What game franchises need a change of developer?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by RulerofGondor (390 posts) -

System Wars, there are a whole lot of franchises out there that are old, and have a lot of baggage behind them; franchises with history and heritage, that still survive, and yet arguably are struggling to even stay relevant. I believe that a franchise can be fully reinvigorated if a new development team, with fresh ideas and a new perspective, comes in and attempts to develop a new game in a struggling franchise. Of course, I believe that the core essence of the franchise still needs to be maintained at all costs, and that thus the new developer has a grave responsibility of maintaining the franchise's legacy, but also reinventing it and making it relevant again. It's a fine line to walk.

With all of that out of the way, these are the franchises I think should change developers, at least for the time being, and these are the developers I think they should go to:

The Legend of Zelda:I love Zelda, but the series is growing stale. It peaked on the N64, and since then it has been in a mad race with itself to recreate the glory of those days, even as its developers and custodians continue to completely miss the point of what made Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask so great in the first place. i respect Aonuma for what he has done, but after having wasted nearly 100 hours of my life on Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, I think he needs to step back from the franchise.I think either Monolith Soft or Retro Studios should develop the next Zelda game.

Final Fantasy:Another classic franchise that has completely lost its way, Final Fantasy's fall from grace is perhaps symbolic of the decline of its genre as a whole. Final Fantasy hit its peak in the Playstation era, and Square Enix, in an admirable attempt to keep things fresh, has continued experimenting with the games, until now, they are borderline unplayable, stuffed to the brim with tropes, and reduced to parodies of their former selves. Square needs to stop developing Final Fantasy and perhaps pursue something new. Meanwhile,I think Final Fantasy should be handed off to Level 5, since they are perhaps among the only developers that aren't owned by Nintendo who can make a competent JRPG anymore.

Fallout:Fallout 3 was widely acclaimed, but it was equally widely reviled by the fans; Fallout New Vegas, the follow up developed by Obsidian, is often held to be the true successor to the classic Fallout games, and general consensus holds that Obsidian 'gets' Fallout better than Bethesda. Therefore, I believeObsidian should be handed Fallout.

Resident Evil:Resident Evil's rapid decline was saddening to watch, as we saw the franchise completely lose sight of what it had been, and lose its hold on being a compelling horror game, to become in turn an incompetent action game. Honestly, I do not know how Capcom screwed up so royally, but they did.I think Platinum Games should be given Resident Evil,as I am confident that they can craft a great game that stays true to the roots of the series.

Prince of Persia:Whereas I loved Ubisoft's take on the classic franchise, adn I honestly don't think there has been a single Ubisoft developer or published Prince of Persia title that I did not enjoy, I still believe the franchise could benefit from a change in developers that would endow it with a sense of freshness again. To this end, I believePrince of Persia should be tackled by Naughty Dog;I would love to see what their motion capture techniques could do to the franchise.

What franchises do you think need or would benefit from a change of developers?

#2 Posted by BPoole96 (22803 posts) -

Devil May Cry. Ninja Theory should not have touched that series.

#3 Posted by TrueAmerican007 (700 posts) -

Devil May Cry. Ninja Theory should not have touched that series.

BPoole96
#4 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -

Wall o'text, bro.

Give us a TL: DR version. It's late here.

#5 Posted by HarlockJC (25546 posts) -
I have to disagree with you about Zelda, I loved Zelda:TP still one of my favs from last gen, Also Windwaker was way to good to say that Zelda pecked with the N64. In turth people have had a problem with Zelda, many disagreed with them. Heck Zelda:TP had a large number of Game of the Year awards and heck even Gametrailers a couple of years ago named it one of the best games of the gen. All the Rare IPs need a change. I can agree with FF, let mistwalkers make the next one.
#6 Posted by Blazerdt47 (5669 posts) -

Battlefront 3 is the first game to come to mind. Strip it away from whatever is left of Free Radical/Crytek and give it to Bungie. Either that or resurrect Pandemic and let them finish this game. Super highly unlikely but oh well.:(

#7 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -

Battlefront 3 is the first game to come to mind. Strip it away from whatever is left of Free Radical/Crytek and give it to Bungie. Either that or resurrect Pandemic and let them finish this game. Super highly unlikely but oh well.:(

Blazerdt47
I would love to see Bungie's take on a Battlefront game. Oh my God. Dat shooting. Dat space combat. Dat scale. I think I need to change my pants.
#8 Posted by jdc6305 (3951 posts) -

System Wars, there are a whole lot of franchises out there that are old, and have a lot of baggage behind them; franchises with history and heritage, that still survive, and yet arguably are struggling to even stay relevant. I believe that a franchise can be fully reinvigorated if a new development team, with fresh ideas and a new perspective, comes in and attempts to develop a new game in a struggling franchise. Of course, I believe that the core essence of the franchise still needs to be maintained at all costs, and that thus the new developer has a grave responsibility of maintaining the franchise's legacy, but also reinventing it and making it relevant again. It's a fine line to walk.

