When does a game series usually peak?

Just before I start playing it.

Jenuall wrote:

Dowbocop wrote:

Rax wrote:GTA IV

I'm no GTA historian (barely played them if I'm honest) but isn't the fourth GTA Vice City?

If you count GTA London then the fourth is technically 3.

There's London 1969 and London 1961 so GTA2 is the fourth game.

GTA:IV is actually the 11th game in the series.

Moggy wrote:

Jenuall wrote:

Dowbocop wrote:

Rax wrote:GTA IV

I'm no GTA historian (barely played them if I'm honest) but isn't the fourth GTA Vice City?

If you count GTA London then the fourth is technically 3.

There's London 1969 and London 1961 so GTA2 is the fourth game.

GTA:IV is actually the 11th game in the series.

Which about as many times as they've tried to resell us GTA:V as well!

Moggy wrote:

Jenuall wrote:

Dowbocop wrote:

Rax wrote:GTA IV

I'm no GTA historian (barely played them if I'm honest) but isn't the fourth GTA Vice City?

If you count GTA London then the fourth is technically 3.

There's London 1969 and London 1961 so GTA2 is the fourth game.

GTA:IV is actually the 11th game in the series.

I didn't know whether London was a full game or just an add on.

Jenuall wrote:This is my list from the most recent "post your top 20 games" thread along with their series entry:

Deus Ex (1)
System Shock 2 (2)
Thief The Dark Project (1)
Final Fantasy VII (7)
Witcher 3 (3)
Doom (93) (1)
Sonic 2 (2)
GTA III (3)
Metal Gear Solid (3)
Prey (2017) (1)
Dishonored (1)
Dark Souls (1, though you might count Demon's Souls as 1...)
Super Mario 64 (sheesh, depends what you count I guess but probably 8 or 9?)
Super Mario Odyssey (as above but this could be anything up to like 20 by now!)
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (6)
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (similar to Mario there are lots that may or may not count as the "core" series but I make this 19 overall)
Half-Life (1)
Half-Life 2 (2)
Portal (1)
Celeste (1)

Breaking that down gives:
1 (9 games)
2 (3 games)
3 (3 games)
4+ (5 games)

I think generally I appreciate the originality of new games more that the refinement/milking of a franchise that comes later. Another factor is that a lot of the series I like tend not to be hugely successful so we don't necessarily get loads of entries so it's hard to know if they would have gotten better or worse!

Does prey count as 1? I know its a reboot, but still.

Pedz wrote:

Jenuall wrote:This is my list from the most recent "post your top 20 games" thread along with their series entry:

Deus Ex (1)
System Shock 2 (2)
Thief The Dark Project (1)
Final Fantasy VII (7)
Witcher 3 (3)
Doom (93) (1)
Sonic 2 (2)
GTA III (3)
Metal Gear Solid (3)
Prey (2017) (1)
Dishonored (1)
Dark Souls (1, though you might count Demon's Souls as 1...)
Super Mario 64 (sheesh, depends what you count I guess but probably 8 or 9?)
Super Mario Odyssey (as above but this could be anything up to like 20 by now!)
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (6)
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (similar to Mario there are lots that may or may not count as the "core" series but I make this 19 overall)
Half-Life (1)
Half-Life 2 (2)
Portal (1)
Celeste (1)

Breaking that down gives:
1 (9 games)
2 (3 games)
3 (3 games)
4+ (5 games)

I think generally I appreciate the originality of new games more that the refinement/milking of a franchise that comes later. Another factor is that a lot of the series I like tend not to be hugely successful so we don't necessarily get loads of entries so it's hard to know if they would have gotten better or worse!

Does prey count as 1? I know its a reboot, but still.

Definitely counts as 1 in my book, it's literally got zero connection to the old Prey game. If anything it's got a better claim to being the third game in the System Shock franchise than it does being number 2 in Prey

I would actively say that series peak during their 3rd entry. My evidence of '3rd is best in a series' would be:

Super Metroid
Gran Turismo 3
SSX3
Forza Horizon 3
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood
Sonic 3&K
Link to the Past
Duke Nukem 3D
Wip3out
Tomb Raider 3
Halo 3
GTA3
The Witcher 3
Soulcalibur 2
Fallout 3
Metal Gear Solid
Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap

For most of the above the third entry was the embodiment of the series that the developers never managed to repeat. For example Polyphony Digital have been chasing the shadow of GT3 since 2002. Namco will never make a Soul game as good as Soulcalibur 2 on the GameCube and Super Metroid is the benchmark by which all adventure platformers are judged.

Preezy wrote:Tomb Raider 2
Mass Effect 2
Half-Life 2
Red Dead Redemption 2
Portal 2
Batman: Arkham City (2)
Uncharted 2
Starcraft 2
Super Mario Galaxy 2

Seems a fairly reliable trend...

