| IamAwsome said: This thread is dedicated to franchises that are so milked out, that they need to stop. I mean, every 1-2 years there is a new installment and fans eat it up, thus funding the next installment in the series. I know that publishers want to make money, bu some games like COD need to stop. Some games like Assassin's Creed will end up like COD if publishers don't stop making so man spin-offs and stuff, and then there is Pokemon, lets not go there. Activision ran Guitar Hero into the ground, EA ran their sports sims into the ground, and the next milked franchise to be ran into the ground will be Assassin's Creed. Why do publishers do it?
|
Isn't the answer obvious?
No matter how crappy a game is, if it's a big franchise, some idiots will always buy it. In fact, millions of idiots will buy it. The fanboy effect is very strong. Just look at all of the people who moaned about FF13, said it was going to be crap and still bought it. That's the power of a franchise. Long-serving fans just can't bring themselves to leave their favourite franchise's games on the shelf, even if they think the game will be a let-down. Publishers know this and milk it for all its worth.
Some people say that gamers should vote with their wallets, but a lot of gamers seem psychologically incapable of doing so.
Whatsmore, if a game is part of a big franchise, you can expect an extra 10-20% from most reviewers. You see, reviewers are afraid of giving really bad reviews to big name games, for two reasons. The first is that big publishers hold a lot of sway in some quarters (some magazines need those exclusives, so they have to play along and keep everyone happy), and the second is that they assume that a big franchise game should be good and this affects the way that they perceive its faults. If they're expecting the game to be good, they're likely to not trust their own judgement; they think that they must just be having a hard time getting into it rather than assuming its terrible and therefore let the game off lightly.
Have you ever noticed that an 8/10 review score is seen as pretty bad for a game from a big franchise? and 7/10 is seen as terrible? That's because a big franchise game has to be abysmal to get a 7/10 (a non-big name game of the same quality would get a five) and profoundly mediocre to get an 8/10. Reviewers see 9/10 as average for a big franchise game and rate accordingly. Reviewers who don't do this stick out like a sore thumb and get a bad reputation. They're seen as rebels who just hate anything that's popular. See the outraged reaction to Edge's review of FF13 to see what happens when a reviewer steps out of line.
Quite simply, putting a big franchise name on the cover of a rushed, lacklustre game will guarantee it sales and review scores far better than it deserves.
