I mean, the idea of exploring a new planet in a given solar system instead of just going once more around the sun sure is one that appeals to me. But I think the sideways shoogle – or truffle shuffle, or whatever you wish to call it – is going to be just as vulnerable to cynicism, crank-turning, churning and dollar-sign-eyeball ker-ching-ing as sequels generally are. Perhaps even more so, since a simple genre switch would also risk inheriting new flaws, instead of eradicating old ones. Off-cuts and spin-offs can just as easily become turn-offs and trade-offs. Pac-Man Rally? Goldeneye: Rogue Agent? There’s just as many games in the dock due to this intelligent-design process as there are due to evolution.

It does feel like a fluid situation, though. Resident Evil 4 is less of a sequel than KOEI’s universe-colliding Gundam or Orochi games. A Manhunt RTS would be the wrong kind of sick. Warrior Within’s teenage regression is a bigger departure than anything the Tony Hawk series has managed, but the baby-step progress of that series is far more precious to me.

I guess it’s just a first principles thing. The Vibri example is more the fault of Matsuura than anything else. Whereas Ubisoft will always probably place more faith in Jade Raymond than Ancel’s Jade etc. etc. I probably won’t be happy until God Hand’s drunken attitude becomes VIDEOGAME LAW.