Arkham Origins is a prequel m80. The Arkham series isn't finished yet.

But yeah, the only good third installments I can think of are Dragon Age Inquisition and Halo 3.

Arkham Origins is a prequel m80. The Arkham series isn't finished yet.

But yeah, the only good third installments I can think of are Dragon Age Inquisition and Halo 3.

The point is, it's the third installment in the franchise.

I'm not even going to comment on your obvious Halo 3 bait.

Verbatim's right, if your story is strong enough to stand on its own then it doesn't need a sequel...at all. Maybe another story set in that same universe, a spin-off, but not a sequel.

But of course if it has sequels in mind then there's no problem!

Verbatim's right, if your story is strong enough to stand on its own then it doesn't need a sequel...at all. Maybe another story set in that same universe, a spin-off, but not a sequel.

But of course if it has sequels in mind then there's no problem!

Of course, no one is denying that. But sometimes devs feel like enjoy the cast of characters or universe to tell another story using the same assets as before (there are multiple reasons for doing this).

The best example I can think of is Uncharted. While I personally don't see why everyone likes them, it's clear that they don't "sequel bait". UC1 is a complete game, and I feel as though UC2 was made because they enjoyed the characters so much and felt they could tell a different story with them.

Hero dies and then just blackness.

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:27:27 PM

Hero dies and then just blackness.

That would suck, bro.

Yeah, but then that character can't be reused and their story can't be altered unless some deus ex machina bullshit (which no one likes) is used or a prequel is made. You really wouldn't need to do anything after the huge climax of the game either. It's just done and that's that.

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:37:53 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 11:30:37 PM

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:27:27 PM

Hero dies and then just blackness.

That would suck, bro.

Yeah, but then that character can't be reused and their story can't be altered unless some deus ex machina bullshit (which no one likes) is used or a prequel is made. You really wouldn't need to do anything after the huge climax of the game either. It's just done and that's that.

Well in the context of the thread's topic, I was hoping for a more elaborate depiction of your game's cinematic climax, not it's literal ending.

Oh, the cinematic climax? Probably close to the same thing. The hero saves the day (or maybe fails) and then character gets rekt or kidnapped right when that all happens. It just kinda works well since you don't have to worry about closing any loose ends on the third one.

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:57:59 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 11:40:17 PM

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:37:53 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 11:30:37 PM

Quote from: Novice on January 28, 2015, 11:27:27 PM

Hero dies and then just blackness.

That would suck, bro.

Yeah, but then that character can't be reused and their story can't be altered unless some deus ex machina bullshit (which no one likes) is used or a prequel is made. You really wouldn't need to do anything after the huge climax of the game either. It's just done and that's that.

Well in the context of the thread's topic, I was hoping for a more elaborate depiction of your game's cinematic climax, not it's literal ending.

Oh, the cinematic climax? Probably close to the same thing. The hero saves the day (or maybe fails) and then character gets rekt or kidnapped right when that all happens. It just kinda works well since you don't have to worry about closing any loose ends on the third one.

I'd have to see it from your mind's perspective, because all I can think about is ME3's ending ruining the entire game for a lot of fans and I see that happening in your hypothetical game, too.

Well the thing is that I'm not thinking the universe is gone after that character is dead. A new character can take the mantle as hero. Maybe a planet got blown up and that's where the hero was. The attention simply shifts to the view of someone that just saw the planet get obliterated in the next game. It would have to be someone that would be able to get all of the player's questions answered, but I wouldn't think it would be too hard.

I wouldn't, I would milk the series indefinitely.

I think we can all agree is that Halo 3 is a textbook example of how not to end a trilogy.

Or to do anything, really.

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 09:15:31 PM

Quote from: Classic Mordo on January 28, 2015, 07:58:38 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 07:56:07 PM

Quote from: Classic Mordo on January 28, 2015, 07:23:45 PM

Arkham Origins is a prequel m80. The Arkham series isn't finished yet.

