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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Can somebody explain how a company can just abandon their franchises like this?

 

Why do companies let their beloved franchises go?

1.) Because they're b**ch-made. 28 65.12%
 
2.) Because they're b**ch-made. 15 34.88%
 
Total:43

This is a topic about things that have mainly happened in the past. I'm also mainly focusing on Nintendo and Sony's b**ch ass's! I was thinking about it and it made me mad.

 

I want you all to put your selves in Sony and Nintendo's shoes as if you were the head of each company respectively.

 

How THE F**K could Sony sit here and let Crash Bandicoot and Spyro The Dragon go like that? How!? These franchises were popular and you just made the decision to just abandon them?

Take this "L(loss)"!

 

And how THE F**K could Nintendo let Rare and all its franchises go like that? How!? This is worse than Sony's situation. Like really, Nintendo? You just ABANDON them that easily? How fu***ng dare you let rare go like that after all you've been through!

 

Take this "L(loss)"!

 

If you look at Microsoft with the Gears Of War situation, you can clearly see that they wern't with any of that " oooh-look-at-me-we're-Sony-and-Nintendo-and-we-abandon-beloved-franchises" shit!

 

Can anybody explain the logic behind why these companies ABANDONED these VERY POPULAR franchises like this?

 

If you were Sony, would you have did the same by letting Crash Bandicoot and Spyro The Dragon go? If so, why?

 

And if you were the head of Nintendo, would you have did the same by letting Rare and all their franchises go? If so, why?

 

I know these things happened a good while ago but I just cannot understand how they made the decision to let these franchises go the way that they did. Let's get to the bottom of this now



Around the Network

Rare case was that Microsoft made an offer to the owners they couldn't refuse. Also Rare themselves were declining, while Microsoft didn't handle rare correctly, rare was already becoming a former shell of itself.

I will let someone else handle the sypro and crash stuff.



 

What if those franchises just...aren't profitable anymore?

 

There's no point in using nostalgia if people won't purchase your game.



Because no one wants to beat a dead cow. Not saying these franchises were dead. But it's better to remember a franchise as being iconic and amazing and loving to see a return of it (which they do by making HD collections) Instead of only stopping once everyone is sick of it.

Microsoft does not seem to care about that which is why Gears is still going. Epic don't want to make them anymore, Judgement was mediocre so they just pawned it off to another developer to keep the series going. Halo will get there as well eventually it'll just take longer, but even that is getting some series fatigue.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Not entirely certain but I think Crash Bandicoot had something to do with Naughty Dog needing a publisher and Universal Interactive stepping in but requiring the rights to the game to do so? Then when they joined Sony they had to leave the game behind? You'll have to double check that though.



Around the Network

Activision owns Crash Bandicoot, and Sierra owns Spyro. It's not up to Sony, it's up to those two companies.  Insomniac orig created the Spyro series, but never had ownership of the IP, it's false to assume that Sony owned it, at any time (or Insomniac for that matter).  Crash Bandicoot, was originally done by ND, and quite frankly, I'm more satisfied with what ND's done since then.  Uncharted + TLOU vs Crash?  Yeah, I'll take the former.



Acevil said:
Rare case was that Microsoft made an offer to the owners they couldn't refuse. Also Rare themselves were declining, while Microsoft didn't handle rare correctly, rare was already becoming a former shell of itself.


This



nice

What do you mean? We still have Skylanders! ;)



Just because a game series is loved by a lot. That a lot failed to cover costs. Simple. These companies don't abandon games for no reason. Same as comic fans yell "WHY'D YOU CANCEL THIS COMIC. IT WAS SO GOOD". The sales kept going down. Simple as that. I love a lot of TV shows and movies that went nowhere. But they screwed up somewhere down the line. And got people to quit. No matter how much love fans give. It can't keep something alive. Look at Firefly and Farscape. Both got movies made to finish their stories. But both movies failed. It showed the audiance isn't big enough to actually keep them going in the first place.



I don't think that Sony at any point owned Crash or Spyro. And even if they did, would you have wanted ND and Insomniac to just keep developing those games? At least in the case of ND I'm extremely happy that they got to move on from Crash since otherwise they wouldn't be where they are now.