i like 2nd sequel games, progression, is good eg tekken 1-6.

but sometimes games dont deserve a sequel but they get one

i also like the fact that a game can come out, people appreciate it, and then the maker can make something new.. .. so i end up with a load of different games in my collection/rack. brilliant.

to compare this the film industry....dont make titanic one, titanic 2..3...4... it would be so boring, not to mention the story is over, in one.

games can be made to set up sequel with open ended finishes...but i dont go for this..i buy a game, spend 60 bucks, i want a beginning and an end, for my 60 bucks, i dont want half a game with features left out, ready to be implemented in the sequel theve already been planning even before the first game.

this shows poor design, (or money-milking design) .i know some games are made with op**ends and my last paragraph cant be applied to every game. ie god of war 1 2 have good / satisfactory endings and im sure the third will as well.

my point still stands that although progression in games is good, id love a load of individual games on my rack, than call of duty 1, 2, 3, 4, fifa every year and others, i name and shame only the greatest of cheap games to milk your pokets. hehe

do u think david cage made this game to milk your poket of dollars,..--- i think not.

and comparing to the film industry again.....whats wrong with putting - ie....Braveheart.- 'from the makers of titanic' etc etc.........it happens all the time,....there is no need for shoddy sequels in the game industry...move on.