It isn't stupid to kill a franchise from milking? Ok then. You probably also think it's better to demand a dev to work on something against their will than to let they challenge themselves and get something even bigger.
By my logic if disney team wants to make more StarWars do it, but if the team doing it doesn't want to do, the result will be bad. And anyway for me SW is really only 4-6, the other ones I watch but care very little.
But as I said, if they want to keep making Halo and their userbase want to buy it, do it... funny although is how many times it was supposed to end with a specific game but they just gone and kept going. That means a company that have no capacity to create new things.
Why don't all movies are only sequels from the ones that made success on the 50's? Why aren't all books sequels until the writer dies? Per your reasoning when you do something that sell you should stuck yourself to do it.
And again I just provided you points that when MS do a franchise that sells good the dev is tied to it, which is what you try to deny, but then go and prove that it's what they do.
1st - MS isnt milking the franchise, they claimed the Halo franchise has over 10 years of content. Halo has a huge following and they want more games made.
2nd - 343i was created to sololy make Halo games for there fans and audience
3rd - No one is complaining Halo is being milked. Do you know what games Nintendo have been making for the past 30 years? Exactly.
Killing off games because you think milking them to death is bad only works on franchises that gamers dont want.
Sony do it with Polyphony with GT
ND did it with Uncharted
Nintendo do it with Mario, Zelda and Pokemon etc
The big differences between MS compared to Sony and Nintendo is they build dedicated companies to keep series going without locking devs in for life. Bungie was a unique case because Halo makes too much money which Sony and Nintendo would have done the same.
Rare is not a dedicated company built from the ground up to support SoTs. They will probably support it until it dies than make something new.
Yearly releases of Halo isn't milking? So for them to milk it they need to make how many per year? Still doesn't deny the fact Halo was supposed to end on the 2nd or 3rd by their own admission.
343i being created for it doesn't neglect the fact Bungie left, and you wanted me to say what studio that wasn't created to do that single game is stuck to it, we can also put Mojang with Minecraft on this bag.
Yes I do know what franchises and characters Nintendo have been doing, and mostly 1 or 2 per genre, and after discussions with Nintendo fans I accepted that doing Mario Tennis, Soccer, RPG, etc that could work with any char is a new IP that Nintendo choose to use their main stars to make it easier to market and succeed not as a milking of games. Or when did you seem any Nintendo game be a yearly release?
Sony doesn't do it with GT, you already started wrong. Kaz were granted an independent studio because he wanted to create GT, he still loves to create it, but also made a bike game and helped on LoD. And if he wanted he could make other game.
ND was moving away from UC (as they done with previous IPs) even creating TLOU, but they decided to go back. There isn't a shred of evidence Sony mandated ND to keep doing UC games.
Yes Nintendo release once a gen or twice something on each of their main franchises and their userbase like it, I don't know if their devs like or not. What I haven't seem so far is they closing studios or studios leaving because they are mandated to do it.
If MS make a studio to do that series how isn't that locking them for life? You know you aren't making much sense right?