Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure

>Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure
>Game 2 is an edgy deconstruction of Game 1
>Game 3 never happens because Game 2 sold so poorly

>Game 3 never happens because jews want a MMO that can bring them monthly millions

>Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure
>Game 2 is an edgy deconstruction of Game 1
>Game 3 has you climb a ladder for 2 minutes

Jak & Daxter :(

Name 201 games that do this

How? The first three were all different but all good

>Game 1 has jokes that are well-written and timed appropriately without coming off as overly forced
>Game 2 is nothing but over the top random wackiness that tries to shove as many jokes as possible into every line of dialogue

>Game 3 has shoehorned political propoganda that the narrative bends over backwards to support and defend, going as far to use blatant strawmen to accentuate their point

>game 1 experiments with new ideas and is pretty good
>game 2 expands on game 1's mechanics and improves on it in nearly every way
>game 3 is nothing but filler shit and butchers the story

I'M A POTATO

I recognize this pattern

Let it be on record was the first to bring politics into this thread.

I hope this is not The Evil Within's fate.

I'm not going deep into it. I'm just saying the example given was above and beyond obnoxious, and I can only hope Game 4 won't be like it.

Doesn't it usually go like this:
When a game is good, the next game sells well. If the next game is shit, the second-next game sells less. If second-next game was amazing, then the third-next game sells pretty well

What is it?

But game 3 did come out, user.

Syphon Filter

>Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure
>Game 2 Refines the system and becomes the high point of the series.
>Game 3 Shoves to many "experimental" gimmicks that bogs down the whole experience.

Franchise is then sold of to be milked to death and never comes back from the grave

Delet ths

>experiments with new ideas
>Evil Within

The game was alright but it was still basically a clone of RE4 with some sloppy stealth mechanics slapped on and all the humor removed.

Assassin's Creed

>1999
>2000
>2001
At least you didn't spend a lot of time waiting for the sequel only to get disappointed

You forgot TORTANIC?

Gothic?

>Game 1 is terrible
>Somehow gets enough funding for a sequel
>Game 2 is amazing
>Becomes a huge franchise and the subsequent sequels are just as good

>Game 1 is decent but generic
>Game 2 is a flaming dumpster of shit
>Game 3 is actually amazing but nobody buys it because everyone has bad memories from Game 2

>game 1 is an adventure game with a 500 hour intro, companions that are almost universally annoying except the ones that are mechanical or black, has a twist that you could see coming twenty miles away, and whose formula matches almost every other game by the developer
>game 2 is its own thing that occasionally points out or makes fun of some of the flaws in the first but still generally treats the source material with respect while developing the characters, advancing the story, and exploring actual meaningful ideas
>game 3 never happened
>game: the old game was possibly the biggest joke in /board/'s history

MGS3 was still good

...farcry?

Syphon Filter

literally this

>Game 1 is straightforward fun, but tedious
>Game 2 improves in every way, adds many new elements.
>Game 3 goes back to game 1's style, still fun
>Game 4 tries to copy game 2 but fails
>Game 5 is a remake of game 2 which completely fucks everything up and ends destroying the franchise.

Silent Hill?

>Game 1 is excellent
>Game 2 is excellent
>Game 2: Episode 1 is excellent
>Game 2: Episode 2 is excellent
>Ga--

Nah, Lufia.

>game 0 is pretty good but a bit janky
>game 1 is straight masterpiece except for some of the later areas
>spiritual sequel to game 0 is a masterpiece
>game 3 is great but not as good as game 1
guess

>Game 1 is flawed but ambitious
>Game 2 throws out almost everything from Game 1 to become a much more financially safe product
>Game 3 is just Game 2 but even worse and with multiplayer shoehorned in
>Game 4 is a soft reboot but is such a disaster it kills the franchise and with it any hope of fulfilling the ambitions of Game 1

Mass Effect

>Game is fantastic aesthetically, narratively, and gameplay-wise, with some rough edges that are smoothed out by its originality and charm
>Exclusive to poor system nobody owned
>Did too poorly to warrant a port

>Game 1 is pretty good.
>gets remade and ported to every console ever made
>Game 2 is a strict improvement on everything from Game 1.
>Only available in its original form.