RDR2 and SMG2 weren't the second games in their respective series though.
Likewise with the below:

Carlos wrote:I would actively say that series peak during their 3rd entry. My evidence of '3rd is best in a series' would be:

Super Metroid
Gran Turismo 3
SSX3
Forza Horizon 3
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood
Sonic 3&K
Link to the Past
Duke Nukem 3D
Wip3out
Tomb Raider 3
Halo 3
GTA3
The Witcher 3
Soulcalibur 2
Fallout 3
Metal Gear Solid
Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap

GTA3, MGS, Sonic 3 and (if we're being really picky) Fallout 3 aren't actually the third entry in their respective series either.

[Karl] It's extremely difficult to plot a reliable trend from this dataset, given how many variables are at play: genre; perceived consistency in output from the developer; platform (does releasing early or late in a console's lifespan have an impact?); and so on. Entirely anecdotally, and based on some examples already given, I would posit the below hypotheses (please see whether these fit with your own opinions on entries in various game series'!):

- where an existing franchise was resumed during the fifth generation of video game consoles, the first entry in this generation is generally considered to be among the "best ever" (examples: Ocarina of Time, Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Super Mario 64)

- if the above rule is not true, and the series originates prior to the fifth generation, then the fourth entry in the series is generally considered to be the strongest, assuming there are 4 or more games within the series prior to the fifth generation (e.g. Sonic the Hedgehog 2)

- if the above rule is not true, the second entry in the series is generally considered to be the strongest (e.g. Donkey Kong Country 2, Super Bomberman 2)

- if an existing franchise skipped the fifth generation, the next published game in the series is considered to be the strongest game in the series if it was released in the sixth generation, but not if released in any subsequent generations (e.g. Metroid Prime, GTA3)

- for series that originate from the sixth generation of consoles onwards, the game generally considered the strongest is the second game released, assuming only one game was released from the series in generation 6 and this second release takes place in generation 7 (e.g. Red Dead Redemption, Fable 2)

- for series that originate from the seventh generation of consoles onwards, the game generally considered the strongest is the second game released, assuming the second game was released for the same platform as the first

- the above rules all apply unless a first-party developed entry for a series, which is 4 or more generations old, is published for the Switch, in which case this entry is likely to be considered better than the previous game that would be highlighted as per these criteria (e.g. MK8D, BotW, Odyssey)

- if a series changes developer partway through the above rules are likely to be null and void

If any forumites would like to contribute their thoughts as to whether other game series fit the above hypotheses - or, just as valid, if they don't! - then add these to the thread and we can revise our findings as we extrapolate additional data. [/Karl]

I don't think there can be said to be a predictable "peak point" in game series', given the diversity of the genres, the quality (or not) of a given development studio, and the fact that some series' last forever with a reasonable quality, while others go through wild peaks and troughs - sometimes several. Sometimes, the trough will be the death knell of the game series and/or studio, but as often as not, it isn't, and there may be peaks yet undreamt of on the way for the series that can cling to life.

Where a series may peak is a complex issue with many moving parts, from the quality and growth potential in the first installment and its sequels, to the success (or not) of subsequent titles' new features' - both in concept and execution. There's singleplayer games morphing into multiplayer games, and vice versa on occasion, and how well that goes, along with other considerations, like fixing old flaws and new ones that may arise. And I'm sure there are other issues, like graphical fidelity, sound design, the ability of the developers and the culture of the studio they work for. Plus, well, when a particular series peaks is often just a matter of opinion. Some people may enjoy this or that sequel that you hated more than the game you see as the pinnacle of that series' excellence.

I can't see any way to synthesise these into a formula for generating an overall average for series peakage. I don't think it can be achieved here.

The start menu of the first time you turn it on.

Errkal wrote:

Jenuall wrote:
No way Portal 2 is better than the purity of the first game either.

Thus, Portal 2 is no where near as good as 1.

Agreed. It's great as an adventure story, and has some nice puzzles, but it loses that purity and focus.

Rax wrote:I realised that the 4th entry in a series is usually a good one.

Rax wrote:Metroid Prime

It's definitely really difficult to define just due to the fact that many series have either evolved in genre or, especially around the jump to 3D, evolved completely in format. It's difficult to call Super Mario 64 the "5th" Mario game in its series- not least because of the off-shoot games on the Gameboy and the duality of Super Mario Bros. 2 between regions, but also because the 3D platformer was so radically different to the 2D platformer. They dropped the "Bros." from the title, so does that make it a new series? Does the change in genre/gametype make it a new series? The same can be said of Zelda with its switch from top-down 2D to 3D.

These things seem to shift and change meanings between series as much as the monikers of "remaster", "remake" and "reboot" seem to. Although we can argue there should be strict definitions for each of these to cover the nuances, they're usually conflated with each other and different studios will apply the names differently to each of their projects. I feel like the games series thing falls under a similar issue with being defined, to some degree.

I don't know, basically. gooseberry fool.

a dan from grcade wrote:

Preezy wrote:Tomb Raider 2
Mass Effect 2
Half-Life 2
Red Dead Redemption 2
Portal 2
Batman: Arkham City (2)
Uncharted 2
Starcraft 2
Super Mario Galaxy 2

Seems a fairly reliable trend...

