Why do games become really good when it's the forth in the series?

Why do games become really good when it's the forth in the series?

Resident Evil 4

Devil May Cry 4

Metal Gear Solid 4

Grand Theft Auto 4

Call of Duty 4

and so on...

How could forget the Elder Scrolls 4? Shame on you. :)

I didn't like DMC4 and I thought GTA4 was the worst in the series so far.

You're forgetting Guitar Hero 4.:)

Sometimes it happens

Games only become good when they reach the fourth installment because it takes that long for developers to realise wtf makes a good game. Its sad they don't employ better community realtions managers etc so they could save more time and money.

There are like 4 other threads like this out there, lmao. This one was the first though.

"You're forgetting Guitar Hero 4.:)
"

Gears of War 4....

Mortal Kombat 4

GTA Vice City was the fourth GTA game and it was the best GTA in the series, so I guess there's some truth to this four thing.

Monkey Island 4
Mass Effect Andromeda
Halo 4

I think it’s 50% coincidence, 50% because video games are an inherently iterative medium. Once a consistent, stable studio gets to #4 they probably have the knowledge and confidence to really nail their creative vision.

This plus, I think people burned out pretty quick on Fallout 4 and Saints Row 4. Battlefield 4 had lots of problems. Soul Calibur 4 had those Star Wars characters in it for some unfathomable reason. Some games just start to feel uninspired by their fourth outing such as Tony Hawk 4, Dead or Alive 4, and Dead Rising 4. This isn't to say there haven't been some steller "4" hits, it's just that there have been some notable misses, as well.

Spelling note: thread title should read "fourth", not "forth."

As people point out (mostly post-necro), you can list just as many 4th games that are the point where the series burns out, or needlessly extends itself when it has kinda run out of good gameplay ideas. I think the 2nd entry is the entry that is usually amazing: assuming the first game had any merit at all and warranted a sequel, the sequel is usually way more refined and expands well upon the ideas of the original.

The 4th entry is usually where the series reinvents itself entirely (for better or worse), or where it gradually slips into irrelevance if its the 4th game with no real change. Waaaaay more 4th games are probably pretty bad.

I think you could say the same about first or second or third and come up with a good looking list of examples for each of them.

Is this the oldest necro in the history of the forum? Nearly 10 year old thread.

I don't agree with the premise anyway. I agree with @bisonhero Lot of times it's the second game, where the franchises really starts to click. Which makes some sense, 1st games are often like a rough draft.

I was wondering that myself. This is some top tier necro. I also agree with your second statement with Mass Effect coming to mind as an example. That game tightened up so much in its second iteration.

anyway, this is an incredibly flawed conclusion to come to.

A lot of those games with 4 in the title are not the fourth attempt and what is going on I just noticed this thread is 9 years old

Uncharted 4 was the worst in the series.

Devil May Cry 4 was lower tier.

Halo 4 was the begining of the end.

Destiny Year Four (Destiny 2) was ass.

Super Castlevania 4 was pretty iffy.

Mega Man 4 was where the series took a downward turn.

Devil May Cry 4 had the potential to be the best, the combat is outstanding. But there are too many little things that kill it...

-Dante's missions being recycled

-The boardgame you play like 7 times that slows missions to a crawl

-Fighting bosses 3 times

-Those chimera enemies that have the attack that you can't do anything to avoid

-The levels where you have to smack the gyro blades into walls/sockets

-The parts where you traverse the level by grappling little lanterns

I personally appreciate these non-Korean spam necros but like, where do they come from? Google searches? How did someone stumble on to this?

Also, man, most of the 4's I know of are outright bad, and many no longer hold up so, yeah. Final Fantasy 4 is great though!

Gears 4 wasn't good at all. Fighting the robots was very boring and less interesting enemies hurt horde mode too. Halo 4 was bad too.

Obviously Mass Effect 4 had major problems, even though I think the internet took the hate too far. God of War 4 is great.

@theoriginalatlas said:

Well, hey there, nearly-10-years-ago me, second commenting.

I obviously 1000% stand by this statement that TESIV is the best fourth game in a series ever. And since this post, I don't think I've played many games that are fourths in a series, except Europa Universalis IV, which was great, and Forza 4, which was very good but couldn't hold a candle to Forza 3.

That rule seems arbitrary...

Out of your examples, GTA4 was bad, DMC4 was inferior to its predecesor and MGS4 was spineless...

@deathstriker: God of War 4 as in Ascention? I thought that one was generally considered the worst in the series? I stopped before finishing 3, personally.

Unless portable games are being counted...

I really dig Gears 4. It’s different, but similar. It feels like a good launching off point for something new-ish. Chainsawing robots is dumb, though. They need to either make it cool or have a lancer analog that better horribly murders robots. Also, It’s only the second time in franchise history that horde has been really fun (Gears 2 being the first).

@nutter: This year's God of War is God of War 4... Ascension is a spinoff to me like Battlefield Hardline.

I got bored of Gears 4 fast. The trailer for Gears 5 wasn't bad, MS just need to getaway from the same 3 franchises in a loop.