Sequels you found inferior to their predecessors.

[Ouenben]

What sequels let you down?

If a prequel is made after the original game but set before it IE Sword of mana (GBA) you can treat it as a sequel to the original game in any case.


Guitar hero 3 - To be fair on Neversoft it was their first entry into the music rhythm genre and it was an okay effort but Guitar hero 2 was much better, specially setlist wise (IMO) but also note charts and overall the feel of the game I preferred. Plus no stupid mario kart style battle mode in GH2.

Resident evil 5 - Such a dissapointment after RE4, after years of waiting and lots of teases about a new main enemy not zombies or ganados we ended up getting African ganado, the levels/story didn't seem to progress as nicely as RE4 either and generally I wasn't a fan of the 9 slot inventory where an egg takes the same amount of space as a rocket launcher. The co-op was fun but as with 4 I'd rather be on my own. Good game but I'd rank RE4 way above it.

Modern warfare 2- Spec ops is great but I enjoy the online MP much less in this game due to the sheer volume of glitches, bugs and exploiters and just the whole extra level of arsenal (damn those attack planes!) make it much tougher to be as good in this game as CoD4. The story itself is wildly confusing and they take tricks from the CoD4's campaign and multiply it by 4-5 to the point where it's ridiculous.

Mario Kart Doubledash and Wii (double dash inferior to mk64 and wii inferior to DD)
Double dash: I do not care for the double kart idea, not being able to hold items behind you, not being able to jump, the whole losing 3 x shells if you're holding them and are hit etc is a pain and made battle much less fun than the n64 version. I did like quite a few of the tracks in the game though like yoshis circuit and baby park.

MK Wii - Oh god Nintendo what the **** did you do to battle mode?! My favourite thing in MK ruined! The courses are mostly pretty uninteresting and far too wide, 12 players feels like too much as you find yourself being hit by as many as 3-6 items in a short space of time in single player.
The Wii controls worked but they didn't make me want to not use the controller again. Online races was nice it's just a shame the rest of the game sucked.


Sonic adventure 2 - I really liked the exploring/open world part of Sonic adventure and being able to play as just one character. Tails mech levels were stupid and I probably don't need to say much about those damn emerald hunt levels. Also Shadows one of the worst characters ever added to the game.


Super monkey ball Wii - just terrible, most of the mini games didnt work or sucked majorly. Monkey target was ruined. The main game is pretty dull and the tilt contols are worse than the precise analogue stick controls of its predecessors.

[SKTTR]

Samurai Shodown V (2003, Neo Geo)

I'm very disappointed by the backgrounds. In 1993, ten years earlier, Samurai Shodown 1 was released for the same system, and there was so much detail, parallax depth effects, and animated stuff going on. Awesome!
The following 3 years (1994, 95, 96) Samurai Shodown 2, 3 and 4 were released, and it got better with each sequel... but after a pause of 7 years SS5 came out in 2003 and look at the flat blurry and bland crap that immediately stabs in your eyes.
Comparing to the 10, 9, 8 and 7 years older games of the series I still can't grasp the ****.
Nakoruru's forest stage for instance: In SS 1 you have moving wildlife, lots of people waving their hands and doing stuff, some sort of Pseudo-3D effect for depth and stuff in the foreground that you can slice.
The same stage in Samurai Shodown 5?? Flan in the face, NO THING! Looks like a damn wallpaper!

The thing is, it's unbelievably crap and it might have something to do with the fact that it wasn't produced by SNK like the other games, but by Yuki Enterprise.
Well I'm not heavily disappointed since I got the SS Anthology (SS1-6) for Wii for 13€, but I would be really mad if I paid for this back in the day.

SS6 is great again, for the first time with flashy hi-res backgrounds (it's not a Neo Geo game, but a PlayStation2-port) and everything else as perfect as ever.

So, SS5 is the black sheep in an otherwise awesome fighting series.
Well, if you can get over the flawed background graphics, you still have a great fighting game.

I shouldn't even complain for that 13€ price!
On VC I would have paid 18€ for SS 1&2 alone, and not just that: On the EU Wii Shop you get the cutted (no blood, cutscenes and finishers) slow 50Hz PAL with borders versions ...that don't have the benefit of the exclusive extra features of the Anthology on top of that. And I might have to wait years for SS 3, 4 and 5 getting released on VC (another 27€) and since SS 6 is a PS2 game originally that fantastic fighter would never show up on VC.

