Hey guys, NekuSakuraba here and today I'm going to be blogging about something I have recently noticed, when does a sequel change too much or not enough? That, my friends, is the question.

It hasn't changed enough! *Shakes fist*

This usually is relevant to games that have yearly releases, such as Call of Duty and Fifa. Obviously due to the 1 year cycle the developers simply don't have enough time to vastly change or improve the game. Yes. they might add a few things here are there and tweak the graphics but the game remains largely the same. People love to complain about this and while it is certainly valid to complain what can we do? Sure, they may be milking the franchise for money and all but it's working because people keep buying them and the developers and publishers get what they like the most: a big fat wad of cash. Don't be fooled however, just because you and me stop buying these yearly games doesn't mean the gaming industry will suddenly stop making them, people like us (...core gamers?.. *cringe*) don't make up enough of the market to change it, sadly. Some people might claim - Fifa needs it to update the roster or Call of Duty needs more weapons and maps but isn't that what DLC is for? (besides charging $40 for skins, tsk tsk Epic games!) adding minor changes for a small price? there is no arguing that they make more money by charging $60 a year for the game but we can only hope they will wait a little longer next time!

You are changing the game too much! *Shakes fist, again*

Most recently, this argument applies to Max Payne 3, however not having played the first two games all that much I can't really comment on the game in particular. Let's look at something like the new Hitman game for example, none of us have played it but from what I read it does not seem impressive. Totally changing what the series is based on is not cool! Hitman games are about stealth and awesome ways of completing levels but it seems like the new one is going to be a lot more action based sadly. I'm trying not to speak too soon since I haven't played the game (maybe that's what people upset about Max Payne should do? :P) but it seems like the game could be a new IP and have nothing to do with the series. Now, when a new developer steps in like with Fallout 3 it seems more reasonable that the game has changed but even with Fallout 3 the games premise was very true to the series and the only thing people seemed to hate about it was that it wasn't in the same viewing angle as the first two games. Making a game seem new and fresh but still true to the franchise seems like a pretty hard thing to do and I'd like to know what games you guys think did well.

Conclusion

What determines whether the game has changed too much or not enough? I'd like to hear your thoughts and what games you think keep the balance between new but familiar particularly well. Thanks for reading, if you enjoyed the blog follow me on Giant bomb or my newly set up Twitter. I'm open to any advice on my blogs so I can keep improving.

Thanks again!