TheMART at Xboxkings
most of the games were just a bunch of generic looking Monster Hunter clones and the saddest part is that FFX was the best looking game... A game that came out in like 2001 or something. No wonder the Vita is failing so bad.
Generic Monster Hunter clones? Soul Sacrifice and God Eater 2 look better than boring Monster Hunter itself... You only buy a game for its name?
Thing is, 3DS has a bunch of rehashed decade old IP's like Mario/Zelda and no one cries. When PSVita gets a remake of a good game on top of its fresh IP's, suddenly its bad. Explain to me how that logic works exactly.
So by your definition a rehash; as long is it doesn't have the same name, is justified?
I'll now explain now in deep detail why the buzz word "rehash" is the stupidest thing invented in gaming history;or rather the most misused
word in gaming history this may deserve a thread, maybe? I don't know who really cares.
A Sequel/Entry/Installation is completely different from a Rehash and both are completely different from DLCs (but this one is stupid and w/e I don't care)
A sequel or better put Installation to nintendo series are justified by the fact that most if not all are completely different from the previous entry
take LoZ:aLttP and say LoZ:TP, in spirit they are the same (Zelda Link Gannon, Puzzle Solving , Adventure) but in actual gameplay they are completely different, from Wolf mechanics to Top and Down view to means of exploration even toit's core combat of Z-targeting and hack and slash.
This would prove true with All nintendo series save Donkey Kong which is an actual REHASH
every time.(Save Donkey Kong 64 but that game was terrible)
This is a Sequel or an entry to the series. that uses character names that you are familiar with.
A prime example of a rehash isn't call of duty persay; but First Person shooters in general(which a few do escape from this fact)
most if not every entry of a 1st person shooter is Name:Number:Title which is fine but it's core gameplay will usually still consist of the same exact thing as the previous installment with it's only difference being that they added new weapons and maps.
And here is what defines 'x' game as a rehash.
These things added could have (in this current tech) been updated to include these features; I mean do you REALLY need to make another game and sell it for full retail for better looking killstreaks and guns? those could have just gone in the previous installment through DLC(which again is another topic full of terrible things happening to the gaming industry).
Here's a video of exactly what I'm talking about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpigqfcvlM
a very fine example
Rehash =/= Installation
Now that we've got these two defined in a way
Another amazing example of this actually even came out very recently; DMC
It uses the same characters(in spirit Dante Vergil ect.) but takes the game in a different way.
from it's combo mechanics to it's targeting(or lack there of)
This is an entry to the series not a rehash.
You don't buy and play just so you can play as link or dante or mario or kratos or anyone really, you play them for well....
The game and what makes Sequels , Entry , or Rehashes isn't the Title of the game you bought but rather the way the game plays
In the end of the day You can make the studio can make a God of War name it French Onion Dipman: Slayers of Newerth and change kratos name to Ruffles of Potato Chip but give it the same polish/dedication/innovation as any other entry into the GoW series
Would you REALLY care you're playing as someone named Ruffles the Potato Chip?
I sure hope not.
doesn't make a series
Also All Mario Parties are rehashes no exceptions besides the first