Sorry for the rant, but really, I expected something much better, especially 10 years after the awesome-to-look-at first game, and with having 7 years of time to make another great sequel after SS4, and because it's one of the latest NeoGeo games and it's supposed to have wonderful 2D graphic effects, but instead it's a freaking flat wallpaper that just doesn't work for a series and system that was striking with 2D!!

There's a reason why SNK released "Samurai Shodown V Special" (unfortunately not available on the Anthology) soon after.

[Mickeymac]

Disappointing?...

Kingdom Hearts II - I consider the first Kingdom Hearts to be one of the best RPGs ever, but all the changes they made in KH2 were for the worse: They simplified the combat too much, the stages were way too linear and required very little platforming, the new graphical style for the non-Disney characters didn't blend in as well with the Disney movie settings, and I hated the story.

Pokemon Pearl - technically it was everything I wanted, and I still played the hell out of it. But looking back, it really was the worst Pokemon game thus far. It didn't really bring anything fresh to the table outside of some interesting side stuff, and a lot of the things that it tried to bring back from the older games they made worse, if only because they missed the point of what made them cool in the first place.

I still enjoyed it, but I just got the feeling that the developers have run out of ideas, and I can certainly say that I'm not looking forward to the next one.

Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike - sigh...First off, let me say that I love Street Fighter. I love Fighting games, and there are few that have ever disappointed me. Street Fighter 3 is one of few. To be fair, my expectations might have been too high - I came into the game remembering grand stories of how amazing it was, and expected it to be more or less the greatest fighting game ever. So you can see my disappointment when it turns out to not only be an average game, but also one of the worst games in the Street Fighter series I had ever played. They stripped out everything that was introduced in the Alpha Series, my all-time faves in the series, reducing it to pretty much Street Fighter II, and only succeeded in adding two laborious systems and a bunch of inane characters that play like the old characters, but aren't as interesting or as fun to use. Honestly, the SF3-ism in Hyper Street Fighter Alpha was way more fun simply because, while it still played like SF3, it let me use characters I actually liked. Now, SF3's gameplay wasn't too bad, I just had a love-hate relationship with it: I loved it when it played like Street Fighter 2, I hated it when it played like Street Fighter 3. The systems I alluded to earlier, the Parries(or offensive blocking) and EX Specials, just ended up ruining the game for me. The parries were incredibly annoying, and were too difficult to pull of on a regular basis to make them useful in a battle, but they're easy enough to pull off that I keep doing them by accident, which usually ruins my combos or entices me to try to pull off a special or super when I really shouldn't. As for the Ex Specials, they're good in theory, and actually, if you're good, you could use them to pretty much replace supers all together, but I just didn't like 'em. I preferred to just pull off Supers, since they cause more damage. The problem is that EX moves in SF3 are way too easy to pull off - I can't count the times I wasted my super guage(did I mention they use the super guage?) because I accidentally pressed two buttons together in the heat of battle(did the same thing in Alpha 3 with the Custom Combos, but in that game I could pick a different ism so I didn't have to worry about that), thus leaving me vulnerable and without the ability to pull off Super Combos to help me comeback. Ugh...I've never been more frustrated with a Street Fighter game before in my life! Thank G-d SF4 and Garou: Mark of the Wolves came in and saved the day by fixing all of SF3's problems, as well as adding so much more.

Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow -

Castlevania III - Yeah, I had some pretty high expectations with this one. I loved the first Castlevania to death, and why I heard the third game was IGA's favorite, I knew it had to be good, and I know a lot of others prefered it over the original as well. And While I will say that the core gameplay was fantastic, and it did do a lot of things right, it did do one thing very wrong: The difficulty. Either the level designer was beaten by a gamer as a child, or he was possed by the devil incarnate, because the levels in this game are pure evil. I mean it, I do love the game, but it's frustrating as hell, and any amount of extended play is guaranteed to end with a controller being thrown against the wall. The first Castlevania game was hard, but at least it felt more fair, and I actually felt like I could beat it if I just tried harder. Beating CV3 will be a daunting task indeed.

