How can franchise be called great if most games in it are bad???

This topic is meant for serious talk, not for trolling. And now to the question...

How can franchise be called great, if most games in the said franchise are considered bad even by the fans of the said franchise???

Consider Sonic as the perfect example.

Now, there are approx hundred Sonic games (including spin offs). But less than ten of those games are considered great. The rest fall to the mediocre-pretty bad category.

Despite this, Sonic is often included among the greatest franchises of all time.

But how can Sonic franchise be great if 90% of the games in it are actually rubbish, if you'll pardon my french?

Makes no sense to me. Iconic franchise, sure, but great? Nope.

Another good example is Halo. According to fans and most critics, less than half the Halo games are great, while rest are failures. Yet this series too is considered great franchise. Why?

I could go on. But I wont.

Bottom line is: if over half the games in a franchise are considered bad by both critics and regular gamers, then the franchise should not be called great. That's my take anyways.

But what do you think?

This probably should be in SW, as it will inevitably go in that direction.

@henrythefifth:

The fan base carries every franchise and as far as Sonic goes, they're very split with what's good and bad. Some fans prefer the 3D games over the 2D ones and others prefer the Sonic Generations/Unleashed over the Dreamcast games. Personally, I fall in line with the newer fans despite being a fan since the Sega Genesis. I think Sonic is better now than he's ever been and put him right up there with Mario.

And I dunno where you get the idea about Halo. The only game that really failed was Halo 5.

I've never been a huge fan of Sonic. Mainly the 2D games. But I liked what I played of Unleashed & Sonic Generations. Sonic Adventure 2 was also pretty good.

@henrythefifth: Halo’s popularity continues due to its online multiplayer. The campaigns are a mishmash, but the fans come and stay for the multiplayer.

Halo 5 comes to mind as a good example of this.

Halo is a good series not many better FPS games in the genre.

Well, most Halo fans I know only love Halo 1 and 3, and think the rest are mediocre games. (inc Halo Wars etc.) That's why I listed it as a example.

But Resident Evil is much better example!

Most people here would say Resi is one of the greatest franchises ever.

But. At the same time, most people here would agree that most Resi games are actually poo. And yes, I mean those horrid PS2-PS3 era Resi games that everyone hates. For a good reason too!

So, we have a franchise where most games are pretty bad, yet it is counted as a great franchise by every gamer. What gives?

People over look the bad games.

@henrythefifth:

Rubbish isn't french. UK use that word.

As for the topic ... I think a lot of people mix iconic and great.

Lara Croft is iconic the PS1 games are very terrible.

Sonic games are iconic but all the 3D ones are very mediocre

Mortal Kombat is iconic but every games they publish during the PS1 and PS2 era ( 3, 4, Deadly Alliance, Deception, Armaggedon and every spin off ) are very bad ... almost killed the franchise.

Devil May Cry is iconic now but 2, 4 and the reboot are quite shit.

etc

I agree actually, Fall Out (for example) doesn't deserve to be called great when most of them are complete garbage. I look forward to The Outer Worlds making Fall Out obliterate

But Resident Evil is much better example!

Most people here would say Resi is one of the greatest franchises ever.

Oh Henry, they are great games. You just need to live with it, even if they don't cater your taste.

Sometimes sales and fans' demand trumps quality. Take Senran Kagura games for example. None of them ever acclaimed by Japanese and non-Japanese critics but it sold like hot cakes for many years. Recently the original creator left the studio for undisclosed reasons and they are skipping Sony in favor of Nintendo and PC, hoping to make more money.

I guess as long as there are lonely, perverted men aged 18-30 who digs into anime chicks, crap franchise Senran Kagura will continue to exist.

For the same reason that The Simpsons is considered to be one of the greatest TV shows of all time even though it has had more bad seasons than it has had good seasons at this point.

The high points in a franchise don't get erased by the low points.

Most of it comes down to opinion anyway. But just because there are 5 games I don't like in a series and 2 I do like, doesn't mean the 5 lousy ones override the 2 good ones.

Can you honestly say that you love the PS3/360 era Resi games???

PS2 era wasn't that bad, just mediocre, when it came to Resi, (and the one on GameCube was actually good!). But the ones I played on 360, still give me nightmares. Because they were so horrible!

Hard to believe Resi survived the PS3/360 era, what with the painful movies dragging the franchise down as well...

@henrythefifth: People consider RE a great series because just about every mainline game in the series is great (even though I personally loved 6, I will concede it is not a popular game) and it popularized the survival horror genre. I get that most of the spin-offs were pretty terrible but very few people look at those as actual parts of the series. I don't know anyone who judges the franchise based on titles like dead aim, racoon city, or outbreak for example. I find typically people judge a franchise by its impact on the gaming landscape and the overall quality of its mainline titles, in those regards RE deserves its status as a great franchise.