With all of that out of the way, these are the franchises I think should change developers, at least for the time being, and these are the developers I think they should go to:

The Legend of Zelda:I love Zelda, but the series is growing stale. It peaked on the N64, and since then it has been in a mad race with itself to recreate the glory of those days, even as its developers and custodians continue to completely miss the point of what made Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask so great in the first place. i respect Aonuma for what he has done, but after having wasted nearly 100 hours of my life on Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, I think he needs to step back from the franchise.I think either Monolith Soft or Retro Studios should develop the next Zelda game.

Final Fantasy:Another classic franchise that has completely lost its way, Final Fantasy's fall from grace is perhaps symbolic of the decline of its genre as a whole. Final Fantasy hit its peak in the Playstation era, and Square Enix, in an admirable attempt to keep things fresh, has continued experimenting with the games, until now, they are borderline unplayable, stuffed to the brim with tropes, and reduced to parodies of their former selves. Square needs to stop developing Final Fantasy and perhaps pursue something new. Meanwhile,I think Final Fantasy should be handed off to Level 5, since they are perhaps among the only developers that aren't owned by Nintendo who can make a competent JRPG anymore.

Fallout:Fallout 3 was widely acclaimed, but it was equally widely reviled by the fans; Fallout New Vegas, the follow up developed by Obsidian, is often held to be the true successor to the classic Fallout games, and general consensus holds that Obsidian 'gets' Fallout better than Bethesda. Therefore, I believeObsidian should be handed Fallout.

Resident Evil:Resident Evil's rapid decline was saddening to watch, as we saw the franchise completely lose sight of what it had been, and lose its hold on being a compelling horror game, to become in turn an incompetent action game. Honestly, I do not know how Capcom screwed up so royally, but they did.I think Platinum Games should be given Resident Evil,as I am confident that they can craft a great game that stays true to the roots of the series.

Prince of Persia:Whereas I loved Ubisoft's take on the classic franchise, adn I honestly don't think there has been a single Ubisoft developer or published Prince of Persia title that I did not enjoy, I still believe the franchise could benefit from a change in developers that would endow it with a sense of freshness again. To this end, I believePrince of Persia should be tackled by Naughty Dog;I would love to see what their motion capture techniques could do to the franchise.

What franchises do you think need or would benefit from a change of developers?

RulerofGondor

I'm not on board with Zelda changing Developers. I can't wait to see what Nintendo does with Zelda in HD.

#9 Posted by Blazerdt47 (5669 posts) -

[QUOTE="Blazerdt47"]

Battlefront 3 is the first game to come to mind. Strip it away from whatever is left of Free Radical/Crytek and give it to Bungie. Either that or resurrect Pandemic and let them finish this game. Super highly unlikely but oh well.:(

DarkLink77

I would love to see Bungie's take on a Battlefront game. Oh my God. Dat shooting. Dat space combat. Dat scale. I think I need to change my pants.

Exactly. Everything would just be...incredible. The latest screen art from their game Destiny just shows how a Battlefront game would look. Not to mention the fact that over a dozen employees from Pandemic now work for Bungie after EA shut down their studio. It's a match made in gaming heaven.

#10 Posted by funsohng (28607 posts) -
Prince of Persia doesn't need to have a different developer making it, it simply needs to be made. By anyone. I would have loved if AC and PoP franchise went back-to-back yearly, like how Black Ops and Modern Warfare is doing. But no, AC had to go all the way.... I do love AC, but I would also love a sequel to PoP 2008.
#11 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
Prince of Persia doesn't need to have a different developer making it, it simply needs to be made. By anyone.funsohng
This. I find it kind of odd that the TC is complaining about Prince of Persia under Ubisoft when we haven't had a Prince of Persia game in four years period.
#12 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
Zelda by retro studios please.
#13 Posted by IAmNot_fun (3336 posts) -
Zelda by retro studios please. jg4xchamp
Bleh.
#14 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
Zelda by retro studios please. jg4xchamp
Not sure if want. I want Nintendo to let Anouma off the leash again. Let the man do what he really wants to do. Because the last time they did that, we got Majora's Mask.
#15 Posted by Blazerdt47 (5669 posts) -

I'd love to see Nintendo make a Ratchet & Clank game and Insomniac a Super Mario Galaxy game.

#16 Posted by charizard1605 (59574 posts) -
[QUOTE="funsohng"]Prince of Persia doesn't need to have a different developer making it, it simply needs to be made. By anyone.DarkLink77
This. I find it kind of odd that the TC is complaining about Prince of Persia under Ubisoft when we haven't had a Prince of Persia game in four years period.

