Forums → The Tavern → Originals or sequels?

That depends more on the series than anything. There is no way to generalize it.

Aw ernie's my only poster =( Ur a great pal ernie

You mean of a book?
Usually the original, especially in a trilogy.

You too Firetail! Ur a great pal! You always reply to my posts ^-^ And I guess it can be books, video games, movies, w/e.

lol, it really depends on what it is.

Yeah I guess ur right. Well if this gets anymore posts then they can specify what they're talking about. Book, movies, video games, flash game. W.e (if it gets anymore posts xP)

Well, for books, I tend to like the original.
I don't know why, but...
Especially if there are multiple series, the first series is usually the best.

Yeah I'd tend to agree. But then there are those rare series that the sequels are just as good as the originals. Rare though....

I usually like more the originals, but some time the sequels are good too or even better.

Originals over... wait a minute...
More often than not, series are made up at the beginning of a project, and are meant to be (at least the author thinks so), which all in all makes that series an entirely original production.
Saying that you like the original of Lord of the Ring (fx) would pretty much mean you like LotR, and not just the first book (or the first half of the first book, for that matter).
Now that said, yes, originals are often better, because unsuspected sequels are more likely made for the fans/profit than for telling a story, and the publisher might press on for exactly that.
Hardly any of the books that are published today is published because of its value to society but rather because of the value to the publisher (60 percent says a lot when it comes to bestsellers).

This goes with books, music (first record made for the music, next record made in a hurry to float on the wave of success, often failing to actually be successful), movies (do I have to mention Disney sequels?) and games (many sequels seem to be the same game in a new wrapping, only with some slight debugging)...

But yes, generalisation is not always right. Just think of "the Da Vinci Code" that had more success than the 'original' "Angels and Demons".
Blah.

to tell the thruth,it really depends,the transformers sequel book was better than the transformers revenge of the fallen,while the original books of star wars were better than the sequel and other books in that franchise

well in the starwars series... the third was the best. you cant argue with that logic it one an acadamy award

I'd prefer both, but mostly sequels.

It depends how many are in the series and how original they are. With some books like mortal engines I prefered the first one becuase the was more going on and the story was better. However with the lord of the ring movies and skulduggery pleasant I prefered the sequels becuase there was more action and story.