@clefdefa: I disagree with you on the DMC series, everyone will agree that DMC 2 is a trash game, but 4 and the reboot were both very solid games that garnered generally positive reviews from those who actually played them, they may not have sold well for one reason or another but they were definitely well recieved and well made games.

FO is in the same category as Halo for a lot of people. While people might like Bethesda Fallout, most of the reverence for the series comes from the Interplay Fallout games, which in fact have a closer connection to the Outer Worlds, when you consider who is developing that game, than the current Fallout series. Similar with Halo, I find the campaigns get progressively better up to Reach (and that includes ODST, which I love for some very different reasons). The new devs just don't have a clue how to make a decent Halo campaign. Silent Hill up to 4. Crash Bandicoot, Spyro. People mentally segregate series into eras and judge by that.

I would also say people remember the fun they had more than the fun they didn't. If you deliver on the highs, it buys you some credibility to endure the lows and that a series may be heralded even as many of the games are not successful, just kind of affirms how great those high moments were. That shouldn't be dismissed as most game series won't even come close to building the memories that Halo, Sonic and others have. Makes them worth remembering, regardless of where they end up in the future.

@henrythefifth: Some certain games in the series have their own fans and haters. Resident Evil 4 fans thought it was fresh new take on the series with better controls and camera angles but fans or previous 3 games thought the fourth game ruined the franchise by making it more action-oriented, leaving its horror part behind. Fifth and sixth are no better or even worse than fourth. The franchise returned to its horror roots in seventh game but most fans of earlier games hates its first-person perspective and melee-oriented combat as apposed to third person firearm-oriented of the previous games. The remake of the second game released in this year, combining horror elements in first 3 games with gameplay of the fourth game and it worked, able to win the hearts of older fans as well as newer ones.

I don't want to talk about spin-off games especially Operation Raccoon City that tarnished the franchise for many years to come. According to some rumors it was an attempt by Capcom to outsource much smaller studio(Slant Six games) just like what Square-Enix did to Left Alive in this year. Slant Six Games closed its doors in 2013, a year after ORC were released. In my opinion Resident Evil 6 and ORC was considered to be its "dork age" that almost killed the franchise but was able to rebound in recent years with the release of seventh game in 2017 and remake of its second game in this year(2019).

Hmm, only Fall Out game I've managed to have fun with is Fall Out 4 due to id Software doing the gun mechanics. Otherwise I was done in a few hours, those games just frankly play horribly.

Admittedly I haven't played the older/pre Bethesda generation games. I've read they're more about choice/ writing than being well made games. Much like Ultima VII which I recently tried playing. And can honestly say some of these games just never had very good gameplay and won on different merits.

From what I played Fall Out 3 was just a cheaply put together The Elder Scrolls game, with many cut corners. And that's not saying TES don't cut corners. . So what are we left with?

V.A.T.s the video game_

Besides V.A.T.s I'm surprised anyone finds the 3D Fall Out games any fun honestly. But that's just my opinion, I know a few here like it's dark sense of humor. I just personally think other games did that better, with better writing, while also being a good game.

The Outer Worlds is running on an engine that's not hot garbage, talent behind the project, and will likely be more well designed and interesting over the three Bethesda games.

I don’t really know. Personally I think that Resident Evil and Halo are both great franchises however I also think that most games in them are great games. I even thought that RE5 and RE6 were really good games as well. ?‍♂️

Hmm, not counting spin-offs (ala Umbrella Corps) that's four games. And three of them are pretty good (5,Rev,Rev2). Not excellent. But decent none the less. Regardless they don't even match up to 30% the mainline entire series, so not sure if a relevant question to your own thread. Seeing as "most" and "bad" are the key words.

However if you do consider spin-offs which most people don't (two extra games) lets just say Resident Evil had worse than even what was shoved on the 360/PS3. Dead Aim, Gaiden, Survivor. . . list goes on. And even then my Fall Out mention didn't include the likes of Fall Out Pinball lol.

PS2 era wasn't that bad, just mediocre, when it came to Resi, (and the one on GameCube was actually good!). But the ones I played on 360, still give me nightmares. Because they were so horrible!

Different tastes, wants, and perspectives. And that's perfectly fine.

Also that's when I became a fan and saw the quality of the series, never began with the 32-bit games. Outbreak was my first Bio/Resi game and I was hooked. Remake, 4, Veronica. All solid entries. I was shocked how much Nemesis did going back to play the older games, it was pretty advance for a 32-bit game.

Hard to believe Resi survived the PS3/360 era, what with the painful movies dragging the franchise down as well...

That I will agree with, after the annoying spin-offs and Resident Evil 6 I was on the Evil Within bandwagon hoping Capcom just let the series die. They bounced back however so I'm not exactly in a position to complain, Remake 2 is one of the best games this generation. For a Survival Horror fan like myself it cracks my top five list!

