the motivation for control and power, but he uses cunning tactics and the worst part; using a gun.
I know it's not going to happen but I still hope we get a Doom 3 follow-up of sorts one day... I liked spooky DOOM as much as Classic DOOM :O
Quake 4 kinda followed the trend, but unlike the others, it actually worked, because Quake always was a dark gritty game, it only served to enhance the good parts and make them great!
Quake 4 is on the same level as Doom 3, being more gritty, realistic and slow compared to previous games, that's true. However, the jump from Classic Doom to Doom 3 was a lot greater than from Quake 2 to Quake 4. And unfortunately, that was the last Quake game we ever got :P so it's not like they could learn anything for future games.
Halo 4 going back it was okay
I miss the bad sequel's for their prices . By the time it comes out the first game is like 1/5 price and the sequel is 1/3 soo you can experience them both . Oh and I'm not saying fallout 4 and Skyrim are bad sequels to fallout 3 and oblivion ( witch were bad sequels to fallout 2 and morovind ) but when on a sale they can be bought for basically a price of a large pizza ( at least where I live)
I ended up playing Brawl more than Smash 4 until I started playing Ultimate. I just thought Brawl had more stuff in it like The Subspace Emissary.
If you miss them, they weren't bad enough.
Here is my list of “bad” (I say but bad I should really just be saying generally seen as the worst in the series by the public) games that I think are amazing
Quake 2.
Sniper Elite V2.
Super Mario Land 2.
Zelda 2.
Doom 64.
And finally Castlevania 2.
yeah now all we get are terrible remasters and remakes lol
Yeah, Doom 3 is a fine survival horror game, with *very* heavy emphasis on the horror.
Heroes IV of might and magic and Assassins creed black flag are both great examples of that.
Both are disliked as a game of the series but if considered a standalone title they are amazing games.
I've noticed that's often the case for the 4th game in the series.
I guess 4th instalments get boring for the developers.
I have never heard anyone dislike AC4, though. If anything, people say that's the only one that actually aged well.
@@GermanPeter when it came out it was considered a solid game, but AC fans were disappointed with it as an AC game, it did make up for it enough to be liked as a game by even AC fans.
thank you
Question what are is your opinion on the "Crafted Mario" trilogy era. Since you don't seem to care about a franchise abandoning its roots too much.
No idea what that is
The “Crafted Mario” trilogy era is refurring to Sticker Star, Color Splash, & The Origami King. Reason why is because if you look at one of the 6277373746363 video essays on the Paper Mario series they all seem to hate this era for being a drastic change in not only gameplay but the fact that it got WAY more restrictive in character designs.
I this this comment was wondering after watching this video that what you said about these “bad” entries being more interesting in retrospect because of how buffet they are.
And this ties into the recently released TTYD remake, because it’s now more likely that the series is going back to it’s roots (as evidenced by the good reviews and it even selling a hair better the the original game)
There could be the fact that if the series goes back to its roots it could become more nostalgia pandering to the first 2 games. Not saying it has to be a bad thing but what if the games get more formulaic after the remake? For example It could have character, locations, and heck even the main story being way too similar to TTYD. Or heck even good in the opposite direction in terms of critics and have too much story (that tries to give Kingdom Hearts a run for it’s money) and character designs that while yes alter existing Mario enemies/species to make the game’s own OCs completely over designs them or just make the new characters feel like they don’t fit in the Mario World (with the exception being if it takes place in another dimension of course)
Though that’s just my response
What is man about to yap about
Please update us
Must be why you like Doom 2 so much
About Wolfenstein TNO, I actually hated its grittiness (just the writing, to be exact, the graphics are really nice especially for 2014), granted I only played it recently. It feels way too over the top and "american" in its presentation if that makes sense. It feels as if the game was written by a 14 year old who just learned about WW2 and the nazis. But again otherwise the gameplay and graphics are great, though the final boss sucked.
Well, when AAA games cost a quarter billion to make now (for some illogical reason), I can't imagine why a mega-corpse company would want to take a risk.
Also, saying all the Kirby games blend into one-another clearly tells me you haven't played Kirby games beyond the first few...
That's kind of an argument against spending billions on video game development, then. As we've seen time and time again, video game companies are insanely out of touch with what players want (e.g. Concord). So maybe they'd be better off actually making smaller, more experimental games that capture different audiences, rather than trying to appeal to everyone and failing.
Also, I quite literally said in the video that I hadn't played a Kirby game in decades (it was the NES one). My point was that when every game looks like the last one, it's difficult to know where to even start. So saying I should play more is exactly what I'm talking about.
@@GermanPeter Yeah they seem to be more interested in making the shareholders happy rather than the players who actually prevent them from having a net loss due to pleasing the shareholders.
Also, apologies about the Kirby thing, guess I didn't hear some of it correctly. I can recommend Planet Robobot for 3DS or Forgotten Land for Switch if you are interested in how the series has changed.
Here's My obligatory Sonic CD mention
I loved Sonic CD, I didn't know that was unpopular enough to be considered a "Bad" Sequel
Zelda II comes to mind
Mentioned that in my "Experimental Sequels" video :) That one doesn't really count though, as they weren't chasing any trends or trying to show off hardware or whatever. The Zelda series hadn't even been established at that point.
@GermanPeter fair point
"all the new kirby games just look the same"
i am offended, seriously give the games a shot, you won't be dissapointed if you liked the older games
I didn't say they're bad, just that I don't know where to start, because they all look identical.
@GermanPeter start with return to dreamland
Dragon Age Veilguard?
Du lebst ja auch noch, moin
what do you mean? theres bad/horrible sequels everywhere, Dragon age vielguard, silent hill 2 remake, TLOU 2 and so on
SH2 Remake isnt bad or horrible; just because something isnt for _you_ doesnt mean its terrible
@@pennplayz nah its horrible
@@Inuitman genuinely asking, what about it is horrible in your opinion?
@@pennplayz it censors and the remake is soulless. I played the OG and playing the remake makes me sick.
Halflife 2 belongs on the list