Wasn't there one in 2010? I could have sworn Forgotten Sands released in 2010.
#17 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="funsohng"]Prince of Persia doesn't need to have a different developer making it, it simply needs to be made. By anyone.charizard1605
This. I find it kind of odd that the TC is complaining about Prince of Persia under Ubisoft when we haven't had a Prince of Persia game in four years period.

Wasn't there one in 2010? I could have sworn Forgotten Sands released in 2010.

Oh, yeah. That. I forgot that existed.
#18 Posted by Sagem28 (10498 posts) -

Letting level 5 develop a Final Fantasy game isn't a bad idea, really...

#19 Posted by BPoole96 (22803 posts) -
Zelda by retro studios please. jg4xchamp
Zelda by From Software :cool:
#20 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Zelda by retro studios please. BPoole96
Zelda by From Software :cool:

Pass that would be too much of an auctioned up take on Zelda. Retro studios to me seems better equipped to handle a Zelda that could throw in some new ideas but still maintain the high bar for the dungeons and puzzle designs of the series.
#21 Posted by Slow_Show (2153 posts) -

Splinter Cell. I was willing to put up with a lot of your sh*t, Ubi, but replacingMichael Ironside??? Get the f*ck out of here. Just put it in a cardboard box outside the studio with a "free to a good home" sign.

#22 Posted by jhcho2 (4479 posts) -

System Wars, there are a whole lot of franchises out there that are old, and have a lot of baggage behind them; franchises with history and heritage, that still survive, and yet arguably are struggling to even stay relevant. I believe that a franchise can be fully reinvigorated if a new development team, with fresh ideas and a new perspective, comes in and attempts to develop a new game in a struggling franchise. Of course, I believe that the core essence of the franchise still needs to be maintained at all costs, and that thus the new developer has a grave responsibility of maintaining the franchise's legacy, but also reinventing it and making it relevant again. It's a fine line to walk.

With all of that out of the way, these are the franchises I think should change developers, at least for the time being, and these are the developers I think they should go to:

The Legend of Zelda:I love Zelda, but the series is growing stale. It peaked on the N64, and since then it has been in a mad race with itself to recreate the glory of those days, even as its developers and custodians continue to completely miss the point of what made Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask so great in the first place. i respect Aonuma for what he has done, but after having wasted nearly 100 hours of my life on Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, I think he needs to step back from the franchise.I think either Monolith Soft or Retro Studios should develop the next Zelda game.

Final Fantasy:Another classic franchise that has completely lost its way, Final Fantasy's fall from grace is perhaps symbolic of the decline of its genre as a whole. Final Fantasy hit its peak in the Playstation era, and Square Enix, in an admirable attempt to keep things fresh, has continued experimenting with the games, until now, they are borderline unplayable, stuffed to the brim with tropes, and reduced to parodies of their former selves. Square needs to stop developing Final Fantasy and perhaps pursue something new. Meanwhile,I think Final Fantasy should be handed off to Level 5, since they are perhaps among the only developers that aren't owned by Nintendo who can make a competent JRPG anymore.

Fallout:Fallout 3 was widely acclaimed, but it was equally widely reviled by the fans; Fallout New Vegas, the follow up developed by Obsidian, is often held to be the true successor to the classic Fallout games, and general consensus holds that Obsidian 'gets' Fallout better than Bethesda. Therefore, I believeObsidian should be handed Fallout.

Resident Evil:Resident Evil's rapid decline was saddening to watch, as we saw the franchise completely lose sight of what it had been, and lose its hold on being a compelling horror game, to become in turn an incompetent action game. Honestly, I do not know how Capcom screwed up so royally, but they did.I think Platinum Games should be given Resident Evil,as I am confident that they can craft a great game that stays true to the roots of the series.

Prince of Persia:Whereas I loved Ubisoft's take on the classic franchise, adn I honestly don't think there has been a single Ubisoft developer or published Prince of Persia title that I did not enjoy, I still believe the franchise could benefit from a change in developers that would endow it with a sense of freshness again. To this end, I believePrince of Persia should be tackled by Naughty Dog;I would love to see what their motion capture techniques could do to the franchise.

What franchises do you think need or would benefit from a change of developers?

RulerofGondor

Your statement about Fallout isn't true IMO. Fans probably made that claim because of diehard loyalty to Black Isle studios. The orginal creative mind behind any game is always important, but only half important. The other half depends on the company itself....everything from financial stability, talent, manpower, management and such.

Obsidian may get Fallout better than Bethesda, but Fallout 3 is still a better game than New Vegas. Herein lies the fundamental question. Is it more important to have the original creator with a volatile company? Or new creators with a stable company? It's been proven time and again that it takes both the company and the creator to make a good game.

