Quantcast
Why do people keep saying Nintendo is milking their franchises?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why do people keep saying Nintendo is milking their franchises?

crissindahouse said:
Nem said:
said:
Microsoft is even worse with 360:
  1. Gears of War - 4 (with Judgement upcoming)
  2. Halo - 4
  3. Forza - 4
  4. Project Gotham Racing - 3
  5. Fable - 3
  6. Dance Central - 3

 


Maybe someone else already pointed out, but yes Microsoft is the worse of the 3, as they limit the number of franchises they have. Also, im pretty sure there was an Xbox live Fable game in 2D. So you can rise that to 4 if you want.

I do agree though, Nintendo is highly criticised by something that the others seems to do worse. In the case Microsoft is clearly worse. Sony has a habit of creating new franchises every gen since most of them end up failing and they try something new, but i would say that they are the most of the safe side. It all depends on what they reveal for the PS4. If the uncharted series continues or gets axed like Jak series did and if the other series carry on. I guess they milk God of war already though. 2 per system.

i thought he already did that because fable 1 was for the original xbox so 3 fable games has to mean he included the pub game. i just wonder which third pgr game he is talking about because i know only 2 for 360 but would love to have a third one.

but if we start to count the fable pub game we should also start to count every game with mario as mario game, i don't think his list would look so good for nintendo and the milking argument then.

and as big halo fan i have to say please milk more but i would like to see some other genres in the halo universe..


Fable the journey is the third youre missing in that thought.



Around the Network
Nem said:

Fable the journey is the third youre missing in that thought.

yeah forgot that and euphoria already told me. easy to forget that game haha



Nintendo has been milking their franchises for almost thirty years. The time to deny that is kind of over. Nintendo came up during a time when creating Iconic character was a very big thing. The 80's and 90's were a prime time to catch the eye of a child and the family home. 2D animation was at its peak and Disney was making a killing and look at them now. Creating iconic characters is seemingly a lost art. Sure you'll find one or two gems, but it is really lacking, especially in Japan.



S.T.A.G.E. said:
Nintendo has been milking their franchises for almost thirty years. The time to deny that is kind of over. Nintendo came up during a time when creating Iconic character was a very big thing. The 80's and 90's were a prime time to catch the eye of a child and the family home. 2D animation was at its peak and Disney was making a killing and look at them now. Creating iconic characters is seemingly a lost art. Sure you'll find one or two gems, but it is really lacking, especially in Japan.

 

I think we're in the age of having entire species for mascots. 

Inkling and Nopon. Minions.

 

Edit: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=211261&page=0#1



Let it be said that Nintendo's major franchises survive: unlike Crash or Fable they don't crash and burn even with how much they are or are not used.

(F-Zero is not a major franchise. Star Fox never quite got to the point of being major).



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

Around the Network

People may say Mario is an over saturated character, but look how well games with him sell. Why would they stop?



That's because it's true. Nintendo doesn't really create that many new IPs in a gen. They make new additions to their main IPs and make off-shoots of those. It works for them but it alienates gamers who want new IPs or more mature games.



OP is freaking me out man! No name, no avatar, started posting in 69.



Aeolus451 said:
That's because it's true. Nintendo doesn't really create that many new IPs in a gen. They make new additions to their main IPs and make off-shoots of those. It works for them but it alienates gamers who want new IPs or more mature games.

And yet how many I.P's that are created by the other companies have healthy lifespan? Half the new I.P's created are never heard of again or die off within two generations. 

And yet even something like Metroid chugs along pretty well, and there is interest in things like F-Zero (They did try to set up a game with Criterion at the early days of the Wii U), and Star Fox (Star Fox Zero was a thing, even if it wasn't super successful it was an attempt to bring it back up).



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

If they keep selling, publishers won't stop.

But why look at this on a generation per generation basis?
Even if there's just 1 Pokemon per console generation doesn't mean I won't get tired of playing the same game for the 6453254'th time.

I skip most Gran Turismo games because it's always a very similar experience.
I don't feel like playing one this generation, but maybe I'll get GT7 for PS5.

Last edited by Hiku - on 25 April 2018