> The problem with sequels in games this good is that the game is so much better than anything else when it is released, that a sequel can't be anything other than an incremental update, and thus feels lackluster.
Depends on the sequel. If the sequel is just an additional collection of levels, then just provide a fun "additional levels pack" as an add-on, and/or provide a way to share community-produced levels. That doesn't have the same expectations as a sequel.
If you're going to actually make a sequel, put enough effort, new mechanics, and story into it to make it a new game in its own right. For examples of sequels that put enough effort in to be a new game while still feeling like a sequel to the original, look at Portal 2, or Super Mario Bros 3 (by contrast to Lost Levels, which was fundamentally just a level pack). Numerous sequels pull this off, even of innovative indie games.
But it's also possible that the new game will end up with entirely new mechanics and story to the point that it isn't a sequel, and instead becomes "a new game from the makers of ...". And that's awesome too.
Depends on the sequel. If the sequel is just an additional collection of levels, then just provide a fun "additional levels pack" as an add-on, and/or provide a way to share community-produced levels. That doesn't have the same expectations as a sequel.
If you're going to actually make a sequel, put enough effort, new mechanics, and story into it to make it a new game in its own right. For examples of sequels that put enough effort in to be a new game while still feeling like a sequel to the original, look at Portal 2, or Super Mario Bros 3 (by contrast to Lost Levels, which was fundamentally just a level pack). Numerous sequels pull this off, even of innovative indie games.
But it's also possible that the new game will end up with entirely new mechanics and story to the point that it isn't a sequel, and instead becomes "a new game from the makers of ...". And that's awesome too.