Last few years I’ve been excitedly waiting for sequels from several small-to-medium sized studios that made highly acclaimed original games—I’m talking about Cities: Skylines, Kerbal Space Program, Planet Coaster, Frostpunk, etc.—yet each sequel was very poorly received to the point I wasn’t willing to risk my money buying it. Why do you think this happens when these developers already had a winning formula?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 61 points 3 days ago (20 children)

C:S2 is likely too ambitious. Doing too many new things at once instead of incremental change.

KSP2 was a management fuck up. Let's take this IP and give it to a completely seperate studio with no experience in this kind of work while not allowing the original Devs to help despite being part of the organisation.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What new things did C:S2 add? It felt like a slight graphical and qol improvement at best.

[–] lockhart@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

At release you couldn't even reverse one-way roads in C:S1. Comparing it to C:S2's road tools is hydrogen bomb vs coughing baby.

load more comments (18 replies)