The Sequel Guide Part 1
Written By: AJ Middleton

Sequels.  All good games need ‘em, all bad games don’t.  But no matter the quality of the game, a sequel or sequel to a sequel can make or break a series.  Now, back in the day of 2-D, the sequel didn’t have any specific rules.  But today, we all look for, and don’t look for, certain aspects in the 2^nd part of the adventure.  What makes a part 2 (or 3 or 4 and so on) good or bad?  Need some tips for future game designing?  Well then, read the Sequel Guide!

Let the Sun Set (The Golden Sun flaw)

Part 1 needs to end.  And I mean completely.  Nothing’s wrong with dropping hints of a potential future adventure BUT DON’T MAKE A SEQUEL NECESSARY!  No one wants to get in the middle the game, reach the climax, and right when the sacred ruby falls towards the ground and the villain kidnaps the heroine, causing the hero to start charging at him, the screen fades to black and the credits start.  That’s not cool.  Sequels shouldn’t be a money-making scheme right away.

Hint-Dropping: A Double-edged Sword

Some games feel the need to leave hints of a future adventure.  This is good, because the game can be completed in full and a sequel can fit in.  BUT!  Hint-dropping is something that must be committed to.  If the designer leaves information and promises, oh let’s say certain Mystery Items (*coughBANJOKAZOOIEcough*) for all to see, and then does not live up to that promise in the sequel, they’ll make many people pretty irate.  Leaving little bouncing game-packs won’t make up for going back to the first game either.  So if you don’t leave hints, you lose an easy and effective way to have the sequel anticipated.  But if you do, you have to live up to it, or else…

Just Make the Sequel!

…Or you could just not drop hints and make a sequel that takes place x years later.  This way, you don’t have to worry about fulfilling promises.  But still…

Keep the Plot Whole and not Hole!

Sequels are good for filling in plot holes that were left uncovered in the first installment.  In fact, a game designer should listen to the players complain about things that they didn’t understand, so they can be sure to answer and clarify those in the sequel.  But!  Filling in holes is good, but making more is bad bad bad!  Chrono Cross was good for answering some questions we had after Trigger, but many gamers were left even more confused after playing it.  Not a good idea.

Toto, I don’t think we’re in Kansas any…actually, nevermind

It’s a sequel, right?  So wouldn’t it be a good idea to include part, if not all, of the world from the first game?  Banjo-Tooie and Pokemon Gold/Silver get an A+ in this category.  B-T started the adventure in the same place as B-K.  Pokemon G/S gave us the WHOLE world from the original game, and you really can’t get any better than that.  There is a feeling of nostalgia that you get from returning to the old areas in a sequel, and it seriously enhances the game experience.  This isn’t a must, but the ideal sequel would follow this rule.

Hey, on the last adventure… (The Referral Rule)      

If a sequel cannot bring in the physical areas of the first or earlier installment, it at least needs to mention the last game.  Sequels that mention or are based on the past adventure are great, and they really have the tied in feel.  The reference can be something big like The Wind Waker’s, or small, subtle, but distinctive like in Chrono Cross.  In this day and age, if you don’t mention old game at all, it isn’t a true sequel. 

COROLLARY: The subtle referral

- If you wish to make a sequel new player friendly, make sure you include elements of the past game that will be understood by the veteran players, but won’t leave any newbies in the dark.  Again, look at Chrono Cross.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it

A simple rule.  If a game has something that’s good, don’t change it in the sequel.  Just don’t. Instead, get rid of the elements that no one likes (Tingle anyone?)

The Law of the Second Meeting

A sequel should contain the same characters as the first.  Even if they aren’t playable, they should be there or mentioned.  The sequel feel just isn’t as strong if the second adventure is full of complete strangers.  The game that breaks this law needs to be very strong in references to the past game and plot links.  Yet, even those won’t win some gamers over.

Hey!  But you’re dead!  (The King K. Rool Trick)

After taking hours beating and banishing the final boss of a game, no one wants to see that they’re up to their old tricks again in the sequel.  If they are, there better be a really good reason.  I don’t think anyone wants to hear “Haha!  That was my clone that you beat!”  No, that’s corny and a cheap way for the designers to get an antagonist.  Guys like King K. Rool and Ganondorf have excuses, because they are never really truly defeated.  But when Andross starts to come back after he’s been killed, things start to get a little, uhh, weird feeling.

Control Conformity

If it’s a true sequel, keep the controls the same.  If it’s a true sequel on a different console, try to keep them similar.  Part of the sequel feel is that it’s only a second chapter, so the player should be able to jump right in without having to learn anything new.  Only an evil programmer would feel the need to switch stuff around.

Character Control Conformity

In an ideal sequel, the characters will already know their old abilities and have their old items.  I mean, come on, do you really forget how to jump?  I don’t understand how Link looses all of his items and magic power, but he somehow does.  I KNOW it’s a plot thing, but still.  It just doesn’t make sense.  Banjo-Tooie, again, serves as an ideal example.  Banjo and Kazooie start the game with all moves learned in Banjo-Kazooie.

The Tertiary Step

Making a trilogy is an iffy thing.  First off, the first sequel has to have done well.  Now there’s a trap.  Do you live off of the success of the past two games or do you not press your luck?  A trilogy can have both wonderful and disastrous results.  If the third adventure is good, then you have a set of games that will go down in history.  If it’s bad, then parts one and two will look bad as well, regardless of how good they were.  A trilogy can either make or break a series.  A simple rule is to follow this guide- in excess.  Don’t take chances and try out new things that might fail.  Stick to what works.  Also, wrap it up.  Don’t leave any lose ends at the finale of the trilogy.  I mean, do you really want to make another “Land Before Time”?  Three’s a good number to stop at before things get crazy.

So, in my opinion, what elements would an ideal sequel have?  Let’s see:

-          Is a believable second/third/etc. chapter

-          Resolves plot conflicts without making holes

-          Contains the same characters

-          Contains some of the same music

-          Has bad elements changed

-          Has part of the old world accessible

-          Mentions the old game

-          Has the same controls

-          Has a believable enemy

Following those guidelines, I would have to say the game that’s come the closest to meet them is…

Pokemon Gold and Silver!

Well, that’s it for Sequel Guide 1.  Stay tuned for part 2!

Posted: 7-8-03