How Far Can A Franchise Push You (Before You Just Quit)?

[rob_simple]

I will never understand people who let themselves get so emotionally invested in a series. You were disgusted by it? Build a bridge and get over it.

I love the Ratchet and Clank series but I didn't pick up All 4 One because I only play games by myself. I was disappointed that the series had, in my opinion, taken an unnecessary direction with the forced multiplayer, but I didn't put a hit out on select Insomniac staff members because it's not that important.

If there's a new R&C game comes out that goes back to formula then I'll get it, if they keep releasing multiplayer-forced stuff I won't buy it; but I'll still think Insomniac are a good company and hope they continue to do well in the future.

 

[Doneeee]

Also if Assassin's Creed hadn't changed protagonist this time I would've given up on it, but thankfully it did.

Yeah as a big AC fan I too got tired of Ezio Auditore de la la la.

There was a time (around 2006) when I would have been insanely excited to hear about a new Resident Evil game, but I am sad to say that effective immediately I am no longer a fan of the franchise.

I honestly used to love the series (hence my user name) but I just don't care about RE anymore. Resident evil can't really get me excited but I am still cautiously optimistic for RE6.

 

[hoboman29]

Devil May Cry: A perfect case of Capcom bullshit. I would be fine if 5 was about a different character or something but calling this a reboot is like calling Half Life a CoD clone. I got through 4 knowing that the combat would get more complex than smash the attack button but in 5 it doesn't seem that you can play as DMC3 Dante or something. If they do make DMC 6 the only acceptable thing it could be is an apology note and a game about the secret ending in 3.

 

[White_Lama]

Call of duty, 1(UO too)+2 were good, 3 was horrible, 4 was amazing, 5 was meh, 6+ dead for me.

Basicly what he said, except that every game after United Offensive was rubbish.

Damn bastards removed my .30 cal, sprint and tanks in CoD 2. And after that it just went downhill and into "current warfare".

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

Call of Duty is probably the most prominent. Only played 4-7 (I'm just a child compared to all you ancient wise ones aren't I?) and 4 and 5 were good but then it just went downhill from there. Also played the campaigns of the first two on PC and just going from that they were pretty darn good.

 

[Stryc9]

For me Red Alert 3 was kind of the end for the C&C franchise with me and C&C 4 totally killed it when they announced the completely stupid system they were putting in place that involved a leveling up prestige system like Call of Duty to unlock good units and that there was no base building I was done. I didn't even buy it because it wasn't a C&C game anymore.

I'm even less excited about this new free to play Generals 2 pile of garbage they announced a while back, way to take one of your best franchises and just grind it into the ground EA.

 

[Pink Gregory]

For me Red Alert 3 was kind of the end for the C&C franchise with me and C&C 4 totally killed it when they announced the completely stupid system they were putting in place that involved a leveling up prestige system like Call of Duty to unlock good units and that there was no base building I was done. I didn't even buy it because it wasn't a C&C game anymore.

I'm even less excited about this new free to play Generals 2 pile of garbage they announced a while back, way to take one of your best franchises and just grind it into the ground EA.

They WHAAAAA?!

It's kind of fallible in an FPS, but an RTS?

Surely that couldn't work unless the unlockables were completely token, like skins or something; and even then that'd not really have much point.

I can sort of get how 'no base building' *could* work (a la Dawn of War II), but unlocking (and by association, locking) units through prestige?

And as a fan of C&C Generals; I'm ambivalent, I'm not sure how an F2P/microtransactions (because EA) model could work for an RTS (and still be balanced/good), and I've still got the first to go back to, just seems an odd decision.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I pretty mcuh like that right now with the Legend of Zelda franchise. Skyward Sword was a huge dissapointment to me. Granted as long the next game still remain to be a big explore world than splitting up up into closed sections than I may consdier it.

