forevercloud3000 said:
Honestly I think that is a very bad idea that I feel Sony is just now realizing. When you let a series that is very popular die, the fanbase the became attached to that title die with it (Which is a bad business practice as that is garanteed money). Yes, some gamers will still follow the pedegree of the Developer's next vision but not all. If you liked Uncharted it doesn't mean that whatever ND does it will be your cup of tea. I know we don't want them to churn them out like other annual game fodders (COD,AC,etc) but it doesnt have to be that way. Part of what makes Nintendo's mascotts so unstoppable is the fact they have such a long running history. Could NIN have killed off the series a long time ago? Yes, but they wouldn't have that garenteed 5million+ sales everytime a new Mario drops. Just because there are many entries in a series doesn't have to mean the quality deteriates(FF had a stellar record until recently). Sony NEEDS more series with an exemplary pedigree. Naughty Dog has never done them wrong and Uncharted is IT! |
Uncharted is not a game you can continue on, it has a storyline that's a little relatable in each game, Mario and Final Fantasy games are completely different on every game, you can't all of a sudden throw Drake in a race car or put him and in a RPG and expect people to keep flocking to it because it's drake. But something fresh and new is almost as good and Naughty dog has always delivered that right from the beginning with the PS, each generation they create a new game that almost out does the last generation, Jak/Crash Bandicoot/Uncharted and now The last of us. I agree other then Grand Turismo Sony needs more big titled games like Mario and Halo, but what's wrong with having a really great developer creating new different games every gen then instead of a really great franchise that could possibly go stale over time?
