We all know the feeling. You get a game and love it so much. The story, the characters, the world...and then you find out there's a sequel in the works. Suddenly you get all ideas in your head about what should be in it and what shouldn't - but are the people behind the game required to listen?

Should developers listen to fans of a game when developing sequels?

jayseven: Of course! Developers should listen carefully to where the first game (or previous in the series) went wrong, or where they could improve it, after all it's these very fans who will most probably be buying the sequel.

Of course, listening to the fans isn't always economically viable; look at rareware; for nearly 5 years fans have been pestering them to release Killer Instinct 3... The fact is that the game isn't a huge, well branded and popular one, and if it was made it probably would not have sold well; Rare knew this, perhaps the fans knew this, but the fans aren't interested in how much Rare would've made... Of course, there are hints of KI3 being in development now -- the last 5 years has given Rare a nice little push of fame and i think they have managed to increase their fan base through switching consoles.. But we're not talking about rare here! Enough with the example

Look back at Perfect Dark (dammit, back to Rare already..) they were open to ideas and suggestions through their own website and through the magazine N64 (now NGC, of course), where many fans sent in their own ideas -- many of which actually made it to the final game!

Developers listening to consumers is a wise thing to do for another reason; they can find out what type of game the market needs, what type of game people want to buy right now. Good market research can help companies find what type of game they'll work on next.

Falco: I have a simple answer to a simple question...YES, they should. If the developers are creating a game sequel due to its success, they should definitely listen to gamers who bought the previous game so they don't fu** it up. That's quite a long sentence. The end.

Ford Prefect: I think they should definitely, RARE did a bit of listening to fans about Perfect Dark through the old N64 magazine and a few ideas were used. Since the fans are responsible in part for the success of the game by buying it, they know the reasons they enjoyed it, and by listening to them the developers can build upon those and make the next game even more enjoyable and playable

Bas: Gamers may have useful suggestions, so ignoring that group would be a waste. But in the end a game should be the result of the developer's creative vision. They should not let fan's requests get in the way of major changes in gameplay, as fans seem to be a bit conservative. If Retro Studios had asked Metroid fans a couple of years ago: "How about we make the next game in a first person perspective?" the great majority would be against that, while now they're eagerly awaiting Metroid Prime's sequel.

James: I agree with Bas - the suggestions should not get in the way of a developers's creative vision for the game, but us gamers know what we want in the game, and taking advice from the people who play the games will help them to improve what may be already an excellent game.

er-no: Should developers listen to fans of a game when developing sequels?

Developers have a tendency to think for themselves when developing any game. Then they tell us all that the game was 'made for the fans'. This is however not often the case. Ok, I'm going to place myself in a nice hole here, but Mario Kart Double Dash!!, did Nintendo listen to any fans?

Hell no.. because if they did they would have realised that most fans wanted normal carts within the game and not some new fangled design that Nintendo insist is 'evolutionary' - because it seems to me when I play it 'evolution' must be going backwards. As for other games? If developers listened to the fans we'd have had another Blast Corps by now. We'd have games which didn't let us down and if Nintendo had listened to us GameCube fans it woulda been built with a DVD player and have the potential from start of being able to go online.

Without us, developers are useless, yet most of us insist on buying shoddy, crap games anyway... so this trend will continue. As long as Joe Average who loves the advert will buy it. Developers will never listen to the fans.

Freddy: There's no use in developing something unless you know what your potential buyers are looking for. I think a lot of people were disappointed with the GameCube for not having DVD playback, or Broadband capabilities. Moving away from console-based consumerism, I think it's important for developers to take on board what the public are looking for.

In some cases, however, it can be good not to listen, but to go with your instinct. Take Metroid Prime for instance, that turned out excellently, but during its developmental stage, a lot of fans were complaining about one thing or another. Sequels, however, it's definitely important to listen to what the fans have to say. Whether they're negative or positive comments, everything the fans suggest has to be considered.

It's probably why there are so few real quality games available, because developers are just making games based on old engines, with no innovation. Countless generic sequels are drowning the games industry, and as the peak of graphical capabilities approaches, developers are going to have to focus more on gameplay. It's then that people will realise what terrible games they're playing, and it's then that developers are really going to have to kick into gear.

Iun: From a financial standpoint, they mostly don't have to. Games developers can churn out a sequel to a game using the original engine from the first game -maybe upgrading the graphics and adding a few new enemies, slap a "2" after the title and every Johnny Six-pack and his wretched brood will buy it. Because it's something familiar they feel comfortable with trying it. Okay, it had a development cycle less than half of the original and most of the team that worked on it have been consumed by EA, but essentially it's what they want.

And there's the nub, crux and centre of the matter. You and I can whiffle on ceaselessly about the need for change in the games market, bemoan the lack of originality and weep at the sight of this years FIFA. However, we're in the minority. And it's often the minority that is the most vocal. We rail against this stagnation and demand new things... but we won't be listened to, because that's what a minority is. At the end of the election day, it's the party with the most votes that wins, not the party with the least. The majority of gamers will insist on buying Generic Sequel X to Shoddy PS2 Platformer 309... because change scares us...

jayseven: But in some cases people would love to have a sequel just being like an extention to the first game; people would like to have more of the same because they enjoyed it so much; this is the case often for great games that end too quickly. I wouldn't half mind if a "sequel" to Pikmin was released where the game was basically just dozens of new levels... of course, if Nintendo took 3 years to develop and produce this matching game then it's not right.

If a company produces a sequel within a year of the previous one and there weren't many differences, on the whole i'd say that was ok. I guess this comment kind of crosses over onto a couple of older Roundtables too.

Conor: As with most things I think they should be a balance.

Whether or not they like it, when making a sequel developers have a responsibility to the original and it's fans. It was, after all, the fans that bought the game and allowed a sequel to be made. To some extent, the developers owe the fans, but only to a certain extent. No doubt almost every fan has his or her idea about what the sequel should be like, and a few will have some good ieas. Developers should listen to the fans, but they are certainly under no obligation to take anything they say on board.

Balancing this is the fact that the developers are the ones making the game; it is their game, no-one elses. They can do whatever they want with it, because in the end they are the ones putting in all the hours and work on it. It's all very well for us to sit about saying what the developers should've done (as gamers we're expected to do so) but they're the ones who have been in the coding trenches. It really is their decision to make.