What is considered "milking" a franchise?

[Michael-5]

Veknoid_Outcast said:

Michael-5 said:

Veknoid_Outcast said:
[...]

That's not 100% true, every Zelda, Final Fantasy, etc, add to the game prior, and rarely are two games the same in most of those franchises. Can you honestly say Wind Waker is like Twilight Princess, which is like Skyward Sword? The core gameplay, and game design aren't too different, but the games themselves are very different. Plus they only release a new Zelda every 3 or 4 years.

God of War I might consider milked, but the game doesn't release frequently enough, and I'm sure the fans see changes with each game.

Hey, you're preaching to the converted :)

I love Zelda, more than anything in the video game world. And I do think it refreshes the formula with each title.

I guess I was just saying that sequels rarely produce anything radically different from the original source material. More often than not, we as players are experiencing variations on a theme. But there's nothing wrong with that. Metroid Prime, for example, is essentially Super Metroid with an added dimension, yet both are outstanding examples of game design, presentation, and play control.

I would like to say that I feel Metroid Prime is a radical change from the source Material, and so is Fusion (but that's more theme like you said). Sometimes games do change, and while rare, it can be amazing. Metroid Prime, Ocarina of Time, and Super Mario Galaxy are all examples of old franchises seeing radical, and favorable changes. Plus the next Zelda is said to be non-linear, and very different, so is Smash Bros.

Either way, these games aren't milked because while the core concept stays the same, each game is unique. We agree on this. However games like Dead Space, are they any different or more of the same? This is why I think Dead Space was milked to death.