Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PC Gaming' started by Rakewell, Jan 17, 2013.
I think GTA 1 is still the best one to this day.
Dune 2... excellent example...
D2 got me into RTS
Pentium 2 really blew away the original Pentium.
Most of these "mediocre" games aren't mediocre.
But in the same vein of naming non mediocre games mediocre, Tie Fighter was much better than X-Wing.
Aliens vs Predator 2 (the old ones, not the newer one) was much better than Alien vs Predator.
Ohh..almost forgot. System Shock 2 was tons better than System Shock.
Just Cause 1 doesn't hold a candle to Just Cause 2.
Not that all of these originals were mediocre, but these sequels were definitely better
System Shock 2
Tie Fighter (sequel to x-wing)
Baldur's Gate 2
Homeworld 2 (gameplay-wise)
Left For Dead 2
EDIT: this is what i get for opening a page and letting it sit for a couple of hours before getting to it at least no one mentioned HW2
EDIT2: omg fail edit to my above post...so much fail
X-Wing Alliance was the best.
I think that some people definitely don't understand, or just shrugged off the actual question, which clearly implies that the titles you suggest would mean that the original was mediocre. Yet, I see games mentioned such as Half-Life? Borderlands? Mortal Kombat?
Even if the sequel was, for example, a "quantum leap" over the original, was "better in every way", doesn't mean that the original was simply mediocre. Seriously guys, the original Mortal Kombat, alone... do I even have to start explaining how by itself it was already a quantum leap on its own when it was released and what it provoked within the video gaming industry? Does ESRB ring a bell? And do I really have to explain as to why the original Half-Life was the absolute FPS revolution and evolution since DOOM and Quake?
If you really do consider that such original games were already mediocre, or mediocre "IP's" during their own times, then either you just weren't there when it actually occurred, or again, you just don't consider the actual OP's question when you post your suggestions. The question is not simply "name sequels that were better than the original". If I was you, OP, I would probably just change the title itself, since obviously lots of people around will just come in and pop some random sequels without considering the actual question.
There let me have my take on it...
Homeworld 2, yup, 'cause the original was totally mediocre.
Should be held in MUCH higher regard then it is.. While H.Zowie may have had some of the RTS ideas first.. DUNE did it all correct and is the formula that has been copied non stop since. Yet is almost forgotten..
Uncharted 2. I would also say Far Cry 3. The mutant thing in the first one turned me off and generally I didnt find it interesting. It could be my tastes have changed over the years.
well, all sequels were created because the original had some kind of success
Absolutely not! TFC is wayy better than TF2. TFC actually required skill to be good at. I cant speak for QTF, as i never played it.
Definetely Baldur's Gate 2 gets my vote
Damn I should have read the title better lol...
And mine. I thought Baldur's Gate was quite boring, especially at the start. But BG2 was awesome right out the box. One of the great games.
Oh yeah, great call. :thumbsup:
I think people are having a problem understanding the meaning of mediocrity, lol. This isn't a thread about games where the sequel was better, it is a thread about a series that started off not so hot and then had amazing sequels. Off the top of my head the Assasins creed series (which has already been mentioned). Dead space on pc was a horrendous port. Dead space 2 was much better
Rant noted and subject line made more clear.
I don't agree that GTA 1 is the best, but there's no frickin way GTA 2 far surpassed GTA 1 and the latter was mediocre. GTA 1 is way better than 2.
Civ 2, GTA Vice City ( I consider GTA 3 original), Mass Effect 2, Daggerfall, Tecmo Super Bowl, C&C red alert, warcraft 2. They are all better but I would not consider the original games to be terrible, though Civ 2 was leap years better than Civ 1.
The first hitman game was pretty bad, the second one was way better imo.
the atmosphere in D2 cannot hold a candle to D1.
the long-term playability is much better though. still, i think of the three, i look back most fondly on D1.
To answer the OP:
Assassin's Creed 2 (not Brotherhood, which IMO is no quantum leap over the '2')
The first games are strictly not mediocre but the 2nd iteration are IMO jumps ahead:
C&C Red Alert 2
Mass Effect 2 (I really enjoyed this more than the 1st one)
Prince of Persia 2
I'd vote for these legends but I haven't played their original version (which likely are not mediocre either):
Master of Orion II
Star Control II