Franchise Death

[Wesker_Chick]

What in the hell is happening to our beloved franchises? Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, Silent Hill, Alone In The Dark...the list goes on. When a formula works and the game sells huge the way it is, why change things and make it worse?

Resident Evil 5 - Big middle finger to the fans.
Devil May Cry 4 - WTF happened to Dante?
Silent Hill Homecoming - When did Silent Hill become less about atmosphere and more about nurses?
Alone In The Dark - HAVING TO BLINK...nuff said...

What about everyone else, what do you think?

 

[TheBluesader]

Matter of opinion. Lots of people really like RE5 and DMC4.

Personally, I've never really liked any of those franchises from the start, or the idea of franchises in general, so blerrgha on the whole thing.

...Unless it's the Total War series, or Fallout. But they are not franchises - they are serieseses. HUGE difference.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Resident Evil 5 wasn't bad. Sure no zombies and more action orientated but if you do judge it has an action game it's pretty good. But RE5 is not a horror game, and by the looks of it never will be one again.

 

[wgreer25]

What in the hell is happening to our beloved franchises? Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, Silent Hill, Alone In The Dark...the list goes on. When a formula works and the game sells huge the way it is, why change things and make it worse?

Resident Evil 5 - Big middle finger to the fans.
Devil May Cry 4 - WTF happened to Dante?
Silent Hill Homecoming - When did Silent Hill become less about atmosphere and more about nurses?
Alone In The Dark - HAVING TO BLINK...nuff said...

What about everyone else, what do you think?

Agree with you on SH and AitD, but not on RE5 and DMC4.

DMC4 was a little different (new character), but still very good. The new character was just Dante with grab moves. Way better than DMC2.

RE5 is exactly like RE4 exept the pesky little ***** that keeps following you now has guns. So your arguement of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" doesn't apply at all. And how is it a middle finger to the fans? I am a fan, loved it. Have many friends who are fans, they loved it. To me, this was a game that will only appeal to fans since the controls didn't change from RE4.

 

[Wesker_Chick]

Resident Evil 5 wasn't bad. Sure no zombies and more action orientated but if you do judge it has an action game it's pretty good. But RE5 is not a horror game, and by the looks of it never will be one again.

And there is the problem, Resident Evil has always been "Survival Horror". Now it's an action game like every other game out there. And to be honest I didn't even think it was very good by action game standards. I disliked it for more than just the storyline.

Agree with you on SH and AitD, but not on RE5 and DMC4.

DMC4 was a little different (new character), but still very good. The new character was just Dante with grab moves. Way better than DMC2.

RE5 is exactly like RE4 exept the pesky little ***** that keeps following you now has guns. So your arguement of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" doesn't apply at all. And how is it a middle finger to the fans? I am a fan, loved it. Have many friends who are fans, they loved it. To me, this was a game that will only appeal to fans since the controls didn't change from RE4.

The fact that is like RE4...EXACTLY like RE4...as in all we did was move it to Africa and had Wesker imitate Krauser...is what kills me about this game. I understand that zombies can't last forever, don't get me wrong, but wtf?

And, to be honest, most of the poeple I've talked to disliked both controls and story. I've been a fan since the PSone days, when the opening was live action. When the creator slams the game, you know something is wrong.

DMC4 is ok, but Nero...no, bring back Dante full time and send Nero back to his girlfriend where he belongs.

 

[SuperFelix]

Resident Evil 5 wasn't bad. Sure no zombies and more action orientated but if you do judge it has an action game it's pretty good. But RE5 is not a horror game, and by the looks of it never will be one again.

And there is the problem, Resident Evil has always been "Survival Horror". Now it's an action game like every other game out there. And to be honest I didn't even think it was very good by action game standards. I disliked it for more than just the storyline.

It has always been survival horror, but Shinji Mikami, the creator of the series, originally wanted an over the shoulder camera but couldn't because of the limited capabilities of the PS1. As he made 4, that game went in the direction he would have wanted I'm sure. However, as he didn't have a hand in Resi 5, then that probably did deviate too far from the original formula. I enjoyed it though, as I did 2, 3, 4 and Outbreak, so it isn't a big middle finger to me.

 

[Internet Kraken]

I disagree. Just because something works doesn't mean you should always stick with it. You never discover new and interesting game types if you don't experiment with your games.

