What are some vidya trilogies that peaked with the second entry?

op says "second entry", brotherhood is the second game of the ezio trilogy. acii, bh and ac:r.

Saints Row 2

Arcania doesn't exist
While the first game did have a better atmosphere, I think that the second game and it's expansion greatly improved everything else, from enemies, spells, quests, map and so on.

I didn't like the first one much. It felt awfully rushed with copypasted bases/corridors everywhere and a shit combat system that is only satisfying if you use a shotgun. The Codex in it was top notch shit though.
2 had probably the most content out of 3 and had interseting conversations with haracters instead of them just being there for the sake of introducing their races.
3 is a fucking abomination of a game. I replayed 1 and 2 many times but 3 I can't ever finish, it's just fucking boring.

...

...

...

Don't be a faggot. I meant Assassins Creed 2, not the goofys spin-offs it spawned.

ME1 is the best game in that series you dew-chugging casual asshole.

AC I > AC II

MGS 3 > MGS 2

ME 1 > ME 2

CB 3 > CB 2

It's like you are faggots or something.

OP is once again a faggot.

You fucking retard.

First correct answer in this thread.

Everyone and anyone who had anything at all to do with the creation of Flatout 3 deserves to be raped.

Assassins Creed 1-3 is the Desmond trilogy, faggot.

Explain your reasoning please. I think AC 1 is pretty underrated but it is objectively inferior to 2 on almost every level besides how hot Lucy Stillman is (she gets a bad case of Steven Tyler lips in the second game).

Why? It is a copypase filled mess with a generic plot? shit companions and same 4 guns with a bunch of different names and numbers.
Also ME1 was originally developed as an xbox exclusive game, it is no less dew-chugging and casual than the others.

...

Seconding this, I'm also curious.

AC1 was a fucking mess. Playing it stealthily was a pain in the ass since it made you move slow and not use the parkour mechanics. The combat system sucked and the fastest way to beat enemies was to take off the lock on, tackle them and finish them off with a hidden blade. You do the same shit 9 times and it gets boring on the third.

...

This tbh

First one was written so badly and gunplay was slow and boring.

brotherhood and revelations are also full games, not dlc or mini games.

2 is objectively superior in quality and quantity in content, environment, and lore compared to the first game, but they took the wrong direction in exploration by making it too linear compared to 1. I also felt that 1 had better customization options. It was difficult getting into the game, but I thoroughly enjoyed 1 once I really got into it.

3 was trash, though. I, too, haven't completed it. I didn't know the ending for several months because I kept on telling myself I'd give it another go, but every time I played I got so bored I'd just do something else. Eventually, I searched it online and was disappointed.

In the first the game was really into all the Miles thing, it felt like a intriguing aventure game during those part, the second one just dropped this and went full Ezio for some reason and I didn't find this character interesting at all (so I was pretty pissed when they went to make another 3 games about this guy).
The setting was also far more interesting, the missions were repetitive but I liked this, it really felt like you just did job as an assassin and went up the ladder.
The game was not about combat but stealth (not a stealth game, but at least it was not a fake thing like all the guards spotting you with the shitty bars filling to make you think you are actually doing something stealthy in AC 2), AC 2 went really into combats, wich were the worst, just the ennemies waiting for their turn and shit.
And some other things too, but I have trouble speaking my mind.

'Berserkers' is a plot that had only been done in an WRPG once before, in the best space game ever made: Star Control 2. Besides that the internal logic of the game was beautifully constructed. Even if a setting is 'generic', that doesn't matter as long as it's well put together.
Almost all the memorable companions from 2 were originally from 1. Fuck, if that actress' ass didn't look so good in that bodysuit the only memorable companion from ME2 that wasn't in 1 would be the salarian scientist. And shows how memorable he is when I can't even remember his fucking name.
The only guns in ME2 that were any different were the goofy heavy weapons, the black hole launcher and flamethrower and shit. The other weapons were just as samey as ME1. Maybe more same because in 1 you could at least customize yourself a badass super rifle that kills anything in one shot but overheats with every shot or poison shotguns or shit like that. In 2 each gun had, like, two fucking pre-selected add-ons you could put on it.

But the biggest problem with 2 was that its story and world was just plain shittier, the worst sin an RPG can make. There was none of the space opera ambiance the first one had. When you first land the Mako on the moon and stare up at the earth with that muted washed out music in the background in ME1, that's a great fucking vidya memory. Nothing in ME2 achieved that.

2 was ultimately compromised in most ways an RPG shouldn't be to make it appeal to the Gears of War crowd. They sacrificed most of what made ME1 unique and interesting to have big setpiece style gunfights around chest high walls like anybody playing this sort of game gives a fuck about such a thing.

Brotherhood and Revelations had Lucy's death and the explanation and it also explained a lot about Ezio and Desmond and subject whatever the fuck. It was a important game in the series, unlike other games.

And yet Ass Creed 2 managed to be even worse.

...

You fight a reaper at the end, this big monster ship that no single ship in the intergalactic navy could harm, ON FOOT WITH A FUCKING ROCKET LAUNCHER. And it's almost an exact ripoff of a fucking terminator. It was pitiful. How could you defend that bullshit?

1 was better. 2 was shorter, had less interesting locations, a lot easier, and a worse story.

