Should Sega sell their franchises to Nintendo & Sony?

[duffmmann]

If such a thing ever happened, Bayonetta and Madworld would not go to Sony, they'd obviously go to Nintendo. However, I don't see Sega ever selling off their franchises any time soon, so this whole discussion is silly.

 

[RevPokemon]

Exclude Yakuza, Phanasty Star, Virtua Fighter and we're good

And give us a shenmue 3 while your at it

 

[Guild McCommunist]

If such a thing ever happened, Bayonetta and Madworld would not go to Sony, they'd obviously go to Nintendo. However, I don't see Sega ever selling off their franchises any time soon, so this whole discussion is silly.

No one wants to buy MadWorld, it sold horribly.

And its "spiritual successor" (Anarchy Reigns) wasn't on a Nintendo system. Oh, and it sucked a ton.

 

[Foxi4]

SEGA's not going anywhere, why are people assuming worst-case scenarios for no reason? They're downsizing certain departments, yes. They're shifting focus to their most profitable businesses, yes. Does that mean they're going to start selling IP's or that they'll go out of business? God no, not at all. All corporations go through transformations like this - Sony's been on a winning streak with the PS4 and they downsized certain gaming division-related businesses as well. You gotta cut the fat off every now and then, it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Social_Outlaw]

And give us a shenmue 3 while your at it

I knew I had forgot something lol, I had Shenmue II on the Xbox and nearly finished it until my disc gave up on me

 

[RevPokemon]

SEGA's not going anywhere, why are people assuming worst-case scenarios for no reason? They're downsizing certain departments, yes. They're shifting focus to their most profitable businesses, yes. Does that mean they're going to start selling IP's or that they'll go out of business? God no, not at all. All corporations go through transformations like this - Sony's been on a winning streak with the PS4 and they downsized certain gaming division-related businesses as well. You gotta cut the fat off every now and then, it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Simple.
People like to blow things up just for the sake of it. Also most people aren't really aware of the financial state of gaming companies unless it is ultra bad. Personally speaking Sony is more likely to go bankrupt (although I don't see that happening)

 

[duffmmann]

No one wants to buy MadWorld, it sold horribly.

And its "spiritual successor" (Anarchy Reigns) wasn't on a Nintendo system. Oh, and it sucked a ton.

The quality of Madworld wasn't the question, just that it was a Nintendo exclusive, would be quite odd if that game was sold to Sony as the OP suggested. Having said that, I enjoyed Madworld for what it was, it wasn't anything amazing, but it was enjoyable for a while, and I really did find great humor in the John Dimagio and Greg Proops commentary throughout the game. But no, I don't want another game in the series or anything like that.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

The quality of Madworld wasn't the question, just that it was a Nintendo exclusive, would be quite odd if that game was sold to Sony as the OP suggested. Having said that, I enjoyed Madworld for what it was, it wasn't anything amazing, but it was enjoyable for a while, and I really did find great humor in the John Dimagio and Greg Proops commentary throughout the game. But no, I don't want another game in the series or anything like that.

Oh no, I loved MadWorld, I'm just saying Anarchy Reigns was a turd.

But it's not really a franchise and it's nothing anyone would revive.

 

[RevPokemon]

Oh no, I loved MadWorld, I'm just saying Anarchy Reigns was a turd.

But it's not really a franchise and it's nothing anyone would revive.

Yep, sadly your right yet making a million generic fps games is acceptable and sells great

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Yep, sadly your right yet making a million generic fps games is acceptable and sells great

Well FPS games aren't even that prevalent. We have Call of Duty every year, which sells, but has seen diminishing success. After that there's what? Halo every couple of years? Battlefield? It's not really as much of a market flood.

Just no one wants to pick up a franchise that has the smallest of cult followings and dismal sales. As much as I liked it, it wasn't good enough to be a cult classic. There's no support for it to be one either; no one's gonna port it or remaster it and I don't even think it'll get an eShop release.

