By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What exactly is considered to be 'Milking'?

brendude13 on 29 August 2011
Rpruett said:

What many in this have failed to realize is milking is quite simply releasing tons of games in a frequent manner for the same franchise with virtually no creativity generated with each passing game. Just iterative and repetitious in nature.

It has almost nothing to do with demand (As a byproduct of milking a game for too long is that this well will eventually dry up). Games generally have to sell well in the first place in order to become 'milked'. The game doesn't have to be epic and great to be milked, just generally marginally successful.

Quality plays its role because eventually it becomes nearly impossible to maintain the proper quality with this insistence on releasing games without the creativity.

Sometimes certain genres lead to milking just as a natural byproduct of the type of game it is. (Sports, Music games come to mind).


Games that fall into the milking category? (Ratchet and Clank, Street Fighter, Madden series, Halo, Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, For awhile GTA was getting dangerously close but they seemed to have calmed down quite a bit, Sonic was milked, Mario (As a character) has been milked but Nintendo has been smart to incorporate him into just about every genre so no Mario game technically plays or feels the same, Final Fantasy hovers around being milked however with story driven games as long as there is a new story given to it it's hard to milk it dry, Sing Star, etc, Capcom is one of the largest violating milking companies. They will run good franchises into the ground on behalf of milking it to death.

For all intents and purposes, I would say anything beyond (3) releases in one generation is milking a franchising for all it's worth and over extending it's value to the consumer base.

I agree with this completely.



Around the Network
Jay520 on 29 August 2011
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:
To all people who claim COD, Halo, & AC To be milked:

What if fans insist on having more experiences? Would it be wrong for companies to meet the demands of their consumers? Should they neglect their consumers, and put the series on a hault, going against the will of consumers? As long as a franchise stays high in quality and sales, a company has every right to 'milk' a franchise. Producers will be happy, Developers will be happy, and most importantly, fans will be happy. The only people upset are the ones who pose no involvement in the game whatsover.

The problem is more people dislike, don't like , and don't want to purchase Halo who own a 360 then people who do like, want as much Halo as they can get.  When resources, time, energy, etc get dumped constantly into either Halo or Kinect projects you end up disappointing a large sector of your fanbase. 

Would you prefer multiple new (Quality IPs and 2 Full-Fledged Halo releases)  or (5 full-fledged Halo releases in one generation)?   I know what I would certainly prefer.  Games are about the experience.  It's like if Lord of the Rings added 15 movies in total.  Only the extreme of the extreme would start to care after awhile.



I Don't understand your first sentence. As for your second sentence, I will say that Halo is only being handled by one team as far as I know. Kinect is utilising a lot resources and the majority of the fanbase may not want it. But MS is trying to use its energy with Kinect to expand its fanbase while leaving the core, for the most part, to 3rd parties. whether or not that's a good plan is up for debate and will surely be revealed in the future.

As for the second paragraph, I would want the former. But that question doesn't apply to Halo. A.) we've only had two full-fledged Halo games and B.) I don't know if the team working on halo has the skill to make another quality new IP.

Rpruett on 29 August 2011
Jay520 said:
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:
To all people who claim COD, Halo, & AC To be milked:

What if fans insist on having more experiences? Would it be wrong for companies to meet the demands of their consumers? Should they neglect their consumers, and put the series on a hault, going against the will of consumers? As long as a franchise stays high in quality and sales, a company has every right to 'milk' a franchise. Producers will be happy, Developers will be happy, and most importantly, fans will be happy. The only people upset are the ones who pose no involvement in the game whatsover.

The problem is more people dislike, don't like , and don't want to purchase Halo who own a 360 then people who do like, want as much Halo as they can get.  When resources, time, energy, etc get dumped constantly into either Halo or Kinect projects you end up disappointing a large sector of your fanbase. 

Would you prefer multiple new (Quality IPs and 2 Full-Fledged Halo releases)  or (5 full-fledged Halo releases in one generation)?   I know what I would certainly prefer.  Games are about the experience.  It's like if Lord of the Rings added 15 movies in total.  Only the extreme of the extreme would start to care after awhile.


I Don't understand your first sentence. As for your second sentence, I will say that Halo is only being handled by one team as far as I know. Kinect is utilising a lot resources and the majority of the fanbase may not want it. But MS is trying to use its energy with Kinect to expand its fanbase while leaving the core, for the most part, to 3rd parties. whether or not that's a good plan is up for debate and will surely be revealed in the future.

As for the second paragraph, I would want the former. But that question doesn't apply to Halo. A.) we've only had two full-fledged Halo games and B.) I don't know if the team working on halo has the skill to make another quality new IP.

More people don't want to purchase Halo who own a 360 then people who do.  Just by sheer numbers, they aren't addressing their entire fanbase.  That's a problem, a very large problem at that.  Same deal with Kinect or focusing way too much on any one singular resource.

