Is There a point on playing inferior prequels?

[RCBH928]

I got another good example for this:

Red Dead Revolver and Red Dead Redemption

While the first is a ps2 game, the second is bigger and badder with HD graphics. It doesn't mean that Revolver is a bad game, but is there a reason to play the first when a "better" sequel exists? Unless you are a die hard fan of the series...

Also I was looking forward to play GTA4 in the future, my backlog is holding me, but now they announced GTA5 which I have no doubts will be a better game. So here is another example. What do you think?

I tend not like to play games that give you more of the same thing but games that give you a different experience. For example I am willing to play Zelda Wind Waker AND Twilight Princess since they are different, than Mario Galaxy 1 + 2 .

Its different from a sequel. Red Dead Redemption is a reimagining of Red Dead Revolver, in a more mature, and better polished light. The games are very different. Revolver is arcadey and somewhat goofy, while Redemption is a straight line 3rd person shooter with a serious tone, funny dialogue, and the occasional underlying joke that would fly over many peoples heads.

A case where both should be taken individually.

i wont argue with you but when I saw the reviews redemption seemed a better version of revolver

[pumpkinpie65]

So does the extra content on the Greatest Hits version of Silent Hill 2 make it worth it to play that one over the original release?

[casterofdreams]

So does the extra content on the Greatest Hits version of Silent Hill 2 make it worth it to play that one over the original release?

That's the same game really. I think this is towards games that are sequels to older games.

I mean one can blend that line with Metroid Prime 1 and 2. You play those on the Wii via Metroid Prime Trilogy and it becomes a different game due to the drastic control change. Same game, different way to play.

[Damm64]

So does the extra content on the Greatest Hits version of Silent Hill 2 make it worth it to play that one over the original release?

I think it has the extra chapter where you play as Maria.

[ninjainspandex]

lol well what if the prequel is an entirely different kind of game like panzer dragoon saga

[o.pwuaioc]

Are there any reasons to own the Xbox Forza Motorsport after the 360 versions? If you had to pick just 1, which would it be? Is there good incentive to buying all 4? 3/4? 2/4?

[casterofdreams]

Are there any reasons to own the Xbox Forza Motorsport after the 360 versions? If you had to pick just 1, which would it be? Is there good incentive to buying all 4? 3/4? 2/4?

As an owner of all five games I feel that they are worth playing. All of them. Sounds stupid I know but trust me. The first one is great because it teaches you everything about tuning and how the cars handle without much complexity. The second and third games come complete with all dlc cars and tracks within specially marked packages but the third one is better because of detailed interiors if that's your thing. The physics engine was revamped for the better in four so it is more responsive and it has a little feature called auto vista if you love cars at all. Showroom for certain cars in a nutshell. Forza horizon is an open world game like Burnout Paradise or Need for Speed Most Wanted.

That and the first Forza i picked up new on amazon for less than $10 so why not. I think that covers it.

[Opa Opa]

So does the extra content on the Greatest Hits version of Silent Hill 2 make it worth it to play that one over the original release?

Not really. It adds very little to the overall plot.

[LBJeff]

Depends on how much time you have on your hands vs. the time investment needed for the games earlier in the lifespan of the franchise.

If you've only ever played SMB3 I'd say yes, play SMB1, SMB2 USA and SMB2 The Lost Levels. None of them take much time or effort, you can pick them up at any time and jump in, doesn't take long to get far and you don't really care if you have to put them down.

If you've only ever played FFX, XII, or XIII then yeah, you may want to think twice about trying to marathon 1 - 9. If you have the time, meaning no job, no school, no pets, no significant other, no bills and basically no life then go for it. I think it's great to experience the series as it was originally released. Preferably on the system it was originally released for (Final Fantasy on NES is a beast compared to today's JRPG's).

However, if you have any of the aforementioned variables using up your time, at all, just research which ones are worth playing and decide from those, if any. If not, just read the wiki pages on them, maybe watch a few videos and read up on the story.

If you are talking really recent titles, like Gen 7 consoles, eh, I mean, either the gameplay is so similar you're wasting your time and should just read up on the story (Gears of War, Uncharted), or it's so drastically different that you are playing almost a totally different game (Mass Effect) so it's not like you are really gaining much by playing it since it's so very different.

Although Mass Effect is a different animal due to decisions carrying over from game to game.

Long story short, is there a point to playing the prequels? Maybe.

[Krejlooc]

Often those sequels aren't given the proper funding. Game sequels are milked, though, as some movie sequels are (like Terminator II). You can usually tell though when a sequel isn't properly worked on and fails.

What? Terminator 2 was a sequel to a niche low-budget film with a cult following, that was given like 20 times the budget of the original. I don't know how anybody could call Terminator 2 a "milked sequel." It's pretty much the best counter example one can give to the whole "sequels are always worse" argument.