IP value, sequels and other related issues

[GrandeLS]

1) I noticed that there is no such thing as a drop in IP value. It doesn't matter whether as a result of the passage of time (hype drops, but not IP), or because of, for example, a bad sequel or spin-off
In my opinion, the value of IP should also fluctuate downwards, not just increase

2) The value of IP greatly increases sales (logically), and the simplest method of building IP is to produce sequels (preferably good ones - you know). And here we come to a problem that I have to raise, although Kyouko Tsukino will probably hate me for it; P.
It's about the unlimited production of sequels without any negative consequences. The truth is, the more sequels the better. You can do all the gameplay on several titles. You can do GameTtile 194 and it will be ok. Mechanics will give us a reward for it. Such a situation is absurd in my opinion. In MGT2, there is no such thing as IP boredom or simply market saturation with topics

3) Topics - the red markers do not change much. If they worsen sales, then imperceptibly (at least in my opinion)

3a) A minor point by the way - I noticed that budget editions also "redden" topics. It probably shouldn't be like that, i.e. budget games should not affect the market saturation with themes

4) Boredom of fans
In my opinion, fans will sooner get bored with the 36th (or even 8/10th) sequel of a given game than with the 3rd game in a row of a given genre. So boredom is also related to the subject of sequels and IP. The whole mechanism of boredom is too crude and suboptimal.
Looking realistically, how many games have more than 10 sequels in a couple of decades? Final Fantasy? And something else? Such series are unicorns. In general, big titles like Civilization, Fallout or FarCry (from other genres) have several sequels, counting on 10, 20 or 30 years of existence. And this is the maximum that, in my opinion, can be realistically achieved without "slaughtering" the brand

[Kyouko Tsukino]

1- IP starts dropping if you abandon an IP for more than five years.

I mean, any IP I've abandoned for more than one year was abandoned for good anyways, so I do think five years is way too high a ceiling for that. I frankly do not care if some people play the game releasing one game a year, that's *their* choice and they should not have to be treated with silk gloves because of their play style.

2- Won't hate you for it. I'll just alternate Sequels, Spin-offs and Ports to allow me to still keep my IP up anyways. Just like I stick to a single main genre to completely nullify "bored fans" and any attempt at fixing that will only anger those who *don't* outsmart the game, not me (I'll simply adapt.)

3- I've gotten 90% games out of wrong topic *and* genre combos, so yes, errors aren't punishing enough (for me at least.)

4- You are treating fans like a static crowd. That is not the case for many, many things in life, even gaming.

For example, while I'm the kind of Dynasty/Samurai Warriors fan that will play any game they release (but not like all of them, "All-Stars" was a gimmicky mess and "Spirits of the Sanada" was boring) and have been along for the ride for a couple decades, there's other fans that jump in late and only discover the saga through things like Dynasty Warriors 9 or Samurai Warriors 5. While some "die hard" fans hate those two, newcomers will love them and play them. Me, I liked SW5 and thought DW 9 was "not bad, not good either," and still play them. Heck, I'm waiting for their "Empires" versions (strategy spin-offs) just because they're rarely ported to PC.

There's also non-gaming examples. My favorite anime, Sailor Moon*, had a re-boot that was, to me, mediocre at best (except for character design,) but a lot of people loved it simply because they were young enough for it to be their first version. Same with Dragon Ball Super, a mess of disconnected arcs that replaced "Red Monkey Goku" with "Red Goku and Blue Super Saiyan Goku" and called it a day. But it has a lot of fans anyways.

Big titles like Civilization, Fallout or FarCry may continue on for decades, simply because they tend to attract newcomers. Just because one fan thinks there's too many sequels...

Then again, I'm a fan of Koei's Warriors/Musou series and Touhou. I do not think that things like "too many sequels" or "too many characters" exist. ;P

* Both my avatar and my username have roots in that show.

