One More Chance - A Study of Video Game Iteration | PostMesmeric 

Great video! I especially like that you mentioned Metroid Prime cause at first glance it seems COMPLETELY different and removed from its previous entries but it actually iterates on almost every design philosophy present in Super Metroid while transitioning the franchise to 3D and First person, it's super fascinating

it’s hard when a game you like very much DOESN’T get iterated on. there are so many games that i wish were more influential, or got their own sequels!

I think a lot of Sonic fans wish that Sega would give those Adventure games another shot at iteration.

I'm of two minds about game series making big changes to the gameplay. Change could make the game almost alien to anyone who would be interested in new adventures in that series and possibly be the last entry of that game or Change could breathe new life into the series and keep it going strong

Fun fact, DmC's gameplay only shared similarities with the original games because- much like the story of DMC2's development- the director of the good ones had to be flown overseas to teach them basic game design concepts

That point about how "standards exist because ideas get iterated upon by others" reminded me that nobody has made iterations of the popular Nemesis System from Shadow of Mordor because WB patented it. If anything, it made people consider better alternatives.

I used to believe that remakes and reboots were more valuable as they reestablished from an advertisement / presentation perspective a fresh start but now I think people are willing to overlook ridiculous discrepancies between prequels and sequels and I personally would rather things just get sequelized or side game-d.

There is a really good video (I forget who it's by but it shouldn't be hard to search for) talking about how Celeste iterates on mechics from Mario, such as beat blocks, cosmic clones, and some other things. If memory serves it's called "How Celeste Borrows from Mario" or something to that effect. Great watch, strongly recdomend if you liked this video and topic.

Commenting for the algorithm. You deserve way more than 9k subs. Excellent work!

General opinion on Resident Evil 5 and 6, and even Zero, were reactionary at launch and years after. Only in the passed 3 to 4 years, people have replayed them and are seeing them in a new light.(including Let's Players saying how trash a game is until like an hour into said LP where they're embarrassed to be enjoying themselves) In fact, Resident Evil is one of the most iterative series in the world of gaming. It has always been experimental but long time RE fans are yearning for nothing but fixed camera angles and tank controls. (I miss those, but I love the new games)

Those still waiting for RAYMAN 4 make some noise!

Excelent video!

Basically, Sonic 2006 is only a bad game in the sense that it was released in beta (which is still terrible), not that it would have hypothetically been this bad if it was finished. That's a solid take.

Nice video

You're too slow! At uploading regularly, LOL. Nice vid man, keep it up

What are your thoughts on titles like Immortals: Fenyx Rising and Genshin Impact? Are they iterative in the sense that they're building on the foundation created by The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, which itself iterated on both its past titles and other exploration-based games, or are they reiterative because there isn't enough to differentiate them from that game, making them look closer to a knock-off than an homage?

This is something that honestly comes up in conversations for me worryingly often, lol. I think the reason for that is because people have a hard time wrapping their head around finding a middleground between evolution and revolution. If I mention that I'm a fan of later Final Fantasy titles, and I enjoy them because they take risks, I'm expected to decry iteration and games that play it safe. But if I defend a game that's solid in execution, but heavily criticized by others due to its extremely iterative nature, it's expected that I dislike massive changes to the status quo within a beloved series. And I've never really understood either expectation. While I may have my own preferences for specific series' in regards to iterations and upheavals, what ultimately matters is whether the game adequately executes on its ideas. I can love Nioh 2 for doing very little to the established design from Nioh 1, while also adoring the fact that Final Fantasy XII plays nothing like the previous games, and eschews many of the series' storytelling themes. The interesting thing for me is that in both cases, generally the bottom line I eventually need to explain, is that (in most cases) a game ALSO deserves to be looked at as if this is the first time you're being introduced to such concepts or that series. The input and critique of someone highly experienced is obviously valuable. But I commonly see the viewpoint of those new to something being undervalued. But if someone new is coming into a game that massively changes the status quo for a series... OR if they're coming into a game that basically changes NOTHING from the previous games... either way, you're left with questions related to how much and why our expectational baggage as experienced fans should even mean to them and their experience? It helps highlight more subjective expectations from the ones that are more utilitarian, technical, or otherwise objective on some level. Because does it really matter that you or I "hate" that so-and-so change was made from the longtime formula, if that has no impact on the new player and their raw play experience? And by contrast, does it really matter that you or I "hate" that not enough was changed from the previous title, when EVERYTHING is new to a new player? How far does the value in our expertise go in judging the game itself? I think it's incredibly important to keep this sort of thing in mind, to maintain a proper perspective. You never know when something you greatly value or detest in a game might say much more about your personal expectations, than the game itself. Those personal expectations are still totally worth discussing, obviously. But they should be discussed with the transparent understanding that we and our own personal critical perspectives are not the ONLY critical perspective. Neither evolution nor revolution in games is inherently good or bad. What makes them work or fail, is the context in which they reside... the game that surrounds them, and all of the other decisions that interact with them.

Eggric

One of the things that's always irked me with the 3D Sonic games is that they feel completely unrelated to the 2D originals, both storywise and, more importantly, gameplay-element-wise. The sense of momentum is gone (because you use the homing attack and boost pads to go quickly now), leading to a very stop-and-start movement that just always feel jarring no matter what you're doing... and the only times you get to actually move fast is in setpieces you have little control over. The devs focused on paying lipservice to the word "fast" instead of iterating on the original gameplay, and then THAT was what was being further developed... 'til and beyond 2006.

"Inverted controls are my favorite way now". Lol bruh, I'd never understood how someone likes those shitty and confusing inverted controls

dude I love your videos but this intro always throws me off, the animation is okay but the sounddesign is just horrible