Did any of the original Diablo creators make anything close to the quality of Diablo without Blizzard? Hellgate London bombed. Torchlight is decent but meh. What was John Romero without id Software? Daikatana bombed as well. What about Peter Molyneux? Are any of his games comparable to that of Dungeon Keeper, Syndicate and Populous when he was in Bullfrog Productions?

Although it's not the norm to compare the gaming industry with football, but i'll do it anyway. When a goal is scored, the striker gets the credit, akin to how the producer or creator does. However, everyone tends to forget about the midfielder who sets up the right circumstance for the striker to score. A striker is nothing without his home team. Similarly, a game creator/producer is nothing without the right company. Time will tell if Cliffy B will ever be able to contribute to the gaming industry the way he did in Epic, ever again.

#23 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
Your statement about Fallout isn't true IMO. Fans probably made that claim because of diehard loyalty to Black Isle studios. The orginal creative mind behind any game is always important, but only half important. The other half depends on the company itself....everything from financial stability, talent, manpower, management and such.

Obsidian may get Fallout better than Bethesda, but Fallout 3 is still a better game than New Vegas. Herein lies the fundamental question. Is it more important to have the original creator with a volatile company? Or new creators with a stable company? It's been proven time and again that it takes both the company and the creator to make a good game.

Did any of the original Diablo creators make anything close to the quality of Diablo without Blizzard? Hellgate London bombed. Torchlight is decent but meh. What was John Romero without id Software? Daikatana bombed as well. What about Peter Molyneux? Are any of his games comparable to that of Dungeon Keeper, Syndicate and Populous when he was in Bullfrog Productions?

Although it's not the norm to compare the gaming industry with football, but i'll do it anyway. When a goal is scored, the striker gets the credit, akin to how the producer or creator does. However, everyone tends to forget about the midfielder who sets up the right circumstance for the striker to score. A striker is nothing without his home team. Similarly, a game creator/producer is nothing without the right company. Time will tell if Cliffy B will ever be able to contribute to the gaming industry the way he did in Epic, ever again.

jhcho2
Interesting idea. Might even be true. But most people consider New Vegas the better game than Fallout 3, Romero was successful before id (and id was never the same once he left) and to an extent, after (Daikatana was the product of a number of terrible decisions, and by the end of if, it really wasn't his fault), Molyneux is more limited by Lionhead than anything else, and Cliffy B was a successful designer before he joined EPIC. I mean, it's a great idea, but there's a lot more to these stories than just the creator and the studio.
#24 Posted by mems_1224 (47789 posts) -
God no, don't give Obsidian Fallout. Bethesda releases buggy games but Obsidian releases broken games. Plus New Vegas wasn't as good as FO3. It made a lot of nice improvements to the gameplay but the setting was terrible and the story and missions weren't nearly as memorable as FO3. I think if Bethesda gets another go at Fallout next gen it is gonna be amazing. Skyrim was such a big jump from Oblivion, I can't wait to see what Bethesda does for next gen consoles.
#25 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
God no, don't give Obsidian Fallout. Bethesda releases buggy games but Obsidian releases broken games. Plus New Vegas wasn't as good as FO3. It made a lot of nice improvements to the gameplay but the setting was terrible and the story and missions weren't nearly as memorable as FO3. I think if Bethesda gets another go at Fallout next gen it is gonna be amazing. Skyrim was such a big jump from Oblivion, I can't wait to see what Bethesda does for next gen consoles.mems_1224
At this point, I'm beginning to think that you're just disagreeing with me on principle.
#26 Posted by mems_1224 (47789 posts) -
[QUOTE="mems_1224"]God no, don't give Obsidian Fallout. Bethesda releases buggy games but Obsidian releases broken games. Plus New Vegas wasn't as good as FO3. It made a lot of nice improvements to the gameplay but the setting was terrible and the story and missions weren't nearly as memorable as FO3. I think if Bethesda gets another go at Fallout next gen it is gonna be amazing. Skyrim was such a big jump from Oblivion, I can't wait to see what Bethesda does for next gen consoles.DarkLink77
At this point, I'm beginning to think that you're just disagreeing with me on principle.

I haven't even read any of your posts in this thread TBH. What do you disagree with?
#27 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="mems_1224"]God no, don't give Obsidian Fallout. Bethesda releases buggy games but Obsidian releases broken games. Plus New Vegas wasn't as good as FO3. It made a lot of nice improvements to the gameplay but the setting was terrible and the story and missions weren't nearly as memorable as FO3. I think if Bethesda gets another go at Fallout next gen it is gonna be amazing. Skyrim was such a big jump from Oblivion, I can't wait to see what Bethesda does for next gen consoles.mems_1224
At this point, I'm beginning to think that you're just disagreeing with me on principle.

I haven't even read any of your posts in this thread TBH. What do you disagree with?

