Ubisoft: "We'll only make games we can turn into franchises"

[Tupin]

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/201...nto_franchises

Proof that rising development costs are hurting the industry, if you ask me.

[Gameguy]

It's proof that these developers can't manage their money properly anymore.

[Atarileaf]

So is "franchise" a clever term for "we'll make the same crap year after year with just a few slight changes, a number after the name, and throw an AAA price on it - sucker"?

[Alpha2099]

It's proof that developers lack innovation. If all you can do is the same thing over and over 3-5 times, why bother?

[The Adventurer]

It's proof that developers lack innovation. If all you can do is the same thing over and over 3-5 times, why bother?

Because the majority of people who buy games are an unimaginative lot.

[Guyra]

I have to agree with The Adventurer on that. I lost faith in humanity a long time ago.

[Words iManifest]

I rarely ever say this about anybody/anything but I really despise Ubisoft and their crappy flag collecting simulator Assassin's Creed games...not to mention what they did to the new Rayman rubs me in all the wrong ways.

[Edmond Dantes]

Because the majority of people who buy games are an unimaginative lot.

To be honest, I sometimes wonder:

Is it that people want these games, or is it that they don't have any alternative?

We folks of the internet often forget that the vast majority of people don't know anything about eBay, Amazon, or other such internet markets and will likely never hear of something unless its on a shelf at Wal-Mart (and Wal-Mart will pretty much never stock anything not by a AAA developer). Before people can want something, they have to know it exists.

[Greg2600]

So is "franchise" a clever term for "we'll make the same crap year after year with just a few slight changes, a number after the name, and throw an AAA price on it - sucker"?

Why not, working out so well for Hollywood these days.....

[Atarileaf]

Why not, working out so well for Hollywood these days.....

Grown Ups 2 anyone?

[Nature Boy]

Proof that rising development costs are hurting the industry, if you ask me.

I disagree, in that I don't see the industry hurting.

It might depend on what metrics you want to use to define what hurting actually means, but overall sales aren't falling (and that's what I would use).

The industry has definitely split (and continues to) into large and small players, but I think it's a good thing. The big boys can give us the big, massively expensive franchise games, whereas the smaller studios can give us the smaller stuff that is innovative and franchise free.

We still get the best of both worlds, and we will still get new franchises, they just have to be something the big boys can build a brand around.

[Daltone]

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/201...nto_franchises

Proof that rising development costs are hurting the industry, if you ask me.

I'm confused - isn't a franchise what most big selling writers, games publishers, film producers etc have been after for years? Why is this news?

[kupomogli]

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/201...nto_franchises

Proof that rising development costs are hurting the industry, if you ask me.

How are rising development costs hurting now more than they did in the past? Gaming is bigger than every, they've got more ways to make money, more multiconsole titles more than they have in the past, etc. Develolpers/publishers are getting more sales than ever.

Now days 95% of games are multiconsole where as maybe 10% were multiconsole in the past. The average game might cost $1-$20 million to develop, but they're selling them across two or three different consoles plus PC. They're selling all this DLC. Collector's Editions items are no longer free preorders like they were in the past. You now pay premium prices for some cheap as hell extras.

Also take into account that today the cost of the dollar is cheaper. Final Fantasy 7 was $45 million back then, so $65 million today.

[duffmanth]

I have nothing against a game being turned into a long running series, as long as it stays fresh and innovative like Metal Gear, Mario, Zelda etc. When it becomes stagnant and repetitive as fuck like God of War, Call of Duty among others, is when it hurts the industry.

[kupomogli]

I have nothing against a game being turned into a long running series, as long as it stays fresh and innovative like Metal Gear, Mario, Zelda etc. When it becomes stagnant and repetitive as fuck like God of War, Call of Duty among others, is when it hurts the industry.

This is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It basically reads

I have nothing against a game being turned into a long running series, stagnant and repetitive or not as long as it's a game I like, such as Metal Gear, Mario, Zelda etc. When it's a game I don't like, such as God of War, Call of Duty among others, is when it hurts the industry.