>Game is a neat RPG with good story and mechanics but lacks content
>Game 2 is a gameplay improvement but has a shitty meme-filled story that doesn't take itself seriously at all
>Game: Subtitle is zero story with all gameplay, but the gameplay is shit so the whole thing sucks
>Game: Other Subtitle is an abomination
>Game 3 is shitty and casual with little connection to the previous titles but rebooted the franchise
>Game: Different Subtitle is mechanically like 3 with more polish, but story wise is true to the original two games, despite being made in a short time by a different compant
>Game 4 is like 3 but better, despite being even more casual

>deconstruction
Now, OP, just some friendly advice, you'd better off to prepare for some RRREEEEEEE screeching fits from fellow wannabe-academia autists flailing around dictionary definitions and Derrida copypasta like trowing candy around.

>game 1 experiments with new ideas and winds up being great
>game 2 tries to do from the brain what was done from the heart in 1 and is mediocre to bad
>game 3 is where they truly came to an understanding of what works and create the most all-around solid and refined package of the trilogy, even if it lacks some of the charm of the first

You're the first to bring it up.

Well, then I hope, I'll be the last too.

>Game 1 is a modern classic despite its flaws
>Game 2 tries to mix things up a bit and is the most controversial and divisive entry in the series
>Game 3 tries to be more like game 1 and ends up feeling uninspired while also throwing anything good Game 2 did out the window

>Game gets a spin-off
>Spin-off 1 is a forgotten game
>Spin-off 2 is remembered for a meme
>Spin-off 3 starts appealing to waifu fags and many believe this is the first title
>Spin-off 4 does the same
>Spin-off 5 repeats that, and everyone forgets that this series is a spin-off

>Game 1 was a masterpiece
>Game 2 takes everything that made Game 1 fun and throws it out the window to casualize it

>try playing a REAL sheen mugoomi tensay game

t. Rog

RE?

Edgy is usually better tee bee aytch.

>>Game 2 sold so poorly

This is false:

According to The NPD Group, Knights of the Old Republic II sold 458,000 copies in North America during the month of December 2004. It entered their chart for the month at number 11, and at number 3 on the Xbox-only chart.[60][61] After its North American release on Windows, it debuted at number 2 on the PC chart for the month of February.[62] In the United Kingdom, the game debuted at the top of the weekly chart, beating Blizzard Entertainment's much-anticipated online game World of Warcraft, which was released in the same week. Eurogamer reported that in the UK Knights of the Old Republic II sold much more in its first week than the first game, which the website speculates was helped by the former's simultaneous release on Windows and Xbox in PAL regions, as opposed to the latter's initial Xbox-only release.[63]

No, but that works too.
I was thinking of pic related.

>Game 1 has a rough launch but is solid and fun at the end of it's life cycle
>Game 2 gets rid of many of the good changes game 1 made and makes the gameplay slower for the sake of PVP balance, and won't be where it should have been at launch until almost a year after release

>Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure that is just a little bit too punishing
>Game 2 becomes more action oriented and isn't as challenging as the first, but still a fun adventure
>Game 3 never happens and Game is long forgotten

Terrible taste. All three were fantastic.
But Jak 3 did happen, Jak 2 sold well. As it should have.

>Game 1 is a straightforward fun adventure
>Game 2 is an edgy transformation of Game 1
>Game 3 is middle ground between first two

I literally just finished game 3 for the first time not an hour ago, it felt lackluster for some reason

maybe its because I took a year long pause once you get out of the prison area?

