Games

38318 readers

1266 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

136

Cities Skylines 2, Kerbal Space 2, Planet Coaster 2, Frostpunk 2... What Went Wrong? (thelemmy.club)

submitted 5 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

64 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Last few years I’ve been excitedly waiting for sequels from several small-to-medium sized studios that made highly acclaimed original games—I’m talking about Cities: Skylines, Kerbal Space Program, Planet Coaster, Frostpunk, etc.—yet each sequel was very poorly received to the point I wasn’t willing to risk my money buying it. Why do you think this happens when these developers already had a winning formula?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 days ago (7 children)

A great product does not necessarily mean there is a winning formula though. We have a trash sequel when the new game does not do something that the existing game does. Even worse, the existing features are locked behind additional payment, so why would players not continue to play the existing game?

KSP 2 - Let's forget the technical disaster. A lot of features are missing at the start. You could argue that it's in early access, but why would I pay for a product that does less? Then we add in the many bugs and performance issues, and you know it's game over.

Cities Skylines 2 - Again, you can't do everything you already can in CS1. Plus, the first game is supported by a huge number of mods. There's really no reason to play the new title. Again, it does not perform any better.

This is a weird take but I think remake or remastered these days are more like sequels than sequels, just because they keep the story and mechanics.

I find that game developers or many businesses try to reinvent the wheel when there's no reason to. Say the Subnautica sequel, why waste money on voice over, add a land mass, cut the beloved submarine, shorten the story and overall map size, all that. I will never understand and sincerely hope the next Subnautica title does not reinvent the wheel.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

I wouldnt go that far. Skylines 2 has a new game engine. If it wouldnt have turned out to be incredibly slow, it would have been a very successful launch.

And I cant imagine anyone buying Skylines 2 if it used the same engine as Skylines 1. Then it truly would have been no point. The new engine was supposed to make cities more beautiful and more realistic. They just didnt manage to make it fast.

I unfortunately bought the game for 50 dollars on launch day and I have just 3 hours in it. I cant bring myself to play it because of the sluggish feeling.