History Main / SequelNumberSnarl

1st Dec '17 8:55:52 AM Corlagon
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

[[folder:Comicbooks]]
* ''The Comicbook/IncredibleHulk'' was originally canceled after six issues. After appearing in various other mags and becoming more popular, the Hulk was given a new solo feature in the ''Tales to Astonish'' anthology. When Marvel finally found a better distributor, ''The Incredible Hulk'' became its own mag again, but it neither started over with a new #1 nor did it continue the original numbering, it continued that of ''Tales of Astonish'', with #102. This resulted in confusion over whether the revival should be considered a resumption of the original series or a second volume Marvel's Web site uses the former interpretation while their trade collections prefer the latter.
[[/folder]]
30th Nov '17 11:15:49 AM Pinokio
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* ''VideoGame/PacMan2TheNewAdventures'' is more like the tenth sequel to ''VideoGame/PacMan''.
22nd Nov '17 10:30:01 PM MrBadAxe
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''TabletopGame/MagicTheGathering'' started numbering its core sets by 4th edition, the fifth set after Alpha, Beta, Unlimited and Revised, by counting Alpha and Beta as the first and second versions of the Limited Edition. 5th edition was the first to introduce number symbols on the cards; prior sets were identified by print quality, border size and date. Numbering continued until 2007's 10th edition (10E), then started yearly numbering in 2009 with Magic 2010 (M10), the date of each set being a year ahead of the set's release year, up until 2014's Magic 2015. The last core set is stated to be Magic Origins, a 2015 unnumbered set with a sunrise symbol and the set code ORI.

to:

* ''TabletopGame/MagicTheGathering'' started numbering its core sets by 4th edition, the fifth set after Alpha, Beta, Unlimited and Revised, by counting Alpha and Beta as the first and second versions of the Limited Edition. 5th edition 'Classic' 6th Edition was the first base set to introduce number symbols use an expansion set symbol on the cards; prior sets were identified by print quality, border size size/color and date. Numbering continued until 2007's 10th edition (10E), then started yearly numbering in 2009 with Magic 2010 (M10), the date of each set being a year ahead of the set's release year, up until 2014's Magic 2015. The last core set is stated to be Magic Origins, a 2015 unnumbered set with a sunrise symbol and the set code ORI.
17th Nov '17 12:20:49 PM VanHohenheimOfXerxes
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''Literature/TheChroniclesOfNarnia'' started out in chronological order but the [[Literature/TheHorseAndHisBoy fifth]] and [[Literature/TheMagiciansNephew sixth]] books were, respectively, a {{interquel}} and a {{prequel}}. Later editions of the series number the books in chronological order, but many fans maintain that reading them in publication order is more rewarding because the prequel contains [[CallForward references that only make sense if you've read the other books first]].

to:

* ''Literature/TheChroniclesOfNarnia'' started out in chronological order but the [[Literature/TheHorseAndHisBoy fifth]] and [[Literature/TheMagiciansNephew sixth]] books were, respectively, a {{interquel}} and a {{prequel}}. Later editions of the series number the books in chronological order, but many fans maintain that reading them in publication order is more rewarding rewarding, because the prequel contains [[CallForward references that only make sense if you've read the other books first]].first]], and because Creator/CSLewis never cared much about the order in which people read his books.
14th Nov '17 8:44:54 AM nighttrainfm
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Interestingly, this has been introduced in-universe with the Doctor himself. Originally, when regeneration was introduced, it wasn't stated that William Hartnell's character was in fact the First Doctor. The Fourth Doctor episode "The Brain of Morbius" has a scene indicating prior regenerations. However, it was later firmly established that the First Doctor was the original incarnation. Then comes "The Name of the Doctor" and "The Day of the Doctor", which introduced a new regeneration between 8 and 9. It was stated that the Doctor doesn't consider the War Doctor to be him, so he doesn't count in the numbering. Add in "Time of the Doctor", which stated that Ten's aborted regeneration actually counted, and you have a situation where the current, Twelfth Doctor could technically be considered the Fourteenth.

to:

** Interestingly, this has been introduced in-universe with the Doctor himself.themself. Originally, when regeneration was introduced, it wasn't stated that William Hartnell's character was in fact the First Doctor. The Fourth Doctor episode "The Brain of Morbius" has a scene indicating prior regenerations. However, it was later firmly established that the First Doctor was the original incarnation. Then comes "The Name of the Doctor" and "The Day of the Doctor", which introduced a new regeneration between 8 and 9. It was stated that the Doctor doesn't consider the War Doctor to be him, worthy of the title, so he doesn't count in the numbering. Add in "Time of the Doctor", which stated that Ten's aborted regeneration actually counted, and you have a situation where the current, Twelfth Doctor could technically be considered the Fourteenth.
6th Nov '17 2:12:28 PM MegaMarioMan
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The ''Super Mario Advance'' series has its own numbering system, despite the games themselves simply being GBA ports of the NES/SNES titles. This led to the fourth entry of the ''Advance'' series having the rather weird title of ''Super Mario Advance 4: Super Mario Bros. 3''. Thankfully, they didn't use the full title of ''Yoshi's Island'', dropping the ''Super Mario World 2'' portion to make room for ''Super Mario Advance 3'' instead.

