There’s a pattern you see with video games, which probably isn’t all that unique to the medium when you really think about it, but nevertheless, it’s something you see a lot of in gaming in particular.
An initial game in a potential franchise will launch, generally with pretty good “bones” – perhaps it’s got a great concept, or maybe it nails some element that can become foundational later on – but the thing nevertheless isn’t 100 percent on point.
Not yet.
The game has some rough edges, some problems, and some things you wish weren’t there.
We can guess that it needed more time in the oven. Or even that it was probably realistically pushed about as far as anyone could expect for a first crack at the thing. But either way, the end result is the same: It doesn’t have polish.
It was a proper idea, but it’s just not quite there yet.
When the sequel(s) come along, that’s when you see your desired refinement occur. Everything that worked about the first game gets built upon and expanded. Everything that didn’t work gets thrown out.
More of the good. Less of the bad.
What emerges is generally a better game than what you had before.
Now, there are plenty of examples of sequels that don’t follow this script — games that deviate too wildly from a winning formula, games that fail to improve upon what came before,* or worst of all games that were given to a team of developers who just weren’t up to the challenge of duplicating what made the entity special to begin with. These are your “disappointment” sequels.
* Probably the most notorious examples of this are your annual EASports-type releases of games that barely change what came the year before. You’ve gotta squint to see what’s been improved from one game to the next. “Hey, the rosters are slightly different … buy it now!”
But by and large, if you want to talk about some of the most successful sequels in history – universally beloved hits like Mega Man 2, Street Fighter II, Tecmo Super Bowl, Sonic the Hedgehog 2, and Donkey Kong Country 2 (just to name a few) – those games didn’t necessarily reinvent the wheel. They built on what had previously been established, and they did so with brilliance.
A game comes out. It establishes a franchise. It’s improved in the sequel(s). And off we go.
Thus, we can say that in general, there’s simply a level of presentation and polish that’s present in a sequel that you don’t see in an original outing. The first game in the series is going to be a little rough or janky in comparison.
It’s the sequels that nail the concept.
And THIS is what makes “Halo: Combat Evolved” a remarkable game.
It sticks the landing on the very first attempt.
Continue reading Halo: Combat Evolved — Retro Gaming Essentials (No. 44)Halo: Combat Evolved at a glance:
Genre: First-person shooter
Released: 2001
Platform: Xbox
IGN’s fourth-best FPS ever