My video game theory.

[jeremyTH]

I have a theory about video games.

It's that when a game franchise is sold to another company the first game the new company makes will be good.Ex:Spyro Enter the Dragonfly, Banjo&Kazooie Nuts&Bolts,etc.

I call it"Gem's law"

So, do you think I'm Right? Wrong? Somewhere inbetween?

 

[Swenglish]

Your theory is great. In theory. Remember Perfect Dark for the 360, made by Rare, the same company that made Banjo and Kazooie? Wasn't that great. The problem with "Gem's law" is that you can't be so naive that you excpect every game being released by a new company to be great. Sorry to say it, but: "No law without exceptions"

I call it: "Never-say-never law"

 

[K.B. Troopa]

I have a theory about video games.

It's that when a game franchise is sold to another company the first game the new company makes will be good.Ex:Spyro Enter the Dragonfly, Banjo&Kazooie Nuts&Bolts,etc.

I call it"Gem's law"

So, do you think I'm Right? Wrong? Somewhere inbetween?

Let me attempt to debunk your theory.

Silent Hill.

That was easy.

Also, all Spyro games not made by Insomniacs were terrible, possibly excepting that new series with Cynder....I've never played it.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Farcry - Crytek = good
Farcry2 - Ubisoft = lame

 

[The Random One]

How does Banjo & Kazooie fit in your theory? Isn't it being developed by Rareware? And isn't it not even out yet?

Anyway, at some time in the dark ages commonly called the nineties, some other company made a couple of Zelda games. They all sucked.

Your theory does have some merit though. When a new company gets a franchise, it's usually because they are fans of it and want to keep it from dying. That means that they both understand what makes the franchise 'tick' and what they should expand to meet the fans' desires (because they are fans themselves). So they do one good game, but afterwards they fail to expand on what they've built, as well as to capture what the original makers made with it that made it good to behin with. That, however, doesn't apply to ALL companies, and doesn't apply to franchises that are bought just to make money off it. So more than Gem's Law, you could call it Gem's Rule or Gem's Theory or whatever.

 

[josh797]

how about tomb raiders 1- angel of darkness, colossal failure after the first. eidos took it away from core and gave it to crystal dynamics, who have since brought two great games, anniversary and legend. and im excited for the third, Underworld

 

[jeremyTH]

Ok let me rethink "Gem's law"

That when a game franchise is sold to another company at least one game the new company makes will be average.

Also I was orginally with everyone else in the world who where saying that after spyro 3 all the games were shit. Then I said "Fuck it" and I went to say that all the spyro games after 4 were shit. Because I know we all hate the new series, and that we all hate Ember from spyro 5.

 

[Souplex]

Rare has always owned banjo and kazooie so that point is moot, they were just aquired by microsoft and now make games exculsively for them.

Capcom made two legend of zelda games, Oracle of ages and orcale of seasons and they were both quite fun.

Gunpei Yokoi has not developed a metroid game since super metroid due to being quite dead and yet Metroid Prime 3: Corruption has been scientifically proven as the greatest game ever.

 

[Swenglish]

Your theory is great. In theory. Remember Perfect Dark for the 360, made by Rare, the same company that made Banjo and Kazooie? Wasn't that great. The problem with "Gem's law" is that you can't be so naive that you excpect every game being released by a new company to be great. Sorry to say it, but: "No law without exceptions"

I call it: "Never-say-never law"

Except Rare also made Perfect Dark for the N64 didn't they?

And that was a rather fabulous game.

True. However, Perfect Dark for the 360 wasn't. I guess the game couldn't be a better example to prove that Gem's law doesn't work.

 

[sneak_copter]

Farcry - Crytek = good
Farcry2 - Ubisoft = lame

If you ask me Ubisoft has done a better job on Far Cry than Crytek did.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Farcry - Crytek = good
Farcry2 - Ubisoft = lame

If you ask me Ubisoft has done a better job on Far Cry than Crytek did.

No way Farcry was originality in gaming terms over the corridor shooters of the time whereas Farcry 2 is a FPS GTA clone but missing a goal driven story and most importantly fun