On Fallout 3 being better than New Vegas. Especially in terms of writing. Bethesda's writing is ass.
#28 Posted by mems_1224 (47789 posts) -
[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] At this point, I'm beginning to think that you're just disagreeing with me on principle.

I haven't even read any of your posts in this thread TBH. What do you disagree with?

On Fallout 3 being better than New Vegas. Especially in terms of writing. Bethesda's writing is ass.

I mean, the writing in both games isn't anything special.
#29 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="mems_1224"] I haven't even read any of your posts in this thread TBH. What do you disagree with?

On Fallout 3 being better than New Vegas. Especially in terms of writing. Bethesda's writing is ass.

I mean, the writing in both games isn't anything special.

The writing in video games isn't anything special period. But Obsidian still spanks Bethesda in that department.
#30 Posted by jhcho2 (4479 posts) -

Interesting idea.

Might even be true. But most people consider New Vegas the better game than Fallout 3, Romero was successful before id (and id was never the same once he left) and to an extent, after (Daikatana was the product of a number of terrible decisions, and by the end of if, it really wasn't his fault), Molyneux is more limited by Lionhead than anything else, and Cliffy B was a successful designer before he joined EPIC.

I mean, it's a great idea, but there's a lot more to these stories than just the creator and the studio.

DarkLink77

The part about the studio can be influenced by various things, like whether the studio is in debt, or whether you have a publisher like EA or Activision who are more interested in churning out sequels, or even as simple as programmer talent or staff experience. A big time studio has more negotiating power in terms of demanding a budget or even a dateline. A new startup studio is at the mercy of the publisher, and is normally pressured greatly to produce something, often stifling creative talent. I can go on and on about this, but it's one simple fact. A talented creator needs a company who can compliment his talent. And looking at Obsidian's current situation, i don't think anybody can possibly show any talent there. Obsidian has been in financial turmoil for some time. Half of their staff had been laid off during the development of Dungeon Siege 3. All their games after NWN2 were diclining in quality. One man can't make a difference there.

#31 Posted by mems_1224 (47789 posts) -
[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DarkLink77"] On Fallout 3 being better than New Vegas. Especially in terms of writing. Bethesda's writing is ass.

I mean, the writing in both games isn't anything special.

The writing in video games isn't anything special period. But Obsidian still spanks Bethesda in that department.

Doesn't change the fact that the desert was such an incredibly boring world to explore and Vegas was a disappointment. Plus there are a lot of annoying bugs. The DLC in FO3 was waaaaaay better too.
#32 Posted by DarkLink77 (31721 posts) -
As you said, Daikatana bombed because of various reasons. And Molyneux is limited by Lionhead. All these reasons fall back to the relationship and circumstance of the creator and the studio.

The part about the studio can be influenced by various things, like whether the studio is in debt, or whether you have a publisher like EA or Activision who are more interested in churning out sequels, or even as simple as programmer talent or staff experience. A big time studio has more negotiating power in terms of demanding a budget or even a dateline. A new startup studio is at the mercy of the publisher, and is normally pressured greatly to produce something, often stifling creative talent. I can go on and on about this, but it's one simple fact. A talented creator needs a company who can compliment his talent. And looking at Obsidian's current situation, i don't think anybody can possibly show any talent there. Obsidian has been in financial turmoil for some time. Half of their staff had been laid off during the development of Dungeon Siege 3. All their games after NWN2 were diclining in quality. One man can't make a difference there.

jhcho2
There's a lot of talent at Obsidian. Most of those guys just happen to be writers/designers, and a lot of the issues with their games comes from tech and being either underfunded or rushed to meet deadlines, not lack of talent. It's just lack of time and money.
#33 Posted by jhcho2 (4479 posts) -

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]God no, don't give Obsidian Fallout. Bethesda releases buggy games but Obsidian releases broken games. Plus New Vegas wasn't as good as FO3. It made a lot of nice improvements to the gameplay but the setting was terrible and the story and missions weren't nearly as memorable as FO3. I think if Bethesda gets another go at Fallout next gen it is gonna be amazing. Skyrim was such a big jump from Oblivion, I can't wait to see what Bethesda does for next gen consoles.DarkLink77
At this point, I'm beginning to think that you're just disagreeing with me on principle.

I guess how good New Vegas is remains subjective, but we can draw a conclusion from Obsidian's previous games.

Let's start with Black Isle.

Bioware made the superior BG series. Black Isle made the inferior Icewind Dale series

Bioware made the superior KOTOR 1. Obsidian made the inferor KOTOR 2. Good game, but inferior to its predecessor

Bioware made the superior NWN1. Black Isle made the inferior NWN2. Vanilla NWN2 is a good game, but still inferior. NWN2: MotB was a severe decline. NWN2: SoZ is basically medieval merchant tycoon bearing a NWN name.

