Anton KlingerJun 30
Thinking about the games Bleed and Bleed 2 again. The sequel feels so much more polished and "fair", and "designed", but the first game got some charm in its sometimes "unrefined" and "unfair" design.
Most prominent example for this is, that in Bleed you absolutely have to use the slow-motion to react to some things, while in Bleed 2 I forgot there even was a slow-motion ability.
Show threadAnton Klinger
This is of course prompted by me thinking about how to approach making a sequel to Roto Force. I agree with complaints that Roto Force is rather "chaotic" and "unfair" at times and my instinct is to make it more "polished" and "fair" and I'm questioning this seemingly universal drive to try to make sequels more "commercially viable". Maybe there is a way to make it more "polished" without the game losing its "character".
Jun 30 at 7:58pmWeb
Show threadAnton KlingerJun 30
I feel like Spelunky 2 did a good job of creating a sequel that's more "polished" while retaining the "quirks" and "bullshit". Though it already lost most of its "bullshit" on the jump from Classic to HD. While Spelunky 2 still did add more "polish" to HD, it was much less. Rather it was more adding content and that's actually the amazing thing about it.
Show threadAnton KlingerJun 30
I guess creating sequels that are just more content without any improvement in "polish" or "QOL" feels wrong nowadays because why wasn't it an update to the original game then. That's why early Megaman style sequels, that are just the same level of polish but different content, feel so wrong to make. See Shovel Knight getting what are essentially full new games just as new campaigns.
Show threadAnton KlingerJun 30
Of course none of these words have any clear definition. Like the concepts I'm thinking about are very concrete in my head, but finding the right words for them is tough.
This is more rambling than serious analysis or any concrete point to make.