RDR2 and SMG2 weren't the second games in their respective series though.
Likewise with the below:

Carlos wrote:I would actively say that series peak during their 3rd entry. My evidence of '3rd is best in a series' would be:

Super Metroid
Gran Turismo 3
SSX3
Forza Horizon 3
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood
Sonic 3&K
Link to the Past
Duke Nukem 3D
Wip3out
Tomb Raider 3
Halo 3
GTA3
The Witcher 3
Soulcalibur 2
Fallout 3
Metal Gear Solid
Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap

GTA3, MGS, Sonic 3 and (if we're being really picky) Fallout 3 aren't actually the third entry in their respective series either.

[Karl] It's extremely difficult to plot a reliable trend from this dataset, given how many variables are at play: genre; perceived consistency in output from the developer; platform (does releasing early or late in a console's lifespan have an impact?); and so on. Entirely anecdotally, and based on some examples already given, I would posit the below hypotheses (please see whether these fit with your own opinions on entries in various game series'!):

- where an existing franchise was resumed during the fifth generation of video game consoles, the first entry in this generation is generally considered to be among the "best ever" (examples: Ocarina of Time, Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Super Mario 64)

- if the above rule is not true, and the series originates prior to the fifth generation, then the fourth entry in the series is generally considered to be the strongest, assuming there are 4 or more games within the series prior to the fifth generation (e.g. Sonic the Hedgehog 2)

- if the above rule is not true, the second entry in the series is generally considered to be the strongest (e.g. Donkey Kong Country 2, Super Bomberman 2)

- if an existing franchise skipped the fifth generation, the next published game in the series is considered to be the strongest game in the series if it was released in the sixth generation, but not if released in any subsequent generations (e.g. Metroid Prime, GTA3)

- for series that originate from the sixth generation of consoles onwards, the game generally considered the strongest is the second game released, assuming only one game was released from the series in generation 6 and this second release takes place in generation 7 (e.g. Red Dead Redemption, Fable 2)

- for series that originate from the seventh generation of consoles onwards, the game generally considered the strongest is the second game released, assuming the second game was released for the same platform as the first

- the above rules all apply unless a first-party developed entry for a series, which is 4 or more generations old, is published for the Switch, in which case this entry is likely to be considered better than the previous game that would be highlighted as per these criteria (e.g. MK8D, BotW, Odyssey)

- if a series changes developer partway through the above rules are likely to be null and void

If any forumites would like to contribute their thoughts as to whether other game series fit the above hypotheses - or, just as valid, if they don't! - then add these to the thread and we can revise our findings as we extrapolate additional data. [/Karl]

Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Heskimo wrote:It's definitely really difficult to define just due to the fact that many series have either evolved in genre or, especially around the jump to 3D, evolved completely in format. It's difficult to call Super Mario 64 the "5th" Mario game in its series- not least because of the off-shoot games on the Gameboy and the duality of Super Mario Bros. 2 between regions, but also because the 3D platformer was so radically different to the 2D platformer. They dropped the "Bros." from the title, so does that make it a new series? Does the change in genre/gametype make it a new series? The same can be said of Zelda with its switch from top-down 2D to 3D.

These things seem to shift and change meanings between series as much as the monikers of "remaster", "remake" and "reboot" seem to. Although we can argue there should be strict definitions for each of these to cover the nuances, they're usually conflated with each other and different studios will apply the names differently to each of their projects. I feel like the games series thing falls under a similar issue with being defined, to some degree.

I don't know, basically. gooseberry fool.

Excellent points

Carlos wrote:Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Snake's Revenge, the NES sequel to Metal Gear

a dan from grcade wrote:

Carlos wrote:Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Snake's Revenge, the NES sequel to Metal Gear

Only a monster includes that!

Jenuall wrote:

a dan from grcade wrote:

Carlos wrote:Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Snake's Revenge, the NES sequel to Metal Gear

Only a monster includes that!

If you start skipping entries because they're not good then this whole thread is irrelevant!

a dan from grcade wrote:

Jenuall wrote:

a dan from grcade wrote:

Carlos wrote:Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Snake's Revenge, the NES sequel to Metal Gear

Only a monster includes that!

If you start skipping entries because they're not good then this whole thread is irrelevant!

But it's so removed from everything else that I think this particular case does warrant exclusion, or at least discussion on the fact. It's like the debate over whether to include Never Say Never Again or the original Casino Royale in the list of James Bond movies

Jenuall wrote:

a dan from grcade wrote:

Jenuall wrote:

a dan from grcade wrote:

Carlos wrote:Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Metal Gear Solid

Did I miss one?

Snake's Revenge, the NES sequel to Metal Gear

Only a monster includes that!

If you start skipping entries because they're not good then this whole thread is irrelevant!

But it's so removed from everything else that I think this particular case does warrant exclusion, or at least discussion on the fact. It's like the debate over whether to include Never Say Never Again or the original Casino Royale in the list of James Bond movies

Id include Never Say Never Again but not the Original Casino Royale personally just my thoughts there.

Snakes Revenege wasnt that an American made product the original Metal Gear makers had no connection to and didnt want made? If so Id call it a spin off not a main part of the linage and not count it as its not made by the real people..... in that way I wouldnt count something like Fallout new vegas as its not made by the same people and not contributing to there skills etc its a side piece to make money with.