this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
42 points (92.0% liked)
Games
31807 readers
1225 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Mortal Kombat 1?" Really? I'm getting pretty tired of this whole trend of really confusing reboot/sequel names that make it increasingly difficult to convey which actual game is being referred to. I kinda wish more games would take the Final Fantasy route and just own their ridiculously long sequel count.
Man, that's even dumber than I thought.
Its worse than you think, MK9 was a loose sequel to MK Armageddon, retelling the events of Mk1 & MK2 with minor twists
This is the second time in a decade NRS is doing a soft reboot/sequal
Were beginning to reach fate and kingdom hearts levels of naming conventions here
Someone needs to implement semantic versioning already.
Or maybe use the Dewey decimal system
Even Square Enix is questioning whether they should still have numbered titles anymore. Media execs just hate the concept these days, I have no idea why. You would think at the very least they would try and avoid naming two games the same name, but nope... We got to have fan-names like Doom (2016) and God of War (2018) now because studios can't keep their names straight.
Not to mention the absolute clown show of Star Wars: Battlefront (2004), Star Wars: Battlefront II (2005), Star Wars: Battlefront (2015) and Star Wars: Battlefront II (2017). Come on, 4 isn't even that high of a number.
I'm wondering if the aversion to numbered titles has to do with execs wanting to divert attention from the sheer number of sequels and reboots being churned out by AAA studios, often way beyond their franchises' reasonable ending points. I remember when Final Fantasy was often the subject of mild ridicule for its absurdly-high sequel numbering, and at this point, a lot of AAA franchises would be starting to get into the double digits. Dropping the sequel numbering may be an effort to get people to forget just how long those franchises have been milked.
That's not the case everywhere, and I think sometimes on reboots they just want to signify that the franchise is "starting fresh" to a degree (Doom and SW:B for instance), but it's still aggravating that completely-identical title repeats are for some reason acceptable now.
Always been a fan of subtitles once a game series has too many entries. I'm especially not fond of publishers calling games the same name as one previously released unless it's a substantial reboot decades later.