Why does Sony leave so many franchises in the dust?

It seems with PS consoles, you're always going to be introduced to new franchises, characters, stories and worlds. However, people love whats familiar as much as they love whats new.

Some "dead" franchises from Sony that IMO we will most likely never see again: Crash & Spyro (cuz rights), Medievil, Parappa the Rapper, Ape Escape, Jak and Daxter, Twisted Metal, SotC, Socom, Resistance, Motorstorm, Heavenly Sword, Jet Moto, (note: I'm aware there are many more than this, and I'm not really counting franchises that were basically dead on arrival, like MAG or PS Allstars).

We even know that the next Uncharted game will be the last one in the series. While I give Sony credit for trying to innovative and always create new franchises, it is sad that they've seemingly closed the door on so many franchises over the years.

I cant be alone in wishing we could see a next gen Medievil or Jet Moto title. Why does Sony not seem like to revive their old franchises? Ratchet and Clank's reception and thread activity on here seems to show some positive reception for classic franchises.

Do you think Sony should continue its current business model of leaving the past where it is, or should they be more like Nintendo's model and let gamers have some nostalgia by having old school franchises at the front lines? Personally, a healthy of both sounds fantastic to me. Discuss.

Because developers don't grow on trees.

true but lets look at the situation- games like parappa or medievil or ape escape wouldnt have to be big budget titles like halo or last of us to be fun and successful.

i mean, damn have you seen this?

hire these guys to lead a small team to create this beauty. not every game calls for a 200 million dollar budget.

plus sony has a lot of secondary studios who have done smaller titles already or ports- mass media, high impact games, nihilistic software, sanzaru games, idol minds would all be perfect candidates to revive parappa, spike or sir daniel.

I personally wish that ND would continue the Uncharted series but I understand their want to move on to new IPs. As for other series that have gone away over the years, it's possible that they could come back to them later.

Another thought is that they don't want to run their series into the ground like EA, Activision and Capcom do. I'm sure Sony would rather that you remember their games in a good light then an overdone husk that's a cash grab.

yeah and thats why i give Sony credit over all the other publishers. they give their developers creative control and freedom to decide when its time to move on, instead of milking something to death. Sony could have made ND pump out Uncharted 4 last gen and instead let them create last of us, super risky to create a new IP at the end of a gen- could have easily been lost in the wind had it not been such a great title.

Okay, so which is it? Sony gets praise for moving on/killing older IP's and make room for new ones, or they get bashed for not continuing with them (basically not doing something that Nintendo gets bashed for, especially when talking about a Plumber/Hylian Hero/kid with monsters, but they also get crap for no attention to their "bounty hunter")?

@nintendoboy16: well.....that is the point topic of the thread

I think the ship has sailed on Parappa coming back. They should have capitalized during the Guitar Hero craze.

I think Crash (E3 announcement), Jak, Ape Escape, and Twisted Metal will all return someday. The rest probably not.

Money bags above all else.

@jcrame10: i feel you bro. I was eagerly waiting for an ICO 2 or a Shadow of collosus 2 let alone another Jak & Daxter or Crash and the list goes on and on.

But on the other hand im finding myself praising SONY for having the guts and balls under their nasty financial case to keep trying to bring massive AAA caliber NEW IPs again and again and again , each and every generation something new and amazing is around the corner every single time.

Thats something only SONY does in such extend and of course when you taking such risks some games might not deliver but then again you wouldnt have that epic diversity and so many great , different experiences thru the years. Thats the main reason why i give SONY kudos for when it c omes to Playstation brand , specially when they managed to do this with PS3 under such financial pressure

All in all , you cant hate them , is not that are not delivering but i understand your logic as well , i would love to see some of the older games once more.

@NathanDrakeSwag: I think parappa could work really well as a 20 dollar download title. I bought the second game off the store for 8 bucks last year

Im guessing demand is not high enough. Cause they have no issue milking other IPs.

Well, many of their IPs don't sell well.

As far as something like Uncharted, they've got The Last of Us to move onto. Not really that drastic of a change, but they don't really need to continue making Uncharted games.

@iandizion713: the only ps franchise that is milked is mlb the show. But hey it's a sports franchise, if it wasn't being milked it'd probably get flack.

