Sequels are good!

Something I've noticed is that game critics and movie critics have different views on sequels.

Game critics see them as awesome yet movie critics see them as Hollywood trying to rake in as much cash as possible.

I've rarely heard any game critic hate on sequels.

They love sequels as evidenced by GameInformer's new issue which has Mass Effect 3 on the cover, as well as other magazine's and websites giving a sequel their full intention.

When a movie critic hears about a sequel they're reaction is:

"Oh great, another artsy meaningful film overshadowed by Big Momma's House 2".

Mass Effect 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 are both AAA games yet every movie sequel barely seems to get past 50% on RottenTomatoes.

My guess?

Game critics are less educated. Movie reviews are more elegantly written when compared to a game review. A review for Let Me In is of much higher quality than one written for Dead Space 2.

Also since games are different than movies, game critics rabidly snatch the next sequel of Mass Effect in hopes of having a more refined experience(mostly in terms of gameplay). Nobody wants to see how Coppola can improve upon Apocalypse Now? Do they?

Games are about interaction through gameplay. Everybody wants to play a more tightly-controlled Battlefield don't they?

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

It's most likely the second thing you said. There are more aspects to a game than to a movie. If you have a problem with something in a movie, the filmmaker can't just write up a new script to fix those problems. Hopefully he or she will avoid those mistakes in their next movie. A game studio, on the other hand, CAN whip up a new game and fix those mistakes.

Also, there are some sequels that are better than the original.

-Toy Story 2 > the other two
-Star Wars: Episode V > the rest of them
-The Boondock Saints II as good as the first
-The Godfather: Part II > or = The Godfather (I personally disagree, but many will agree)
-Austin Powers 2 > the other two
-The Lord of the Rings gets better with each one.

Just a few examples of both personal preference and crowd preference.

TRF wrote:

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

It's most likely the second thing you said. There are more aspects to a game than to a movie. If you have a problem with something in a movie, the filmmaker can't just write up a new script to fix those problems. Hopefully he or she will avoid those mistakes in their next movie. A game studio, on the other hand, CAN whip up a new game and fix those mistakes.

Also, there are some sequels that are better than the original.

-Toy Story 2 > the other two
-Star Wars: Episode V > the rest of them
-The Boondock Saints II as good as the first
-The Godfather: Part II > or = The Godfather (I personally disagree, but many will agree)
-Austin Powers 2 > the other two
-The Lord of the Rings gets better with each one.

Just a few examples of both personal preference and crowd preference.

I love you, Trf....

Teckno wrote:

I love you, Trf....

Seeing Michael Corleone's subtle and slow descent into darkness is much more fascinating than seeing him already in it. That's why I like the first one more. Also because Don Corleone is a great character and isn't the same in the second one.

Sonic 06 is NOT a good sequel.

TRF wrote:

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

It's most likely the second thing you said. There are more aspects to a game than to a movie. If you have a problem with something in a movie, the filmmaker can't just write up a new script to fix those problems. Hopefully he or she will avoid those mistakes in their next movie. A game studio, on the other hand, CAN whip up a new game and fix those mistakes.

Also, there are some sequels that are better than the original.

-Toy Story 2 > the other two
-Star Wars: Episode V > the rest of them
-The Boondock Saints II as good as the first
-The Godfather: Part II > or = The Godfather (I personally disagree, but many will agree)
-Austin Powers 2 > the other two
-The Lord of the Rings gets better with each one.

Just a few examples of both personal preference and crowd preference.

I agree on most of those except Toy Story. Personally loved the first one and hated the second.

TheJubJub5721 wrote:

I agree on most of those except Toy Story. Personally loved the first one and hated the second.

I thought the second was the best, followed by the first, then the third. I'm probably the only person who thinks the second is the best, but I've never met anyone who actually hates the second one.

TRF wrote:

TheJubJub5721 wrote:

I agree on most of those except Toy Story. Personally loved the first one and hated the second.

I thought the second was the best, followed by the first, then the third. I'm probably the only person who thinks the second is the best, but I've never met anyone who actually hates the second one.

Well, I can't really say I hated it but I disliked. I also disliked the first. I don't think they should have continued after the first.

As far as reviews go I think movie critics view a 50% as average while game reviewers see a 70% as an average.

BlackStigma wrote:

As far as reviews go I think movie critics view a 50% as average while game reviewers see a 70% as an average.

That's generally the way Metacritic does it. A 65 for a game is one you'd want to avoid but a 65 for movies is something worth watching.

TRF wrote:

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

O rly?

Movie critics are like 50 year old people who wear monocles and discuss philosophy.

Game critics aren't like that and you know it!

Pickles1337 wrote:

TRF wrote:

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

O rly?

Movie critics are like 50 year old people who wear monocles and discuss philosophy.

Game critics aren't like that and you know it!

I can wear monocles and discuss philosophy if I wanted. Does that mean I am more educated?

I prefer the scale where 50 out of 100 is considered average; like it would logically be anyway.

With gaming anything in the 75 range is considered average....

I personally view a 5/10 as "mediocre" and a 6/10 as "okay." I pretty much have the same scale for movies and games.

TheJubJub5721 wrote:

Pickles1337 wrote:

TRF wrote:

Game critics are not automatically less educated than film critics.

O rly?

Movie critics are like 50 year old people who wear monocles and discuss philosophy.

Game critics aren't like that and you know it!

I can wear monocles and discuss philosophy if I wanted. Does that mean I am more educated?

Typically, movie reviews are written more "intellectually" than game reviews.

Which, if logic still exists, means movie critics are in Internet words: "moar smrt".

Not necessarily true. The only reason movie reviews are more in-depth and intellectual is because the movie reviewer is only looking at story. A game reviewer has to look at story, gameplay, longevity, etc. A game reviewer could go in-depth with each aspect of a game, but the resulting review would most likely be five pages long.

Movie reviewers aren't automatically smarter than game reviewers, and this is coming from someone who wants to study film in college and become a movie reviewer.

Hmmm...you're right, I guess.

Although I do wish developers take stories more seriously.