Sequels, Prequels, and Franchises

[Wolf Kanno]

Well, we now have FFXIII-2 on the horizon and now a new FF Type series coming. Not to mention IV is getting a new remake with another minor sequel element added on. SE is in business when it comes to making franchises out of the series and even creating a few new ones while we're at it.

So my question is this, what are your thoughts on SE's new business model with FF and technically even KH? The idea we can take a title and build it into its own franchise. VII is no longer the numbered entry in the FF series as much as it is a franchise title that incorporates a myriad of titles and media outlets. Dissidia is an unofficial prequel to the original FF1 and Ivalice Alliance is a series of titles that spans thousands of years of history of one little place that might be created from the imagination of a little boy. XIII has become a marker for a new mythology spanning several unrelated titles and despite barely a year old from it's western release, FFXIII already has a sequel ready for the winter holdiay season.

Do you feel this has been great marketing, revisiting old titles, and creating new content that can expand into more future titles with your favorite characters or do you simply see it as milking the franchise?

If it is milking, is there ever a proper circumstance where a prequel/sequel/spin-off is justified?

If it's perfectly fine to expand an IP, do you feel it's necessary to retcon some of the original in order to create more elbow room to spread the creative wings?

How about the fact that some titles like Versus XIII and the future FFXV are being held back why teams spend more time expanding the rest of the series?

Just some stuff I've been pondering lately.

[Flying Arrow]

The only thing that bothers me more than sequelling is prequelling, which outright disgusts me. This of course isn't exclusive to Final Fantasy either.

[Rostum]

I love a company to expand an IP, and explore it in different ways. Just like the Ivalice games in the Final Fantasy series.

When an IP has been left for a decade or so, I have no problem with them retconning it a bit. I mean the original vision changes over time, and I see it first hand with my own work in short periods of time. But I think there really needs to be a long time difference in order to do that commercially.

I am guessing you are refering to the Final Fantasy VII Compilation? My view on that is they've tried to cram way too much in to the timeline of that world that it's just so messy. I wouldn't so much mind a retcon or an expansion on the universe otherwise, especially since it feels like the original game was incomplete or could have been told better.

Direct sequels and prequels can be done well, but generally are not. However, I'm generally of the opinion that I won't ignore the sequels or feel they don't exist like so many people love to do. I would prefer less sequels and spin-offs and more main titles in a series, especially when talking about Kingdom Hearts.

[Remon]

I luv sequels,prequels and franchises
I just hate the FFX-2 kind of sequels . I want sequels when the characters don't change that much.

[Depression Moon]

The FF series as I feel was an attempt to cash in. The number and quality of some of those games speak for themselves on that department. Really Dissidia is a prequel to FFI? That doesn't make much sense to me. Also for the subject of sequels and spin offs for KH, I am bothered by them. They've been so numerous and over the amount of time I just want III already. If they had made some of those for consoles or produced interesting titles for PS3, I wouldn't mind as much.

I do feel that it is too early for a sequel to XIII when games that were announced alongside it back in 06 aren't close to being out, not to mention all the negativity the original was given.

[VeloZer0]

I am totally against Retcons. When a game developer goes to such lengths to build a world it is a travesty to come in and stomp all over it for whatever you want to come next.

A common justification for sequels/prequels is for the fleshing out of the already established world. Yet the writer of this new entry (whether it be the original or not) just changes things whenever they get in the way of the new story he is trying to tell? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of doing a homage to the original game? A sequel/prequel should only exist to help develop the original, if a compelling story for a game can't be written with the existing cannon, then don't make it! If your artistic vision is so grand that it eclipses that of the original title then maybe you should stop being a hack and make your own new great IP.

The only possible exception I give is to MMO developers. I appreciate their need to keep expanding on lore, and though it should be avoided at times they may be forced to make a small retcon to allow for more future content development. A console developer does not have the same obligation to expand the lore no matter what.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
(does HTML not work anymore? I can't put my my typical 'hr' in )

On the topic of sequels and prequells, I guess the question they should all pose is that after the game is there an appropriate story to be told. I say appropriate because not all stories are suitable to be told in a video game, let alone an RPG environment. Often times it feels like they have taken something that could be worth telling, started working on it, then realized the narrative wasn't something appropriate to a video game. After which they have to start cramming in a bunch of retcons to justify inclusion of typical JRPG elements of the game.

Crisis Core is an excellent example of this. The story of Zack is something that is completely worth telling. However, it doesn't translate well into game form. So they needed to create a villain, and they needed to create a whole bunch of extra 'dungeons'. Zacks end in FF7 was extremely anticlimactic and uninspiring. Not suitable for a game ending. So they had to add a whole bunch of extra adventures. In the end the story that was produced was (IMO) and insult to FF7s story.