@jcrame10: Yeah, i wasnt talking every year milked. I was talking like Uncharted had 3 games on PS3, then some on Vita and now PS4. GoW, GT, Ratchet and Clank, LittleBigPlanet etc. Games they have no problem continuing to support cause many people love and buy them.

As long as it sells, Sony will continue it.

@iandizion713: there's been like 7 gran turismo games in 20 years. 3 main god of war games, and a few spin offs. Ratchet was a bit much with 6 games on ps3.

Were not talking milking level here of halo, forza, assassins creed, mlb, FIFA, madden, mario, Pokemon though

@jcrame10: There have only been like 5 Pokemon games mate. And only a few main Mario games. Plus Mario games are always way different. Mario Kart is a better example. And even then, we only get 1 each gen.

FIFA, Madden, and MLB are all milked games. Nintendo dont do those.

I'd kill for a new Jet Moto.

@iandizion713: there's like over 20 Pokemon games in the past 20 years. And Mario's name is put onto all types of games to sell. That's complete milkage.

I don't see how 3 mario bros games on the NES is any different than 3 uncharted games on the ps3. Or how mario 3d land and mario 3d world aren't more or less the same gameplay.

Also ratchet constantly added new gameplay mechanics, gadgets and weapons in the games as well, in a similar fashion to the mario 64, sunshine then galaxy

@jcrame10: Those are remakes. And those 3 Mario games are way different. Those three Uncharted are bout the same. And yes, Ratchet and Clank changes it up some, but its still bout the same. It could be compared to Super Mario 1, 3, New Super Mario Bros, and New Super Luigi in that it changes a little and adds 4 player later on.

@remiks00: me too, I still play jet moto 2. Great gameplay and a great soundtrack. Always thought of motorstorm as a spiritual successor to the franchise and that maybe evolution would revive jet moto.....guess those dreams are dead though

Because it's clear what sells and makes money these days, and AAA games are simply too big an investment to take serious risks on, sadly. Thankfully there are smaller studios and indie developers out there to bring the variety.

Sales of a game determine if a sequel is made. What that margin or number of units sold is, nobody knows, but you can see it in todays games.

arent remakes/remasters considered the king of milkage on these boards?

anyhoo, wiki lists as:

1. Pokemon Red/Green/Blue

2. Pokemon Yellow

3. Pokemon Gold/Silver

4. Pokemon Crystal

5. Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire

6. Pokemon Emerald

7. Pokemon Diamond/Pearl

8. Pokemon Platinum

9. Pokemon Black/White

10. Pokemon Black/White 2

11. Pokemon X/Y

12. Pokemon Sun/Moon

not including FireRed, LeafGreen, HeartGold, SoulSilver, Omega games....pokemon console games and other pokemon spin offs.

yeah, pokemon is a successful franchise that has definitely benefited nintendo with a lot games.

your opinions on ratchet and uncharted would weigh more if i believed you had actually played them. but ratchets evolution is similar to marios, as mario still had an overworld (hub) where you jumped into paintings/worlds, doing objectives and finding stars/sprites. each one offered one or two new mechanics, like FLUDD or the star collector guy in galaxy. not sure how there is such a variety or change in gameplay here, just a natural evolution of the franchise like i said. dont see how its fair to pick on ratchet and not say mario 3d games arent more or less doing the same thing.

i personally think sony should invest in some of these smaller developers (listed them above) and have them revive some old franchises. they wouldnt have to be big budget, and could launch at 30-40 dollars to moderate success.

Some of the reason is because Sony wanted to compete with Microsoft in the West, so they did that by focusing on Western games and dropping a lot of their Japanese franchises.

