The Problem with Threequels Pt. 1
Quite simply, either the developer gets stupid or the publisher gets greedy.
Developers and publishers need to understand the fundamental makeup of a threequel. By the end of the second game the series has an established identity, and audiences have decided whether or not they’re a fan. So when it comes to the third game, regardless of how amazing it looks, would-be fans are not likely to jump onboard as a result of not being familiar with the first two entries, or having already decided that the series is not for them.
But it’s at this point when studios realize they have a hit on their hands, and decide to all-out for the third entry to get the most bang for their buck. This usually results in the series being greatly altered in order to appeal to a wider audience. As a result, these entries end up alienating dedicated fans who go on to criticize the game for loosing its identity, and getting away from what made the series great to begin with. This has a cascading effect where non-fans, who are unaware of what made the series great, all they see is the criticism and conclude that must not be that good, making them less interested than they already were.
That’s a long-winded explanation of a single reason why a third entry might fail, but there are several more as to why this happens. While budget constraints and rushed deadlines definitely play a roll, the most notable factors are executive interference and creativity issues. Now true, this could happen at any point throughout a series’ lifetime, but for some reason, it’s most common on the third entry.
Ignoring whether or not a game was financially successful, I wanted to look at why certain threequels failed to live up to their predecessors.
Dead Space 3
Dead Space 3 is probably the most infamous example of a third entries failure. But before going any further, it needs to be mentioned that 99% of the blame lies with the publisher EA (Electronic Arts), as they forced developer Visceral Games to remove features that would’ve bolstered the experience, and add new features that nobody wanted in order to appeal to a wider audience.
To start with, Visceral added a co-op campaign, which was actually a welcome addition after the lackluster multiplayer of Dead Space 2 that many felt was out of place. Unfortunately, executive interference from EA would prevent Visceral from creating the co-op experience they originally envisioned. A vision that would have fans clamoring over what could’ve been when it was revealed after the game’s release.
The developers originally wanted the players to play through the game as Isaac and Shadow Isaac, a visual representation of Isaac’s alter ego disguised as a seemingly unrelated character. The two would brave the game’s campaign together, but would perceiving events differently in order to insight conversation and confusion as to what was really going on. Then at the game’s conclusion, Shadow Isaac’s identity would be revealed in a Fight Club style twist. The problems came when EA was hesitant about releasing a game that leaned so heavily into the realm of psychosis, and forced Visceral to ditch the darker undertones and make the game more action oriented. With no room to negotiate, Visceral Games had no choice but to remove the concept completely, and replaced Shadow Isaac with the flat and uninteresting Sgt. John Carver. The characters dual perceptions would be the only idea to survive the purge, but was nowhere near as prominent as originally planned.
Although, the games biggest problem was its drastic change in tone, which could be attributed to a domino affect caused by a single bad feature.
Domino #1 would be the crafting bench. Rather than collecting a small arsenal of unique weapons, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, the game allowed you to use scavenged resources that could be endlessly crafted, customized, and combined into an all-new weapon of your own design. This circumvented the game’s difficulty to such an extreme that many considered it to be game-breaking. It enabled you to create an ideal all-purpose weapon, fit for any situation. In essence, making the Swiss Army Knife of guns and completely tanking weapon variety.
Domino #2 would be universal ammo. In order to accommodate this new ability to create any weapon, all ammo became universal. In previous entries you not only had to determine which gun was best for the situation, but also which gun you even had ammo for. But Dead Space 3 killed the tension of resource management, as you knew that any weapon was viable as long as you had some ammo in you inventory.
Domino #3 would be the experience this created. A weapon that can do anything combined with an ammo stock you didn’t have to worry about, created an experience that was no longer scary. Thus, Dead Space became a series that had lost its identity.
Army of Two: The Devil’s Cartel
Army of two has always been about the clear and simple premise of shooting up bad guys with buddy. Propelled by explosions and irreverent humor, the games were never meant to be taken seriously. But with the Devils Cartel, its as if the developers set out to dumb down a game that wasn’t very smart to begin with.
To start with, the face of the franchise was no longer the face of the franchise. Not only was its B-movie aesthetic part of its charm, but fans also become attached to the original veteran protagonists, Salem and Rios, which raised the baffling question of why they were sidelined in The Devil's Cartel for the far less likable and generically named, Alpha and Bravo. On top of being overly generic, Alpha and Bravo lacked any of the chemistry that was hailed of the original duo, as charming banter became uninspired one-liners. The game had quite literally lost its character. But the final straw for longtime fans was the decision to make Salem the villain. Not only was a beloved character being replaced, he was turned evil and killed off.
However, the games biggest sin is its unoriginal gameplay. It settles into a monotonous rhythm with an astonishing lack of variety. This is were the failure of this game is unique, in that it wasn’t trying to appeal to a wider audience or that the development suffered from executive oversight, it’s a game that suffered from a lack of vision and creativity. The developer got the green light to make a sequel, but simply didn’t know what to do with it.
While Army of Two: The Devil’s Cartel isn’t necessarily a bad game, it definitely isn’t good either, it just sort of exists. Rather than losing its identity, it lost its charm. In the end, it’s still Army of Two, but only in name.
I didn’t realize until after writing this that both games were made by Visceral. Maybe next time they’ll stop at number 2.