Oh, and you know what's worse? I went into the game expecting it to be easier than the first. I'm pretty sure I have VC-Reviews to thank for that, actually.

Mario Kart Wii -

The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass -

I'll fill in the rest later, my computer's acting up.

[Kiwi the Tortoise]

Final Fantasy Tactics Series:
The first one was great. The sequels (FFTA; FFTA2) weren't.
Where the original had an epic story, the sequels only had a mess.

Master of Orion Series:
Part one was good, the first sequel great. MoM3 was complete rubbish!
While they had a few good ideas (e.g. the renewed ground combat) they changed everything else to the worse (e.g. bad real-time combat, micromanagment, awful menu design).

Bushido Blade Series:
The first one was innovative. The "one hit could kill" system gave the game a realistic feeling. The sequel was a bad "run of the mill" fighting game, with the return of the health bars

[LinkFanatic]

The only one that comes to mind for me would have to be Zelda II: The Adventure of Link. While it is an awesome game, I found it to be a disappointment as opposed to the original Legend of Zelda. Mainly due to all the gameplay changes and the formula. I ended up liking the game very much, but I originally was disappointed.

[Ouenben]

Originally Posted by LinkFanatic

The only one that comes to mind for me would have to be Zelda II: The Adventure of Link. While it is an awesome game, I found it to be a disappointment as opposed to the original Legend of Zelda. Mainly due to all the gameplay changes and the formula. I ended up liking the game very much, but I originally was disappointed.

I Didn't care for Zelda 2 much either.

Don't forget Sonic 2 you mentioned in the other thread.

Which reminds me I highly reccomend you try sonic 2 again it is quite superior to Sonic 1 and you're the first person I've seen not to prefer the 2nd.

[Tides of Chaos]

Everything Ouenben said about Mario Kart Wii and Guitar Hero 3 I highly agree with. I also feel the same way about Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz but I actually have never played it so I'm just basing it on what I know.

Other sequels that nobody else has mentioned would probably be:
Age of Empires III - It's still a good game, but it just doesn't have the addictiveness the first two had. I still play II on occasion whereas I've barely played III. Also, 2D beats 3D more often than not for me graphics wise.

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon: I highly enjoyed the Fire Emblem games for the GBA so I was excited at the thought of a new portable Fire Emblem. But everything about kind of sucks. The new 3D graphics aren't that good and they're quite bland, and the game just fails to pull me in.

Super Paper Mario: They changed the beautiful gameplay from the first two PM games and added tons of text in an attempt to cover things up. But I can see through the lame platforming anyway. Come on Intelligent Systems! With this and Fire Emblem, I'm worried that you guys don't know what you're doing anymore!

[The shoemaker]

Originally Posted by Tides of Chaos

Everything Ouenben said about Mario Kart Wii and Guitar Hero 3 I highly agree with. I also feel the same way about Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz but I actually have never played it so I'm just basing it on what I know.

Other sequels that nobody else has mentioned would probably be:
Age of Empires III - It's still a good game, but it just doesn't have the addictiveness the first two had. I still play II on occasion whereas I've barely played III. Also, 2D beats 3D more often than not for me graphics wise.

Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon: I highly enjoyed the Fire Emblem games for the GBA so I was excited at the thought of a new portable Fire Emblem. But everything about kind of sucks. The new 3D graphics aren't that good and they're quite bland, and the game just fails to pull me in.

Super Paper Mario: They changed the beautiful gameplay from the first two PM games and added tons of text in an attempt to cover things up. But I can see through the lame platforming anyway. Come on Intelligent Systems! With this and Fire Emblem, I'm worried that you guys don't know what you're doing anymore!

Well Shadow Dragon was a remake of the original, what could you expect?

Anyways

The Legend of Zelda Phantom Hourglass:

Come on. This is not at all a worthy sequel to Wind Waker. I know it's a DS game, and I understand that they couldn't fit as much in, but this was not a good sequel. I want a full blown console Wind Waker sequel, not some cheap DS one. And of course we're never going to see another sequel, because everyone complained about the art style, so now we're stuck with cell shaded graphics on the DS.

Most sequels I'm satisfied with.