@Bigboi500: true, but sony has enough first and second party developers, as well as working relationships with independent third party developers, to where there's not a 100% an excuse IMO

well, first Motorstorm sold good, second game was even better but sold a fraction of the amount, Evolution ended up making a low selling PSP game on top of that so not hard to imagine funding for Apocalypse was cut and that's why it sucked, and not hard to imagine they had to fire more people and work with less which is why they shook things up and tried to make DriveClub, which sucked even more

and this is not a Sony specific pattern, other companies do this to, like MS too they had studios make Kinect games because MS was willing to fund the titles but they also had to deliver results if they wanted future funding, they didn't and they weren't making squat after so wasn't surprising many of those studios were among those cut during that big MS studio purge that took place short while ago, and maybe these studios though MS's willingness to fund them for these projects was a signal of unconditional support like they'd established tenure so they'd keep their jobs as long as they gave it a good college try

think the lesson here is if you're a studio then don't take on risky projects unless there's assurances, at least (I hope) with some of the companies going out on a limb to make PSVR stuff the smarter ones will make games that can sell to VR and non-VR crowds alike, just that they're enhanced with the extra feature, as straight VR-only games probably won't make the money do to a smaller install base and a new emerging competitive market means only the strongest VR-only offerings will survive

anyhow, all publishers need to come up with new stuff because that's what gamers want, they start to whine if they keep getting served the same thing again and again, surely publishers wouldn't mind delivering things again and again if they sold, at some point they let things go because nobody cares enough to buy it and there's no point making things if you know people aren't going to buy them

It's largely going to boil down to market demand. As pretty intense gamers, we want the more obscure IPs to make a comeback, but they likely just won't sell to the common gamers out there. Not to say that there aren't some IPs that may sell excellently, but I know less than who Sony hires...

Sort of unrelated, but why do a lot of Sony fanboys capitalize Sony? Like, they write SONY. I've been noticing it a lot lately, I find it... interesting.

---

To answer your question, I think the answer is three pronged:

• None of Sony's franchises have historically struck a chord well enough to be continued across generations. I think the PS2 era was the first time we saw some of their franchises do well enough to continue - mostly Ratchet and God of War - and the PS3 era saw a lot of franchises that deserved to be retained. It is no surprise or coincidence that there are the franchises that continued to be retained across generations. Most of Sony's other 'classic' franchises were mostly highly niche that never did well enough to warrant being kept around.
• Sony generally also has a strategy of prioritizing new IPs. I do have to give them credit for that, but given that while Sony do like pushing new IPs, they are also limited by resources - in simple words, they have a limited number of developers, but an ever expanding number of IPs that they are tackling - this means that their older projects naturally need to be dropped to push their newer ones. Point #1 contributes to making this decision easier.
• Finally, Sony's priorities have massively changed over the years with their first party. Back in the PlayStation days, Sony sold the PlayStation to third parties by promising to not have blockbuster franchises of their own that third parties would have to compete against, which made PlayStation a more fertile ground for them than Sega or Nintendo systems. The PS2 era saw Japanese console development at a peak, and Sony's first party output largely reflected this. The PS3 era saw Sony reorient towards the west, and we see their first party realigned again to reflect this. In general, given Sony's consistently changing internal priorities regarding first party titles, their IPs also are dropped or developed accordingly.

Your messing up the whole list. It goes

Pokemon Red, blue, green, and yellow.

Pokemon Gold, Silver, Crystal

Pokemon Emerald, Sapphire, Ruby

Pokemon Diamond, Pearl, Platinum

Pokemon Black, White

Pokemon Sun/Moon.

6 in 25 years.

@jcrame10: I agree as a consumer. I'm sick of how monotone the really big releases have become. I know that there are plenty of other lesser known titles out there that have good variety, but I remember a time when major releases were fairly different from each other. Now the majority of them are shooters of some sort. Investing in smaller budget titles would go a long way toward injecting variety into the very mainstream gaming scene.

I always wondered and realized they're always bringing new IPs. You get people who complain about too many sequels and people who complain about them not continuing some franchises. Can't please everyone.

There was a rumor about a new Medievil I believe, based off some footage awhile back. Was the UE4 clip that? If so kinda lame that it's not an actual game.

Anyways the biggest reason for not continuing series would be $$$$$. Resistance and Motorstorm both sold much worse as the series' continued so unfortunately can't really blame em. They tried bringing back Twisted Metal it also sold poorly I believe. Honestly I'm surprised Ratchet is still going , it's sales have declined significantly since the PS2 era.

Hopefully like someone suggested, some of these series might be dusted off as lower budget titles in the future.

