Inquisition wasn't quite as bad, I actually enjoyed it because it made an attempt to walk back some of the "streamlining" from 2, though obviously they both pale in comparison to Origins.
I was kind of hopeful they'd rediscovered their identity somewhat with Inquisition, but 4 looks like that hope was misplaced. They doubled down on abandoning the RPG in favor of the overly simplistic button masher with a smattering of RPG elements that are more or less meaningless.
Some will argue that sequel or franchise fatigue is not really a thing, in that it is immediately disproved when a hit like Bad Boys: Ride or Die comes along. But it’s hard not to feel fatigued when original films are just croutons in a Hollywood buzzword salad: made entirely of sequels and prequels and existing IPs and brands and reboots and remakes.
So basically the evidence suggests it isn't a actually a thing, but you're going to continue to imply it is?
The whole article just reeks of projection. The writer feels something, and insists the rest of the world feels it too, to spite the evidence to the contrary.
I also don't get what they're trying to imply by saying original films are "just croutons in a buzzword salad". I mean...yeah? What year is this? Does this writer believe this is a fresh take? Original films share the space with franchises and adapted IPs, that has been the case for decades now, and people have been complaining about it for just as long.
But so what? Original films are getting made all the time, and really good ones at that, you just have to stop giving a shit what Disney or Warner Brothers are doing and seek them out.
Click reader view and refresh, without leaving reader view.