[ALL] Too many sequels?

[Chrispy]

Assassin's Creed 10? 'I hope so,' says Ubisoft's Detoc

 

The core market isn't shrinking, says Ubisoft North America executive director Laurent Detoc -- it's just there's only room for high-end games. And if you own one of those brands, as Ubi does with Assassin's Creed, there's no such thing as too many sequels.

Does that mean the company would make an eighth, ninth, tenth installment in the prolific Assassin's Creed series? "I hope we will," Detoc told Gamasutra at E3. "I also hope we'll be able to branch out from within the franchise. It's very simple to me: There's no such thing as not being able to annualize a franchise. If it's good, people will come."

He also says the company's mobile and social strategy must be very prescriptive, and embrace the idea that what consumers want from a game experience is contextual and situational. Detoc likens it to film and television, where sometimes one might want an ad-supported 30-minute program at home, and at others one might be ready to pay for an experience at the movie theater.

The game industry has an advantage, though, in that it can leverage one product across multiple platforms (Ubisoft's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier has a Facebook companion in Ghost Recon: Commander). "We can make these games collaborate and communicate and use one to help the other," Detoc says. "But we also need to concentrate on making these products that stand on their own."

Ubisoft says it'll lend as much support to Nintendo's Wii U and other new technologies as it has in the past; having had a strong Wii strategy paid off for the company earlier this generation, and getting a jump on new hardware maximizes the time developers have to learn a platform.

"We're very supportive of Wii U, and we leave it to Nintendo to go and sell millions of machines," Detoc says lightly. "With the Wii, it was a sound choice for us to have been very supportive."

In Detoc's view, the hardware trend that seems to hybridize tablet and console gaming isn't a response to the tablet trend, but rather a continuation on what console-holders with portable platforms have been hoping to do for some time.

"It's a natural evolution of how we engage players; we're just taking advantage of new technology," he says of the hardware industry. "If it ties in with tablets, even better -- why not? It gives [consumers] the flexibility to play how and when they want; it's an all-you-can-eat menu."

But signs of massive transition are still everywhere. "The hardware is going to be replaced, and it's been a very long cycle," Detoc reflects. "I think that's partly an issue because there's been some fatigue from gamers who want the excitement of new hardware; they want to see that evolution."

Even the period after a new platform launch is still exciting to gamers because of the software leaps and bounds that can be seen early on. "Whereas now, the games just have to become bigger and bigger, rather than shine versus last year's games. [The industry] needs to finish this cycle properly and then start a new one," he says.

"I totally see HD gaming staying at the forefront of the industry," Detoc adds, explaining how one of his friends' first thoughts upon seeing the Watch Dogs presentation video was that it should become a movie. "That tells me we are getting into a level of expertise in production value that's making people dream, and it will only be exacerbated. To me, HD gaming is going to be very healthy for a long time."

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/172053/Assassins_Creed_10_I_hope_so_says_Ubisofts_Detoc.php

Does there come a point where a franchise does too many sequels or is there never too many?

 

[Swarley]

If they keep the characters fresh, and keep advancing the gameplay, I think this series could survive for awhile. But they definitely need to retire Desmond after 3. Jumping to a completely different time period should help out a bit.

However, if they keep spitting out these non-numbered games, AC10 might be a little much lol.

 

[Buzzman]

I always felt like you should have at max 3 games per system. At that point they have usually fleshed out the bugs and that third game is as good as it's ever going to be. Like I have no real motivation to ever want to play another Uncharted in the near future, I am done with my Commander Shepard in Mass Effect, and the characters of Gears are dead to me now. I do not want to see them again.

Ironically what I don't mind is having 10 titles in the franchise ala Resident Evil and Final Fantasy as long as they are spread out and not just pumped out every year.

 

[Swarley]

Ironically what I don't mind is having 10 titles in the franchise ala Resident Evil and Final Fantasy as long as they are spread out and not just pumped out every year.

I definitely agree with the not churning one out every single year. Series will get old real fast doing that.

 

[j.hen]

Assassin's Creed is a series that could probably pull it off. 3 looks so :fap: worthy

 

[Maynard]

games are becoming more and more repetitive. it doesnt matter the genre, the games are all basically the same thing. Some devs make a good one, but most dont.
its cheaper for a dev to copy and paste than make something new. Everyone is following the lead of sports devs...basically slapping together a new game with a roster update.

its also the norm now for device manufacturers who like to release a new iDevice every year. its nothing but a racket now

and why the fuck am i watching a commerical with tom cruise singing pour some sugar on me.....i really wish it was legal to blast people with a shotgun

 

[A Tasty Burgerr]

With games being so expensive to make companies don't want to risk spending huge amounts of money on a new IP that might not sell. It's unfortunate but it makes sense.

 

[DannyD]

I'm fine with it, THE GAMES ARE GOOD MAN

 

[SethMode]

With games being so expensive to make companies don't want to risk spending huge amounts of money on a new IP that might not sell. It's unfortunate but it makes sense.

Exactly. Kingdoms of Amalur was considered a successful new IP, and it wasn't enough to keep 38 solvent. Just the first example that popped into my head of "everyone claims they want new IPs, yet no one goes and buys them".

 

[Maynard]

nobody buys them because they arent that good. that game u mentioned sucked. i played the demo and thought wtf were they thinking.
the problem with new games is they tend to take until the second one comes out to be really good. If they can get it right on the first try, people will buy it ala batman aa.

btw, when u view the list of threads in the arcade its funny how you see this thread first, then the next 8 threads that follow it are sequels.