New IP is good and you still get the old stuff TOO like Uncharted, GoW and LBP. With MS it's Halo, Gears, Halo, Halo and Nintendo with Zelda, Mario, Mario, Mario, Zelda. Variety is good.

@iandizion713: yellow, emerald, platinum weren't released at the same time as the ones before it, even though they're basically the same games.

There's been way more than 6 releases

@jcrame10: Yeah, but their the same. Just like Sony released more then just 4 Uncharteds. But the point remains the same, Nintendo doesnt release yearly games like others.

And Sony has to release new IPs cause so many fail. If it aint making money, it aint makin sense. If Sony could, theyd have All-Star Racing, Battle Royale, and any other game they could milk. Sony tried to do the Mario, they failed. They tried to do it more then once, and failed. Theyll probably try again if they get a chance.

@iandizion713: you could say the same about a lot of nintendo franchises, like Metroid, star fox, f zero.

Only ones guaranteed to sell are smash, mario kart, mario, Zelda, Pokemon and animal crossing.

@iandizion713: FE is thankfully getting up there as well and it's about time. But still, I don't see FE ever Pokemon or mario level sales

@jcrame10: And many more, go ahead an list all them top sellers. But Nintendo is not Sony, Nintendo will try, try again. Advance Wars/Battilon Wars, Chibi-Robo, Sin&Punishment, Wario, Kid Icarus, Star Fox, Earthbound, Ryhtmn Heaven, Xenoblade, shoot, they even tried to bring F-Zero back and couldnt find anyone good.

@iandizion713: none of the franchises you listed are too sellers, or franchises that are branded with nintendo in the sense that mario or Pokemon are.

@jcrame10: No i was listing poor sellers who Nintendo still gave a chance. I was saying you were missing some top sellers like Donkey Kong, Kirby, NintendoDogs, Tomodachi Life, Luigi Mansion, Splatoon, etc

@iandizion713: oh. Did tropical freeze ever reach over a million?

I don't view kirby or luigis mansion as a multi million dollar seller but I'm not sure what the actual figures are

I'll be curious to see it a Splatoon sequel does as well as the first one did

They still make nintendogs?

@jcrame10: Yeah, it should be close to 2 million now after that price drop to $19.99. It was at 1.5 million before the price drop.

Kirby is a good seller also. Triple Deluxe should be around 2 million now. Kirby is bigger in Japan though. And yes, Nintendodogs+Cats is on 3DS.

I have a feeling Splatoon might break out next gen. Talking 7-10 million. I mean heck, its bout at 5 million on Wii U.

@iandizion713: oh really. That's surprising. It's a damn good game one of the best platformers I've played in the past decade. I thought it was swept under the rug and forgotten, didn't realize it sold so well

@jcrame10: Its not forgotten, its just a little too hardcore for most. The Wii Donkey Kong burned a lot of people thinking it was a kids game. Nintendo received many complaints about its difficulty. Its why Nintendo dont hype Hardcore games, it can actually hurt you in the long run by burning people.

Kinda like how Dark Souls II most likly did to many. Well find out with Dark Souls III, if Dark Souls III sells bad, well know hype hurt it on DSII. It happens. Its bad luck to hype hardcore games.

I actually think it's great that Sony invests in new IPs.

@SolidGame_basic: It is, without it we wouldnt have one of the best in Ico. But its important to find that balance too. Sometimes you have to take a lost on a game to make a gain. But i agree with Sony too, no need digging up some of them franchises, so are dead for a reason.

Sony can only fund so many projects at one time, so what might seem like a cheap way to make money through an old franchise to us might be an unnecessary risk in the grand scheme of things to them. Even if ten projects are technically "cheap," if those ten projects fail, then that's a big financial loss all together. Sony doesn't have the kind of franchise identity that Nintendo does, where if they put out a few mediocre titles people will just shrug and wait for the next "real" game. And since they have other markets to pull profit from--all those other hardware things they put out that aren't gaming consoles--they don't need to wring every IP they have for money to fund their "real games," either.

Sony's just in a better position than Nintendo to be more restrained with their big IPs.

Your argument is completely stupid. Lets not forget all the other Pokemon games. There are almost too much to name.