Matt's Somewhat Serious Bit
Many film makers over the years, both amateur and professional, have dreamed of creating a trilogy of movies. Being able to expand your vision over a number of movies gives you the freedom to add new elements to the plot, go deeper into the backstory of the characters, and most importantly, develop a solid fan following. For many years, the game industry has been following in the steps of the movie industry, both are narrative formats and movies were pretty much the last great media creation prior to gaming, so why not.
We've seen many successful franchises extend into and beyond the trilogy in gaming - Mario, Sonic, Zelda, Crash, Jak, Ratchet, Splinter Cell - the list is an article in itself.
The thing about trilogies is that you just can't say off the bat "I/we are making this as a trilogy." From a financial standpoint, you have to have a successful first chapter before you can even contemplate a sequel, let alone two. It's easier from the Hollywood perspective - you have multiple avenues from which to derive revenue - theatrical release, DVD/VHS release, rentals, pay per view, (Near) Video on Demand and the eventual free to air showing. Budgets for film projects are much more scaleable, and the lower price of entry will at least ensure that any fans disenfranchised by one entry in a series will possibly return for the third part (or more).
Even the most successful trilogies had to take it one step at a time
Games aren't too different - you need that successful first chapter before you can even contemplate parts two and three of your trilogy. The difference is that getting those sales for the first iteration of your game is a larger financial strain. Nine times out of ten, for a game to be a smashing success, it'll need to be at least an A class title, and A class titles demand big budgets. You've only got that single revenue stream from which to derive your income - the initial release. Moderate successes can get a second shot with a budget re-release, but it's just not the same as what the movies have.
Yet despite these hurdles, eager developers are planning going hog wild, constantly boasting about how their great new game is going to be the "first part of an epic trilogy". Advent Rising was one of the first recent examples of this, and has just been joined by Silicon Knight's Too Human (which has been in planning for some 8 or 9 years) and BioWare's new RPG Mass Effect, just announced at X05.
What a load of wank.
The problem with these developers planning these games as trilogies is that they are going to inevitably leave the first part of the game off with a cliffhanger ending. Think back to Halo 2 - how many of you were seriously pissed at how that game ended? But you knew for sure that you'd eventually see the conclusion of that cliffhanger in Halo 3, even if you have to wait three years. Think about the poor Shenmue fans - the second game has the amongst the most excellent second halves of any game to date, and ends with a huge cliffhanger - but at this stage it looks like we may never see the conclusion (four years and counting).
In five years, will we have seen one Too Human game, or all three?
So you start your trilogy, release the first game with a cliffhanger ending - what if the sales aren't up to scratch? How many developers are willing to continue to fund development of series with only small cult followings that are likely to never make their money back? And the fans of the first title - they will be alienated by the fact that you won't continue the story that they've enjoyed so far, and may tread cautiously when considering any further titles your company releases.
Of course, then there's the fact that a lot of developers aren't even capable of writing a compelling story for a single game, let alone a trilogy, but we'll leave that rant for another day.
So, the (realistic) solution? Keep the trilogy ideas at the back of your mind, and plan each part as it comes, and for the love of God, no cliffhangers until you're sure that you'll be able to make the next part!
Why don't they bring back...Sparkster
A lot of companies are sitting on some prime IP that's begging for a re-birth or sequel. I thought that with this section I'd be able to highlight a few of my favourite games that have been seemingly ignored by their developers, and suggest what I think could be done with them.
It was the Summer of 1993, one of the best for 16-bit gaming. Poor misfortunate Matt had been rummaging through his parents cupboards looking for Christmas presents, only to discover a copy of the awful awful awful NBA All Star Challenge. Not being one to like bad games, I confronted my parents over the issue, and informed them of their error, displayed a bunch of reviews of the said title from my favourite gaming mags of the time (Sega Megazone, Hyper and MEGA). Convinced by my argument, my parents yielded to my demand (a rarity) to exchange for another, and that's how I ended up with a copy of the arguably excellent Rocket Knight Adventures.
Rocket Knight Adventures, developed internally by Konami, centers around the exloits of an opossum named Sparkster, who is said to be the bravest of all Rocket Knights. One day, an army of pigs from space attacks the kingdom which the Rocket Knights protect, and steals the princess. Teaming up with these pigs is Sparkster's rival Axel, who has left the Rocket Knights for a life of villainy.
One of the Megadrive's best
The game featured cartoony graphics with a few hilarious cutscenes (which actually changed between regions). Sparkster was packing a rather mean sword which could execute both ranged and close attacks, not to mention the jetpack, which could be used for propulsion as well as offensive and defensive moves. Rocket Knight Adventures even adjusted the events of the game based on which difficulty you played on, with the real ending only being revealed on the hardest difficulty (even harder difficulties were unlockable, too) With an excellent cast of characters, great bosses and a brilliant soundtrack, Rocket Knight Adventures was easily a highlight of the Megadrive lineup.
Sparkster would appear in a self-titled sequel a year later, released on both the Megadrive and SNES. Funnily enough, each console received a different version of the title. The SNES version of Sparkster closesly resembles the original Megadrive title, keeping most of the best elements of the title, while featuring a slightly different art style, and a top musical score. The Megadrive version of the game is a little disappointing, with the mechanics of the title being made much easier (the jetpack doesnt need to be charged, one button press is all you need, the sword is also upgradable), and the graphics and soundtrack are not as good as the original game. The property has stagnated since the release of Sparkster, not even managing to garner a cameo appearance in any of Konami's recent efforts.
Left: Sparkster MD, Right: Sparkster SNES
Personally, I believe that a third title featuring Sparkster would be fit best into one of the currently available handhelds on the market - maintaining the original 2-D style gameplay would be a big factor - Konami haven't had great success taking their properties into 3-D, with only Metal Gear gaining popularity with the extra added dimension. GBA, DS or PSP? No idea. You could put the game onto the PSP and retain the 2-D playing field (highly detailed sprites would be great, but 2.5-D would also be welcome), or do the same on the DS, and use the touch screen to assist with an enhanced flying mechanic. If any readers have an idea for the game (or any other they'd like to see reappear from the dead), I'd like to hear your thoughts in the comment thread.
You know what really grinds my gears #2: CG-only Trailers
It has become a yearly tradition for me to purchase the E3 Access DVD set that comes out each July, not only because it's produced by a bunch of Aussies over at Next Generation Videos on the Gold Coast, but because the set kicks a lot of ass, and is especially handy for those impatient sorts not willing to sit around downloading trailers on their modems. On top of the regular trailers, interviews and press conferences, the set offers a bunch of developer/publisher guided run throughs of games, which are really quite cool.
The thing that always upsets me about the set is that a bunch of publishers in this day and age still seem to think that they can get away with showing a reel of CG footage, and calling it a trailer for their latest game. Who are you trying to fool, exactly? If the game isn't ready to be shown, then wait until it is before showing us anything. There needs to be a rule at E3 that trailers shown must be indicative of what's actually going to be in the final game.
Left: Bullshit, Right: Playable bullshit
The amusing thing is that it's always the games that turn out to be of subpar quality that use these CG-only trailers - for example, this year's CG-only trailers included gems such as 50 Cent: Bulletproof and Luke's favourite 187: Ride or Die (which is absolute baloney, sorry Luke
).
From the bowels of the Internet #2
A picture is worth a thousand words, as the old saying goes;
You can find more Mario and Super Smash Brothers Fan Art at http://asame2.web.infoseek.co.jp/mariof1.html
The views expressed in the Easy Mode article are those of Matt Keller, and are not shared by PALGN, its affiliates or its advertisers.
Related Articles:
!
Loading...