[theUndead_feature]

The only sequel that comes to mind that I absolutely abhored was Resident Evil 4. Such a contrast, too. The GC Resident Evil is one of my favorite games ever. It just turned what use to be a tongue in cheek B-movie-esque story into an outright joke. Coupled with the horrid over-the-shoulder thing . . . what happened to survival-horror?

I suppose Doom 3 was a huge dissapointment, too. A lot got in the way of how Doom should play out, things like story and whatnot. It just wasn't necessary. Much too much of a departure from Doom and Doom II. Yet, at the same time, throughout all the hype of Doom 3 I never actually cared about it because I knew it wouldn't be as good as its predecessors. My step-brother had himself an XBOX and I told him to get the collectors edition so we could play the good ones.

[Spore]

Originally Posted by theUndead_feature

I suppose Doom 3 was a huge dissapointment, too. A lot got in the way of how Doom should play out, things like story and whatnot. It just wasn't necessary. Much too much of a departure from Doom and Doom II. Yet, at the same time, throughout all the hype of Doom 3 I never actually cared about it because I knew it wouldn't be as good as its predecessors. My step-brother had himself an XBOX and I told him to get the collectors edition so we could play the good ones.

I think Doom 3 gets a lot of unwarranted ****. Definitely not completely Doom-like though. I remember hearing awhile back that Doom 4 is supposed to follow in the shoes of the first two. We'll have to see how it plays out.

Oh... sequels that weren't great... Unreal Tournament 3.

[Ouenben]

Originally Posted by Spore

Oh... sequels that weren't great... Unreal Tournament 3.

Oh how did I forget that one?! What a dissapointment

[Tides of Chaos]

Originally Posted by The shoemaker

Well Shadow Dragon was a remake of the original, what could you expect?

I know it was, but that doesn't change the fact that the updated graphics are lame. I haven't played much of the game though, so truthfully I can't give a good criticism on the rest of the game, but the graphics could have been easily in the 2D style of the GBA games but they insisted on 3D.

Oh yeah, and I second Phantom Hourglass being a disappointment. I loved Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass did not live up to it a bit. Probably the killer for me was the stupid repetitive tower. It's thanks to that thing I have no desire to finish the game, although I believe I did get a good portion of the way through it.

[SKTTR]

Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (DS)

As a true sequel to one of the best games in history, Zelda: The Wind Waker (Gamecube) it could never stand a chance. First, the DS is not capable of what the Gamecube did, when showing off this technical masterwork. So the DS couldn't hold a candle in his limited hardware. Still we hoped the best. But the graphics here were a lot more bland and undetailed with lots of pop-up. The whole controls where different, and as such all-new gameplay and puzzles was the result. True, unique and new with touchscreen only controls, but Wind Waker with Gamecube Controls can't be beaten by that.

I was disappointed by many other things in Phantom Hourglass, (yeah expectations for a Wind Waker sequel were high) though I beat everything 100% apart from 3 golden ship parts. for DS standards this is still an 8/10.

The Wind Waker 10/10 no need to discuss.
Freshly Picked: Tingles Rosy Rupeeland. 10/10
Ocarina of Time & Majora's Mask 10/10 & 10/10
A Link to the Past 10/10
Twilight Princess 9/10

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Tides of Chaos

I know it was, but that doesn't change the fact that the updated graphics are lame. I haven't played much of the game though, so truthfully I can't give a good criticism on the rest of the game, but the graphics could have been easily in the 2D style of the GBA games but they insisted on 3D.

Yeah, I'm glad they did, too. Big improvement over the GBA graphics. It would have pretty a pretty bad remake if they had only updated the graphics to early-pre-gen levels.

I'll go with Kiwi on Final Fantasy Tactics Advance being a disappointing follow-up to Final Fantasy Tactics, even though it's not a sequel. Again, this is mainly because FFT is my favourite game ever.

Chrono Cross, though good to very good, is kind of a disappointing sequel to Chrono Trigger mainly because CT set the bar so high, and fans wanted to see more.

Final Fantasy IX was a pretty disappointing installment in the FF series because, although the gameplay/system stuff was really nice, the story, plot, and characterization were lame. The FF series prematurely ejaculated onto itself during this fanboy strokefest.

[Tides of Chaos]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

Yeah, I'm glad they did, too. Big improvement over the GBA graphics. It would have pretty a pretty bad remake if they had only updated the graphics to early-pre-gen levels.