We have had (3) Full-priced Halo releases, don't make exceptions for it.  On the verge of four. (Which we may see five this generation yet) .  What exactly is Microsoft going to go for on the Next Xbox?...I can promise you we will see another Halo releasing pretty early into it's life.   If a team isn't qualified or skilled enough to make another new IP, what makes you think they will be able to live up to the high expectations for the Halo franchise?

And doesn't that essentially by your own definition fall into the milking category if the latter is true?



superchunk on 29 August 2011

This.



Jay520 on 29 August 2011
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:
To all people who claim COD, Halo, & AC To be milked:

What if fans insist on having more experiences? Would it be wrong for companies to meet the demands of their consumers? Should they neglect their consumers, and put the series on a hault, going against the will of consumers? As long as a franchise stays high in quality and sales, a company has every right to 'milk' a franchise. Producers will be happy, Developers will be happy, and most importantly, fans will be happy. The only people upset are the ones who pose no involvement in the game whatsover.

The problem is more people dislike, don't like , and don't want to purchase Halo who own a 360 then people who do like, want as much Halo as they can get.  When resources, time, energy, etc get dumped constantly into either Halo or Kinect projects you end up disappointing a large sector of your fanbase. 

Would you prefer multiple new (Quality IPs and 2 Full-Fledged Halo releases)  or (5 full-fledged Halo releases in one generation)?   I know what I would certainly prefer.  Games are about the experience.  It's like if Lord of the Rings added 15 movies in total.  Only the extreme of the extreme would start to care after awhile.


I Don't understand your first sentence. As for your second sentence, I will say that Halo is only being handled by one team as far as I know. Kinect is utilising a lot resources and the majority of the fanbase may not want it. But MS is trying to use its energy with Kinect to expand its fanbase while leaving the core, for the most part, to 3rd parties. whether or not that's a good plan is up for debate and will surely be revealed in the future.

As for the second paragraph, I would want the former. But that question doesn't apply to Halo. A.) we've only had two full-fledged Halo games and B.) I don't know if the team working on halo has the skill to make another quality new IP.

More people don't want to purchase Halo who own a 360 then people who do.  Just by sheer numbers, they aren't addressing their entire fanbase.  That's a problem, a very large problem at that.  Same deal with Kinect or focusing way too much on any one singular resource.

We have had (3) Full-priced Halo releases, don't make exceptions for it.  On the verge of four. (Which we may see five this generation yet) .  What exactly is Microsoft going to go for on the Next Xbox?...I can promise you we will see another Halo releasing pretty early into it's life.   If a team isn't qualified or skilled enough to make another new IP, what makes you think they will be able to live up to the high expectations for the Halo franchise?

Like I said

And doesn't that essentially by your own definition fall into the milking category if the latter is true?



Like I said, they're using Kinect to expand the userbase while leaving 3rd parties for the core. Is that a good idea? Possibly. As far as sales are concerned, they seem to be doing just fine.

I only count Halo 3 & Reach. What are you including? Halo Wars or ODST ? Even if there's been 3 releases, that would mean only 4 Halos this gen. (Halo 5 will be releasing two or more years after Halo 4, at which point the nextbox will likely be out.) Games like Uncharted & AC will likely be seeing 4 releases this gen, and I wouldn't call either of those milked. But then again, that's just my opinion.

No, if the quality is consistent, then I wouldn't say Halo is milked. But then again, my definition of milked is dependent upon quality, while yours isn't.

Around the Network
Rpruett on 29 August 2011
Jay520 said:


Like I said, they're using Kinect to expand the userbase while leaving 3rd parties for the core. Is that a good idea? Possibly. As far as sales are concerned, they seem to be doing just fine.

I only count Halo 3 & Reach. What are you including? Halo Wars or ODST ? Even if there's been 3 releases, that would mean only 4 Halos this gen. (Halo 5 will be releasing two or more years after Halo 4, at which point the nextbox will likely be out.) Games like Uncharted & AC will likely be seeing 4 releases this gen, and I wouldn't call either of those milked. But then again, that's just my opinion.

No, if the quality is consistent, then I wouldn't say Halo is milked. But then again, my definition of milked is dependent upon quality, while yours isn't.

Halo 3, ODST, Reach (3 Full priced retail games).  Wars is a usage of the Halo IP but different game.  4 Halos so far with one releasing what ... this Christmas? Again you said that 343 Studios might not have the talent to make another game quality, yet you are entrusting them to take a game that has a high bar set for quality and making a quality game?   By your very words, you are saying that if 343 studios makes a poor Halo then it would be a milked franchise.

The other aspect to this story is, type of game.  Uncharted doesn't have a wildly successful multi-player component. Most people who purchase the game, purchase it for Single-player and the new treasure hunting story.   In my opinion, Uncharted would be slightly better then Halo for releasing 4 games based on this movie-esque dynamic to it that drives the fun.  However, Sony would still be milking it dry.

Four releases (minimum) is far too many for a game like Halo.  It tarnishes the image it has and the quality it has.  Just like it would if Nintendo released four Zelda's in one generation, or 4 Mario Platformers, Or 4 Mario Karts. 