Then we have Fallout 3. And since we are disputing this, we'll exclude it. But general reviews seem to indicate that Fallout 3 is a better game. Metacritic score of 93 for Fallout 3 vs 84 for New Vegas?

Then we have the atrocious Dungeon Siege 3. If it wasn't for the credits which made clear of Obsidian's involvement, I would have thought that some low budget indie studio made the game

I know. They made the Fallout games and Planescape torment. But that was way back during the BG era when they were at their peak. The Black Isle from the 1998 period is long gone, and Obsidian's history of games doesn't seem to support your claim that New Vegas is necessarily better than Fallout 3. But anyway, to digress a little, I think Interplay was probably a good publisher. Companies like Black Isle and Bioware flourished under them. Both Black Isle and Bioware never made games better than those under Interplay ever again.

#34 Posted by campzor (34932 posts) -
call of duty... give it to respawn entertainment...the only ppl who have a clue.
#35 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -

[QUOTE="RulerofGondor"]

System Wars, there are a whole lot of franchises out there that are old, and have a lot of baggage behind them; franchises with history and heritage, that still survive, and yet arguably are struggling to even stay relevant. I believe that a franchise can be fully reinvigorated if a new development team, with fresh ideas and a new perspective, comes in and attempts to develop a new game in a struggling franchise. Of course, I believe that the core essence of the franchise still needs to be maintained at all costs, and that thus the new developer has a grave responsibility of maintaining the franchise's legacy, but also reinventing it and making it relevant again. It's a fine line to walk.

With all of that out of the way, these are the franchises I think should change developers, at least for the time being, and these are the developers I think they should go to:

The Legend of Zelda:I love Zelda, but the series is growing stale. It peaked on the N64, and since then it has been in a mad race with itself to recreate the glory of those days, even as its developers and custodians continue to completely miss the point of what made Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask so great in the first place. i respect Aonuma for what he has done, but after having wasted nearly 100 hours of my life on Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, I think he needs to step back from the franchise.I think either Monolith Soft or Retro Studios should develop the next Zelda game.

Final Fantasy:Another classic franchise that has completely lost its way, Final Fantasy's fall from grace is perhaps symbolic of the decline of its genre as a whole. Final Fantasy hit its peak in the Playstation era, and Square Enix, in an admirable attempt to keep things fresh, has continued experimenting with the games, until now, they are borderline unplayable, stuffed to the brim with tropes, and reduced to parodies of their former selves. Square needs to stop developing Final Fantasy and perhaps pursue something new. Meanwhile,I think Final Fantasy should be handed off to Level 5, since they are perhaps among the only developers that aren't owned by Nintendo who can make a competent JRPG anymore.

Fallout:Fallout 3 was widely acclaimed, but it was equally widely reviled by the fans; Fallout New Vegas, the follow up developed by Obsidian, is often held to be the true successor to the classic Fallout games, and general consensus holds that Obsidian 'gets' Fallout better than Bethesda. Therefore, I believeObsidian should be handed Fallout.

Resident Evil:Resident Evil's rapid decline was saddening to watch, as we saw the franchise completely lose sight of what it had been, and lose its hold on being a compelling horror game, to become in turn an incompetent action game. Honestly, I do not know how Capcom screwed up so royally, but they did.I think Platinum Games should be given Resident Evil,as I am confident that they can craft a great game that stays true to the roots of the series.

Prince of Persia:Whereas I loved Ubisoft's take on the classic franchise, adn I honestly don't think there has been a single Ubisoft developer or published Prince of Persia title that I did not enjoy, I still believe the franchise could benefit from a change in developers that would endow it with a sense of freshness again. To this end, I believePrince of Persia should be tackled by Naughty Dog;I would love to see what their motion capture techniques could do to the franchise.

What franchises do you think need or would benefit from a change of developers?

jhcho2

Your statement about Fallout isn't true IMO. Fans probably made that claim because of diehard loyalty to Black Isle studios. The orginal creative mind behind any game is always important, but only half important. The other half depends on the company itself....everything from financial stability, talent, manpower, management and such.

Obsidian may get Fallout better than Bethesda, but Fallout 3 is still a better game than New Vegas. Herein lies the fundamental question. Is it more important to have the original creator with a volatile company? Or new creators with a stable company? It's been proven time and again that it takes both the company and the creator to make a good game.

Did any of the original Diablo creators make anything close to the quality of Diablo without Blizzard? Hellgate London bombed. Torchlight is decent but meh. What was John Romero without id Software? Daikatana bombed as well. What about Peter Molyneux? Are any of his games comparable to that of Dungeon Keeper, Syndicate and Populous when he was in Bullfrog Productions?