 

[Gone Rampant]

I thought I'd given up on the Halo franchise after Reach, I was close to the highest kill multiplier medal (I think I was on 8) and had the last two in my sights when some gimp drove in front of my tank shot in a fully loaded warthog, meaning I got a triple betrayal and a swift boot. Was single-handedly defending the last objective and they went and did that. I traded it in for Cooking Mama 3 the next day.

Pretty much the same to me. Reach has the WORST multiplayer in the franchise (Short of abotu 5 playlists and Co-Op Campaign), yet I still play the crap out of 3 (Shameless plugging- wanna play 3 or ODST on campaign? Looking for Legendary, and my Gamertag is the same as the profile name), and while I initially bought ODST for the Hale 3 multiplayer disc, I now love it.

Otherwise, Battlefield made me sell my copy after GameStop couldn't be assed to give me an online pass WHEN THERE WAS NO OTHER SHEETS IN THE FUCKING BOX, the campaign sucked and the DLC became overpriced- still love Bad Company 2, though. Except for the fact that it got a perfect circle scratch when a relative kicked the XBOX over during a hectic Rush battle... *Sigh* God, I miss that game.

 

[Zing]

We'll see after I play Dragon Age III, I guess.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

As I said in the other thread:

River Song.

River Song is the exact distance I can be pushed before I stop reacting to a franchise.

More specifically, River Song added to an incompetent Doctor multiplied by three awful long term seasons minus one redeeming side character squared by a massively character decayed companion.

Or to put it simply, everything since RTD left.

No gaming examples yet though.

 

[walhallafive]

I wouldn't go nearly as far to say "I'll never buy one again," but Final Fantasy doesn't get a free pass anymore. I could still buy a Final Fantasy game, but I'll need to read reviews and see demos to do so. FFXIV is what put me over the edge. I know it's an MMO and isn't in the same category as the main series, but it was so bad, and so disappointing, That the studio as a whole lost my vote of confidence. Square Enix is kinda like that smoking hot chick that is off her rocker crazy. You really want it to work with her, but eventually you get tired of the crap.

 

[lacktheknack]

Going console-exclusive seems to do the trick pretty well.

If not that, though, then...

<spoiler=Rayman>Rayman almost did it, with the spectacular first game, the dark, edgy and somehow better second game, the third game which balanced the first two, and then they highjacked the series and put in a bunch of rabbits.

I'm sorry, "Rabbids".

Whoooooooo.

So the "I Quit" mark would be the point that they highjack a series and make two games about stupid side characters that were never mentioned before, and feel like they're using the series for brand recognition alone.

BUT, they recovered by releasing Rayman Origins, one of the few games-worth-buying-on-PC that Ubisoft has released in years! WHOOOOOOOOOOO!

...And now they're going Wii-U exclusive for Rayman Legends.

Balls.

<spoiler=Tomb Raider>What it was: A series about an archaeologist with tremendous thighs and frankly irresponsible breasts (I died multiple times from a arrow going directly through her boobs) navigating platform puzzles and angry animals/people.

Where it went wrong: While the story got ludicrous (the fifth game took place over Lara's funeral, basically), it somehow hit the absolute bottom with genuine awfulness with game six. I took one look at the reviews and said "NOPE".

Did They Fix It?: Yes. They completely abandoned the stupid, stupid story they had going, and added two characters that I quite like.

 

[LittleJoeRambler]

For me Red Alert 3 was kind of the end for the C&C franchise with me and C&C 4 totally killed it when they announced the completely stupid system they were putting in place that involved a leveling up prestige system like Call of Duty to unlock good units and that there was no base building I was done. I didn't even buy it because it wasn't a C&C game anymore.

I'm even less excited about this new free to play Generals 2 pile of garbage they announced a while back, way to take one of your best franchises and just grind it into the ground EA.

They WHAAAAA?!

It's kind of fallible in an FPS, but an RTS?

Surely that couldn't work unless the unlockables were completely token, like skins or something; and even then that'd not really have much point.

I can sort of get how 'no base building' *could* work (a la Dawn of War II), but unlocking (and by association, locking) units through prestige?