Deviating from the original formula can bring both success and failure.

 

[Wesker_Chick]

I total agree that some things can and should change, given the change in hardware. But you should never sacrifice story and immersion in favor of a new idea.

Look at Silent Hill, pacing and atmosphere has always been #1 with that game. The idea and feeling of being completely alone in a creepy and sometimes hostile environment was what made the game so freaking spooky. With Homecoming and Origins, it feels more like an action game with big titted nurses.

 

[SmilingKitsune]

Silent hill Homecoming is just a big pile of fan-service, "hey look it's pyramid head, for no reason other than every-one loves him/it".
And while I'm aware I'm qouting Yhatzee here, the big breasted nurses are the result of James' frustrated sexuality, why are they in Homecoming?
I'm just going to pretend it doesn't exist.

 

[Gladion]

People used to complain about Resident Evil stagnating too much, and rightfully so. Practically, up until Resident Evil 4, it's just been the same game over and over again. Besides, I didn't consider Resident Evil to be truly scary since I've become 15 years old. Condemned, Silent Hill and Fatal Frame (Project Zero) just beat it. Not saying they were bad games, but the change was desperately needed.

What's wrong with Devil May Cry 4? Okay, you don't get the same main character most of the time, but that doesn't make the game worse in my opinion. Except that the game was unnecessary since they had almost perfected the gameplay when they had made Devil May Cry 3, but oh well, it was alright.

Why they did that to Silent Hill, I don't know. Possibly they thought American developers would do better and improve the series (lol at that). Or maybe they wanted the next entry in the series to be more mainstream. But I think they knew this was a risk, otherwise they wouldn't have saved the name "Silent Hill 5". I guess they'll just make a 'real' Silent Hill 5 in Japan, ignoring Homecoming and pretend it never existed altogether.

I total agree that some things can and should change, given the change in hardware. But you should never sacrifice story and immersion in favor of a new idea.

That's what you say but I think differently. In a market that offers so little changes, you definetly should - no, need - to experiment, even if that could contradict with the thing you planned beforehand. If it enhances the experience, great - if it doesn't, at least you'll know better next time. Besides, game's stories are just plain shit (yes, I know there are exceptions, don't name them), so there won't be anything to sacrifice on that part anyways.

 

[JuniperIsAPlant]

Yeah... I like RE5, and DMC4 was just as fun to me as the first and third of the series, which makes it ten times better than the second. Really I don't think either of these count as Franchise deaths. The other two though I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Wesker_Chick]

My biggest issue with RE5 is the plain and simple fact that to me (my opinion) it's a slap in the face to fans of the series. And not to be an asshole, but I'm talking about fans since before the movies, the first games. It's so damned cliche, with the ending and the storyline. Yea let's tie up some loose ends but throwing together a story, then hoping it makes sense...oh and lets' do nothing new except strafing and adding a partner character that is more pain in the ass than help. Besides, who can really give a shit about a main character that is a whinny *****?

To be honest one of the things I like about the series was the story. If a game doesn't give you a reason to play it, to connect with the character, what is the point? Sure wandering around killing people is nice and all, but I want a reason for doing it besides the obvious.

My biggest issue with DMC 4 is Nero...he's just kinda annoying to me. I mean DMC was awesome...DMC2 sucked horribly...3 was perfect...4 is milking the series.

Sometimes is just time to say no and end the damn series before it becomes someone's *****...like Sonic, the poor thing...

 

[Beltaine]

It's because when you hit a certain point in a franchise, you just can't make everybody happy.

If you repeat what you did before, you're not being innovative.

If you try and innovate, you've lost the feel of the franchise.

 

[Doomhammer828]

Games that ended franchises because they were bad

Mario Kart Wii (NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO)
Super Smash Brothers Brawl (CRAPPPPPPPPPPPPPP)
SSX Blur (...... technically SSX 3 killed it first but still)
Mario Party 8 (the ones after 3 weren't that great either but were at least playable)
Sonic (nuff said)

Game Franchises that need to stop NOW (before the above happens)

Super Mario games (the only one left that isn't a step backwards would be Super Mario Time)
Zelda (a Zelda game where he uses a train?!?!?!? for God's sakes Miyamoto)
Final Fantasy (you can only push your luck so far)
Resident Evil (same as reason above)