I agree with this one too. It compromised I think on the ambiance that made Fallout 1 so special by going a little too heavy on the comedy, but it added SO MUCH fucking content that I think it made up for it.

I have actually thought about this a lot. The first AC 1 was a lot comfier and a LOT more intriguing, I agree with you on this part. I remember when I was playing I searched every corner of that tiny fucking room you're allowed in as Desmond, tried to beat the glare coming in through the windows to see what was outside, etc. I was just fascinated by the world. I think when you block off so much but at the same time are so suggestive with what the outside world contains, you can really capture players' imaginations. I was so fucking pumped to leave the room in Ass Creed 2. I found Lucy's new model slightly offputting and I did have the sense that controls weren't as tight as they were in the first game (this repeated in Ass Creed 3, where I think the controls were even looser than in 2 to the point it actively hurt the game among other things). But man, when you finally break out of that little prison after being stuck inside it the whole first game, that was fucking great. I think there is a real lost art in vidya to 'building a moment', devs are too quick to prematurely blow off shit they've been building in mediocre reveals out of fear that players will lose interest if they're teased too long.

So yeah, I do agree that 2 was missing an atmosphere that was present in 1. But at the same time there is so much more you can do and Venice is so much more colorful and enjoyable than the middle east that I could forgive that.

If you are talking about Tali and Garrus than the point they actually became memorable was in 2. I didn't give much of a shit about Garrus in 1. You talk to him 3 times on the ship. Once about Saleon, once about doing the right thing and once about pursuing his dreams/being a good cop. Tali has some talk about being uncomfortable in a quiet ship and about geth data. Other than that all that makes them interesting is their cool design. 2 actually added on that, you could speak to them after nearly every mission and learn more meaningful things about them. Personal quests also helped.

The weapons in ME1 all work the same, just have different overheat and damage numbers. They look slightly different, shoot with the same sound, have the same crosshairs, same rate of fire. What is worse, you can only shoot straight if you use a skill, if you on't the crosshairs will be a giant circle. 2 added a fuckton of guns, each with their unique looks, some with different aiming principles and ammo capacity. Phalanx is my favorite pistol in it, and it shoots very slowly but does a fuckton of damage and has laser aim, Geth Shotgun can be charged to spend three shots at the same time. Viper sniper rifle has a balance betwheen rate of fire and damage so you can headshot multiple enemies in adrenaline rush. The guns actually feel different. There is no difference betwheen Naginata and Avenger in 1.

I am not sure if you remember ME1 well, but that game was full of setpiece style gunfights around chest high walls. When I got to Ilos and even i had chest hight walls and fucking elevators I wasn't even surprised.

I will disagree with you on one thing though, I enjoyed Ezio more than Altair. Ezio enjoyed life, fucked girls, cracked jokes, had a regular family you could interact with and was ultimately more human and enjoyable to play as than Altair.

I'm not talking to you anymore since I suspect you are underage. Tali in 1 enjoyed more group jack-off parties on 4chan/the internet than any vidya character of the last ten years. Again, we go back to something I mentioned earlier with suggesting shit to players rather than telling or showing them. You don't HAVE to have ridiculous shoehorned in bullshit like Archangel to have characters bang on about. It's better to leave shit to the imagination than to provide dumb shit. Character interactions in 1 were fewer but more meaningful. Hell, you can straight up FUCK Tali in 2 yet it doesn't feel as good as interacting with her in 1 because it feels faker. You could tell the devs went "Oh shit, the players really like this character, let's have it so you can romance her in the sequel!" And it started a trend too, since from what I hear characters act even more out of character in 3. I do like it when devs pander to players but not when it's at the cost of story quality.

I completely agree with you on this, even the fact that there is more things to do in 2, but the thing is that I played the first one way more because of the atmosphere, riding the horse from city to city to do new missions was great I even named my horse

That's the thing though, Altair was brainwashed, and I found all the secretive story was way more interesting than just a sad story about a hunk with a dead family wanting revenge.

Ezio was a bitch nigga that became a leader of Assassins without even knowing what they are about. He even says it at one point in Brotherhood. He just decides to fight for freedom since he likes the idea.

That doesn't make a character memorable. Remember the fucking Alistair threads? And yet the cunt has a personality of a cardboard cutout.

This tbh fam.

...

This is a fair point, but the most interesting parts of the story happen out of the Animus anyway, and this is true across all of the games. One of the biggest things that hurt Brotherhood and Revelations (besides the stupid tower defense minigame) was that you were trapped in the Animus.

I still haven't played this game. With the state of the industry being what it is I think I'll buy it on Cyber Monday.

Did you not play the lost archive dlc in revelations or desmonds journey? Well yes you were trapped in the animus, but it still revealed a lot of shit about Desmond and the other guy. It also showed some dirty jew tricks the Templars used and explained why Lucy had to die.

I played everything the series had to offer until 3, I was into it. It was still a crappy fucking way to deliver it. That first person puzzler was goofy as fuck and had nothing to do with anything, instead of finding pieces of eden in famous paintings it was just you doing some lame poorly-made platformer while exposition tapes played in the background.

Well yes it was indeed very badly done and most of that shit could be solved on the first try, but still the story was decent. I mean decent for a game.