[GrandeLS]

My point is that - as a rule - endless sequel productions don't happen. Yes, series based on spinoffs (e.g. as part of some universe) or ports are. It happens that there are dozens of games from a given brand / IP (e.g. Mario) although they are not numbered at all. They also - through their universes - attract new fans. It's clear. But these are the exceptions after all
But there are a lot of games - you can't count them, because they are the overwhelming majority - which had 1, 2, max 3 sequels and there was no point in continuing it. These are the realities of the market. Sequel - not only in games but also in movies or books - it is supposed to be easier (because you have some base), but actually making success (meeting expectations) is harder. Statistically speaking, it will be unimaginably difficult with the continuation No. 20
In my opinion, there should be some mechanics - but not too random on the basis of rng - so that each subsequent sequel, for example, increases expectations. This would make it harder to deal with them. After all, HalfLife 3 will never come out precisely because it would have to face its legend and no matter how good it was, it would have a false start like CP77. And this is not about overhype and smart marketing (as in CP77) but about something that is built on a real event such as previous titles (i.e. IP value)

[DerEld]

Assassin's Creed IP till Syndicate is an example, inclusive all spin-offs for other platforms.
Than they stop for 2 - 3 years and begin new with Origin and there successors...

Maybe IPs become a second counter, they generate fans as genres for your company and become a special "bored IP fans" event. These mechanics exist allready and can be used.
Maybe...

[GrandeLS]

Originally posted by DerEld:

Maybe IPs become a second counter, they generate fans as genres for your company and become a special "bored IP fans" event. These mechanics exist allready and can be used.
Maybe...

I'm not sure if this should trigger a bored fans event. I'm just wondering how to make some panalties for tapping 174 sequels, because today it's possible and effective. And illogical
Probably best for the next sequel to somehow increase market expectations for quality, which would make it increasingly difficult to do a good review. It's just a general note

[Sol]

Originally posted by Red Valour:

Originally posted by DerEld:

Maybe IPs become a second counter, they generate fans as genres for your company and become a special "bored IP fans" event. These mechanics exist allready and can be used.
Maybe...

I'm not sure if this should trigger a bored fans event. I'm just wondering how to make some panalties for tapping 174 sequels, because today it's possible and effective. And illogical
Probably best for the next sequel to somehow increase market expectations for quality, which would make it increasingly difficult to do a good review. It's just a general note

Weak sauce, no offense. "Because realism" only has a place in "realism simulator" games. If there are valid reasons for something, great, but realism is never a valid reason in and of itself. The best way to look at issues like this is to ask why its a problem, and who it effects.

The easiest solution to this is - do not make Super Racer 184. Someone else doing so won't hurt you in the slightest way.

I think you are also wrong about IP value. My IPs decay (Legendary difficulty) and it's hard to keep up with more than a few at a time, especially when it's time to make bigger games. As a result, we're stuck with Hyper Drive Rally 38. Also, I wouldn't like it if the AI released Hyper Drive Rally 38 and didn't get bored fans, but I release EndTime Travelers and got the penalty.

In this game, releasing chain sequels (which you would have to do to get that many sequels of a game) hits you with diminishing returns - at some point, you will get 5.0 IP forever anyway, and systems like this only irritate newer players and intermediate players, as vets know how to work around these kind of systems.

It's also not a good idea to use "because realism" as a nerfstick reason because that reason knows no boundaries.

Skilled Employees are too good - should all employees at 90+ skill have an intolerance for other equally skilled workers? In the real world, people sabotage each other and dislike one another based on traits and are worried about their own careers and ideas.

Should Production and Storage rooms be forced to use Technicians and Office Workers for maintenance and inventory?

Should there be taxes, tariffs, and supply-side relationships? What if the Gen2 graphics card doesn't want its chip in the same Console as the best sound? Should you have to bargain your way through this or be forced to make a choice, because realism?

Realism ruins the fun in games.

