Mr. Krystal Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Something has irked me for a while now, and it's coming up again now that Super Mario Galaxy is almost here. You hear the phrase a lot in video games, "that game is the true sequel," or "that wasn't a true sequel." Usually they were talking about Super Mario Sunshine. They (the gaming public) largely complained, "When is Nintendo going to give us a true sequel?" It's as if people, by putting the word "true" in front of sequel, change the phrase to mean the exact opposite. According to them, a true sequel is not a "other creative work that is produced after a completed work, and is set in the same 'universe', but [usually] at a later time." No, to them, it means "a creative work that has the same characters, but is awesome to me personally in a way completely different than the original." It's like how "bad" means bad, but "baaaad" means good. Really, Super Mario Sunshine was in a game set in the same universe, but at a later time, and some small changes over Super Mario 64. It's the very definition of sequel. But those people will have none of that. Why can't they just say, "I didn't like this game for reasons A, B, and C"? No, they have to put good games down because it wasn't as different as they expected, using non-sensical terms that suggest that the game in question is completely different from the original (Sunshine is, all in all, a near exact copy of the Mario 64 gameplay formula, with the addition of a water-device). Furthermore, Super Mario Galaxy also involves collecting 120 somethings (in this case, stars), and involves the same kinds of jumping, running, and platforming as before. It's just that they added a significant number of gravity-based gameplay elements. How can they say that it's the true sequel to Mario 64? It's as different from Sunshine as Sunshine is different from Mario 64. I just hate it when people say that.</rant> What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts