Can popular franchises end, even if their successful or not?

[Psych the Psycho]

I've been thinking back to a moment when I was reading a gaming magazine whenI saw a small piece that talked about the script for the FINAL character of Mass Effect [3] being finished, firstly this was about a month after Mass Effect 2 (the XBOX 360/PC vision) and secondly if anyone was not unaware of this but Bioware is making Mass Effect 4.

Even though the ME trilogy did end quite messy; the franchise is still being drained to put out more games. And Mass Effect is just one examlpe, the big one being Call of Duty then there's Assassin's Creed, Mario, Final Fantasy etc.

The main problem this causes, besides milking, is a lack of innovation. Though, there VERY rare expections like Far Cry 3 which was unrelated to previous games, in a good way, it was a stand-alone story which give the developers freedom do what they want.

This is also problem in the movie industry, Jim and Bob sum this up best:

Jim on "Franchises"
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7759-Sequel-or-Slaughter

Bob on "Originality"
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/7674-The-New-Originals

I liked to hear people's opinion on this, should Franchises start ending or keep going or take the Far Cry 3 route?

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

I liked to hear people's opinion on this, should Franchises start ending or keep going or take the Far Cry 3 route?

I find it hard to answer this, there are some franchise that deserve to continue, and others that don't.

How do we decided which ones go to the chopping block? Is there an international comity of videogame franchises to consult? What parameters or checkboxes should be imposed to determin if a franchise should be ended? How can we do all this and make it a fair choice. When decisions have to be made by humans, and since all humans have naturally different opinions, how do we decide whether or not there should be a Call of Duty 10 or Final Fantasy 100?

The only thing I can do at a consumer level is support the franchises I like by purchasing them, and just completely disregard ones I don't care about.

 

[sethisjimmy]

My problem is sometimes with the starting of franchises that should just be left as standalone games.

I think the gaming community is kinda weird about sequels. And I can see why. I mean, compared to movies, games can actually make good sequels. In fact, often game sequels are actually way better than the originals, because games often have somewhat more objective qualities to improve on, in the form of gameplay.

On the other hand, the community is somewhat demanding and crazy about them. For instance, if a new original game comes out, and people enjoy it, it gets good reviews etc, the question almost immediately will be "when is the sequel coming out". Typically nobody considers that maybe the game is a great standalone experience that should be left alone to stay golden, it's always "this is good, therefore I demand there be more of it". You'll see hundreds of lists online like "Top ten games that deserve sequels" which is the weird assumption that somehow a game is selling itself short by not wanting to continue an open and shut style story.

Which again, I understand. I've never really demanded a sequel, but it just so happens that a ton of my favorite games are sequels anyway. Sequels often are an opportunity to improve and fine tune mechanics while adding new features and continuing stories.

However, there are also a few games I really love where I definitely don't want to see a sequel. The story is concluded, or the world is really self-contained, and I feel like the game should just be left alone instead of artificially extended or rebooted. I don't think it should be default normal for a good game to be expected to have a sequel. If the developer is up for it, sure. Sequels incurred naturally and organically are great. But I don't think there's much point in pressuring a certain developer to make a sequel where one isn't necessary, or when they don't want to. You're basically saying, go ahead, milk this quality for all its monetary worth so the fandom gets some short term enjoyment.

 

[Bellvedere]

I'd like to see more new IPs, but that doesn't necessarily mean less franchises. There's definitely worlds and characters that I think are worth exploring further.

Franchises should end when the developers are tired of it, or the audience is. We only have control over the audience component, and for all the complaints seen about ANOTHER Call of Duty, or ANOTHER Assassin's Creed, the fact that these games as well as, Final Fantasy, Mario and Pokemon games are still selling like crazy means that there's a sizeable portion of the audience who aren't done with them yet.

 

[Hero of Lime]

From a business perspective as long as the franchise is profitable and keeps the company in good standing with gamers and critics alike, then it should continue.

From the consumer perspective, in a similar way, if the franchise still excites a large enough fanbase to keep purchasing the games, then it should continue. I personally do not care if an IP is "milked" as long as the milk is still tasty. If a company cares to make and continually try to innovate, yet keep the fundamentals that made the others so beloved, then I think they can keep making them. Besides, if lots of people like a game series, what gives someone who does not like the series the right to call on the developer to stop the franchise just because it doesn't wow them personally.

For example, many people would want Nintendo to either stop making so many Zelda games, or put new games on hiatus in exchange for new IPs. The likes of Shigeru Miyamoto and Eiji Anouma really care about what the direction of the series, and they love to work on the games, and the fans are eager to keep playing the new games. The games keep themselves separate from each other, yet keep the same themes and gameplay mechanics, which is why I think it has lasted this long.