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

Trading Used Games, Like Fraud?Trading Used Games, Like Fraud?

David Braben, founder of Frontier Developments, says retail outlets that buy and sell pre-owned games are “essentially defrauding the industry.” Although multiplayer gaming might not be a huge threat, the single player experience in games may die out because gamers play the game quickly and resell it back to places like GameStop for others to buy.

Developers don’t get a dime when a game goes traded, many gamers will “share” the single player experience with a single copy of the game by reselling it over and over. The end result, retail outlets make a good penny for marking up old games while developers see nothing. This is really how game retail outlets survive because the margins on video games is so damn low.

The story has been heard before, developers want a piece of the action so they’re taking steps to entice people to keep the game with renewed downloadable content on old games; you can’t experience the new content without keeping the game around longer. In the world of low margin games, high cost development and short-lived story lines the solutions to this problem aren’t exactly obvious.

Braben’s idea of a solution is to offer two versions of the game, a not for resale/rental version at a high price, say $160, and a low priced version that cannot be shared (heavily DRM’ed?) for $50. In essence, gamers would no longer be able to trade in games because the idea of spending double for a game so you can resell it makes no sense to most gamers (including myself.)

(more…)

Duke Nukem 3D Certified For XBLADuke Nukem 3D Certified For XBLA

Duke Nukem 3D has now been certified by Microsoft and is ready for the big time, let’s rock. It seems like “forever” since we’ve seen a Duke Nukem game, even if this is simply a flashback to 1996. There were plenty of gamers that have an Xbox 360 now that didn’t get to play Duke Nukem 3D back then

This is a great time for younger gamers to experience an old school FPS in the days where we had to network our DOS systems together and play over IPX, before the Internet would bloom to where it is today. This version of Duke 3D has Xbox 360 achievements, so you can go back and re-live and re-achieve like never before.

“Murderous aliens have landed in futuristic Los Angeles, and humans suddenly find themselves atop the endangered species list. The odds are a million-to-one, just the way Duke likes it!”

It’s important to look back at some of our old games and replay them to see just how much we’ve advanced. It may not, however, be enough to make an old school gamer re-buy the game again. I find it odd that someone took the time to put energy into porting old Duke 3D and have yet to release Duke Nukem Forever, that was promoted back in 1997 is that next great Duke game. Where is it? Instead, we get a rehash of the last title. Interesting decision.

(Thanks, Kotaku)

Nintendo Takes Yet Another Month in United StatesNintendo Takes Yet Another Month in United States

The holiday season is over, the NPD sales data for January 2008 is in and we see a common theme: Nintendo rules the show. While Sony continues to try and persuade gamers that the PlayStation 3 is in a completely different gaming category, statistic gathering companies like NPD put ’em all in one big basket.

wiifitIt makes sense for Sony to try to push themselves away from being classified with the Wii console because it makes them look bad. We’re all equal gamers here, there is no need to break into more sub-categories when only three consoles vying for top spot. Many folks (including us) criticize the slow adoption rate of Wii games, yet they steal top software sales spots as well.

  • Wii — 679,200
  • Nintendo DS — 510,800
  • Xbox 360 — 309,000
  • PlayStation 3 — 203,200
  • PlayStation Portable — 172,300
  • PlayStation 2 — 101,200

Thankfully Sony’s PlayStation 3 product took top spot on their hardware list, so that’s not so bad. Sadly, combining all Sony’s hardware still doesn’t meet the units of the Wii.

On the software sales front, Nintendo took six of the top ten positions including position’s one, two and three. Wii Fit takes number one position with an insane 777,000 units sold. The only closest product to Wii Fit was Wii Play (still!) with 415,000 units sold. Place four was held by a 360 title, Left 4 Dead sold 243,000 units.

Although many gamers haven’t turned on their Wii in ages, there is no doubt the market is red hot for Wii. At this point, we’re all wondering how long it will last — any predictions? It’s already been a long time.