Wagram on 29 August 2011



rf40928 on 29 August 2011

I'd say milking is giving out milk.... the only problem is most everyone likes milk.. See the point ?
What sells any product ? ... Of course demand for that product.. If someone's selling you milk and your buying it - then isnt everyone happy ?

Also, milking has nothing to do with sacrificing quality.. because games that aren't that successful sometimes have quality - and thats not always enough to succeed either...



Jay520 on 29 August 2011
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:


Like I said, they're using Kinect to expand the userbase while leaving 3rd parties for the core. Is that a good idea? Possibly. As far as sales are concerned, they seem to be doing just fine.

I only count Halo 3 & Reach. What are you including? Halo Wars or ODST ? Even if there's been 3 releases, that would mean only 4 Halos this gen. (Halo 5 will be releasing two or more years after Halo 4, at which point the nextbox will likely be out.) Games like Uncharted & AC will likely be seeing 4 releases this gen, and I wouldn't call either of those milked. But then again, that's just my opinion.

No, if the quality is consistent, then I wouldn't say Halo is milked. But then again, my definition of milked is dependent upon quality, while yours isn't.

Halo 3, ODST, Reach (3 Full priced retail games).  Wars is a usage of the Halo IP but different game.  4 Halos so far with one releasing what ... this Christmas? Again you said that 343 Studios might not have the talent to make another game quality, yet you are entrusting them to take a game that has a high bar set for quality and making a quality game?   By your very words, you are saying that if 343 studios makes a poor Halo then it would be a milked franchise.

The other aspect to this story is, type of game.  Uncharted doesn't have a wildly successful multi-player component. Most people who purchase the game, purchase it for Single-player and the new treasure hunting story.   In my opinion, Uncharted would be slightly better then Halo for releasing 4 games based on this movie-esque dynamic to it that drives the fun.  However, Sony would still be milking it dry.

Four releases (minimum) is far too many for a game like Halo.  It tarnishes the image it has and the quality it has.  Just like it would if Nintendo released four Zelda's in one generation, or 4 Mario Platformers, Or 4 Mario Karts. 



I wouldn't consider ODST to be a full-fledged title, but for the sake of the argument, let's say it is. That makes 3 Halos so far with another releasing next year. That makes 4 releases this gen.

As for 343 studious and their future with Halo. They are pretty experienced with the IP. They've been working with Bungie on Halo for over four years and there've been some ex-Bungie devs who went to 343. I think they'll do fine. But if they fail, then yes you could call Halo milked

The second & third paragraph is subjective. I would say four Halos/Uncharteds/AC this gen wouldn't constitute them being milked, nor would it cause a tarnish in quality, especially when consider the length of this generation. But that's my opinion.

rf40928 on 29 August 2011
Rpruett said:
Jay520 said:
 


Like I said, they're using Kinect to expand the userbase while leaving 3rd parties for the core. Is that a good idea? Possibly. As far as sales are concerned, they seem to be doing just fine.

I only count Halo 3 & Reach. What are you including? Halo Wars or ODST ? Even if there's been 3 releases, that would mean only 4 Halos this gen. (Halo 5 will be releasing two or more years after Halo 4, at which point the nextbox will likely be out.) Games like Uncharted & AC will likely be seeing 4 releases this gen, and I wouldn't call either of those milked. But then again, that's just my opinion.

No, if the quality is consistent, then I wouldn't say Halo is milked. But then again, my definition of milked is dependent upon quality, while yours isn't.

Halo 3, ODST, Reach (3 Full priced retail games).  Wars is a usage of the Halo IP but different game.  4 Halos so far with one releasing what ... this Christmas? Again you said that 343 Studios might not have the talent to make another game quality, yet you are entrusting them to take a game that has a high bar set for quality and making a quality game?   By your very words, you are saying that if 343 studios makes a poor Halo then it would be a milked franchise.

The other aspect to this story is, type of game.  Uncharted doesn't have a wildly successful multi-player component. Most people who purchase the game, purchase it for Single-player and the new treasure hunting story.   In my opinion, Uncharted would be slightly better then Halo for releasing 4 games based on this movie-esque dynamic to it that drives the fun.  However, Sony would still be milking it dry.

Four releases (minimum) is far too many for a game like Halo.  It tarnishes the image it has and the quality it has.  Just like it would if Nintendo released four Zelda's in one generation, or 4 Mario Platformers, Or 4 Mario Karts. 


Id say if you're putting out alot of games and people are buying them you've just got a winner.. The only reason to develop games is to sell alot..  The majority of titles on any given console never sell enough to ever hope to get milked... Most of these titles have a single release and they are dead in the water..

Without using the same words "Milking" Id think the ultimate goal of any developer is to make a game that can "milk" money from someones pocket.. For the reason of being fair:  Any good or great game accomplishes this - just some to more of an extent then others.... If a game can be "milked" I suppose they have a winning formula..