[GrandeLS]

I will not refer to everything, because we will start to include multi-page elaborations, which I do not really want to do, because I know that it will not change anyone's point of view anyway

I will give just 1 example regarding the sense of realism, after which I hope you will understand what I mean (although I think you know it, but you don't like it;)).

If I play a sports game - let's say football - then I expect that the (statistically) results of the matches will oscillate around the realistic ones, e.g. 1-0 or 1: 2
I wish it wasn't 21:24 like in hadball for example
And for the players to be 11, etc. Well, unless we have a sports joke game in a funny style, where the ball is a duck's egg and the players have three legs (and they are aliens)

The fact that the match lasts a few minutes (not 90) is not so important, because thei it actually kills the fun. That is the difference. Some aspects of realism kill the fun and some build it.
The ability to make dozens of sequels is like the 21:19 score in FIFA and - of course in my opinion, because you might like it - is poor. And it doesn't matter that although I can (luckily know I can't) score 30 goals and I don't do it because I don't want to. The mechanics of the game are to prevent this, because it is a basic issue. I mean the highest difficulty level, of course, because I also only play the legendary one

I could go on and on, but I hope you know what's going on

I do not want - as I wrote above - the game to be realistic in any detail. I want it to be returned in the basic, key mechanics. Of course, unless it's a fun-based game or some kind of pastiche (and MGT is called Tycoon, not funny-one)

[Aida79]

Originally posted by Old School:

Originally posted by Red Valour:

I'm not sure if this should trigger a bored fans event. I'm just wondering how to make some panalties for tapping 174 sequels, because today it's possible and effective. And illogical
Probably best for the next sequel to somehow increase market expectations for quality, which would make it increasingly difficult to do a good review. It's just a general note

Weak sauce, no offense. "Because realism" only has a place in "realism simulator" games. If there are valid reasons for something, great, but realism is never a valid reason in and of itself. The best way to look at issues like this is to ask why its a problem, and who it effects.

The easiest solution to this is - do not make Super Racer 184. Someone else doing so won't hurt you in the slightest way.

I think you are also wrong about IP value. My IPs decay (Legendary difficulty) and it's hard to keep up with more than a few at a time, especially when it's time to make bigger games. As a result, we're stuck with Hyper Drive Rally 38. Also, I wouldn't like it if the AI released Hyper Drive Rally 38 and didn't get bored fans, but I release EndTime Travelers and got the penalty.

In this game, releasing chain sequels (which you would have to do to get that many sequels of a game) hits you with diminishing returns - at some point, you will get 5.0 IP forever anyway, and systems like this only irritate newer players and intermediate players, as vets know how to work around these kind of systems.

It's also not a good idea to use "because realism" as a nerfstick reason because that reason knows no boundaries.

Skilled Employees are too good - should all employees at 90+ skill have an intolerance for other equally skilled workers? In the real world, people sabotage each other and dislike one another based on traits and are worried about their own careers and ideas.

Should Production and Storage rooms be forced to use Technicians and Office Workers for maintenance and inventory?

Should there be taxes, tariffs, and supply-side relationships? What if the Gen2 graphics card doesn't want its chip in the same Console as the best sound? Should you have to bargain your way through this or be forced to make a choice, because realism?

Realism ruins the fun in games.

Realism doesn't ruin the fun in games.
Alot what you said sounds like personal issues with and your opinion

Whether fake or realistic everything is about balance too much this side or too much that side could be bad

Saints row 1 and 2 was great but then it just went too wacky to the point I was like wdf is this. Aliens simulations of being in hell almost killed the franchise lol

[Aida79]

Originally posted by Red Valour:

I will not refer to everything, because we will start to include multi-page elaborations, which I do not really want to do, because I know that it will not change anyone's point of view anyway

I will give just 1 example regarding the sense of realism, after which I hope you will understand what I mean (although I think you know it, but you don't like it;)).

