Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
That's what I was worried about. A DLC is nice, because it usually considers your progression. A sequel is good, when the feeling, graphics, maps, mechanics, gameplay and/or story changed enough to offer you a different/new experience when playing the sequel.
If that different/new experience in the sequel is not provided, then it more or less feels like a (maybe improved) replay of the first game, starting from zero.
I really like games like Thief Sim, Slime Rancher, Time at Portia, The Forest, Subnautica etc. as mentioned. They are all nice games. But I have the same worries with their sequels. I mean, I guess I would still buy the sequels one day. But yeah, the question is, do those sequels provide enough of a different/new experience to buy them on release/higher price, or better wait a few years for good sales.