Are the Sequels for games better or worse than the original? Which should u get first, the sequel, or the original, will it ruin the story? For example, I only have like $30, should i get Halo 2 or Halo? which is better, and which usually is better, and what should you normally do in cases were there is the original and sequel out?
I will base my responce based on the example: Halo is Better than Halo 2. But it depends if you like multiplayer or single player in your games. Multiplayer In Halo 2 cause of live. Singleplayer for Halo because its the start of the series and its Hella better Singleplayer. I would think about enjoyment i will get, Halo is cheaper too, so i would save some cash.
Knight of MarsBeater of Ass
3rd June 2006
Generally, the sequels are better, seeing as how they are improvement from the first. There are, however, a few exceptions- Halo being one, and KOTOR being another, among a few more.
usually you can only appreciate the improvements of the sequel if you've played the first. Usually the sequels are better due to various fixes and new features, but there have been f**kups, devil may cry2 for example.
well, i like single player with occasional multiplayer, so should i get halo2 over halo? but sometimes the sequel escapes the universe of the first game. like DOWWA, kinda jumped out of gothic-war and went into modern combat. but still good.
If you like single player with a little bit of multiplayer then get Halo. Halo 2 had a dissapointing single player to me.
This generalisation can't be made. It goes on a game-by-game basis.
Halo or Halo 2?
I'd say the original. Definitely where you need to start. You can't truly appreciate the Halo franchise without starting from the very beginning.
(Also check out the Halo books. Awesome reads.)
I don't know how, and I don't know why, but this is totally Sheep's fault.
well, so far it seems the sequels offer less improvements on the original game and story. Halo it is.