1 Views | 4 Comments

T0ast On Jam: Franchises

T0ast On Jam: Franchises

This week I’ll be taking pot-shots at franchises and all their despicable evil. Now before you angrily throw some edible item at your monitor, symbolically me, let’s just clarify. I have absolutely nothing against trilogies or series that were intended from the first game in said series because then it’s there to help realise a story arc, so I will not be ranting about God of War, Assassins Creed, Mass Effect or any of those titles because it was intended almost from the beginning for there to be a trilogy or series of games over which the story would be told.

Instead I will be attacking the unnecessary sequels, too-long-in-the-tooth series’ and the shamelessly milked concepts. First off, there are some games which were just fine as they were, yes people said they would have liked to see more of the same but truth is they wouldn’t. Bioshock 2 is a case in point; Bioshock 1 was great, amazing and the stuff of legends so 2K decided that since there was now such a large fan-base for the game it would the right thing to do to just make a sequel, bad move. Bioshock 1 didn’t need a sequel, it wrapped up all the loose ends, the protagonist escapes and everybody leaves the game with a smile on their face, except for the dead people. Despite all of this, they made a sequel anyway and are even deciding to make a third instalment in what can now be called a series. Make no mistake, Bioshock 2 is a really good game but it just falters in the shadow of its Big Daddy. There was no reason for Bioshock 2 to exist other than because all the R&D and level design and pretty much everything could be taken from Bioshock 1 and just enhanced and augmented. It was a lazy decision on the part of 2K which is perhaps why the main man behind Bioshock 1 and its story, Ken Levine, was not part of the Bioshock 2 team. He saw that 2K were about to milk a good concept and ducked out.

There are some unexpected sequels which do make sense because they add to what the first had due to new breakthroughs in technology or fine-tune and perfect on what was seen in the first such as Just Cause 2 with its greatly advanced freedom and physics but these are the exception rather than the rule. For this reason I await Arkham Asylum 2  and InFamous 2 with mixed emotions because I really liked both games and would love to see more of the same (I am human after all) but know that there is great potential for a Transformers 2 fiasco where all that developers do is take what people really liked from the first game and copy-paste it everywhere and then stick things in which completely ruin the game, but are there, because everybody wanted them, such as the chance to fly the Batwing around an obstacle course or some other really conspicuously unnecessary bit of gameplay. There is also great potential for a truly great game in both cases due to the chances that the developers took with the originals and what was ultimately produced.

Now the thing about franchises that I hate the most is the potential for milking and how after the first time, it just becomes too easy to keep producing generic games. I would really like to say that Star Wars and the Jabba lookalike known as George Lucas is the only example of this but unfortunately it’s everywhere. When’s the last time that you saw a game with Mario or Sonic that was not a lot like the last one. These games sell, not because they’re amazingly good or really original but because of who is in them. It’s like those weak rom-coms that women watch; they’re all the same but they watch it because ‘Oh, it’s got Sandra Bullock ‘(hey, she actually won an Oscar (I think)). How many Star Wars have we had to endure just because Lucas was making money from it, hopefully Force Unleashed 2 will redeem the franchise somewhat. These games keep getting made because at the core there are elements or gameplay which make it really nice but nothing really gets added to these likable elements, instead they just get reproduced over and over again and people keep buying the games because they still want that feeling that they first felt all those years ago when they first wielded a light-sabre or stomped on a mushroom; make no mistake this is a very serious addiction get these people some help.

Games like Street Fighter are different because they are sort of just brought out to exist on each new console that comes out. We see a new version of games like these every few years and then maybe an update a few years later but ultimately the game is still very much the same as when the first one came out. This does apply to Super Mario because Nintendo churn out another Super Mario game every year. Racers & Shooters are a mixed bunch; some franchises have a new title every few years some only once in a while but ultimately they never really die. They are constantly updated and upgraded in terms of graphics and the latest guns/ cars/ both. This is because we play these games just for the enjoyment and experience that they deliver and so want that experience to constantly be up-to-date with the latest machines and best graphics because it is indeed racers & shooters which tend to push our perceptions of pixellated beauty. Although some franchises abuse their popularity *cough* Need for Speed *cough* and throw a game at us every year or two even if it’s actually worse than the last one. Just a word of caution: watch out for COD / Modern Warfare because the one is headed for some really bad games while the other is headed for a lot of milking.

To sum it all up, trilogies and planned story-arcs are very kosher but don’t just throw in some unknown plot-twist to keep the franchise alive. If nobody expects a sequel, think very hard about whether you actually need to make one or get to work on a new IP. Finally, don’t keep making Star Wars games that are pretty much the same with a new number or name stuck on no matter how popular they are*. So get back on that bong and dream up the next Star Wars Mr Lucas, figuratively speaking since encouraging a new Star wars would just go against a lot of what I just said so dream up something that will be as big.

*Racers, Shooters & Fighters are exempted from this statement

RELATED CONTENT

Name: A-G Sonday
Location: Cape Town
Position: Editor, News

  • reV

    An article with the words “Franchise”, “Milking” and Final Fantasy was not mentioned? I’m in shock.

  • Nexorsist

    Final Fantasy wouldn’t be mentioned because Square Enix make a BRAND NEW story for every game, they spend A LOT of time and effort in delivering that story to you in mouth-dripping gorgeous visuals. The only thing Final Fantasy does is keep the same game-play mechanisms and brings you everything else new. (This obviously changed after Final Fantasy X)

  • http://egamer.co.za/ Tody

    I’m with Nexorsist, you can’t really count Final Fantasy games in, because not only do they deliver excellence with practically every game, but they also create entirely new gameplay concepts, stories and worlds for the various games. Practically no two games are identical :grin:

    Unless reV is being sarcastic of course, in that he expected Final Fantasy to be mentioned, but whatever :razz:

  • Nitrate

    Rev always mentions FF that’s why he’s cool. He should be our designated FF guy.. If you have a problem, he’ll be able to help out.

    Anyway, back on topic.

    Well, usually, money turns the world. Okay, not usually it does. So if something does well, there is always place for a sseeeeeeequuuuuuueeeeellllll