-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
did any series ever had a comeback after a really disappointing game?
- Thread starter nickcv
- Start date
There are better threads for that sort of thing.
But seriously, I adore RE4 to bits. But I also thought Zero was the best of all the pre-4, classic-style games - I guess it was to do with my age when I first played it. So for that reason, Zero is probably my favourite Resident Evil game. My earlier comment was just a cheeky but good-natured little curveball
Back on topic... it's actually really difficult to come up with a series that has fluctuated that much.
I in no way think Advance Wars: Dual Strike was disappointing, but I guess it started to show little signs of having gone as far as they could with certain things. Dark Conflict was then a really refreshing entry which shook things up largely for the better.
And now I really want another Advance Wars game.
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
Sounds to me your hype level going in affected your enjoyment greatly. I'm assuming you went into SMG2 with a greatly adjusted hype-level.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
I don't think this thread is talking about personal opinions, but about consensus...
Good Job Bob
Member
Gears of War 3 Multiplayer.
CambriaRising
Member
Hopefully Resident Evil 6.
First example that comes to mind is Super Mario Sunshine -> Super Mario Galaxy. The quality jump is unbelievable. Going from the first average at best mainline Mario game to one of the best games ever (which in turn would eventually be surpassed by its genre defining sequel).
The Mana Legend
Banned
Nope. My hype level doesn't affect my enjoyment of anything. If I'm disappointed in a game, it won't keep me from enjoying it.
Game was boring as fuck.
Snacks the sober sea lion
Member
Multiple stars per galaxy without relying on secret stars to impede your progress? New worlds opening before you have all of the stars in the previous one? Awful. Truly awful. Give me SMG2's method: No challenge at all for the first 60 stars, then an endless barrage of secret stars, needing 10 stars to advance one galaxy. Let's just recycle Super Mario World's format in a completely gratuitous way that kills any sense of progress for beating levels. Also, of the World S galaxies, one is recycled from the first game, one of them is combat-based (we all know how deep and nuanced Super Mario Galaxy's combat is, right?), and one of those galaxies is just a series of bosses recycled from the first game with a daredevil comet tacked on for the second star. Hope it was worth collecting 50 secret stars and comet stars, suckers.
djplaeskool
Member
I don't know.
I really liked both PSIII and SMS.
Even though they abandoned certain established facets, I didn't find either of them disappointing.
(Though, admittedly, PSIV was amazing)
Heck, I think SMS is one of the most underappreciated games ever.
The Mana Legend
Banned
I don't care about the consensus.
The magic was lost after the first.
Bending_Unit_22
Member
Civilization IV after the atrocious Civilization III.
I would say RE Revelations after RE5 but then RE:R was followed up by ORC and it looks RE6 will continue the downward spiral.
Mega Man X following Mega Man 5 through 812.
Every Mario Kart after Super Circuit.
I would say RE Revelations after RE5 but then RE:R was followed up by ORC and it looks RE6 will continue the downward spiral.
Mega Man X following Mega Man 5 through 812.
Every Mario Kart after Super Circuit.
More like it went up because 9 came after 8 then went down again when 10 was released.
Megadragon15
Member
King Of Fighters 2001->King Of Fighters 2002.
Fatal Fury 3->Real Bout Fatal Fury.
Donkey Kong 3->Donkey Kong Country.
Fatal Fury 3->Real Bout Fatal Fury.
Donkey Kong 3->Donkey Kong Country.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Such a rebel.
Came here to post this, was surprised nobody had posted it until I got to the last page.
I hate Phantasy Star 3 so much, but Phantasy Star 4 is glorious.
Seriously? I enjoyed PS3. It wasn't nearly as good as 4, but I thought it was a fun game in its own right. It felt like a side story, but I liked the marriage system and branching plot, and thought the "worldship" setting was neat. It was just a little too ambitious for a cartridge-based game at the time, and I felt it suffered for being squeezed into that format. I'd have loved to see what they could've done with it as a CD-ROM game, or even as a cart with double the memory.
SomeOneInaHat
Member
Assassins Creed-> Assassins Creed 2
Vampirolol
Member
Red Steel 2!
ScreenSplitter
Member
You are just the worst kind of person.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Just follow the general Zelda cycle.
Wind Waker released = Wind Waker sucks = Majora* becomes a classic
Twilight Princess released = Twilight Princess sucks = Wind Waker becomes a classic
Skyward Sword released = Skyward Sword sucks = Twilight Princess becomes a classic
Obviously it doesn't apply to everyone, but you generally see the trend take place every console Zelda cycle...especially in the press.