Although it's not the norm to compare the gaming industry with football, but i'll do it anyway. When a goal is scored, the striker gets the credit, akin to how the producer or creator does. However, everyone tends to forget about the midfielder who sets up the right circumstance for the striker to score. A striker is nothing without his home team. Similarly, a game creator/producer is nothing without the right company. Time will tell if Cliffy B will ever be able to contribute to the gaming industry the way he did in Epic, ever again.

while I disagree with the notion that fallout 3 is a better game than New Vegas, I do really like this post. That said I'd say there is something to some big names. But yeah your overall point legit.
#36 Posted by jhcho2 (4479 posts) -

[QUOTE="jhcho2"]As you said, Daikatana bombed because of various reasons. And Molyneux is limited by Lionhead. All these reasons fall back to the relationship and circumstance of the creator and the studio.

The part about the studio can be influenced by various things, like whether the studio is in debt, or whether you have a publisher like EA or Activision who are more interested in churning out sequels, or even as simple as programmer talent or staff experience. A big time studio has more negotiating power in terms of demanding a budget or even a dateline. A new startup studio is at the mercy of the publisher, and is normally pressured greatly to produce something, often stifling creative talent. I can go on and on about this, but it's one simple fact. A talented creator needs a company who can compliment his talent. And looking at Obsidian's current situation, i don't think anybody can possibly show any talent there. Obsidian has been in financial turmoil for some time. Half of their staff had been laid off during the development of Dungeon Siege 3. All their games after NWN2 were diclining in quality. One man can't make a difference there.

DarkLink77

There's a lot of talent at Obsidian. Most of those guys just happen to be writers/designers, and a lot of the issues with their games comes from tech and being either underfunded or rushed to meet deadlines, not lack of talent. It's just lack of time and money.

Lack of time and money is still a 'studio problem'. Yes, the lack of money is because the publisher is unwilling to pay more, but that's still a studio probem. That was the reason why Hellgate London bombed. In Blizzard, Max Schaefer and Bill Roper had the luxury of reiterating and refining Diablo till it met Blizzard's quality standards. At the end of the day, Blizzard is the kind of company who emphasizes quality over time. The end result is a game that was finely tuned. In Flagship studios, they ran out of time and money. Why? Probably because EA and Namco Bandai isn't as forgiving with datelines as Vivendi Games. All of that falls under the 'studio problem', because it has something to do with the relationship between the studio and the publisher.

#37 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="jhcho2"]As you said, Daikatana bombed because of various reasons. And Molyneux is limited by Lionhead. All these reasons fall back to the relationship and circumstance of the creator and the studio.

The part about the studio can be influenced by various things, like whether the studio is in debt, or whether you have a publisher like EA or Activision who are more interested in churning out sequels, or even as simple as programmer talent or staff experience. A big time studio has more negotiating power in terms of demanding a budget or even a dateline. A new startup studio is at the mercy of the publisher, and is normally pressured greatly to produce something, often stifling creative talent. I can go on and on about this, but it's one simple fact. A talented creator needs a company who can compliment his talent. And looking at Obsidian's current situation, i don't think anybody can possibly show any talent there. Obsidian has been in financial turmoil for some time. Half of their staff had been laid off during the development of Dungeon Siege 3. All their games after NWN2 were diclining in quality. One man can't make a difference there.

DarkLink77
There's a lot of talent at Obsidian. Most of those guys just happen to be writers/designers, and a lot of the issues with their games comes from tech and being either underfunded or rushed to meet deadlines, not lack of talent. It's just lack of time and money.

or that they royally suck d*ck when it comes to time management. At some point their can base needs to stop making excuses for Obsidiana many short comings. As talented as they are they need to just flat out do better jobs.
#38 Posted by jhcho2 (4479 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="jhcho2"]As you said, Daikatana bombed because of various reasons. And Molyneux is limited by Lionhead. All these reasons fall back to the relationship and circumstance of the creator and the studio.

The part about the studio can be influenced by various things, like whether the studio is in debt, or whether you have a publisher like EA or Activision who are more interested in churning out sequels, or even as simple as programmer talent or staff experience. A big time studio has more negotiating power in terms of demanding a budget or even a dateline. A new startup studio is at the mercy of the publisher, and is normally pressured greatly to produce something, often stifling creative talent. I can go on and on about this, but it's one simple fact. A talented creator needs a company who can compliment his talent. And looking at Obsidian's current situation, i don't think anybody can possibly show any talent there. Obsidian has been in financial turmoil for some time. Half of their staff had been laid off during the development of Dungeon Siege 3. All their games after NWN2 were diclining in quality. One man can't make a difference there.

jg4xchamp

There's a lot of talent at Obsidian. Most of those guys just happen to be writers/designers, and a lot of the issues with their games comes from tech and being either underfunded or rushed to meet deadlines, not lack of talent. It's just lack of time and money.

or that they royally suck d*ck when it comes to time management. At some point their can base needs to stop making excuses for Obsidiana many short comings. As talented as they are they need to just flat out do better jobs.