>Nobody remembers Game 1
>Game 2 was great in it's own merit, but had many flaws nostalgiafags ignore
>Game 3 was a vast improvement to everything 2 did and was considered a masterpiece by many
>Game 4 started to cater to casuals but was still fun to play
>Spin off game absolutely flopped
>Game 5 is a literal autism cash in on the series
Name it

user, stop denying reality; Dino Crisis 3 DID happen

>Game 1
>Great, unique combat mechanics, story and likeable characters
>Game 2
>More of the same but without the great and unique combat, basicly a clone of an other game
>Game 3
>Straight up shooter which could have been on rails, while mechanicly different, still enjoyable but far from what made the first game great in the first place

Borderlands

Somebody already did Persona, user

>Half-Life 3
>forgotten

>Demon's Souls
>Dark Souls
>Dark Souls 2

>game 1 is flawed, but good and fun
>game 2 is good in many respects, but flawed in different ways than 1
>game 3 patches them together to eliminate most of the flaws and create the best game in the series

Not persona my dude

>Mass Effect 1
>ambitious
hohoho

well?

SoulCalibur, assuming you consider SoulEdge Game 1.

>1 is a great game filled with charm and originality
>Sequel is mechanically better but loses most of it's uniqueness
>Plebs hail it as the best of the series
>3 is just a CoD knockoff

Holy fuck this made me laugh

lost planet but one number ahead.

I was going more along the lines of this

Close but no cigar, if it were Persona the descriptions of 2 and 3 would be swapped.

now i want to replay LP2
how's the pc port?

>1st game is serious with a side of wackiness
>2nd game is wacky with side of seriousness

Nope

>Game 1 is considered a masterpiece, and mandatory for anybody who likes video games
>Game 2 is so universally despised nobody plays it
>Game 3 fails to live up to Game 1, but is still fun and stands up in its own right
>Game 4 is not good enough to garner universal praise and not mediocre enough to be hated and is thus forgotten entirely, possibly killing the franchise

Parasite Eve.

Fallout.

WHY CONTAIN IT?

Deus ex?

The Darkness
DMC
GTA

This is weird but I actually thought it was maximo but thought no one on here would care about maximo...the original dark souls

Xenoblade if you consider X as game 2

>game 1 is a solid formula with fun, kinetic gameplay but lots of minor flaws that unfortunately drag it down from a critical perspective
>game 2 improves literally every single flaw from game 1 and then some, expands upon the mechanics in every way while introducing some of its own, has few to none objective flaws, and is rightfully considered one of the best games of its genre
>game 3 was made by the company's B-team and lacks the soul of the original two while incorporating lame gimmicks and characters

Borderlands

>game franchise is highly-polished niche nerd shit full of complexity and game
>game franchise becomes popular marketable IP
>suddenly all the gameplay complexity is leeched out and dumbed down, annoying supportive characters thrown in, MC goes from silent protag to quipping action-comedy hero

fallout

>game 1 is one of the best rpgs from old bioware
>game 2 doesnt exist because wuxia doesnt sell

Ep 1 was a fucking chore

>Game 1 is grimdark as fuck when you play without music even if the music is awesome
>Game 2 is way less grimdark but also have a lot of comedy and wacky shit again with awesome music that change the tone of the game
>Game 3 becomes serious with no wacky shit at all and no grimdark shit either
>soundtrack is not memorable

Guess the game.

>Game 2 goes on sale for less than $1

i never played it, even when it first came out. is it worth it even to laugh at how bad it is?

Dark Souls excluding Demon's Souls

>Game 1 is revolutionary for its time, but shit nowadays
>Game 2 was a step in the right direction, but also worse due to the platform limitations
>Game 3 was perfection
>Game 4 was perfection: The Sequel

>GTA
Nope. Far Cry

Jade Empire
>game 2 doesnt exist because wuxia doesnt sell
Ehhh I doubt that's the culprit. With enough advertising, Wuxia movies do well in the west. Netflix even produced a Crouching Tiger sequel.

Not even close
And I knew the mention of a B-team would drag a Soulsfag out of the woodworks

>game 1 is perfect
>game 2 is one of the biggest examples of console casualisation
>game 3 is alright but doesnt top 1
>game 4 fixes many of 3's problems but it still has some faults
>series dies