In the end I don't think prequells or sequels suit the FF series in the least. The way the stories are written the events of the game are the biggest ordeals that their respective worlds have ever faced. Having a sequel after can either not hope to live up to the original, or poorly attempt to one up it cheapening them both.

Not to say I am against it as a rule, but it is extremely rare for an RPG to be worth making as a sequel or prequel.

[Depression Moon]

I forgot to touch upon sequels and prequels for the series. To me I welcome it if the game felt unfinished or good enough that I wanted one. Even though I don't care for seven much I didn't mind it as the ending was open ended and there was undeveloped background for some characters.

I didn't like Dirge of Cerberus or Advent Children though sooo....
I haven't played XIII so I have no opinion for that one. X umm, well...When I knew about X-2 I was still realitvely young and didn't have the same mindset as I do now. Looking back at it, I saw it as unnecessary, but not ??? or insulting. Story wise I was disappointed by X-2.

IV is one that confuses me. It didn't feel like it needed a sequel to me. I haven't played its sequel so I don't know about the quality of it to justify it, so no opinion on that.

[Roogle]

There was a time when the Final Fantasy series was known for its distinct lack of sequels or prequels. I remember when a short anime series based on Final Fantasy V was notable because it was one of the only instances that a Final Fantasy game was elaborated upon outside of the actual game itself. I think that people prefer those times than what we currently have right now. My personal opinion regarding sequels and prequels is that the game should be extremely similar in gameplay to its predecessor. For example, compare and contrast the similarities between Lunar: The Silver Star and Lunar: Eternal Blue or Final Fantasy IV and Final Fantasy IV: The After Years to Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy VII Dirge of Cerberus.

[Vermachtnis]

In this case it all depends on the cast. If I like the cast I'll want to see more of them. And like Roogle said, it's going to be a sequel they should have the similar battle/class/whatever system or at least stay in the same genre. Going from a turn based RPG to a third person shooter is a big leap.

And since they do something different with each new proper numbered entry, and at this point they could become there own series.

[Crop]

No, it's totally stupid.

My interest in Kingdom Hearts (which I really really enjoyed with 1 and 2) has been totally ruined with all of these spin offs and prequels that I just can't keep track of.

I don't own any handhelds damn it, let alone two of them!

[Depression Moon]

Now it's 3.

[Jessweeee♪]

Nothing wrong with milking a cow. That's what cows are for. Milking. You have wasted money if you don't milk the cow you have invested in.

[McLovin']

It's because Square sold out. They aren't the same people that we liked back from FF1 to FF10. They changed their whole approach to Final Fantasy after X. They should just stick to their old ways and make a great, amazing game utilizing all the graphics and artistic potential of the era (FFXIII Verus looks like it might do this actually! We'll see). Also as said earlier the prequel or sequel should be justified, damnit! Which is why I don't have that same awe for Kingdom Hearts as I did when it first came out. Too many crazy additions to the story that was originally just a cool Disney/FF story.

[Hot Shot]

It's because Square sold out. They aren't the same people that we liked back from FF1 to FF10. They changed their whole approach to Final Fantasy after X. They should just stick to their old ways and make a great, amazing game utilizing all the graphics and artistic potential of the era (FFXIII Verus looks like it might do this actually! We'll see). Also as said earlier the prequel or sequel should be justified, damnit! Which is why I don't have that same awe for Kingdom Hearts as I did when it first came out. Too many crazy additions to the story that was originally just a cool Disney/FF story.

How can a business sell out? That's their main goal, to make money. If they didn't 'sell out' then we'd think they are stupid. They want to maximise their profit by appealing to the mass market. I remember when FFVII came out (well a year or two after it came out, I was too young too appreciate it) only me and one other guy played FF in my class. Everybody thought it was boring and such. But since X (or maybe XII) I've noticed a lot of people actually saying they are fans of FF (despite the fact that they only play the latest titles and never really got a true FF experience.

But with regards to sequels/prequels, I don't have a problem with them as long as they are good. I disagree with some people who have said that the characters shouldn't change (isn't an RPG about character growth/development) or the battle system should be the same (change can be good, we can get a different experience from the game). But I do think SE make too many prequels/sequels imo and a lot of them are sub-par (I don't know why so many people like Crisis Core), but regardless of what I think the fans are still buying the games and liking them. And that's the important thing at the end of the day. As long as the gamer enjoys it and SE makes some money everybody wins. And guess what, if we don't like any of these sequels/prequels, we don't have to buy or play them. It's that simple.

[Jessweeee♪]

If there's one big moment where you could say they "sold out" it'd be FFII. Final Fantasy was to be their last game after all! They only made a second because the first got them monies. And boy am I glad they did. Those first few in the series weren't really my thing.

(Also, Crisis Core is pretty awesome if you both like FFVII and can ignore the existence of Genesis. He is by far my least favorite villain in the series, maybe even ever.)