 

[RevPokemon]

Well FPS games aren't even that prevalent. We have Call of Duty every year, which sells, but has seen diminishing success. After that there's what? Halo every couple of years? Battlefield? It's not really as much of a market flood.

Just no one wants to pick up a franchise that has the smallest of cult followings and dismal sales. As much as I liked it, it wasn't good enough to be a cult classic. There's no support for it to be one either; no one's gonna port it or remaster it and I don't even think it'll get an eShop release.

I know sales are what matter in gaming not necessarily quality. It's just as a gamer I have always am upset when quality tittles that don't sell very well are scrapped yet games which sell great with average (or less) quality get tons of remakes and what not. Sure I get it is the smart business thing to do but I just don't care for it.

 

[duffmmann]

This is true, we are no longer in the midst of the PS2/Xbox years and early PS3/360 where every other game was a freaking FPS. Aside from Halo, Battlefield, and COD, the only FPSs you see are the occasional one here and there, but the fact is, COD and Battlefield have cornered the market. No one is trying to compete with them even if they have a better idea for a game, because loyalists keep going back to those games every year.

But this is a good thing, aside from what Portal did to the genre, no one has done anything significant or revolutionary for the genre in years, because there isn't much left to do. And this means developers have instead opted to pursue other new and unique games.

 

[Gahars]

I know sales are what matter in gaming not necessarily quality. It's just as a gamer I have always am upset when quality tittles that don't sell very well are scrapped yet games which sell great with average (or less) quality get tons of remakes and what not. Sure I get it is the smart business thing to do but I just don't care for it.

It's not just a gaming thing; you'll find that in every media, from books and music to film and television. The best stuff isn't always the most popular, or popular at all, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

This is true, we are no longer in the midst of the PS2/Xbox years and early PS3/360 where every other game was a freaking FPS. Aside from Halo, Battlefield, and COD, the only FPSs you see are the occasional one here and there, but the fact is, COD and Battlefield have cornered the market. No one is trying to compete with them even if they have a better idea for a game, because loyalists keep going back to those games every year.

But this is a good thing, aside from what Portal did to the genre, no one has done anything significant or revolutionary for the genre in years, because there isn't much left to do. And this means developers have instead opted to pursue other new and unique games.

The "realistic FPS" genre is also a shrinking market. They're seeing diminishing returns and jumping into it is a bad choice. Cornered, yes, but dying, also yes.

Portal isn't a FPS, it's a puzzle game played in the first person.

Also "there isn't much left" is a really shit argument. I mean platformers just involve you jumping on platforms. What more can be done? FPS games do have diversity, you can add any mechanics you could add to another genre and it'd work, provided the foundation is solid.

 

[RevPokemon]

The "realistic FPS" genre is also a shrinking market. They're seeing diminishing returns and jumping into it is a bad choice. Cornered, yes, but dying, also yes.

Portal isn't a FPS, it's a puzzle game played in the first person.

Also "there isn't much left" is a really shit argument. I mean platformers just involve you jumping on platforms. What more can be done? FPS games do have diversity, you can add any mechanics you could add to another genre and it'd work, provided the foundation is solid.

I agree every genre is repetitive in a sense. Puzzle games are, racing games,fighter,platforms, fps, and what not All follow a simple genre formula

 

[Social_Outlaw]

Well FPS games aren't even that prevalent. We have Call of Duty every year, which sells, but has seen diminishing success. After that there's what? Halo every couple of years? Battlefield? It's not really as much of a market flood.

Just no one wants to pick up a franchise that has the smallest of cult followings and dismal sales. As much as I liked it, it wasn't good enough to be a cult classic. There's no support for it to be one either; no one's gonna port it or remaster it and I don't even think it'll get an eShop release.

Huh? Wasn't Vampire The Masquerade getting a remake? It had poor sales but it was heavily supported with patches and updates throughout the years. There were people willing to do a remake until CCP games slayed it.