And as a fan of C&C Generals; I'm ambivalent, I'm not sure how an F2P/microtransactions (because EA) model could work for an RTS (and still be balanced/good), and I've still got the first to go back to, just seems an odd decision.

C&C 4 gives you basic units to start with, and you don't unlock your Mammoth Tanks/heavy bombers etc. until you level up by GRINDING THE GODDAMN MULTIPLAYER. The way they "balanced" it was to add a population cap and make bigger stuff cost more, so that your basic units in larger numbers are roughly equivalent to the big stuff.

I can appreciate what they were trying to do by removing base building and making your factory/construction yard mobile, but it just didn't feel like a true C&C game anymore, and it also killed the series for me.

Company of Heroes Online was, I think, a decent model for a F2P RTS. It needed balancing badly, but since it died after so little time I can't really hold a grudge against it. It was great fun to play and made different doctrines more distinct, rather than just stacking a few abilities and units on top of a vanilla faction.

 

[Manji187]

Final Fantasy XII was the last FF I played (meh). Final Fantasy IX was the last FF I finished (several times actually). FF X did not sit well with me, for some reason I couldn't care less what happened to any of its characters.

And as for XIII (or XIII-2 for that matter)...fuhhgetaboutit. Not touching that with a 10 foot pole.

I guess I've gradually become apathetic toward the franchise.

 

[excalipoor]

I'm Squenix's little *****. I gave up on FFXIII shortly after reaching Gran Pulse. I played FFXIII-2 for a few hours the other day, and have no intention of picking it up again. Oh, and I pre-ordered the limited collectors editions of both, as well as the collectors edition of FFXIV. I'll probably bend over and buy whatever comes next too, and kick myself in the head after.

What happened to Nomura, Kitase and Toriyama? They used to be cool...

 

[remnant_phoenix]

I was introduced to Final Fantasy with the PS1 titles when I was 16 and I loved it. I have since played all the (non-MMO main series) games from start to finish.

The last one that I REALLY enjoyed was FFX. FFXII was solid enough, but didn't really impress me. FFXIII was the most disappointing game I've ever played.

I'm willing to play FF Versus XIII, but if that game doesn't hook me, I'm kissing the franchise goodbye.

 

[Smooth Operator]

It all depends on the attitude, if devs fuck up massively and say "shit went down we didn't want but next time it will be better" then it's all good, I will come back to see how you do next.
But if they fuck up and maintain it all went perfectly... then we just got no more to discuss, if the devs don't get what went wrong then there is no chance of fixing the games.

 

[Imthatguy]

For me Red Alert 3 was kind of the end for the C&C franchise with me and C&C 4 totally killed it when they announced the completely stupid system they were putting in place that involved a leveling up prestige system like Call of Duty to unlock good units and that there was no base building I was done. I didn't even buy it because it wasn't a C&C game anymore.

I'm even less excited about this new free to play Generals 2 pile of garbage they announced a while back, way to take one of your best franchises and just grind it into the ground EA.

They WHAAAAA?!

It's kind of fallible in an FPS, but an RTS?

Surely that couldn't work unless the unlockables were completely token, like skins or something; and even then that'd not really have much point.

I can sort of get how 'no base building' *could* work (a la Dawn of War II), but unlocking (and by association, locking) units through prestige?

And as a fan of C&C Generals; I'm ambivalent, I'm not sure how an F2P/microtransactions (because EA) model could work for an RTS (and still be balanced/good), and I've still got the first to go back to, just seems an odd decision.

Are you aware they've dropped the Generals subtitle and it only going by 'Command and COnquer' now?

 

[Mirroga]

The God of War series, that I loved, is still keeping on making prequels when the finale of the franchise's story has already been finished. It's feels like I'm being reminded of Star Wars Episode 1-3.

Also, indirectly as I've never played the games before, the Halo franchise. The original developers already ended the story of Halo and Microsoft just gave the franchise to another developer so they can milk a franchise dead.