But yeah, the only good third installments I can think of are Dragon Age Inquisition and Halo 3.

The point is, it's the third installment in the franchise.

I'm not even going to comment on your obvious Halo 3 bait.

But your title clearly states trilogy. Arkham Origins is not part of the trilogy. Nice backpedaling.

There's no "backpedaling" here. Origins is the third in the franchise, deal with it. Prior to Arkham Knight's announcement, everyone was okay with calling it a trilogy.

I assume Knight will be the best in the RS trilogy, but Origins was third in line.

But again, I'm not here to argue semantics. Either add something to the conversation or leave.

There's a very stark difference between franchise and trilogy. It's like saying AC Brotherhood is the worst in the trilogy because it was the third installment. Change your OP or stop damage controlling.

Seriously, your backpedaling is borderline cringy here.

I remember why I muted your ass on Bnet, now. You're like the disabled love child of Gojira and Verbatim.

Cringe all you want, mate. There's no backpedaling here. You can participate in the conversation that everyone else is or you can continue to try and bait me. Either way, I don't care.

Quote from: Mr. Admirals on January 29, 2015, 10:18:30 AM

I think we can all agree is that Halo 3 is a textbook example of how not to end a trilogy.

I think the way they ended it (having the Master Chief be thought dead) was pretty cool, though.

Yeah, except the Arbiter was like, "Nah man, he's alive" to Hood at the end of Halo 3. No one got that though because everyone misinterpreted  "Were it so easy." (even I).

Quote from: Classic Mordo on January 29, 2015, 06:04:02 AM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 09:15:31 PM

Quote from: Classic Mordo on January 28, 2015, 07:58:38 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 28, 2015, 07:56:07 PM

Quote from: Classic Mordo on January 28, 2015, 07:23:45 PM

Arkham Origins is a prequel m80. The Arkham series isn't finished yet.

But yeah, the only good third installments I can think of are Dragon Age Inquisition and Halo 3.

The point is, it's the third installment in the franchise.

I'm not even going to comment on your obvious Halo 3 bait.

But your title clearly states trilogy. Arkham Origins is not part of the trilogy. Nice backpedaling.

There's no "backpedaling" here. Origins is the third in the franchise, deal with it. Prior to Arkham Knight's announcement, everyone was okay with calling it a trilogy.

I assume Knight will be the best in the RS trilogy, but Origins was third in line.

But again, I'm not here to argue semantics. Either add something to the conversation or leave.

There's a very stark difference between franchise and trilogy. It's like saying AC Brotherhood is the worst in the trilogy because it was the third installment. Change your OP or stop damage controlling.

Seriously, your backpedaling is borderline cringy here.

I remember why I muted your ass on Bnet, now. You're like the disabled love child of Gojira and Verbatim.

Cringe all you want, mate. There's no backpedaling here. You can participate in the conversation that everyone else is or you can continue to try and bait me. Either way, I don't care.

>getting this buttblasted over your own fuck up

holy shit, i bet you're an ex desticle or something

Quote from: Mr. Admirals on January 29, 2015, 03:12:20 PM

Quote from: Snake on January 29, 2015, 02:21:23 PM

Quote from: Mr. Admirals on January 29, 2015, 10:18:30 AM

I think we can all agree is that Halo 3 is a textbook example of how not to end a trilogy.

I think the way they ended it (having the Master Chief be thought dead) was pretty cool, though.

Yeah, except the Arbiter was like, "Nah man, he's alive" to Hood at the end of Halo 3. No one got that though because everyone misinterpreted  "Were it so easy." (even I).

But if everyone misinterpreted what he said (I don't see how you could misinterpret that, but okay), then it fulfilled it's purpose of ending the trilogy like that. Everyone assumed he was dead.

It's not like Arby could've known he was alive.

I always assumed he meant, "If only it was easy to accept his death."

As a 12 year old, that's a pretty easy thing to misinterpret.

I want a game where you die at the end and the bad guys win.

So very few games and movies do this