 

[SethMode]

nobody buys them because they arent that good. that game u mentioned sucked. i played the demo and thought wtf were they thinking.
the problem with new games is they tend to take until the second one comes out to be really good. If they can get it right on the first try, people will buy it ala batman aa.

btw, when u view the list of threads in the arcade its funny how you see this thread first, then the next 8 threads that follow it are sequels.

First of all, the game far from "sucked". Having played both it and Skyrim to completion, I would personally say that it was just as good as Skyrim, but Skyrim gets an irrational amount of love for whatever reason. If it had the hype and security that comes from being a sequel, I think that it would have sold a lot better, but even still, my point was that it was a successful new IP and it still didn't make enough money to save 38 Pitches.

 

[Maynard]

if 38 needed to rely on the success of 1 new IP then they obviously had poor management.

wasnt Kingdoms of Amalur the cartoony looking game that was somewhat a top down scroller?

 

[jms493]

if 38 needed to rely on the success of 1 new IP then they obviously had poor management.

wasnt Kingdoms of Amalur the cartoony looking game that was somewhat a top down scroller?

No...it was an 3rd person action RPG with great combat.......you played the demo. The KOA XBOX game was an intro to open up the world of Amular. They were making a HUGE MMO (Copernicus) that was going use that lore.

Amalur was a game to get them some money to help them make Copernicus. 38 Studios was created to make the MMO.

 

[SethMode]

if 38 needed to rely on the success of 1 new IP then they obviously had poor management.

wasnt Kingdoms of Amalur the cartoony looking game that was somewhat a top down scroller?

I don't know what "top down scroller" is.

It was a 3rd person RPG with the open world/do what you want questing aspects of an Elder Scrolls game and combat similar to an action game like God of War.

And 38's business practices are not the point. It seems like you're arguing with me here but I don't know what or why. All I was saying is that even successful new IPs rarely sell extremely well, so of course companies are more likely to focus on sequels. In my opinion, Skyrim and KoA are basically the same level of quality, with each doing things better than the other in certain ways (combat, story, KoA, world, graphics, Skyrim) but Skyrim sold a shitload because the Elder Scrolls is a known property.

 

[jms493]

Well almost all games start out as NEW IPs.

Just a few from this generation...

Uncharted
Gears of War
Dead Space
Bio Shock (sort of)
Mass Effect
Assassins Creed
Left 4 Dead
Demon Souls
LA Noire - Removed
Dragon Age
Borderlands
Crysis....and more.

These games are only 5-6 years old. You get one that sticks then you make 3-4 iterations and when the next console drops you probably try more new IPs.

 

[Maynard]

i must be thinking of a different game then...my bad....but still, if it was such a great game then why didnt people play. people dont choose not to play great games just because they are a new ip

If koa was a new IP then so was LA Noire, RDR, and countless others that i dont care to name.

game developers just like to find something that works and keep pounding it out for cheap dollars. they could make new titles, but they choose not to because they dont have to

 

[Maynard]

I don't know what "top down scroller" is.

It was a 3rd person RPG with the open world/do what you want questing aspects of an Elder Scrolls game and combat similar to an action game like God of War.

And 38's business practices are not the point. It seems like you're arguing with me here but I don't know what or why. All I was saying is that even successful new IPs rarely sell extremely well, so of course companies are more likely to focus on sequels. In my opinion, Skyrim and KoA are basically the same level of quality, with each doing things better than the other in certain ways (combat, story, KoA, world, graphics, Skyrim) but Skyrim sold a shitload because the Elder Scrolls is a known property.

sorry if it sounds like i am arguing....im seriously not. i was mentioning their business practices to counter the point you made that their new IP couldnt save them.....which was your point to why companies dont like to make new IPs

i disagree with that. i think companies dont make new IPs simply because they are too cheap to do it and the risk may be to high. they can ride the success of a previous game.

and now i think its going to go one step further. there was a game that came out not to long ago, and now the developers are making a new game that takes place inside that original game. Cool concept i suppose, but also a very cheap way to make a new game.

imagine building a 2nd game within the world of mass effect. i totally different game, but still within the same world...maybe the 2 games overlap at times too.

 

[SethMode]

i must be thinking of a different game then...my bad....but still, if it was such a great game then why didnt people play. people dont choose not to play great games just because they are a new ip

If koa was a new IP then so was LA Noire, RDR, and countless others that i dont care to name.

game developers just like to find something that works and keep pounding it out for cheap dollars. they could make new titles, but they choose not to because they dont have to

I agree. Again, I get the feeling we're saying the same thing. There are so many sequels because if it's a successful franchise game companies know that they can iterate and it will be more cost effective and probably sell better than anything new that they make.

And I think that there is a difference between a new studio making something completely new, and a studio like Rockstar making "new" IP that heavily iterate on their old IP (and Red Dead was not new IP -- and the studio that made LA Noire no longer exists due to going bankrupt).

 

[jms493]

i must be thinking of a different game then...my bad....but still, if it was such a great game then why didnt people play. people dont choose not to play great games just because they are a new ip

If koa was a new IP then so was LA Noire, RDR, and countless others that i dont care to name.

game developers just like to find something that works and keep pounding it out for cheap dollars. they could make new titles, but they choose not to because they dont have to

FYI throw out comparing RDR and LA Noire....they are from the makers of GTA (one of the greatest games of all time).

IMO the game DID sell well for a new IP action RPG. It sold 1.15 million copies in 2012

to compare Dark Souls sound 1.6 million as a sequel since 2011....

 

[jms493]

and again 38 studios was about the MMO and not so much KOA.