to:

** The ''Super Mario Advance'' series has its own numbering system, despite the games themselves simply being GBA ports of the NES/SNES titles. This led to the fourth entry of the The ''Advance'' series having games are released in no particular order: the rather weird title first game is an UpdatedRerelease of the US ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBros2'', the second game is an updated rerelease of ''VideoGame/SuperMarioWorld'', the third game is an updated rerelease of ''Super Mario Advance 4: Super Mario Bros. 3''. Thankfully, World 2: VideoGame/YoshisIsland'' (thankfully, they didn't use the full title of ''Yoshi's Island'', dropping the ''Super Mario World 2'' portion to make room for ''Super Mario Advance 3'' instead.instead), and the fourth game has the rather weird title of ''Super Mario Advance 4: VideoGame/SuperMarioBros3''.
27th Oct '17 8:25:38 PM MyFinalEdits
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The mainline Mario games have two different games titled ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBros2'': the original Japanese version (aka ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBrosTheLostLevels'') and the version that the rest of the world is familiar with (adapted from the Japan-exclusive ''VideoGame/DokiDokiPanic''). This was done since ''Lost Levels'' was essentially [[MissionPackSequel a level pack]] for the first game with the [[SequelDifficultySpike difficulty spiked up]], and Nintendo of America wanted a more original game to serve as their own version of ''Super Mario Bros. 2'' (presumably to avoid the conundrum of having to renumber ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBros3'' when it came time to localize that game in the west, which is what would've happened had they decided to just skip ''Lost Levels'' completely without releasing a substitute game). Ultimately, both games were recursively made available in both Japan and overseas (with the former receiving ''Super Mario Bros. 2'' under the name ''Super Mario USA''), and were further canonized by the inclusion of their features in future games, so the snarl is now limited to their names.
** Strictly speaking, ''VideoGame/WarioLandSuperMarioLand3'' and ''[[VideoGame/YoshisIsland Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island]]'' aren't really proper sequels of their respective predecessors, but instead [[PoorlyDisguisedPilot spin-offs]], which is why ''their'' own respective sequels dropped the original titles and went by the subtitle instead (e.g. ''Wario Land II'' instead of ''Super Mario Land 4'', ''Yoshi's Island DS'' instead of ''Super Mario World 3''). Interestingly, the original ''VideoGame/SuperMarioWorld'' was originally going to be titled ''Super Mario Bros. 4'' and this {{working title}} was still used on the packaging of the Japanese version (it isn't used in the actual game).

to:

** The mainline Mario games have two different games titled ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBros2'': the original Japanese version (aka ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBrosTheLostLevels'') and the version that the rest of the world is familiar with (adapted from the Japan-exclusive ''VideoGame/DokiDokiPanic''). This was done since ''Lost Levels'' was essentially [[MissionPackSequel a level pack]] for the first game with the [[SequelDifficultySpike difficulty spiked up]], and Nintendo of America wanted a more original and less frustrating game to serve as their own version of ''Super Mario Bros. 2'' (presumably to avoid the conundrum of having to renumber ''VideoGame/SuperMarioBros3'' when it came time to localize that game in the west, which is what would've happened had they decided to just skip ''Lost Levels'' completely without releasing a substitute game). Ultimately, both games were recursively made available in both Japan and overseas (with the former receiving ''Super Mario Bros. 2'' under the name ''Super Mario USA''), and were further canonized by the inclusion of their features in future games, so the snarl is now limited to their names.
** Strictly speaking, ''VideoGame/WarioLandSuperMarioLand3'' and ''[[VideoGame/YoshisIsland Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island]]'' ''VideoGame/SuperMarioWorld2YoshisIsland'' aren't really proper sequels of their respective predecessors, but instead [[PoorlyDisguisedPilot spin-offs]], which is why ''their'' own respective sequels dropped the original titles and went by the subtitle instead (e.g. ''Wario Land II'' instead of ''Super Mario Land 4'', ''Yoshi's Island DS'' instead of ''Super Mario World 3''). Interestingly, the original ''VideoGame/SuperMarioWorld'' was originally going to be titled ''Super Mario Bros. 4'' and this {{working title}} was still used on the packaging of the Japanese version (it isn't used in the actual game).game); meanwhile, ''Yoshi's Island'' didn't have the ''World 2'' monicker in Japan, so the full name was ''Super Mario: Yoshi's Island''.