Movie games usually hold franchises in shame unless fully animated.

Ever watch the live Tekken movie? of course you haven't. No one wants to.

Too bad Outer Worlds will be Epic exclusive on PC until late 2020.

Back to topic I think Onechanbara(Big Sister Rose?) another crap franchise with none of its game ever acclaimed. Like Senran Kagura it was aimed to horny, lonely males with even worse graphics. The PS4 version of the game looks like an extremely bad port of PS3 version despite being PS4 exclusive.

On the women's side, countless of otome games that come out every year for consoles, PC and mobile phones. very, very few of them were acclaimed but rest of them are just digital version of childish wet dreams for young, lonely females. Even worse some of them try to romanticize or glorify abusive "relationships" with main character(usually a placeholder for players) had severe version of Stockholm Syndrome. If fans demanded that, why bother to improve the whole genre?

@pook99:

For Resident Evil : 1 to 3 where they got their creds. Veronica felt like they were out of stamina while still good enough. 4 as a game is freaking good but as a Resident Evil it felt so different and so not that much Resident Evil ... they did continue that trend with 5 and 6 at that point they saw how crappy their idea was.

Resident Evil 7 was a step in the right direction. Very inspired by RE1. Then they did RE2 remake ... an amazing game. So Resident Evil in every way but still not exactly the OG RE2. But even though it is different it felt the same. They did themselves with 7 and RE2 remake.

Just like they put Street Fighter back on the map with SF IV. All they did on the PSOne, PS2 didn't caught much attention ... and one of those SF was in 3D ( y'know since Virtua Fighter and Tekken did so well ) and it was the worst.

AS for DMC. DMC2 was bad very bad. DMC4 wasn't good. They decided to reboot it after how poor DMC4. The reboot while not a bad game it was a crappy DMC too ... They seem to have redeem themselves with DMC5.

If you talk about DMC ... people will talk about 1 and 3 and discard the rest... same shit with RE ... they will talk about the original Trilogy and both remake or they'll talk about RE4.

agreed that dmc 2 was very bad, but 4 and the reboot were not. Of course you may not have enjoyed them, which is fine, but objectively speaking they were released too good reviews and maintain high scores on aggregate review website. Sure they were not as great as 1,3, or 5, but by any measurable means they were very solid games.

What's your take on storylines in Resi games, tho??? (and this question is to all above who say Resi is all round good stuff!)

Personally that is yet another thing that kinda keeps disappointing me. The main story behind Resi is really great and evocative, but the games fail to use this story to good effect.

Resi1 has that great mystery-survival horror story. Resi 2 and 3 had ok stories too. But after that, the storylines just went south and I cannot remember any PS2-PS3 era resi where I would've been blown away by the story.

Well, that's how I feel about it. Games like this must have story that pulls you in, and not many Resi games do.

I found the stories in all the mainline Resident Evil games to be pretty enjoyable.

100% agree, I love finding things out as well. Remake 2 showed us Jill has a pet dog. What will that alter in Nemesis Remake?

Lore notes and documents in Resident Evil is pretty consistent and well developed, especially 1,2,3,Veronica, Zero, Outbreak, Outbreak 2.

If one just plays games for long and high budget cutscenes? The sad part is they just do not factor a games overall quality like gameplay does, which Capcom excel at. Capcom are no means great story tellers, never claimed to be, and if you want that sort of thing seek out Telltales next game. .

Capcoms on the up_and_up. And Resident Evil is one of the highest praised gaming series in the gaming industry. It's not coincidence.

@RSM-HQ: I didn't know you played Fall Out games. I haven't play any of them. I just don't get why everybody in the gaming community are hyped over The Outer Worlds. What am I missing? As for the topic/question, it's interesting & has me thinking. I can think of gaming franchises that are iconic, but ain't great: Splinter Cell (Double Agent was the last good SC game), Call Of Duty (COD 4 Modern Warfare was the very last excellent game), Soul Calibur (first & second games are excellent) & Halo (Halo: C.E., Halo 3 ODST & Halo Reach are only the best games in that franchise to me).

@BigCat2K20: I've played the third and fourth game. Always wanted to enjoy them because I'm a fan of a good shotgun to a mutants face, plus the series does try and have a dark sense of humor. Sadly it just fell as a cheap and further rushed Elder Scrolls game/ with a mad max twist. Even reuses many assets from TES games Morrowind and Oblivion.

I just don't get why everybody in the gaming community are hyped over The Outer Worlds

Hmm, hyped is not my word, "hopeful" fits me better. And honestly looking at the track record, doesn't seem much reason not to be at least hopeful.

