Are Publishers Mishandling Sequels?
by Benjamin Yoder, posted on 17 August 2011 / 3,601 Views
Sequels have been absorbing the industry as of late. Just look at the last E3. Plenty of sequels were found like Assassin’s Creed: Revelations, Modern Warfare 3, Uncharted 3, Resistance 3, Gears of War 3, and so on. Obviously, these franchises are big hits and companies want to keep pushing them. In the short term, it has been very successful with franchises over this generation, but the continuing development trends with these titles does seem to put the health of these franchises in jeopardy.
As of recent years, two seems to be the magic number when it comes to years a title stays in development, plus or minus depending on possible difficulties during development. This development time period seems acceptable for creating quality software that we can see in franchises like Call of Duty, Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed (though the latter has now gone to a shorter cycle). This timeline gives developers enough time to tighten the experience where the last title had suffered and add in features that may have not made the final cut in the previous title. Of course, some new features are thrown in here and there as well. Building off the foundation of its previous title, it makes a satisfying experience that not only reuses quality of the first title, but also builds upon it. It's like adding another level to a mansion. Despite the financial benefits, history has shown that this formula can only last so long.
What these titles usually end up lacking is a refreshing aspect. Sure, there are plenty of new features and do-dads thrown about in the title, but there's rarely that aspect that gives an entirely fresh feeling. So, hardcore gamers and journalists quickly turn to begging for new original titles to fill that void. Publishers are reluctant to do this because, without built-in following, two years or more of development could go to nothing, in some cases putting a developer or even the publisher itself at risk.
There is a middle ground that refreshing gameplay and tried and true formula can both meet at. Sequels today bring over the game experience from past titles into the sequel. What they should be doing is instead trying to bring over the spirit of a franchise into each entry. Thus creating an experience that not only falls in line with past entries, but isn't afraid to deviate from a specific formula. Developers can throw in little gimmicks to pretend they're changing things, but if a title is built heavily off of a previous entry, it doesn't work.
A good example of a title that carries the spirit instead of the game itself, is Super Mario Galaxy. Released in 2007, it brought back classic Mario action after he deviated in Sunshine with his water jetpack, Fludd. Galaxy didn't stop at just bringing the franchise's more traditional formula back and adding bigger and better levels, new moves or skills. Instead, it threw Mario in a different environment. That environment not only heavily affected the level designs of the title, but also how the game overall played. So while the classic star collecting, running and jumping Mario still remained in the title, the environment he traversed completely threw a wrench in the formula, creating an all new experience for gamers.
We've also seen franchises in the past that had started struggling, from releasing slight improvement over slight improvement, fix themselves by creating these familiar but new experiences. Resident Evil 4 basically relaunched that franchise. What Capcom didn't expect is that they couldn't cozy up to the Resident Evil 4 formula as long as the original, as by Resident Evil 5, critics had already started panning the series again for not making any sort of move forward. Other franchises haven't been so lucky, like the Prince of Persia franchise that was quickly ran into the ground last console generation. While sales of the franchise have yet to hit rock bottom, it still leaves quite a bit to be desired compared to the past successes.
Looking at the sequels of today, most are building off the past entries themselves rather than being built on the spirit of a franchise. In the short term, it works. However, looking at franchises like Prince of Persia and Resident Evil show that eventually, the franchise will either fall or need some sort of re-tinkering to become relevant again. Considering how many entries we are into some of these franchises, it sounds like that moment might come sooner rather than later. Looking at Nintendo's franchises will quickly show that sparse but quality releases keeps a franchise moving over the years. Although now even Mario seems to be falling prey to this to a certain extent. Will publishers change? No. Frequent releases definitely knock up the profit margin for a publisher. Just looking at Capcom's history and back catalog of franchises will show you how quickly quality names can be run into the ground.
17 Comments