agreed, these threads turn into flame monsters for "what popular game you think is garbage?" instead of actually over milked things. and i would agree on the halo thing 100%, up until e3 announcements halo was not over milked, especially compared to quite a few out there.Mr. Omega said:Sports franchises. Easy. But for a less obvious choice:
Now I would not have said Halo and would defend it... until E3 this year.
Remember how Halo 3 was advertised as "FINISH THE FIGHT."? I understood Wars, ODST and Reach, because they were just spin-offs. And I would have even understood 4. But they also announced 5. And 6. And Halo Anniversary Edition. In less than 2 hours, Microsoft announce FOUR Halo games.
And you can't even use the same defense you can use for Mario. For Mario, they are in different genres (This year we have Mario Kart, Paper Mario and Mario 3DS. A racing game, an RPG and a platformer. 3 very different types of games.), different systems (not the case this time, but usually true), use different mechanics and typically have a different selling point. Not the case with Halo. They are all FPS titles. They will all be on the 360 (Actually, I'm calling it now: Halo 6 will try to be the system-seller for the next XBox.). While there will be minor tweaks to the mechanics, it is unlikely there will be any significant gameplay differences in each game. The major selling point of each will be the franchise's multiplayer (not a bad thing, mind you...).
Also, the people picking Mario just makes me sigh at how predictable it's gotten on these kinds of threads... they ignore the obvious answers (see top of post) and go right for their favorite punching bag...
your 3rd point i couldn't quote for truth any harder unless i smashed my face into my computer screen right now, the only thing 99% of the games share is the publisher/developer, and the name "final fantasy", otherwise in their own respects they are completely different games every time unless completely pointed out from the start they are a spin off.Arqus_Zed said:1) The well-known sports games that bring out a new edition every year with a set of 'new' features the size of a DLC add-on.
2) The big Nintendo franchises.
The way they keep whoring out their characters to all sorts of spin-offs, abusing the fandom's nostalgia, never cutting the prices of their lead games... It's quite disturbing, really. Especially since most of those people think Nintendo is this nice, colorful, innocent company compared to the power-hungry Sony and Microsoft.
It always reminds me of "Mom Corp." from Futurama.
3) Not Final Fantasy.
Why? Because contrary to most Nintendo franchises, each Final Fantasy game is unique in almost every way (with exception of a few bad seeds like FF X-2, FF IV: The After Years and the soon-to-disappoint FF XIII-2). Except for the names of some spells and species, everything is different: characters, story, environments, style, setting, battle system, music, menus, etc.
Sure, Square-Enix might be a nasty corporation these days: publishing some bad games, overpricing remakes, putting out C&D's on fan-created games, releasing FF XIV all buggy, making FF XIII an interactive movie... But you still can't blame them for not trying something new. If Nintendo were making Final Fantasy, we'd still be stuck with FF I mechanics.
The only and obvious exception to all this being the Final Fantasy VII Compendium, that's genuine 'milking out' right there. They really should have just kept it at one game. And, possibly in the future, the Final Fantasy XIII games.