The Outer World uses good ol' reliable Unreal, over the Gamebryo engine Bethesda has been using forever (and will do for the next two titles).

TOW too has a developer that has a positive recent reputation. Bethesda however has been anti-customer, lying to the public, and selling poor quality products.

Let's look at latest entries-

Bethesda Studio made Fall Out 76

Obsidian Entertainment made Pillars of Eternity II

I think that shows a quality difference.

And while I will never play Fall Out: New Vega, have read it's better than Bethesda Studios efforts despite Obsidian Entertainment only having one year to develop FO:NV. While Fall Out 3 had two years and is considered the lesser game by majority fans.

You know Fall Out standards are real low when this(^) is what they call "better than Fall Out 3". Not a rare bug either, and only with fan patches on P.C. does this have a guaranteed resolve.

I do like Bethesda as a publisher. But as a developer, they've been "meh" to bad for sometime now. What I found most suggesting this, the only parts I liked about Fall Out 4 was already credited to id Software, and not Bethesda Studio.

Eitherway, I'd rather play whatever Larian Studios is next working on honestly. But I'll keep an eye on The Outer Worlds.

New Vegas is great game, a must play for everyone. Even tho it does not really feel genuine Fallout. Or make sense.

For example, if you kill a dude from faction A in a remote location, your rep with faction A goes down. Immediately. Now how could they know I killed their dude since there were no witnesses? Yeah, that sort of illogical rep handling really peeves me off.

None of you count Revelations as a RE-games? I think they were pretty good, sorta return to the roots with puzzles and sneaking around with limited ammo.

I think there are far too many good good games in the RE-series to call it bad. I never really considered the other spin-offs as RE-games.

Know a lot is written however I clearly did in my #20 post above. The two Revelation games are considered main entries, despite having a side name like Veronica did. They fill the gaps in-between 4,5, and 6.

I think they were pretty good

Me as well, prefer them over Resi5 and 6. However I wouldn't rank them higher. Great seeing Barry back at anycase. We waited far too long.

*Also before I'm being misunderstood. I actually prefer Resi6 to Resi5 personally. Due to the highs. Overall I acknowledge Resident Evil 6 does a lot of things downright bad (chase scenes, three bad campaigns, some of the worst boss battles in the series, every single line of lore, QTEs). But! That's countered by both Ada and Leon/Helena having solid campaigns that seem to get what Resident Evil is to a degree higher than 5, jump back mechanic was surprisingly useful (and hilarious in coop), and Mercenaries being the best in the series. They even fixed the terrible A.I. coop issues from 5.

Resident Evil 5 is 'good' clunky action game, fun coop. But a 'meh' Resident Evil game, tried being too Gears of War, which didn't work with the stop and shoot structure of Resi4. Resident Evil 6 was broken up and while had great parts, it was flooded by awful set-pieces and poor game design.

It's difficult to ever want to return with either when TEW and Rev games are easily accessible and superior alternatives.

@RSM-HQ: I didn't really care for 5 or 6. I had 6 on the backburner a long time until I finally decided to finish it. They're ok games, but I play mostly alone so I don't like co-op games very much.

I see what you are saying. I saw many people talks about how great the Dragon Age franchise is ,only to understand they like only Orgins while they hate 2 and Inqusition. Which makes no sense...

Sonic is nostalgic because it was a pack-in with the Genesis and it had a ton of sequels in a short span, so everyone's played it either on their system or a friend's. As a game it was never particularly good: loads of trial and error and flash over substance.

My first Resi game was admittedly a coop game (Outbreak) so I'm never against the idea. However I do agree looking back, they are not very fun solo. And far to action heavy, with no real challenge, just set-piece after set-piece.

Only first 2 Saint's Row games were good. Third have good gameplay and selections of licensed soundtrack but poor story in comparison to previous two. Fourth was forgettable at best. Gat Out of Hell feels like glorified standalone expansion pack and forgotten as well. Though unrelated, Agents of Mayhem flopped and sent to bargain bins less than a month after its debut. Something went wrong in the studio perhaps.

I agree on this. SR 1&2 are still brilliant sandboxes. The first game also had awesome talk radio with totally outrageous 'serious talk' programs.

SR3 was just too bland to be fun. SR4 I've played through three times, tho. Its very good action game, with masses of fun.

The kept trying to 1up their last game not realising its not always a good idea. If they just stuck with how 1 and 2 were, they would of been better.

Yeah, probably. But quick note, New Vegas was not Bethesda, but actually some of the guys working on Outer Worlds now. Of course they got stuck working with that shitty engine.

The closest recent game to the Interplay Fallout games is Wasteland, but Original Sin is pretty close. Basically it went from that genre to an ARPG.

@Ish_basic: "three Bethesda games"- Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Fallout 76.

I already noted New Vegas was Obsidian.