Changing what made your game great to begin with.

Changing what made it great to begin with. Is it a bad ideal, a risky gamble, or a good move.

What kind of gamer suggest that removing successful parts of a game in exchange for new parts which "might" be successful, is a great business model, and good for gaming. Casual gamer's who have no idea how the gaming market works, that's who. Any real gamer knows that when you break way parts of a game that worked, in exchange for anything YOUR GOING TO PISS OFF YOU FAN BASE. NEWSFLASH, that's where your money comes from, you don't want to lose or alienate your fan base.  A youtuber by the name of fastpager200 stated

 “but to me, breaking off elements of what made it successful and replacing them can turn out OK if it does it right. also, i am not talking about the first sequel i mean like very late in the series.“

I’m well aware that you shouldn't EVER take what a youtuber said seriously, but something about this particular comment got me thinking about what several game companies have decided to do. About how several of them have decided to change major elements of a game in hopes to reach out to a wider audience. Sadly the vast majority of them fall short. Why do they fall short you may ask? Well in my opinion it’s because they are changing major successful elements of their game to please people who never followed there game. They gamble with their fan base, innovating in areas that could alienate them, in hopes they gain new fans. Sadly it rarely ever pans out the way they hope. I mean I understand innovation, and I’m all for it, but not with a preexisting formula that has been known to work time and time again. I mean look at Square Inix, EA, and Ubisoft, each one had a great series, Final Fantasy for Square, Simcity for EA, and Assassins Creed for Ubisoft, and each one decided to try and change major elements to their preexisting formula, and were dealt a major blow in return from fans of the series.

Square Inix - Final Fantasy

Final Fantasy to me is the Call of Duty of Fantasy Action-Adventure/RPG’s. Like Call of Duty very few of the Final Fantasy series are actually sequels, only those like Final Fantasy X 2 and Final Fantasy XIII 2 and the yet to be released Lightning Returns are sequels to their respected titles. They are based off a Formula Square has used from the beginning, one that has been known to work time, and time again, and put numbers on the board. A formula that over time has been steadily growing, with Square taking out bad elements, in exchange for newer ones, in hopes they will serve to benefit the overall formula.  Over the years Final Fantasy has built up a fierce following, made up of gamers who tend to argue over just which Final Fantasy is better than the other. The biggest rivalry being “Cloud vs Squal” While Kelfka and Sephiroth remain the biggest antagonist in the series.

Recently Square released Final Fantasy 13, doing exactly what fastpager200 suggested. As a result many Final Fantasy fans hammered down on them hard, I personally didn’t even finish the game, I couldn't get into it like I did with the previous Final Fantasy’s. Why is that? Simple really, because they removed A LOT of what made the series great to me, there was no open world exploration, the Levels were closed off and linear, I couldn't back track in half the stages, and the combat was bad, half the time my party which were more then strong enough to kill a boss died because of stupid AI choices, where my medic would stand RIGHT in the mist of a.o.e attacks when he should have been out of range, resulting in him dying, and as a result my sentinel would soon die. While the story was similar to all the rest, that feel that I was playing a Final Fantasy game was replaced with frustration, and that general feeling that something was missing. In their recent attempt to fix this they released Final Fantasy XIII 2, An while they fixed a lot of the problems in the first, it still didn't feel like Final Fantasy, it was still missing major elements they cut out of it. Now they are making Final Fantasy XIII Lightning Returns… Only time can tell if it will be good, and only because of loyalty do I even consider buying this game.

Electronic Arts - SimCity

I think it’s a save bet to assume that like many of you out there, I have played EVERY Simcity since the beginning. An while SimCity has seen many changes, it stayed true to what it started, an still to this day I feel it’s the best in city building simulators out there. Thing is I hate AODRM, I hate that they took and limited my city size to encourage multiplayer, I hate that my enjoyment in the game is dependent on EA’s ability to keep the servers running, and I hate that at any moment a game I used to be able to enjoy can be taken down and I can’t play it. All the previous SimCity games allowed you to play whenever you wanted, however you wanted. There was no way that they could “close” the game down if it wasn’t profitable, if you had the game, you owned it for life, and it was yours, they had no control over what you did with that copy of the game.  Now they have taken so much away from you that it’s not even funny, a feature I’m particularly vexed about is the fact that my save files aren't my own, if i destroy my city in a freak accident i can't just boot up a previous save, an worse the multiple times I have logged out of the game only for it to tell me a the last moment that my save files FAILED TO SYNC I.E. MY GAME DID NOT SAVE. That means any and all work I did in my city, gone. I never had this issue before hand, and I don’t enjoy having it now. Simply put, they changed a lot of major elements, and the only people who are enjoying this game, NEVER PLAYED A SIMCITY GAME PRIOR TO THIS ONE.

Ubisoft – Assassins Creed

          Recently I’ve come to find out, far more people then who I originally expected were dissatisfied with Assassins Creed 3. While Assassin’s Creed wasn't the best game around, it was one of the most innovative games of its time, and due to that innovation, it developed a fan base. Assassin’s Creed 2 followed a similar formula extending it, adding a fresh new feel, while downsizing to a smaller game in some aspects. Brotherhood, and Revelations both followed the same formula, and were great games in their own right. ASSASSINS CREED 3 HOWEVER FEEL SHORT, as they ham fist'd the Tree running, (although I still kinda enjoyed it when I got used to it, but it could have been much better, and used more often.) the characters were barely even likable  and hardly relatable, and the side quest were just not interesting. They decided to change major key elements, to take out major key elements that made Assassins creed so great, and the game suffered as a result of this choice.

          What am I getting at you may ask? Simple, you never want to cut out major parts of the game that made it what it was. It’s a risky gamble and very few companies, a small fraction, manage to do it right. Lets look at Metal Gear Solid, then Look at Metal Gear Rising. While not exactly Metal Gear Solid, it still had that Metal Gear feel it, it still had the major and key elements that made a Metal Gear game what it was while providing something new and fresh to the scene. For another example of breaking off successful parts of a game in its main franchise and alienating fans, yet still being successful would be Saints Row. While I personally hate what the game has become, many others LOVE IT. Saints Row lost it’s story driven purpose, it’s character development, and any seriousness it once had, for a more over the top, insane, nonsense fun style of game play. YES I know THQ is no more, yet Saint’s Row will live on, as I do believe Koch Media bought the Volition and Metro, Volition of course being the studio behind Saints Row, for 28 million.

          My point is that it’s a risky gamble, if you fail you lose majority of your fan base, and revenue that comes with them buying the game the love. That isn't something any game company should really be wanting to do, I can’t see any logic or reasoning behind cutting out successful elements to make room for content that players might not like, or do want. All you will do is leave them disappointed as they will wonder “where this piece of the game went”, or “why they cut this out, to add that.” As fastpager200 said if done correctly it could work, question is, who can do it correctly. An the sad answer to that is, not many, as many have tried and only few have successes in the endeavor. Anyway, I hope this gives you food for thought, and at the very least something to talk about with your friends, and as usual thank you for your time and your continued support, and I’ll see you guys next time.