Well FPS games aren't even that prevalent. We have Call of Duty every year, which sells, but has seen diminishing success. After that there's what? Halo every couple of years? Battlefield? It's not really as much of a market flood.

 

[duffmmann]

The "realistic FPS" genre is also a shrinking market. They're seeing diminishing returns and jumping into it is a bad choice. Cornered, yes, but dying, also yes.

Portal isn't a FPS, it's a puzzle game played in the first person.

Also "there isn't much left" is a really shit argument. I mean platformers just involve you jumping on platforms. What more can be done? FPS games do have diversity, you can add any mechanics you could add to another genre and it'd work, provided the foundation is solid.

Portal is kind of an FPS, granted you aren't shooting guns to kill people, but you are shooting a gun that creates portals, in the first person, isn't that by definition, a First Person Shooter? This is what I mean by changing it up, they found a way to make an FPS a puzzle game instead of kill everyone game. And unless anyone finds a way to be more unique and innovative with the FPS genre like Portal was, the genre is going to die. Maybe someone will surprise me, but aside from what Portal did, I'm not seeing any innovation to the genre, or attempts at any such innovation. Frankly I'm not so sure what more could be done to the genre to give us a fresh new take.

 

[Gahars]

I agree every genre is repetitive in a sense. Puzzle games are, racing games,fighter,platforms, fps, and what not All follow a simple genre formula

I don't think that's the point. It's pretty reductive to state "All FPS' are the same" when you could say the same thing about any genre once you boil it down to its most basic elements. ("All racing games are the same, you just race.")

Portal is kind of an FPS, granted you aren't shooting guns to kill people, but you are shooting a gun that creates portals, in the first person, isn't that by definition, a First Person Shooter? This is what I mean by changing it up, they found a way to make an FPS a puzzle game instead of kill everyone game. And unless anyone finds a way to be more unique and innovative with the FPS genre like Portal was, the genre is going to die. Maybe someone will surprise me, but aside from what Portal did, I'm not seeing any innovation to the genre, or attempts at any such innovation. Frankly I'm not so sure what more could be done to the genre to give us a fresh new take.

I dunno, that's a little silly, like getting mad that fighting games still revolve around fighting people or platformers are still based on jumping and moving; there's still plenty of variety in those genres. It's not the shooting that's the problem in bad FPS games, it's a host of other issues (poor level design, poor weapon selection/feel, etc.). Portal was great as its own thing, but it's not as if that's the only direction there is.

There's plenty to choose from in the market besides the modern military shooters if that's not your thing. There's Wolfenstein: The New Order and Shadow Warrior if you want takes on more classic FPS design with modern polish, games like Tower of Guns mixing in procedurally generated levels, etc. Even the new Call of Duty is taking cues from Tribes and changing up how players can move and maneuver around environments. Granted, you'll get a better, more diverse selection on PC, but reports of FPS' demise are greatly exaggerated.

 

[RevPokemon]

I don't think that's the point. It's pretty reductive to state "All FPS' are the same" when you could say the same thing about any genre once you boil it down to its most basic elements. ("All racing games are the same, you just race.")




I dunno, that's a little silly, like getting mad that fighting games still revolve around fighting people or platformers are still based on jumping and moving; there's still plenty of variety in those genres. It's not the shooting that's the problem in bad FPS games, it's a host of other issues (poor level design, poor weapon selection/feel, etc.). Portal was great as its own thing, but it's not as if that's the only direction there is.

There's plenty to choose from in the market besides the modern military shooters if that's not your thing. There's Wolfenstein: The New Order and Shadow Warrior if you want takes on more classic FPS design with modern polish, games like Tower of Guns mixing in procedurally generated levels, etc. Even the new Call of Duty is taking cues from Tribes and changing up how players can move and maneuver around environments. Granted, you'll get a better, more diverse selection on PC, but reports of FPS' demise are greatly exaggerated.

yeah shooters can be diverse and enjoyable just like every other genre. The issue of all genres caneffect each other as bad camera, poor ai, poor level design, boring objectives can haunt all types of games