2008: The Year of Sequels? Too Much Risk?

While compiling a list of games to respond to a user question on the TD Gaming Podcast, I’ve noticed something about this years gaming lineup: their mainly all sequels! Are there any new franchises taking a risk in the market or just more of the same? Some are not really “sequels” but spin-offs of the same franchise.

A few examples of some October time frame titles: Fable 2, Far Cry 2, Gears of War 2, Rock Band 2, C&C: Red Alert 3, Saints Row 2, Rayman Raving Rabbids 3, Tekken 6, Call of Duty 5, Guitar Hero World Tour, Tom Clancy End of War, Sing Star Vol 2 and others.

There are a few original titles: Afrika for the PlayStation 3, Little Big Planet (PS3) and Huxley (360 and PC). Most of the original franchise creations seem to be PlayStation 3 related, probably because the console needs some major hits to spur more sales.

Is the market so competitive and risky that new franchises are becoming a rare breed? Last year we saw Assassin’s Creed and before that Viva Pinata and Gears of War exclusive on the Xbox 360. Consider Viva Pinata a “slight” failure in terms of excitement and Gears of War a success, that’s 50/50 in terms of risk vs. reward.

We’re going to see sequels for both of these new franchises (Viva Pinata: Trouble in Paradise and Gears of War 2) with no word yet on Assassin’s Creed 2. Perhaps E3 will show off some hype for a brand new franchise but the chances are great we’ll be bombarded with part two and part three all the way to part six to known game franchises.

It seems the 2008 holiday season is going to be filled with “safety net titles” in terms of risk vs. reward. It’s hard to argue Gears of War 2 in terms of sales and profit, making it a great safety title, but where is all the brand new titles? We can’t look towards Nintendo to produce anything as they’ve been kicking out Mario and Zelda titles for fifteen years, we must look towards other developers, but who?

Electronic Arts has proven to be very reliant on past titles performance when developing their next big hit. They’re the master of tagging a title with a year and releasing it (Madden is a great example). TheSims, Battlefield and Command and Conquer are a few of their known titles which get seemingly yearly franchise releases. Who can we look towards to take the risk?

Microsoft and Sony are the most likely to kick out a brand new franchise as it would make the title exclusive to their console and, considering the money the spend on marketing their consoles, they’ve got enough money to deposit in risking a new franchise in hopes for a hit.

Although we’re all happy to see yet another release of TheSims, Fable, Far Cry, Rock Band and other hot titles, it’s also nice to see something new and creative hit the store shelves. Apparently we have to stop buying into the sequels (i.e. GTA IV) before we’re going to see any real change, forcing developers to risk their reputation for the next great game innovation.

0 thoughts on “2008: The Year of Sequels? Too Much Risk?”

  1. hmmm, made me think if having one too many sequels could only cause players to get tired of the game.But if it showcases something new why not. Sometimes, you don’t like the first release but loved the sequel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 375: And We’re BackEpisode 375: And We’re Back

After a problematic week, Episode 375 is now up, with tons of news. So much that there’s no room for a Gaming Flashback or a Gaming History.

The news includes:

  • Joystiq no longer scoring” reviews
  • New Harmonix survey points to Rock Band 4
  • Hatred gets an AO rating in US
  • Disney, Activision both claim landslide victory in toys-to-life category
  • Microsoft maintaining $349 price point on Xbox Ones
  • Windows 10 includes in-home game streaming from Xbox One

This week’s Question of the Week: “What, if any, was your favorite part of Rock Band?”

Wolfenstein for PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3Wolfenstein for PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3

When you hear the word Wolfenstein what game do you think of? Constantly, I recall Wolfenstein 3D and all the memorable times I had building my first person shooter fingers. From a new-generation FPS perspective, Return to Castle Wolfenstein for the PC back in 2001 was my last touch on a Wolfenstein game series. I enjoyed it a great deal and would love to see more out of the game series.

It seems Activision and Raven Software are working on a PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 game, currently titled Wolfenstein set to be released “when it is done.” The game follows the same concepts as most of the Wolfenstein titles of the past, a bit of dark science fiction and undead matched with World War II settings with Nazi’s and the main character BJ Blazkowicz.

This series seems to be full of re-hash and repeat with plots, characters and overall feel. Developers seem to favor re-makes over sequels to the famous franchise, eventually putting out one or two sequels of their re-make hits well with customers.

Is this the correct direction for the Wolfenstein franchise? In my humble opinion, it doesn’t really matter to me because I’m such a fan of the series. Perhaps they will continue to re-make the game until the larger demographic screams “Not again!”

(Thanks, Eurogamer)

Robbie Bach says: There Will Be Multiple VictorsRobbie Bach says: There Will Be Multiple Victors

It’s amazing to think we’re in our third year of “next generation” console bliss. Three years have passed since the first Xbox 360 shipped, for good or bad, and it’s time to start thinking about the future.

Or is it?

Bobbie Bach, Microsoft Entertainment and Devices president, seems to believe this generation of consoles will expand out further than the typical four-year release cycle. Perhaps because the console developers have invested so much money in defeating each other in the market and making their console “number one” in the eyes of their investors.

Bach does not believe we’re cresting on the current generation, that is for certain, and we’ve yet to hear any hype over a new next-generation console from Microsoft. They were the first to market so, theoretically, they should be the first in the next-generation as well, right?

Their move to be number one was really a strategic attack which has paid out well, leading them above the past domination of Sony and Nintendo before it. However, they are holding strong with the Xbox 360 and there might be cause to sit tight and let this generation playout before bringing in another piece of hardware.

Bach stated that he believes consoles today are competing at different levels than ten years ago. There isn’t one clear winner, there isn’t one dominating console. There will be victors in different areas of the industry; casual consoles, top game sellers, best graphics and others. It’s not about sheer “units sold” it’s more about being profitable and building a community around your hardware, see Xbox Live as a great example.

Next generation will be full of fantastic new features, ways to connect and crazy hardware specifications, no doubt, but… for many of us, it will take years before we forget the pain and suffering we paid shipping our dead Xbox 360’s back to Microsoft for repairs. Would you be willing to buy into their next generation as their first customer?

(Thanks, 1up)