Or the time allocated by the publisher may just be unreasonable for anyone to make a AAA game. Give James Cameron a million dollars and 9 months. I doubt even he can make a blockbuster movie

#39 Posted by Master_ShakeXXX (13361 posts) -

Capcom needs to give all of their franchises to Platinum Games and then go bankrupt.

#40 Posted by iiSnopel (8 posts) -
I do agree with a first-page comment. Ninja Theory really should not have touched DMC. Other than that... something tells me that Mortal Kombat is far better off with Netherrealm Studios rather than Midway... they did a bloody good job on the recent MK9 (One of my favourite fighters in my library) and I think they could continue on to do great things to the series. Without, of course, keeping to the same formula over and over.
#41 Posted by Namgis (3591 posts) -

Kotor should be in the hands of From Software. Harry Potter too.

-

ND would do well be The Walking Dead.

#42 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="iiSnopel"]I do agree with a first-page comment. Ninja Theory really should not have touched DMC. Other than that... something tells me that Mortal Kombat is far better off with Netherrealm Studios rather than Midway... they did a bloody good job on the recent MK9 (One of my favourite fighters in my library) and I think they could continue on to do great things to the series. Without, of course, keeping to the same formula over and over.

Um it's the same studio. Publisher is the big difference here.
#43 Posted by iiSnopel (8 posts) -
[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="iiSnopel"]I do agree with a first-page comment. Ninja Theory really should not have touched DMC. Other than that... something tells me that Mortal Kombat is far better off with Netherrealm Studios rather than Midway... they did a bloody good job on the recent MK9 (One of my favourite fighters in my library) and I think they could continue on to do great things to the series. Without, of course, keeping to the same formula over and over.

Um it's the same studio. Publisher is the big difference here.

Stupid, stupid me. Guess I better think through what I post...
#44 Posted by siLVURcross (26106 posts) -

Letting level 5 develop a Final Fantasy game isn't a bad idea, really...

Sagem28
nothx.
#45 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="iiSnopel"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="iiSnopel"]I do agree with a first-page comment. Ninja Theory really should not have touched DMC. Other than that... something tells me that Mortal Kombat is far better off with Netherrealm Studios rather than Midway... they did a bloody good job on the recent MK9 (One of my favourite fighters in my library) and I think they could continue on to do great things to the series. Without, of course, keeping to the same formula over and over.

Um it's the same studio. Publisher is the big difference here.

Stupid, stupid me. Guess I better think through what I post...

Well technically you're not wrong, but just something else changed. Midways mentality for what they wanted to publish could have dictated what we kept getting out of MK. MK under WB could be a better combo. WB has come up fairly quickly. Arkham City is legit, and picking up Rocksteady was smart. And picking up MK and neatherrealm was a good move considering how well MK9 did, and how well it was received. From what I hear Fear 3 isn't nearly the massive insult that Fear 2 was(although no where near what FEAR 1 was, but hey one step at a time here).
#46 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="Sagem28"]

Letting level 5 develop a Final Fantasy game isn't a bad idea, really...

siLVURcross
nothx.

Isn't level 5 suppose to be a good JRPG dev? Why would they suck with this?
#47 Posted by IAmNot_fun (3336 posts) -
[QUOTE="siLVURcross"][QUOTE="Sagem28"]

Letting level 5 develop a Final Fantasy game isn't a bad idea, really...

jg4xchamp
nothx.

Isn't level 5 suppose to be a good JRPG dev? Why would they suck with this?

Because making a final faptasy will tarnish their reputation.
#48 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="IAmNot_fun"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="siLVURcross"] nothx.

Isn't level 5 suppose to be a good JRPG dev? Why would they suck with this?

Because making a final faptasy will tarnish their reputation.

Idgi Final Fantasy besides 13(and I guess X, but f*ck off silvur I liked 10 when I was like 13) has usually been a very good series.
#49 Posted by IAmNot_fun (3336 posts) -
[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="IAmNot_fun"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Isn't level 5 suppose to be a good JRPG dev? Why would they suck with this?

Because making a final faptasy will tarnish their reputation.

Idgi Final Fantasy besides 13(and I guess X, but f*ck off silvur I liked 10 when I was like 13) has usually been a very good series.

So was Tony Hawk before it got ruined.
#50 Posted by jg4xchamp (49245 posts) -
[QUOTE="IAmNot_fun"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="IAmNot_fun"] Because making a final faptasy will tarnish their reputation.

Idgi Final Fantasy besides 13(and I guess X, but f*ck off silvur I liked 10 when I was like 13) has usually been a very good series.

So was Tony Hawk before it got ruined.

Well that got run into the ground, and they ran out of ideas. No team change in that case either right? Level 5 could have a different spin on a FF game. Or maybe get back to the core of what a JRPG needs, and less of the fluffy stuff these games get padded with.