Which is inherently the more soulful option for a series whose story concluded in first game?
>prequel set some time before first game
>sequel set some time after first game

Most video game prequels end up being shit.

>>714633596 (OP)
Neither because that's story shit and it doesn't really influence the gameplay.

>>714633596 (OP)
I cannot think of a single good video game prequel that isn't MGS3.

>>714633596 (OP)
Always liked Halo Reach a lot. Interesting to play a game where you know you're fucked and gonna lose

>>714633596 (OP)
the originals are literally cartoonish nonsense without the prequels. also prequel have some of the best character and set desings ever

>>714634032
DMC3 and MGS3 are the best in their respective franchises so, probably prequels

>>714634032
DMC3?

>>714633596 (OP)
>>714634032
>what is Red Dead Redemption 2

prequels because they explore the lore and sequels often time feel either forced or cash grabs because the story already concluded in the original. There is literally no point to keep it going unless there was a cliffhanger

You make a game with a story separate from the previous game but the game is titled that way to denote the expected genre and setting.

>>714633596 (OP)
Prequel, they tend to work better than unnecessary sequels that ruin the ending of the first game by adding context and further characterization to events whose end you already know, if done well

>>714634032
DMC3, Yakuza 0, RDR2, Halo Reach, Castlevania III, Tales of Symphonia/Berseria, Arkham Origins, etc.

>>714634032
Does Street Fighter Alpha count when it takes place before 2 but after 1?

>>714633596 (OP)
depends on the context, for example some story backstories are supposed to be vague so a prequel would probably ruin it, on the other hand a story with a definitive conclusion would probably get ruined with a sequel

>>714634032
Fire Emblem: Blazing Blade

>>714633596 (OP)
>series whose story concluded in first game?
I mean if the first game concludes it why the fuck would you have a sequel other than cashing in on brand regonition?

Neither sequels nor prequels should exist. The idea of IP is a jewish cancer. If the story is finished, it's finished. That's it.

>>714634413
HOLD ON DUTCH I GOTTA SPEND TEN SECONDS ANIMATIN M’SELF GETTIN’ A CAN A BEANS, GIVE WOMENFOLK THE RIGHT TA VOTE, RESPECT THE DARKIES, AND CHANGE MAH OUTFIT TO LOOK LIKE A KANSAS CITY FAGGOT BEFORE WE GO ROBBIN’!

>>714637042
>Arkham Origins

>>714637850
The animations in RDR2 really triggered zoomies ADHD, didn't they?

>>714633596 (OP)
Interquel. Pic related, all the best Star Wars media are side stories set around / during Episode IV-VI

>>714633596 (OP)
Neither. Side stories are the most soulful.

>>714638373
Ah, yes. Nice pic.

>>714638548
OP's pic, clearly.

Sequel but you're the villain.

Sequel that's revealed to actually be a prequel.

>>714639640
Bioshock: Infinite is the only one I can think of and it was a convoluted mess.

>>714633596 (OP)
a sequel that's also a prequel

>>714633596 (OP)
A sequel can pointlessly ruin what the first game created, a prequel can be severely limited due to the first game already establishing what has to be true for the setting after the prequel.