• Akira Toriyama passed away

    Let's all commemorate together his legendary work and his impact here

Which release schedule do you think is the best strategy for a franchise's health?

MysticGon

MysticGon

Member
Enthusiast
There are plenty of success stories for every scenario but which do you think is the most sustainable release schedule and which series could benefit from a change of their current strategy?

Personally I think Metroid Prime could do with a few tweaks so Nintendo can make themselves a Destiny type persistent online shooter that encourages co-op and exploration. Making it a generational game could do quite well for it.
 
I think generational releases are best because it gives people time to miss the franchise. I detest annual release cycles for games like CoD and sports franchises because they are obvious cash grabs where not much has changed from the previous game. Instead of churning out the same game every year the publisher could use their resources to develop some new IP with fresh ideas. Instead, they wait for some indie game to set the new trend and just copy that. That's what CoD did when the BR craze hit in 2017. AAA gaming is creatively bankrupt!
 
That's for the market to decide. I say go as much as you can, and go back to the drawing board when needed.
 
I think Nintendo's generational/bigenerational release does well, however there may be cases where this doesn't work well, franchises such as Bio, FF, and DQ were at their peak when releasing multiple games a generation, however there may be other factors contributing to success and decline besides just release frequency.
 
Most franchises don't see the returns of a Cod or Fifa or Nba2k or Madden, so if you do it yearly, you're more than likely gonna kill it sooner rather than later.

You build it strong enough, you do it generational and maybe do bi yearly updates with free dlc.
Give them a chance to miss you.

Otherwise you'll end up like Level5 and kill off viable franchises with oversaturation.
 
It depends on the franchise. People crave constant new content for gaas games, an annual release wouldnt even be enough for fortnite, they want new content every week.

For a single player entry i think one game every 3 years is good, once a generation was more viable when generations werent 8 years.
 
The problem with generational releases are that assets don’t get reused as often. My vote is biannually but in reality I prefer trilogies or duologies in each generation.
 
One or two titles across generations, on the one hand because the development phase always takes longer and on the other hand to prevent rapid wear and tear.
 
Once or twice per generation sounds about right. Sports games and Call of Duty aside, the era of game developer being able to release a trilogy of games (or more) from the same franchise within a single console generation is over. Game development is simply too complex and time consuming for that to happen nowadays.

MysticGon said:
Personally I think Metroid Prime could do with a few tweaks so Nintendo can make themselves a Destiny type persistent online shooter that encourages co-op and exploration.
Click to expand...

Metroid Prime and Destiny are nothing alike aside from being 1st person and sci-fi.
 
I don't post here very often, I love to just read the comments however I would love to give my answer to this awesome question. I think games should release once a generation. That way it will give Developers a chance to update games within a franchise using brand new fresh more powerful innovative Hardware.
 
Last edited:
I would say two or three releases per generation, supplemented with spin-offs and experimental titles depending on the series. This allows for quick mainline sequels that reuse assets, like Majora's Mask, and provide more releases without burnout.
 
Last edited:
awng782 said:
Once or twice per generation sounds about right. Sports games and Call of Duty aside, the era of game developer being able to release a trilogy of games (or more) from the same franchise within a single console generation is over. Game development is simply too complex and time consuming for that to happen nowadays.



Metroid Prime and Destiny are nothing alike aside from being 1st person and sci-fi.
Click to expand...
That's very true but exploration and in the case of Metroid Prime Federation Force co-op are also things it has in common.

It could go a Elden Ring/BOTW route where vast expanses having the more traditional areas hidden within them.
 
  • Generational for multiplayer-games (Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Splatoon)
  • Bi-Annual for big singleplayer-games that tell a continuous story (Mass Effect, Xenoblade, Assassin's Creed)
  • Annual for sports titles and gameplay-light singleplayer-games (The Walking Dead-series, FIFA)

The fact that games like Xenoblade, BotW or even Halo take 4-5 years in-between is hugely frustrating, because these games want to tell a multi-game spanning story, yet take 5 years to continue telling it. Can you imagine 5 years in-between a tv show? Whether or not you liked Halo Infinite's story, but waiting so many years for THAT?! And I love Xenoblade, but if Xenoblade 3 ends on another twist ending, I'll go insane. Yes, these big games require the time, but then publishers should create better, more efficient production plans, something that Ubisoft kinda does best, regardly of what you think about their individual games. If one Xenoblade-game takes 4-5 years in development, have two Xenoblade-games be developed at the same time so that a new one can release every 2 years. That would be a perfect concept for big games that tell a continuous story. For big games that don't care about continuity, once per generation is okay, too.
 