I may be in the minority about this, but I stand by my opinion of higher quality 2D > lower quality 3D.

[theUndead_feature]

Originally Posted by Tides of Chaos

I may be in the minority about this, but I stand by my opinion of higher quality 2D > lower quality 3D.

I'm with you on that, Tides.

[Nibbz]

Castlevania 2

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Tides of Chaos

I may be in the minority about this, but I stand by my opinion of higher quality 2D > lower quality 3D.

I'm with you on that, too.

[Kiwi the Tortoise]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

Chrono Cross, though good to very good, is kind of a disappointing sequel to Chrono Trigger mainly because CT set the bar so high, and fans wanted to see more.

I agree. CC really sucked compared to CT.
CC seemed more like a failed experiment by Squaresoft.

The FF series prematurely ejaculated onto itself during this fanboy strokefest.

lol

I may be in the minority about this, but I stand by my opinion of higher quality 2D > lower quality 3D.

I'm with you, guys.

[link64]

Originally Posted by Nibbz

Castlevania 2

Seconded although part of the problem is the awful translation

New Super Mario Bros (DS) felt like a step back for the mario series I still think 3 and world are way better.

I have little interest in the wii version but may get it once it goes down to £5.

I mean what happened to mario's cape or raccon suit and the koopa kids.

[Spore]

Originally Posted by link64

I have little interest in the wii version but may get it once it goes down to £5.

You do realize that that means you will be buying it in 2016, right?

[link64]

Originally Posted by Spore

You do realize that that means you will be buying it in 2016, right?

Ill just probably skip it then.

Still buying galaxy 2 when it comes out.

[Tull]

Sequels you found inferior to their predecessors?

This is easy 3D sequels to 2D games.
ALTTP to OOT where bigger turn off then LOZ to TAOL
Or is it just me

[link64]

Originally Posted by Tull

Sequels you found inferior to their predecessors?

This is easy 3D sequels to 2D games.
ALTTP to OOT where bigger turn off then LOZ to TAOL
Or is it just me

Just you and the ten other guys that don't like OOT

[Tull]

Originally Posted by link64

Just you and the ten other guys that don't like OOT

I like it but not to the extend that i love ALTTP best game ever(after MM2/SMB3 : -)

[link64]

Originally Posted by Tull

I like it but not to the extend that i love ALTTP best game ever(after MM2/SMB3 : -)

I would like ALTTP more than OOT but some of the first dungeons (like the first and fourth) felt a bit basic.

Edit: I also like the OOT water temple.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by Tull

I like it but not to the extend that i love ALTTP best game ever(after MM2/SMB3 : -)

You know that OoT is just like aLttP in terms of the concept, right?

Originally Posted by Ouenben

What sequels let you down?

If a prequel is made after the original game but set before it IE Sword of mana (GBA) you can treat it as a sequel to the original game in any case.

To be fair, Sword Of Mana is a remake of a game that came out before Secret Of Mana. I'm not sure that'd count.

[Ouenben]

Originally Posted by Refa

To be fair, Sword Of Mana is a remake of a game that came out before Secret Of Mana. I'm not sure that'd count.

It doesn't matter it's a remake, besides which theres quite a difference between the original the the GBA remake anyway.
It came out after Secret of Mana and borrowed alot from the game but was not as good, therefore I'm using it as an example.

[TechnoSuperguy]

Mega Man X4-X7: The original X trilogy are probably my favorite games on the whole planet. Then X4 came along, with a crappy new engine, unresponsive controls, slower movement, and lousy level design. Then X5 came along, and it got even worse. Then came X6 and... *quiver* X7. Need I say more?

[Refa]

Originally Posted by TechnoSuperguy

Mega Man X4-X7: The original X trilogy are probably my favorite games on the whole planet. Then X4 came along, with a crappy new engine, unresponsive controls, slower movement, and lousy level design. Then X5 came along, and it got even worse. Then came X6 and... *quiver* X7. Need I say more?

Are you joking me? X2 and X3 were dissapointing, while X4 and X5 were a proper return to form. You're obviously biased against the non SNES games for some silly reason that I can't fathom.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Refa

Are you joking me? X2 and X3 were dissapointing, while X4 and X5 were a proper return to form. You're obviously biased against the non SNES games for some silly reason that I can't fathom.