If I play a sports game - let's say football - then I expect that the (statistically) results of the matches will oscillate around the realistic ones, e.g. 1-0 or 1: 2
I wish it wasn't 21:24 like in hadball for example
And for the players to be 11, etc. Well, unless we have a sports joke game in a funny style, where the ball is a duck's egg and the players have three legs (and they are aliens)

The fact that the match lasts a few minutes (not 90) is not so important, because thei it actually kills the fun. That is the difference. Some aspects of realism kill the fun and some build it.
The ability to make dozens of sequels is like the 21:19 score in FIFA and - of course in my opinion, because you might like it - is poor. And it doesn't matter that although I can (luckily know I can't) score 30 goals and I don't do it because I don't want to. The mechanics of the game are to prevent this, because it is a basic issue. I mean the highest difficulty level, of course, because I also only play the legendary one

I could go on and on, but I hope you know what's going on

I do not want - as I wrote above - the game to be realistic in any detail. I want it to be returned in the basic, key mechanics. Of course, unless it's a fun-based game or some kind of pastiche (and MGT is called Tycoon, not funny-one)

My recommendation for IP is for it be quality based

The more quality a game is the better the IP
The less quality the more the IP drops in rating
If you just releasing averaging games than the IP barely climbs

But it's focused more on time

I hate the feature but I've accepted it

[Kyouko Tsukino]

Saints Row 3 was the last good SR game for me - it got silly without resorting to nuke-riding, aliens and time travel (not that aliens and time travel are bad, in sagas that call for them.) The reboot is trying to return to the "slightly wackier than GTA 3" roots, which may be good.

But yeah, realism can be good, what I personally don't get is using realism as a substitute for challenge. Sleep-to-save or such things can make a game far less enjoyable for those who don't care about "eat-drink-sleep-repeat" realism. I won't say "ALL REALISM IS BAD NYAH NYAH NYAH" tho because... Well, I enjoy drops of realism where they fit.

[Panda]

I think one of the biggest proponents for 'realism' in implementation is intuitiveness, People tend to understand features and mechanics that mirror real life over something made overly complex or non-intuitive game decisions.

An example of this is the suggestion I made about taxes, while the discussion largely turned to 'I hate that kind of realism' - nobody was going to fire up the game and think 'what the heck are taxes?'

This doesn't make those changes necessarily needed but it tends to be better than adding some arbitrary 'catch up' mechanic (you randomly lose 1 million dollars due to fines etc) or A.I cheats to win feature for example.

When it comes to a game being 'wacky' or what have you, this comes down more to personal taste.

[Panda]

Concerning the OP I agree that IPs should drop due to poor quality releases.

I understand not everyone wants the 'challenge' of working around mechanics and systems that go against their desired playstyle - this has created it's own challenge for the developer to make additions (see difficulty, penalties, negative consequences) that don't wholly break certain playstyles.

I had originally suggested a 'second level' to IPs. Something like the 1st 5 'gold stars' are potentially temporary and can be lessened and the next level 'platinum' stars are permanent. I thought this would placate people who do not want their IPs damaged by allowing them to 'max' them out. The issue is once you start adding complexity to the solutions both the complexity to implement them and the time to add them increases.

But on the flip side if you simply just add 'well fans get bored if you release too many sequels' you add an inoperable obstacle for certain players.

So this is where things fall sometimes on the developer to make tough decisions, or sometimes simply leave things as they are. That is where certain things are as of right now. Maybe that changes, maybe it doesn't.

[Panda]

And I know the popular suggestion is to make everything optional. Which I can understand, but given how many times changes have been suggested be made optional and how few have been made optional I don't think adding check boxes for everything is quite as easy as we think. I believe it comes with it's own developmental complexities.

[Aida79]

Originally posted by Panda:

I think one of the biggest proponents for 'realism' in implementation is intuitiveness, People tend to understand features and mechanics that mirror real life over something made overly complex or non-intuitive game decisions.

An example of this is the suggestion I made about taxes, while the discussion largely turned to 'I hate that kind of realism' - nobody was going to fire up the game and think 'what the heck are taxes?'

