[Poll] Update or Regress Franchises?

[Doctor Fugue]

Should old franchises be updated to modern standards - what I mean is should an attempt be made to incorporate and evolve gameplay mechanics from all previous entries in a series as well as updating the graphics/sound/music/controls...or can new games be made with the exact specifications of older generations?

Obviously, this question mainly arises because of Mega Man 9. I know most everyone is excited to see a nostalgic return to the games in the series that are perceived to be the best. Should ALL Mega Man games from now on look and play exactly like the NES games? Was it really the fault of progressing hardware that caused a decline in Mega Man games, or was it the designers' failure to preserve excellent game mechanics in later installments?

There tends to be a "sweet spot" in a series' history. This is the game or games that the majority of people believe to be of the highest quality; where everything came together in perfect harmony. Should developers try to emulate that exact style? How far back in a series should developers go?

Does the thought of endless sequels to Mega Man that are just filled with new levels bother you? Perhaps not. I imagine that I would love a new Streets of Rage game every year with the same look and feel as #2, but wouldn't I get tired and hope for something fresh?

Take a look at some other examples. Gradius Rebirth was just announced. From the one screenshot we have seen, it looks like Gradius III or IV. Would you find it difficult to regress to that style after playing Gradius V? I'm not just talking about graphics, I imagine Gradius Rebirth will go back to the previous method of weapons and level layout and bosses as well.

In the opposite direction, we have ThunderForce VI. It is a new entry, and it is trying to evolve the series. Should they stick to emulating the feel of III and IV?

If a new entry in the series looks graphically updated but retains the same EXACT gameplay, is it worth the graphical update? But if there is no attempt is made to use more modern styles, should there be some new twists in the mechanics of the game?

I have a million other things I want to say about this topic, but I'll let it go for now. Essentially, do you want endless sequels that might become stale because of a lack in evolution? Or do you always want updates and new bold ideas in established franchises?

Or is there room for both - meaning the series will follow two branching paths - one modernized and one emulating the past.

Or does anybody wish for more completely new franchises? Should a series be laid to rest after its best days have come and gone...without any attempt to revive it?

[Ack]

Invent new franchises. Seriously, I don't mind playing a couple of installments in a series, but when you're getting to the fourth game, you're either starting to make drastic changes, or your running out of ideas. I love Mega Man, but look at some of the later master robots you had to fight. Yamato Man? Come on.

[The Apprentice]

It's difficult to deal with outdated franchises. I say keep gameplay intact while updating graphics and sound.

[ott0bot]

I wanted to vote for all of the above....but I just voted both. I think having a mix is good. I'd love to see and old school thunder force game too! Maybe even a short 4 leveled one as a bonus feature. Also new franchises are the lifeblood of the gaming industry....Okami is a great example. But there are way too many crappy new ideas. Also reahasing the same ideas over and over is just dull. You gotta change it up, thats for sure.

[Haoie]

Chrono Trigger is another example, I think.

Not so much a franchise, but very noteworthy lately.

[RemyC]

Both. Theirs comes a point in a franchises life where you need to realize you've done all that can and should be done. So update...the sky is the limit. Inspire a generation of gamers, developers. Drop jaws with your ideas, and execution. However, after awhile you need to bow out respectfully with your dignity intact, making way for the newcomers to have their shot.

[Gamerforlife]

I voted for update.

There really should be a three game cut-off point(trilogy)after which a series is no longer allowed to keep rehashing the same thing over and over again. Though ideally developers would start innovating before that. If you've got a good formula that is UNIQUE then I think you can get away with three similar games. After that, you should do something new or bow out gracefully.

This rarely happens though, and many of us are guilty of supporting at least one series that stopped innovating ages ago(including myself). And you always have the whiners who complain when a series tries to break away from a once great, but now stale formula(just look at all the Resident Evil 4 haters on this board).

I don't approve of sequels using outdated technology like what Capcom is doing with Megaman 9. There is simply no excuse for HALF ASSING a sequel that way. Though, it's cool for indie developers to use old technology as an affordable way to get their ideas out. You see a lot of that on Xbox Live Arcade and I think that's cool. Capcom is basically screwing Mega Man fans though with a CHEAP and EASY sequel that will just be MORE OF THE SAME that we've had for eight installments now. I mean, we're talking about something that won't even match the quality of the Mega Man X series.

I mean I have a soft spot for MM and MM X games, and I'll probably end up checking MM 9 out for curiousity's sake, but I'm not as excited about this as others on this board. It's like they're just throwing MM fans a bone. Don't we deserve better?

[Gamerforlife]

Actually, scratch that. Fortunately, I didn't actually put in my vote yet. I was going for update, but I'm going for both instead. It's important to make new franchises too. God, the gaming industry would go nowhere if we didn't.

EDIT: Wait a minute, both means NOT making new franchises? This poll is confusing. There should be an option for updating and making new franchises. I guess I'm not voting for any of these options

[Doctor Fugue]

EDIT: Wait a minute, both means NOT making new franchises? This poll is confusing. There should be an option for updating and making new franchises. I guess I'm not voting for any of these options

Sorry for not being clear. My idea for 'both' is that a franchise has room for games in the older style while also making games that clearly evolve and break tradition. It hasn't yet really been done, but I'm wondering if it is a viable option. Would gamers support both paths?

Obviously, we would always love to see great new franchises. The point of this poll is to discuss which is most important. I'm assuming a company rehashing series will have much less time to devote to making new products.

Look at Treasure, and their remakes and ports. They have been doing this much more in recent years (even though they say they don't really want to), and so their original shooter and action games have had to be postponed. I would rather they spend their time on new games than Gunstar Super Heroes or another Bleach fighter (as great as those are), or even the time it took them to port Ikaruga to XBLA...I'm grateful for it, but not at the expense of putting off their new shooter.