X2 is good. X3 is fine. X4 is fine too. X5 smells.

[Mickeymac]

IMO, X6 is the only really bad game in the X series. I mean, X7 and X8 weren't great by any means, but I still enjoyed them.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

X2 is good. X3 is fine. X4 is fine too. X5 smells.

Really? X2 was pretty much a rehash of X1...I don't consider that good. X3 has ridiculous balance, and the Zero gameplay is a big tease.

Originally Posted by Mickeymac

IMO, X6 is the only really bad game in the X series. I mean, X7 and X8 weren't great by any means, but I still enjoyed them.

I don't think any of the X games are bad (sans X6) either, but I haven't played X7. X8 was actually really good IMO, even if it had some dumb gimmicky snowboarding levels (Mega Man and snowboarding is not as good as Klonoa and snowboarding ).

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Refa

Really? X2 was pretty much a rehash of X1...I don't consider that good. X3 has ridiculous balance, and the Zero gameplay is a big tease.

That's why X3 was only fine. And the fact that X2 was a rehash of X is precisely the reason I like it. X was nearly perfect.

IMO!

[TechnoSuperguy]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

That's why X3 was only fine. And the fact that X2 was a rehash of X is precisely the reason I like it. X was nearly perfect.

Hear hear!

And no, I'm not biased against the non-SNES games, Refa. I love Maverick Hunter X, which is technically it's a remake of X1, but it's on PSP and in 2.5D. I also enjoyed X8. There's just something about the X4-6 gameplay that feels different than the gameplay from X1-3. Most notably, X feels like he runs a lot slower, the controls are a lot less responsive (though granted, that might just happen on Gamecube, since I don't have the actual PSX versions), and the graphics style hurts my eyes. Sure, that last point may have an air of SNES bias to it, but what can I say? I just loved the old graphics style.
Oh, and if you've never played X7, do yourself a huge favor and don't. It's a disgrace to every platform shooter ever created. It takes all the problems I mentioned about X4-6, multiplies their intensity 100 times, and adds several more annoyances to the mix (like atrocious voice acting, a lousy camera, ridiculously overpowered bosses, and level design that would make you puke). That's my opinion, anyway.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by TechnoSuperguy

Hear hear!

Oh, and if you've never played X7, do yourself a huge favor and don't. It's a disgrace to every platform shooter ever created. It takes all the problems I mentioned about X4-6, multiplies their intensity 100 times, and adds several more annoyances to the mix (like atrocious voice acting, a lousy camera, ridiculously overpowered bosses, and level design that would make you puke). That's my opinion, anyway.

I'll make myself suffer through it for my huge Mega Man Fest.

[sponge]

Originally Posted by Ouenben

It came out after Secret of Mana and borrowed alot from the game but was not as good, therefore I'm using it as an example.

even if it came after, its a remake of a game that came out BEFORE secret of mana. so it didnt borrow from secret, the opposite is true.

(edit: i looked at some of the things they did with the remake, and they DID borrow features from secret. oops! the rest of this i stand by)

secret of mana is the sequel.

sieken densetsu = final fantasy adventure (remade as sword of mana)
sieken densetsu 2 = secret of mana

thats like saying mario advance is a sequel to mario 2.

your thread and all, but i agree with refa. i dont think that should qualify.

content:

i really like sequels. i really really do. i looove mario 2. zelda 2. castlevania 2. all the ones people hate.

not to say they are better, but i like them. a lot. i like 3d sequels to 2d games as well, but almost always not as much as the originals.... i agree on zelda, link to the past was way better than oot. (IMO) and i played, beat and enjoyed oot.

um.... double dash? i just never got into it, but i played the hell out of some mario kart 64. thats one of the more striking examples of sequel inferiority i can think of at the moment. i guess sunshine too, but thats not to say these were bad games by any means. i played mario 64 a whole lot more though.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Sequels!!!

Here's a fun one! Even though I find Lunar: Eternal Blue to be an excellent, top-notch all-round awesome game, I consider it to be inferior to Lunar: The Silver Star.

Just because you think a sequel is inferior to its "predecessor" (not "prequel"—that means something different) doesn't mean you think it's a bad game.