Somewhere between generationally and biannually, depending upon the franchise. If a franchise is narrative focused then biannual releases are best to keep the narrative fresh in people's minds.
 
MysticGon said:
That's very true but exploration and in the case of Metroid Prime Federation Force co-op are also things it has in common.

It could go a Elden Ring/BOTW route where vast expanses having the more traditional areas hidden within them.
Click to expand...

Metroid Prime getting multiplayer co-op is not the same as it becoming a GaaS constantly evolving game ala Destiny.

Open-world is something that Retro toyed with for Prime 3 but weren't able to achieve due to the technical limitations of the Wii. Maybe Prime 4 will have an open-world now that the hardware is more capable, but who knows 🤔
 
awng782 said:
Metroid Prime getting multiplayer co-op is not the same as it becoming a GaaS constantly evolving game ala Destiny.

Open-world is something that Retro toyed with for Prime 3 but weren't able to achieve due to the technical limitations of the Wii. Maybe Prime 4 will have an open-world now that the hardware is more capable, but who knows 🤔
Click to expand...
Yeah I'm not campaigning for the GAASification of Metroid just that it takes some modern game conventions and work it into it's design that makes sense.

When BOTW was in the oven Skyrim came up in one of the interviews iirc. Nintendo can take an idea from elsewhere an improve upon it immensely.
 
Depends on the game, market environment and company - there is no better choice, its all about making it work for you.

Also you probably wanna first explain what you define as a franchise being healthy because it might differ from what other people think of it.
 
Not often enough to get oversaturated, but often enough that you don't have to get impatient waiting for it. Basically as long as it takes a single studio to develop a sequel
 
I prefer once a generation. Get the most you can out of a generation of hardware., blow people away, and then make the consumer miss your product for you to max out the next generation. Instead of making constant sequels, I'd prefer developers work on many different IPs per generation rather than just one and wear it out. This means we get a variety of products rather than more of the same.

Granted, only Nintendo really adheres to the "one-per-generation" rule but I wish more did.
 
I like 1-2 games of like single player games, mainly around 3-4 years. Keeps from being too short or long a wait. Give titles a chance to breathe.
 
randomengine said:
The problem with generational releases are that assets don’t get reused as often. My vote is biannually but in reality I prefer trilogies or duologies in each generation.
Click to expand...
Asset reuse is absolutely still possible, even with generational releases. While there has been slight improvements over the generations as technology permits fewer compromises to visual fidelity, Nintendo has been able to leverage Mario character models that were created in the Wii era and scaled to fit the platform they have been intended for use on. Pokemon is at a point where similar asset reuse is now possible, if they aren't already engaged in it.
 
This is entirely dependent on the genre and kind of game you're making.

I don't think there's any one correct answer that applies to every game/genre/model, so I'm not sure what we're trying to do here.
 
Always been a fan of the 3D era generational Nintendo output. One game per system aka one entree ever 5 years. Which always made me laugh when I heard people say Nintendo’s always making Only Mario and Zelda. Dude how many Crash’s were on PS1, Jak and Daxter on PS2 and Sly Coopers? I get one great game a console. By the time I’m done I sit and wait for the next installment.
 
There's no easy way to apply a blanket statement I feel. Even if you try to divide things into categories I feel like many developers have their own schedules to go on. But having at least one release in a generation is probably enough to keep many series in the conversation.
 
Some studios are more efficient than others, and it also depends on the scope of the game. For example, HAL Labs were pumping out Kirby games all the time, especially on the 3DS, including spinoffs, but they ended up spending three years on Kirby and the Forgotten Land, and by the time the game releases next year, it will have been 4 years since Star Ailles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom