Sequels are the best thing to happen to games.

Take the change from Assassin's creed 1 to AC2 for example. Seeing how much better AC2 is compare to AC1, it's hard to believe they came out in the same generation. Then AC:brotherhood came out and made it even better.

If there were no sequels, gone would be the insanely in depth universe building of a Mass Effect or dragon age. Wow we put years worth of work into making this crazy deep universe with really interesting characters. Now since we made one game, no one will see any of this stuff ever again. We probably could have saved months of work there. Maybe if we could make a 2nd game, we could really flesh out all this stuff, or use it in some other ways.  Sequels are the 2nd season of your favorite TV show.

Take the change from Assassin's creed 1 to AC2 for example. Seeing how much better AC2 is compare to AC1, it's hard to believe they came out in the same generation. Then AC:brotherhood came out and made it even better.

If there were no sequels, gone would be the insanely in depth universe building of a Mass Effect or dragon age. Wow we put years worth of work into making this crazy deep universe with really interesting characters. Now since we made one game, no one will see any of this stuff ever again. We probably could have saved months of work there. Maybe if we could make a 2nd game, we could really flesh out all this stuff, or use it in some other ways.  Sequels are the 2nd season of your favorite TV show.

They are for the most part, though some developers will churn out sequels because of sheer laziness.

Tim Schafer is the best thing to happen to video games!^^

That's true to an extent, but there's also a possibility that a game was simply meant to be a one-off. To make a movie analogy for instance, none of the Matrix sequels were really necessary and they probably degraded the quality of the source material overall.  
 
I agree that some games with a rich and untapped universe like Mass Effect benefit from sequels (especially those deriving gameplay and plot storylines from past choices) but other games such as Prince of Persia: Sands of Time were great just as a standalone I think; can anyone here honestly say that Warrior Within was "needed" or beneficial to the series?

They are and they aren't. For games with a large universe or story they're great, and as you said they can help improve a game or bring it into a newer generation. But they can also ruin a great series. Then there's stuff like the Call of Duty franchise, where they aren't continuing a story or universe, they aren't drasticly improving any game mechanics (Except for Call of Duty 4), all they're doing is making money off a big name.

" Tim Schafer is the best thing to happen to video games!^^ "

" That's true to an extent, but there's also a possibility that a game was simply meant to be a one-off. To make a movie analogy for instance, none of the Matrix sequels were really necessary and they probably degraded the quality of the source material overall.   I agree that some games with a rich and untapped universe like Mass Effect benefit from sequels (especially those deriving gameplay and plot storylines from past choices) but other games such as Prince of Persia: Sands of Time were great just as a standalone I think; can anyone here honestly say that Warrior Within was "needed" or beneficial to the series? "

Dead Rising 2 and Halo: Reach are the two games I'm playing at the moment and both are awful due to their overly derivative nature.

I'm going to say good games are the best thing to happen to video games, whether they are sequels or not doesn't really matter to me. 

" I'm going to say good games are the best thing to happen to video games, whether they are sequels or not doesn't really matter to me.  "

" They are and they aren't. For games with a large universe or story they're great, and as you said they can help improve a game or bring it into a newer generation. But they can also ruin a great series. Then there's stuff like the Call of Duty franchise, where they aren't continuing a story or universe, they aren't drasticly improving any game mechanics (Except for Call of Duty 4), all they're doing is making money off a big name. "

" Take the change from Assassin's creed 1 to AC2 for example. Seeing how much better AC2 is compare to AC1, it's hard to believe they came out in the same generation. Then AC:brotherhood came out and made it even better. If there were no sequels, gone would be the insanely in depth universe building of a Mass Effect or dragon age. Wow we put years worth of work into making this crazy deep universe with really interesting characters. Now since we made one game, no one will see any of this stuff ever again. We probably could have saved months of work there. Maybe if we could make a 2nd game, we could really flesh out all this stuff, or use it in some other ways.  Sequels are the 2nd season of your favorite TV show. "

" @trophyhunter said:

" Take the change from Assassin's creed 1 to AC2 for example. Seeing how much better AC2 is compare to AC1, it's hard to believe they came out in the same generation. Then AC:brotherhood came out and made it even better. If there were no sequels, gone would be the insanely in depth universe building of a Mass Effect or dragon age. Wow we put years worth of work into making this crazy deep universe with really interesting characters. Now since we made one game, no one will see any of this stuff ever again. We probably could have saved months of work there. Maybe if we could make a 2nd game, we could really flesh out all this stuff, or use it in some other ways.  Sequels are the 2nd season of your favorite TV show. "

I was with you until the last line. Second seasons rarely live up to the first seasons. "

Wow people actually agree? 
I was expecting a lot more "They should make original games Whah!"
When you really think about it, it's pretty hard to come up with something truly truly original.
That's what I'll give the PS1 era props for. Development was so cheap back then, that anyone with a wild hair up there ass could make a game. Also that was the time where Japan wackiness was in it's prime.

I've always thought that, if you had to pinpoint one single reason that games are different from books or movies, it's that game sequels are almost always an improvement. 

I prefer games that don't have direct sequels, so I can enjoy the story in one good, well-thought out game.

The BEST thing to happen to video games? No. In general, more shitty sequels are made than good ones. Of course there are times when sequels are obviously the correct answer though.  
 
I didn't know anyone was against good sequels.

I thought Super Mario Galaxy was better than Super Mario Galaxy 2. The sequel to Deus Ex wasn't great. Modern Warfare 2? I don't know.

I strongly agree. All the best games are sequels.

I very much agree in most cases, only one I can think of as not being as great is BioShock 2. Oh, and River Raid 2.

I tend to agree.  For the most part, every sequel I play in a series just makes me love the series more and more.  There are obviously exceptions to this, but it's true for most series. 

" @mylifeforAiur said:

" Tim Schafer is the best thing to happen to video games!^^ "

In theory yes, but almost never in actuality. "

" Dead Rising 2 and Halo: Reach are the two games I'm playing at the moment and both are awful due to their overly derivative nature. "

" @HandsomeDead said:

" Dead Rising 2 and Halo: Reach are the two games I'm playing at the moment and both are awful due to their overly derivative nature. "

I rather like both of those games, especially Reach, and don't see how something being derived from something else is necessarily a bad thing in and of itself.   I also don't really know what makes something "overly derivative" or how we are supposed to measure that. "