*Majora was always a classic, imo
Wind Waker released = Wind Waker sucks = Majora* becomes a classic
Twilight Princess released = Twilight Princess sucks = Wind Waker becomes a classic
Skyward Sword released = Skyward Sword sucks = Twilight Princess becomes a classic
Obviously it doesn't apply to everyone, but you generally see the trend take place every console Zelda cycle...especially in the press.
*Majora was always a classic, imo
Nocturnowl
Member
The combat based stage was actually the last galaxy before Bowser in world 6, but it was indeed complete crap, battle belt is possibly the lowest moment of both Galaxy games.
No challenge for the first 60 stars is pretty laughable though, while it's not overly tricky it's certainly steps beyond pretty much most of the first games entire difficulty level, or if not more difficult then the stages felt more focused with more obstacles and less time blasting around planetoids with launch stars.
I honestly have no idea what this sense of progression stuff is about, opening a new world isn't exactly dissimilar to opening up a new set of stages in the first game. The mid map roadblocks are just like the planets trapped inside question mark blocks in the first game as well, just that Galaxy 2 is stricter on the star requirements, in that regard the first game gives you greater options for reaching star requirements.
Looking at both games closely SMG is still ensared close to the stylings of Sunshine and 64 whilst also progressing towards a more linear obstacle course filled format, Galaxy 2 takes this further, either is fine by me but i'll take the SMG2 approach here. Not that I condone Galaxy being a disappointing game by any stretch, if anything the jump from1 to 2 was like the best just got better.
Dwight Schrute
Member
Suikoden V
There are better threads for that sort of thing.
But seriously, I adore RE4 to bits. But I also thought Zero was the best of all the pre-4, classic-style games - I guess it was to do with my age when I first played it. So for that reason, Zero is probably my favourite Resident Evil game. My earlier comment was just a cheeky but good-natured little curveball
No worries dude, I was being pretty tounge-in-cheek with my responses anyway. I'm a big fan of Zero myself. Less so than the immaculate REmake that preceeded it (which I believe to be the best example of the classic Resident Evil formula) but it still retained that genuine horror feel that most other Resident Evil games, including 4, lack in favour of a more 'B Movie' tone. I also wish Capcom would revisit the characters of Billy and Rebecca as well. Especially Billy, I think there's still an interesting story to be told about him.
However I consider 4 to not only be the best titles in the series but also one of the greatest videogames ever made. So I'm always going to pop up when I see posters slighting that game.
On topic: After a promising start the Kingdom Hearts series took a progressive slip in quality ranging from decent (Kingdom Hearts 2) to downright boring (Days). Then Birth By Sleep stormed on to the scene as not only the high point in the series but also one of the best action RPGs ever made, period.
The biggest sin of the first Galaxy is that it was a cakewalk for 98,5% of the game and repeated some level design tricks way too much. Outside of a few more challenging stars, I pretty much never died in the first game. And that's a bad thing for a platformer to have. It was way too easy. Galaxy 2 fixes that AND offers shittons more variety throughout the game.
Snacks the sober sea lion
Member
I couldn't take it. I felt like I was making no progress whatsoever. For needing 10 stars just to advance one galaxy, all of the World S galaxies were weak in some way. They should have been the best. Instead we got the Thwomp maze with terrible camera angles, a crappy boss galaxy, and while Rolling Coaster Galaxy was probably the best rolling ball section of the series, I can't really put it very high up because it's still a rolling ball galaxy. World S didn't do it for me, and I just realized how little I cared for most of Galaxy 2's levels. They felt like they were relying on gimmicks (the drill, 2d sections where the gravity changes, 2d sections on rotating cylinders, Flipsville, pushing snowballs around to make platforms over lava) rather than quality platforming. There were levels where you barely even needed to jump. I'll take good platforming over these attempts at "variety."
And I thought the art design completely fall flat. Aside from Hightail Falls, Tall Trunk, and Slimy Springs (everyone's favorite galaxy to mention for artistic design), it didn't feel like it was breaking new ground. And as for scale, did anything come even close to Buoy Base?
I liked the Super Mario World references, but as a whole the game completely fell flat. Like a series of ideas that they felt were underutilized or left out of the first game just mashed together with countless secret stars tossed in.
Part of the reason why I never finished 2.
whalleywhat
Member
Some people are lame.
Doctor Decimate
Member
are we pretending people weren't almost universally disappointed at Zelda 2's direction? because i outgrew playing pretend
Tekken 5 was really a big upgrade/comeback, balance and depth never seen before for the series. T6 and TTT2 followed suit just as good, re-enforcing the series as the new king of 3d fighters. Bringing much joy to me, as an oldschool tekken player.