This doesn't make those changes necessarily needed but it tends to be better than adding some arbitrary 'catch up' mechanic (you randomly lose 1 million dollars due to fines etc) or A.I cheats to win feature for example.

When it comes to a game being 'wacky' or what have you, this comes down more to personal taste.

Personally I think you should worry about taxes when all the features are out. We can't assume all the new features will leave us with too much money. You have already got the dev to make games more costly to make but we have to think about buying companies, game pass and other features before we worry about taxes.

Just an opinion

Originally posted by Panda:

Concerning the OP I agree that IPs should drop due to poor quality releases.

I understand not everyone wants the 'challenge' of working around mechanics and systems that go against their desired playstyle - this has created it's own challenge for the developer to make additions (see difficulty, penalties, negative consequences) that don't wholly break certain playstyles.

I had originally suggested a 'second level' to IPs. Something like the 1st 5 'gold stars' are potentially temporary and can be lessened and the next level 'platinum' stars are permanent. I thought this would placate people who do not want their IPs damaged by allowing them to 'max' them out. The issue is once you start adding complexity to the solutions both the complexity to implement them and the time to add them increases.

But on the flip side if you simply just add 'well fans get bored if you release too many sequels' you add an inoperable obstacle for certain players.

So this is where things fall sometimes on the developer to make tough decisions, or sometimes simply leave things as they are. That is where certain things are as of right now. Maybe that changes, maybe it doesn't.

I think the Ip degrading limits play styles but no point covering old ground I reached my final stage of grief.

Originally posted by Panda:

And I know the popular suggestion is to make everything optional. Which I can understand, but given how many times changes have been suggested be made optional and how few have been made optional I don't think adding check boxes for everything is quite as easy as we think. I believe it comes with it's own developmental complexities.

I don't think everything should be optional but if we can make the commercial success/fail optional it can't be hard with IP also maybe add more years for easy and medium. Outsourcing maybe the solution though well see ( maybe I haven't reached my final stage of grief lol)

[Dragoon]

I really hate that IPs drop if left alone for 5 or however many years.

How long has it been since the last Elder Scrolls? (Eso / Card games don't count)
(Elder Scrolls V, Nov 11th 2011.) Special Edition came out on 2016...
Rip their IP rating.

Civ 6
October 21st, 2016. (That is 5 years, rip the CIV IP rating I guess?)

Mario Kart 8
May 29th, 2014. (Re-release does not count)

Mount & Blade - March 30th, 2010 until Bannerlord came out in 2020.


I could list some more examples but the point should be made.

You could argue against some of those, if DLC is counted for example. However, the general image of each IP (excluding outside developer issues) have not diminished.

You could even argue that the Elder Scrolls image HAS diminished due to the constant re-releases of Skyrim (People joke about being able to play Skyrim on their microwaves).

Rumors of Elder Scrolls VI using the same engine as V have also hurt their image slightly, which could be compared to the player rushing out yearly sequels with the same engine and such.


The longer it takes for a sequel to release, the more excited people become for it. If the IP is already big enough to be known.

If the IP is on the fringe, like an Indie game, then this isn't quite the case.

What about a game like Stardew Valley though?

February 26th, 2016. No DLC. Free updates though, which don't raise the IP value in MGT2.

Will Stardew Valley 2 become doomed in terms of IP value due to the lack of a sequel / spin-offs? Of course not.


The current system is not very fun to work with.

[Dragoon]

Originally posted by Panda:

And I know the popular suggestion is to make everything optional. Which I can understand, but given how many times changes have been suggested be made optional and how few have been made optional I don't think adding check boxes for everything is quite as easy as we think. I believe it comes with it's own developmental complexities.

I don't like that the random failure / success option is optional, or tied to the random event one at the least.


I dislike the random 'video game market crash' events. But I like the idea of the random game failures / success event. lol