Sorry, but there's very little difference between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 3. I've never played more than five minutes of Metal Gear Solid 4 at a friends so I won't act like I have, but the third game is pretty much the first game with more diverse areas, camo, and stuff to fix broken bones, cuts, burns, etc. Metal Gear Solid is a lot like Metal Gear but in 3D.

I'm not a fan of God of War or Call of Duty, but except for Mario, I'm also not blind that the ones you listed are the same rehashes again and again. The difference between Mario and the others is that the most recent ones aren't good games. I'd rather have good repetitive new releases rather than an innovative overrated pos games like Super Mario 3D Land.

[Daltone]

This is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It basically reads



Sorry, but there's very little difference between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 3. I've never played more than five minutes of Metal Gear Solid 4 at a friends so I won't act like I have, but the third game is pretty much the first game with more diverse areas, camo, and stuff to fix broken bones, cuts, burns, etc. Metal Gear Solid is a lot like Metal Gear but in 3D.

I'm not a fan of God of War or Call of Duty, but except for Mario, I'm also not blind that the ones you listed are the same rehashes again and again. The difference between Mario and the others is that the most recent ones aren't good games. I'd rather have good repetitive new releases rather than an innovative overrated pos games like Super Mario 3D Land.

This.

[Gameguy]

Basically sequels are alright as long as they're made well. Making sequels has been a standard practice since the early arcade days, look at Breakout and Super Breakout as a couple examples.

Making sequels when you've run out of ideas on how to improve the gameplay or continue the story properly is the problem, then it's just a cash grab. Looking at movies just look at The Terminator. The direct sequel to this is often considered to be better than the original, then more sequels came out which are complete garbage and ruined the series. The problem with most video game franchises today is that they're beyond beating a dead horse, yet they're still going on anyway. Either they're not improving the way the games play, or they're story based yet they've already dragged out the story past where it should have ended. Even with keeping the same gameplay, sequels are then basically just level expansions. There comes a point when you run out of ideas to make good level designs and the quality begins to suffer, either with repeating the same designs or producing terrible new ones. Don't let your series become the Death Wish of video games.

[Daltone]

This is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It basically reads



Sorry, but there's very little difference between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 3. I've never played more than five minutes of Metal Gear Solid 4 at a friends so I won't act like I have, but the third game is pretty much the first game with more diverse areas, camo, and stuff to fix broken bones, cuts, burns, etc. Metal Gear Solid is a lot like Metal Gear but in 3D.

I'm not a fan of God of War or Call of Duty, but except for Mario, I'm also not blind that the ones you listed are the same rehashes again and again. The difference between Mario and the others is that the most recent ones aren't good games. I'd rather have good repetitive new releases rather than an innovative overrated pos games like Super Mario 3D Land.

This.

[LaughingMAN.S9]

This is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It basically reads



Sorry, but there's very little difference between Metal Gear Solid and Metal Gear Solid 3. I've never played more than five minutes of Metal Gear Solid 4 at a friends so I won't act like I have, but the third game is pretty much the first game with more diverse areas, camo, and stuff to fix broken bones, cuts, burns, etc. Metal Gear Solid is a lot like Metal Gear but in 3D.

I'm not a fan of God of War or Call of Duty, but except for Mario, I'm also not blind that the ones you listed are the same rehashes again and again. The difference between Mario and the others is that the most recent ones aren't good games. I'd rather have good repetitive new releases rather than an innovative overrated pos games like Super Mario 3D Land.

Metal gear solid 1 is nothing like metal gear solid 3, not in setting, not in characters, not in story not in gameplay or graphics and just barely similar in theme


Metal gear solid 2 on the other hand is very very similar to mgs1 and this was by design for the purposes of plot

[Press_Start]

This is full of all sorts of hypocrisy. It basically reads


I'm not a fan of God of War or Call of Duty, but except for Mario, I'm also not blind that the ones you listed are the same rehashes again and again. The difference between Mario and the others is that the most recent ones aren't good games. I'd rather have good repetitive new releases rather than an innovative overrated pos games like Super Mario 3D Land.

So the guy you called out for trying to pass his opinion as fact then passed your own dam opinion as fact. Hypocrite much?