*** The Yoshi's Island case was due to a regional title change. In Japan, it was known as Super Mario: Yoshi's Island.
27th Oct '17 3:15:02 PM Dere
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBros2'' is actually the third game in the ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBros'' series; the current pattern is that only the portable titles are numbered, while the home titles are named after the console they're on (the actual second entry is ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBrosWii'', released in 2009.

to:

*** The Yoshi's Island case was due to a regional title change. In Japan, it was known as Super Mario: Yoshi's Island.
** ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBros2'' is actually the third game in the ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBros'' series; the current pattern is that only the portable titles are numbered, while the home titles are named after the console they're on (the actual second entry is ''VideoGame/NewSuperMarioBrosWii'', released in 2009.2009).
28th Aug '17 5:27:06 PM oknazevad
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* UsefulNotes/MicrosoftWindows. Internal and external version numbers haven't matched in years. Part of this complexity stems from the different versions being entirely different code bases over the years. Earlier versions were based on the old MS-DOS system (indeed, Windows was originally an add-on program to DOS, not an operating system). This applies to every version up to and including the 95/98/Me versions (DOS-based Windows 4.x, internally). Meanwhile, the NT code base was introduced as a high-end, network-friendly system, released in parallel and aimed at businesses. The ''first'' version of that was NT 3.1 (the same version number DOS-based Windows was on at the time). NT 4.0 was released at the same time as Win 95 (and looked just like it, despite not being internally compatible). It wasn't until Windows XP (NT version 5.0) was released that the home and business lines were fully merged. Vista was NT 6.0, but when it went over like a lead balloon, they intentionally pushed the external number up to 7, while the internal system number was 6.1, as the core internals are only slightly tweaked; Win7 was mostly a user-end overhaul. Windows 8 followed, again overhauling the user-end stuff, so it's internal number is 6.2; it was even more criticized than Vista (because 7 actually was popular and not too old), so a patch job called 8.1 was released, making the internal number 6.3. For the follow up, they wanted to show a big jump, so they skipped the name straight to Windows 10. [[strike:But it's just 6.4 internally!]] Surprisingly, the build number is also 10--specifically 10.0.10240 for the RTM release.

to:

* UsefulNotes/MicrosoftWindows. Internal and external version numbers haven't matched in years. Part of this complexity stems from the different versions being entirely different code bases over the years. Earlier versions were based on the old MS-DOS system (indeed, Windows was originally an add-on program to DOS, not an operating system). This applies to every version up to and including the 95/98/Me versions (DOS-based Windows 4.x, internally). Meanwhile, the NT code base was introduced as a high-end, network-friendly system, released in parallel and aimed at businesses. The ''first'' version of that was NT 3.1 (the same version number DOS-based Windows was on at the time).time; the user interface of NT 3.1 looked and functioned just like the DOS version). NT 4.0 was released at the same time as Win 95 (and looked just like it, despite not being internally compatible). It wasn't until Windows XP (NT version 5.0) was released that the home and business lines were fully merged. Vista was NT 6.0, but when it went over like a lead balloon, they intentionally pushed the external number up to 7, while the internal system number was 6.1, as the core internals are only slightly tweaked; Win7 Windows 7 was mostly a user-end overhaul. Windows 8 followed, again overhauling the user-end stuff, so it's internal number is 6.2; it was even more criticized than Vista (because 7 actually was popular and not too old), so a patch job called 8.1 was released, making the internal number 6.3. For the follow up, they wanted to show a big jump, so they skipped the name straight to Windows 10. [[strike:But it's just 6.4 internally!]] Surprisingly, the build number is also 10--specifically 10.0.10240 for the RTM release.
28th Aug '17 5:14:56 PM oknazevad
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The various ''TabletopGame/DungeonsAndDragons'' editions are titled ''Dungeons & Dragons'', ''Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set'', ''Advanced Dungeons & Dragons'', ''Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition'', ''Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition'', ''Dungeons & Dragons v3.5'' (a minor revision), ''Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition'', and ''Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition''. While the relationships between early versions isn't hard and fast (they were considered the same game, just aimed at different audiences, and were largely compatible until the Basic Set was revised in 1981), there's no way 5th Edition is actually the 5th version of the game. For extra confusion, ''TabletopGame/{{Pathfinder}}'', while technically a separate product, is really just a further revision of v3.5, and thus is frequently referred to by fans as "v3.75".

to:

* The various ''TabletopGame/DungeonsAndDragons'' editions are titled ''Dungeons & Dragons'', ''Dungeons & Dragons Basic Set'', ''Advanced Dungeons & Dragons'', ''Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd Edition'', ''Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition'', ''Dungeons & Dragons v3.5'' (a minor revision), ''Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition'', and ''Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition''. While the relationships between early versions isn't hard and fast (they were considered the same game, just aimed at different audiences, and were largely compatible until the Basic Set was revised in 1981), there's no way 5th Edition is actually the 5th version of the game. For extra confusion, ''TabletopGame/{{Pathfinder}}'', while technically a separate product, is really just a further revision of v3.5, and thus is frequently referred to by fans as "v3.75".
This list shows the last 10 events of 341. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.SequelNumberSnarl