There's also Kingdom Hearts 2, I hated the first one, but 2 won me over big time. What it lost in story clarity, it gained in absolutely everything else, making it probably my absolute favorite action-game, final mix+ with its critical mode and amazing boss fights sealing the deal.
There's also Kingdom Hearts 2, I hated the first one, but 2 won me over big time. What it lost in story clarity, it gained in absolutely everything else, making it probably my absolute favorite action-game, final mix+ with its critical mode and amazing boss fights sealing the deal.
KillerTravis
Banned
You are offending me directly with this.
No but seriously Wind Waker is much better than Twilight Princess.Synth_floyd
Banned
The terrible Resident Evil was Code Veronica and it made a comeback with RE4.
SniperHunter
Banned
yea I agree with this. The PSP syphon filter games were AMAZING, Omega strain on the other hand pretty much killed the series for good. Fucking 989 studios
we.are.the.armada
Member
Persona made the biggest comeback in its genre in my opinion. I loved Persona 2 EP, flaws and all, but it was pretty disappointing that such a beautiful and rich game was buried in obtuse gameplay elements. Several years later, Persona 3 released and not only made extreme revisions to the gameplay, but introduced a sort of schedule that made each session feel meaningful no matter how much time you had to play it.
Persona 3 is a major comeback.
Also, I've been to the future and the next Metroid game is fucking incredible.
Persona 3 is a major comeback.
Also, I've been to the future and the next Metroid game is fucking incredible.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
MGS2 is a legitimately poor game that's tough to go back and play now. MGS3 and 4 are much better.
SpacePirate Ridley
Member
Doctor Decimate
Member
You are offending me directly with this.
definitely. Twilight Princess may have had the better dungeons, but Wind Waker had the better everything else
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Sonic Generations and Sonic Colors were a damn good comeback for Sonic as a series, aboslutely brilliant, from Sonic being known as absolute shit then coming out with the PC version of Sonic Colors was a complete turn around.....probably the best choice for this thread because in almost every thread where people talk about series falling from grace Sonic still gets mentioned.
Driver San Francisco arguably the best Arcade racer of 2011, we need to drift to that!
One More
Just Cause 2.
Just Cause was a terrible game, not a mediocre game, terrible......Just Cause 2, absolutely brilliant.
Raptomex
Member
This.
Nocturnowl
Member
World S was certainly underwhelming, to think it actually starts quite promising but then deteriorates quite noticeably, having played Galaxy 1 to pieces stuff like the boss gauntlet and Stone Cyclone were like a kick in the balls as bonus stages. Wicked Wall jumps was great but I certainly agree that visually speaking it was blander than the blandest areas of NSMB.
I would completely disagree that Galaxy 1 had more platforming though, Galaxy 2 has stages like flipswap, beat blocks, cloudy court, clockwork ruins, the first star of melty monster galaxy and so on, you get the idea. SMG1 while certainly having its moments is quite content with more open areas, like making you collect 5 bits of a launch star far more often, having more frequent pull star paths and bopping between more small planetoids for the more linear moments, i'd say that all three of these were probably less frequent in 2 since the first game got more than enough mileage out of them. As such Galaxy 2 does feel far more obstacle course like, the worlds themselves are more like progressive linear paths floating in space while the first game has a similar approach but these various paths all hover over one large planet and are all visible from each other, see comparing Dusty Dune to Slipsand, both are desert themes but there is a noticeable difference to their layouts as an actual galaxy (see also Freezeflame vs Shiverburn).
World themes in 2 tend to take directly from the first game with spiritual succesors which means it lacks the same impact, as for your Buoy Base mentions, Space Storm galaxy was the follow up to that one, the second star has the same music and tasks you with climbing a very similar tower to that of Buoy Base, I just wish the storm was well...more stormy.
The gimmick point is interesting though and one that i've not really considered, Galaxy 1 has a bunch of ideas and gets a lot of use out of them but isn't quite as heavy with them, Galaxy 2 grabs new ideas frequently and doesn't quite get to explore each one fully as it always goes to introduce something new, more variety but missed potential perhaps, I feel 3D land took a few of them like the flipping platforms and beat blocks and pushed them to further usage. Personally I prefer that though, I love seeing something new in each stage.
You know I will say Galaxy 1 feels like a more complete and linked game so to speak while Galaxy 2 is a bunch of leftover ideas thrown into a melting pot but I really do prefer number 2 regardless, different strokes. What I actually find most interesting here is how two games that are so incredibly similar can have a few minor differences that manage to carve out a different identity to each other.