If a sequel doesn't look or play at all like its predecessor, why even make it a "sequel". Red Steel 2 has completely different core mechanics, a different character and story, a different setting, and different art style, and most importantly a different overall quality.

You may remember my March List where I jokingly typed and then crossed out Red Steel 2 from my "will play" list. Why did I do this? Well, because a sequel to such an awful game couldn't possibly be any good, right? After all, Red Steel 1 has a terribly unimpressive 65% average score over on GameRankings.

Now, the first game did sell a over a million copies. But honestly, this could be attributed to it being a heavily marketed launch title for a very hyped system. Does Ubisoft really think that all those people that were burned on their purchase of the first game would get hyped about a "sequel" because it has the Red Steel name attached to it? I imagine many of those people are like me, highly skeptical of this "sequel" because of the name. Now maybe there are more fans of the original game than I realize, but I feel Ubisoft shot (and slashed?) themselves in the foot by calling this game Red Steel 2.

If Ubisoft was confident in their product -- which maybe they should have been as Red Steel 2 currently sits at a much more impressive 82% on Gamerankings -- why not just create a new IP and throw the same marketing budget behind it?

Or better yet, attach it to the one IP that Red Steel 2 actually fits with. Watch the intro to this PS1 classic, and tell me Red Steel 2 wouldn't have been a better sequel for this franchise. This is borderline plagiarism yo.

Brad

P.S. Ubisoft, how the fuck is it "Red" Steel when their isn't any blood in the damn game??

Comments

  • Avatar
    zekana
    14 years, 8 months ago

    I remember seeing that opening on cinematech, that old show on G4 where they played a bunch of game things like trailers, gameplay, and user submitted stuff. i was blown away by how cheesy it was but it always looked like the premise of a gaming classic.

    And ya, there really isn't much thats the same with RS1 and 2.

  • Avatar
    Prowler
    14 years, 8 months ago

    Probably named Red Steel 2 to sell more copies, yet it backfired for them

  • Avatar
    Questi
    14 years, 8 months ago

    I loved Rising Zan back in the day. :) It's the only reason I'm following RS2.

  • Avatar
    Bayonetta
    14 years, 8 months ago

    It wouldn't make sense to name its "sequel" Red Steel 2 in order to promote more copies, after many people had come off from its prequel with negative attitudes towards the Red Steel franchise/name, and just from the negative press overall. Also, wow, Red Steel 2 intro? Pshhhaw, Rising Zan: Samurai Gundam is where its at. Gonna go look more on Rising Zan, seems interesting..

  • Avatar
    thecosmicfly
    14 years, 8 months ago

    Well you practically answered your own question with ‘the first game did sell over a million copies‘. Whether the IP did good or bad, it’s still become a well known IP. As we all know the name of the product is usually all you need to have to make massive sales. That’s pretty much why Harry Potter games sell in 6 figures each time a new film comes out. We might not like it or not, but I doubt many people care whatever the hell Red Steel 2 is called at this point as long as its fun.

    Or, for a better example, look at the Final Fantasy series. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t virtually every game of that series completely different in terms of plot, style and gameplay? Then I don’t see why Red Steel 2 can’t make significant changes while keeping the key idea’s intact, especially if it’s for the better.

    Although, I do agree, RS2 sure does have a lot more in common with that Rising Zan than it does with its modern day Yakuza filled predecessor, and it probably would have been a better game to attach its name to. But I’ll refer to my Harry Potter analogy again for that.

  • Avatar
    Darknezz
    14 years, 8 months ago

    The greatest video game intro ever.

  • Avatar
    Sammonoske
    14 years, 8 months ago

    Pretty much what thecosmicfly said.

    Why is Final Fantasy XIV called Final Fantasy XIV when it has nothing to do with Final Fantasy I? The name alone is just as contradicting, as is Red Steel to it's game content.

  • Avatar
    Brad
    14 years, 8 months ago

    You guys are missing the point.

    People will ignore this game because they hated the first game so much. Final Fantasy doesn't have this problem.

    It's like if the Jericho guys made a completely new shooter and for the hell of it, decided to call it Jericho 2. It would be a terrible business decision, as people would most likely avoid it like the plague.

  • Avatar
    Chocothunda
    14 years, 8 months ago

    This could be argued for Devil May Cry 3 as well, but it did extraordinarily well, despite mixed reviews of Devil May Cry 2.

    I can see people being genuinely wary about the game itself, but ignoring it? Maybe not completely.

  • Avatar
    thecosmicfly
    14 years, 8 months ago

    The Final Fantasy analogy was more about showing how a series that, despite not being connected at all save for a few basic concepts, can still have numerical sequels. But you are right about the Final Fantasy series not having the problem of being overlooked because of a bad predecessor (Hell, anything Square Enix shits out these days is bound to make passable sales). Choco's Devil May Cry example was a much better argument. In fact, he also has a point about people being wary rather than ignoring it.

    The first Red Steel was definitely overhyped, and did have its fair share of issues, but as a launch title and first Wiimote controlled FPS it was still relatively novel. Looking at Metacritic the game was more of a love it or hate it affair, not a fully blown panned game. So there's really no justification in making a statement that there's a large group of people out there who'll disown the game based on just the name. This series has been mainly targeted at hardcore gamers anyway, and I seriously doubt that a hardcore gamer wouldn't at least check out some articles or reviews of the game to see if it did or didn't turn out any better. If anything, the fact that they've made such radical changes and improvements should actually attract more people into look into it thoroughly. If Red Steel 2 gets good reviews and word of mouth spreads that it's much better than the first game then the franchise could very well be redeemed. We'll just have to wait and see.

    Seriously, someone would have to be a stubborn as all hell gamer if their first reaction to the name Red Steel 2 is "DUDE FUCK THAT GAME THE FIRST WAS AN OVERHYPED PIECE OF TURD" and not even at least look up a video or two.