Definition of sequels are about retreading old ground

People are trying to change what a sequel is. If a video game is about Unicorns and pancakes, sells very well, then the sequel is expected to be ‘more Unicorns and pancakes’. If the game is changed into ‘Giraffes and bananas’, then it is not really a sequel.

You either make a sequel or you make a brand new game. It’s either-or. The advantage of the sequel is that there is already an installed base of ready buyers which removes the risk. A brand new game has to win an audience all over. If you want the market security of the sequel, you have to give up doing ‘whatever you want’. Sequels are about delivering a consistent experience to the predecessor, not re-defining that experience.

What we’re witnessing is game companies want to have their cake and eat it too. They want the security of the sequel with the freedom of the new IP. But it doesn’t work like that. All you do is piss off the fans and destroy the franchise.