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

Forums - Gaming - 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
WhiteEaglePL said:
If I would be the head of Nintendo.....I would rule the gaming world.

Its good to dream.



Around the Network
GTAexpert said:
WhiteEaglePL said:
If I would be the head of Nintendo.....I would rule the gaming world.

Its good to dream.


I night and day dream everyday.



WhiteEaglePL said:
GTAexpert said:
WhiteEaglePL said:
If I would be the head of Nintendo.....I would rule the gaming world.

Its good to dream.


I night and day dream everyday.

So do I and everyone, if they have any imagination.

Doesn't mean they come out to be true though



AZWification said:
Wright said:

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

 

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

How can we know for sure if a franchise isn't profitable anymore? It's not franchises like Crash are constantly getting games or something.


Ask Neversoft/Activision, I guess.  Really, there were a ton of Crash games after Sony.  Like most mascot based titles, the novelty wore off and gamers moved on.  Nothing but the big boys remain.  No nIghts, Aero, Adventure Island, etc.  Even Sonic and Donkey Kong are struggling.  I even expect LBP to do poorly.

 

Spyro became Skylanders and seems to be doing just fine, though.



Wright said:

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

 

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

they were profitable when Naughty Dog and Insomniac were making them and I don't think that's a coincidence.  The quality dropped well before the profitability became a problem.  Look at those crappy Crash and Spyro games on PS2 and they still sold over a million usually.  Once people realized the drop in quality then the sales stopped.  If the quality increases again it's reasonable to think (as long as advertising is adequate) that sales will follow.




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Around the Network

I don't think Nintendo had much of a choice with Rare, as someone mentioned. Also I believe at the time Ninty sold them Rare's output was lagging pretty bad- SFA was taking forever and the dev time + sales of Conkers I think added to their woes. I'm pretty sure they can still make handheld games for Nintendo- they could do a Banjo port surely if they wanted, and see how it sold? IMO Banjo was their main loss from the Rare deal, but it wouldn't have been worth it to keep the thing. Shame BK3 had to kill the franchise.

As for Crash, I think he peaked on the PS1, same with Spyro. If I remember the PS2 versions didn't sell as well? and yeah it's for the better that ND moved on, I think they had more room to breathe with Jak and Daxter



Astrosquall1 ~

Now that's a signature!

Sony never owned crash or spyro, just moneyhatted them.

And Nintendo never owned rare, then microsoft became majority share owner. Nintendo basically had to sell their shares at that point.



Ka-pi96 said:

Only problem with that is they didn't own Rare in the first place... you can't sell something that isn't yours...

I know

I meant, I would sell the other 49% but I would've tried to keep the Banjo IP as part of the agreement.



Things cost $$$, you can't bring things back based on love.

In the case of Crash, Sony never owned them. Naughty Dog sold it and something else to Activision to escape bankruptcy. Sierra was bought out from Activision.... Thus, Spyro.

Nothing Rare worked on in it's own time was owned by Nintendo... hell Nintendo didnt even have a controlling stake, they did have a large stake in Rare. Microsoft bought out 100% of the company



Crash and Spyro were never SONY IPs. Vivendi owned them. Once Activision and Vivendi merged, SONY wasn't needed anymore.



4 ≈ One