Which would you prefer? Strong focus on support or sequel?

[Maklershed]

I posed this question to Cheapy/Wombat in the CAGbag but I figured I'd see what everyone else thought.

I was listening to the 1up Yours podcast and heard Shane Bettenhausen mention that the team behind Little Big Planet was going to dedicate their time and support to LBP long after it's release. This begs the obvious question, how long would they focus on Little Big Planet before they moved efforts to Little Big Planet 2.

This makes me wonder, for games in general, given a choice, would you prefer a development team provides strong focus and support of a game that is out, well after it's release or would you prefer that they have a fairly brief period of support and then move their attention to keeping the series fresh by beginning work on a sequel?

[pete5883]

I love what Criterion is doing with Burnout Paradise, so I'll go with the first.

[Dandeschain]

I'm down with support too. I really wish that EA would do this with their sports games. Most of the time they release the game and the only update we get is a minor roster change. I think it would be great if they tweaked the gameplay every month or so.

[darthbudge]

I think it honestly depends on the game. LBP wouldn't benefit much from having an entire new game, because all it would consist of is extra levels and items and such. Well all of that can be done via DLC now, so I think that is the best way to go.

However, there are other games such as Call of Duty, sure you can add extra multiplayer levels and such, but you can't add an entire new campaign or better graphics and such via DLC. So in that case I think it is better that they focus on making a good sequel.

[Draekon]

It all depends on the game. However all developers should try and fix post-release bugs. More so if they're game breaking.

Shooters - Online shooters should give us new maps regularly whereas offline should just go straight for the next game.

RPGs - I'm pretty much fully on going towards the next game.

Sports -Roster updates yearly (and/or give us the option to do it ourselves manually) with the occasional new game when they actually have something to add to the next game.

Racers - Maybe occasionally new cars and bikes, but they should add tracks for online racers regularly. For offline ones, like shooters, just work on the next one.

Shoot'em Ups - Just work on the next one.

Others - Meh, too lazy to think of them.

Mass Effect's DLC I thought was pretty worthless considering it's all reused textures and it's not much different than any other planet outside of actually having a little bit of a story. Burnout Paradise on the other hand with adding in bikes and new online modes is actually rather a good idea and I don't mind it.

Then you have games like LittleBigPlanet which is based around user created content. With a game like that, developers really can hang around for a while and create a lot of new content with easy distributation. That's the kind of game I'm really all for it and am glad to see the developers doing it.

EDIT: Usually new maps/tracks in shooters and racers don't take a lot of people to do. So really while they're making the next game they can easily be making new maps on the side. I usually like Epic for this as they do occasionally release new maps for their shooters. At least they do it with the UT series.

[rabbitt]

It would be nice if a company supported its game at least a little after release, but most just move on to the sequel because it means more money (usually).

All of these XBLA games with online play are absolutely barren, and I think that at least some of the fault has to go to the developer for not further contributing to the game (no, a new pack of gamerpics doesn't count).

[The Mana Knight]

I'm down with support too. I really wish that EA would do this with their sports games. Most of the time they release the game and the only update we get is a minor roster change. I think it would be great if they tweaked the gameplay every month or so.They actually have to release a new version everywhere since a decent percentage of Madden players don't even have internet connection. That's why there's still a disc release of certain games. Games which are online only, can go by this method.

That's why there's a RB2, since there are certain people out there who lack internet connection (some might not believe it, but it's true. The majority of PS3 owners I've seen at GameStop said they never connected their console online).

[Dr Mario Kart]

Zero post game support, no exceptions.

[dmaul1114]

I'd have to go with sequels for most games. Long term support will often just equal having to buy a lot of DLC and a lot of times that just ends up feeling like stuff that should have been in the game to begin with. Like the 400pts for the short extra mission in Mass Effect.

Half Life 2 is another good example. Episodes 1 & 2 were great, but I think a lot of us would rather them have just gotten cracking on a full fledged Half Life 3 that included some of that content plus more.

But I can't say zero post game support like DMK with his usually lame "I'm against any kind of progress in gaming" mindset. Lots of types of post game support are very worthwhile. New maps in online FPS, new tracks in racing games etc. All add replay value and don't seem to take much time (i.e. Infinity Ward still gets a CoD game out every other year despite putting out map packs for their games).

So I guess I do support it as long as it's worthwhile and doesn't severely hold up development of sequels or new games from the developer. So things like Map packs are ok, but I'd prefer a new game over single player expansion packs like in HL2 or FEAR.

[Chacrana]

I posed this question to Cheapy/Wombat in the CAGbag but I figured I'd see what everyone else thought.

I was listening to the 1up Yours podcast and heard Shane Bettenhausen mention that the team behind Little Big Planet was going to dedicate their time and support to LBP long after it's release. This begs the obvious question, how long would they focus on Little Big Planet before they moved efforts to Little Big Planet 2.

This makes me wonder, for games in general, given a choice, would you prefer a development team provides strong focus and support of a game that is out, well after it's release or would you prefer that they have a fairly brief period of support and then move their attention to keeping the series fresh by beginning work on a sequel?

Focusing on support usually means lots of horse armor, so I'd rather see a sequel.

[The Crotch]

While I'll finally be off dial-up come the 30th, I still have to go with the second option in solidarity with those still on 56k.