You'll have to excuse Claude, it must've missed that.

They're both Tampere-based, in fact they're like 500 meters away from each other. Unlike CO, Iceflake is owned by Paradox. CO has no public projects outside Cities Skylines, so the question is will they fail and will their employees simply be poached by Iceflake.

There definitely were improvements to be made in both KSP (physics of large vessels) and CS (FPS in large cities).

Instead we get this... 0/2

Development teams are expensive to fund, and people who have bought a game will pay full price for a sequel, but won’t pay full price for updates/DLC.

And releasing a sequel gets you hype and press coverage - potentially expanding your customer base - in a way that releasing updates won’t.

There are some exceptions (No Man’s Sky?) but they are very few and far between.

Both could definitely have used a completely updated engine at the very least (not just graphics, but scaling/capabilities around the core gameplay had grown quite a bit beyond what made sense originally), which would enable a lot of things which weren't as feasible in the original games, but it's hard to do that kind of reset and match 10 years of building and tweaking on the original. Hopefully KSA (Kitten Space Agency) can have better luck.

Yep. It's the curse of too much money.

Just because you hit on something and gamers threw their money at you because you deserved it, it doesn't mean the next iteration has to have MORE OF EVERYTHING.

Even some series that have maintained quality have got a bit too big for their own good if you ask me. Did Horizon Forbidden West need to be that big? Zero Dawn was the perfect length if you ask me.

Even Witcher 3 has a faint whiff of 'it could have been a bit shorter and still brilliant'.