People get really upset when I say this but I think it's pretty undeniable at this point that transitioning your non-action game franchise to an action game loses you sales. There's not a single example you can point to where that isn't the case!
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Like a Dragon has sold better than ever as of late, with 7 being the series’ best-seller as of 2023 and 8 reaching a million sales in its first week. the wealth really is infinite
It helps that they didn't feel the need to change the games structure or identity to achieve that transition, which is where these sorts of titles fail imo
Like 16 would've been 3X better if it didn't try to be the Witcher and got bored of it halfway through
Granblue Fantasy: Versus and Relink both kinda say the opposite though, they're both incredibly successful and deviate from the turn based format into two entirely different genres
Granblue also has a highly fanatical fanbase and those games came with game codes for the gacha to get specialized character skins, weapons and high speed uncaps for very specific characters.
Though, CyGames committing to the spinoffs being actually VERY good licensed games probably helped.
They’re also undeniably spinoff games, the core experience of the franchise remains the gacha and everything else is supplemental to it rather than a sequel or replacement for it so they stay divided into separate sets of expectations
And CyGames was VERY VERY upfront about what to expect with these games in the build up to their release through their Anniversary (March), Summer and Christmas streams.
And due to the relatively high amount of polish for an AA game, they also had very good word of mouth.
There are definitely examples of a shift to action leading to better sales: Resident Evil 5 and 6; Mass Effect 2 and 3; Dragon Age: Inquisition; Final Fantasy XV (best-selling single player FF game since VII). The strategy seems less effective now, but historically, it's worked with some huge IP
The big competition built up for the first two or so chapters was the first time I was given the opportunity to use some of the team members. A TRPG would have worked so much better in making them feel like a team
Well it's still all about money. The broader the audience the more potential sales. Marketing that the adrenaline inducing gameplay also plays a factor on success. Because if what I'm thinking you're talking about, the bigger issue is splitting it into 3 separate games.
I think the most famous one is Fallout I don't really think it can be argued Fallout 3 would have exploded the way it did being too similar to 1 and 2 unless it went all in on fighting Final Fantasy as a high end turn based RPG.
God now I'm seriously thinking about what Bethesda could do if they scaled back enough to make a turn based RPG. But then again we'd be subjected even more to their writing.
I always considered VATS to be a workaround for Aim Assist Andys who play on console. Now granted, there's no good arguments to say how functional the gunplay is in 3 and to the same extent as New Vegas.
That’s wrong. Fallout is an RPG first. If a character sucks at gunplay, they don’t get to ignore that drawback because someone played a lot of FPS. Sure, it can help, but only to a limited degree.
Compared to Fallout 1 and 2, 3 is the least RPG like. From interviews they definitely wanted to go all guns blazing, but of course, their engine was the biggest hindrance since it was outdated and most importantly...buggy.
Sure, but the entire reason Bethesda was able to buy Fallout in the first place was that Interplay went bankrupt trying to turn the series into an action game
Interplay canceled Black Isle's Fallout 3 in favour of producing the console focused action game Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, which reviewed dreadfully and sold worse.
What. What is this. I have never heard of this. I have never seen this. I've 100% looked up a list of Fallout games in release order before and this was not there.
You are right, I’m not disagreeing, but I do have a single example I can point to— though it likely has less to do with appeal to existing fans and more to do with a larger installed user base.
Personally I love it almost as much as TTYD! It’s the original PM that was a disappointment after Super Mario RPG, but the other two (before the massive wrong move of Sticker Star) are both A+ in my book.
Wii did sell like crazy so it makes sense why there'd be more sales compared to N64 and GC.
Because, despite higher sales, most primarily the turn-based Paper Mario purist regard it as their least favored in the series, well aside from Sticker Star, of course. Personally, I think SPM is solid.
Turns out people who like menu-driven or rtwp games might actually, y'know, like them. And not be as interested in an action game no matter how many baby modes you put in!
I really want to know what the stats are on how many people use the baby mode options for action games, especially action rpgs. I feel like it's probably a smaller percentage of players than most would think.
I feel like in general wildly changing genres that your series is established as is gonna turn people off unless its explicitly marketed as a weird spin-off thing
Glad you mentioned RTWP, because man Avowed has got to be good. Selfishly so Josh Sawyer and his team can get funded for Pentiment 2 or w/e. But mainly because I'm worried they might be finished if it flops.
FF16 trying to make baby's first DMC to avoid scaring off FF fans was possibly the worst decision that team could've made. Wanted to keep the old guard but do something new but not so new that the old guard would complain, and ended up with a kiddy pool for their efforts
As someone that played Fallout 1&2 before 3, 3 was a massive disappointment and likely sold on Bethesda's pedigree at the time, not because it was a more action oriented game.
Fallout 3 was one of the best selling games in the franchise and that dipped out of the turn based combat into a more traditional FPS combat. I dunno if you'd consider turn based combat as still action, but the difference in pace is night and day.
I don't mind if there's an action game spinoff, but 100% agreed. I like FFXV and XVI, but there's no way they're ever going to dethrone IX as favorite.
will be better if all games ain't changing the gameplay to the opposite direction, like yakuza games, but some slight changes to the main gameplay not too bad like many of newer sequels of the old titles like re for example
Counterpoint- Morrowind is definitely not an action game, whereas Skyrim is (Oblivion sits somewhere in the middle), and no one would argue that Skyrim has lost sales compared to the comparatively niche Morrowind.
You could also argue the Elder Scrolls' success was never hingent on its gameplay outside of a few niches. Skyrim was successful not because it was an action game but because it removed alot of the friction from its combat and quest design
It's also widely derided for all the things it cut to achieve its mass market success. More widely beloved still, but I guess in opposition to kris' statement you can, it just costs you eating a huge rep hit to wildly change a franchise's stylings
For sure, I just think that what Skyrim went through is a whole lot less radical coming off of Oblivion than what, say, Bioware on general went through post EA acquisition
FF7R sold really damn well. It’s at half of FF7 OG and it’s not had over 2 decades. It’s not like it’s impossible for it to go well.
I agree that turn based is fantastic and in no way inferior. But it’s not superior either. Designers should always do what they think is best, rather than tradition
dragon age inquisition is apparently the best selling game in bioware's entire history but it's the only one that comes to mind, i think veilguard's underperformance is much more connected to everybody absolutely loathing the writing and lore
If you really think that most of the people who bough Inquisition played it on higher difficulties for gameplay are not less than 20% of the auidience that vought it, then idk what to tell you tbh
when i tried playing it like that i could feel the game's palpable hatred of rpg fans and i am pretty convinced all of its rtwp overtures are just placative, the tactical cam is so unplayable that i stuck to real time party member swapping before dropping it in the hinterlands anyways lol
Yup, FF16, the FF7 Remake saga, and now Dragon Age are basically proof that its not worth changing gameplay styles for entirely new audience. All it will do, is mostly alienate the already existing one.
...No, they aren't. Origins/Awakening are a mix of Baldur's Gate 1 + 2 and Final Fantasy XII. They straight-up have a gambit system in there. It's a turn-based RPG running in real time with pause.
I was complaining to my husband recently that I miss the old Sherlock Holmes games that had hidden object elements... why are there quick time events now ;__;
It's crazy that a fast paced action game that requires a ton of focus is considered more casual friendly than a genre where the action is always at a standstill, so you have time to think & not worrying about pausing the game at an awkward moment.
While a bit generalizing I think the "fast pace action games" tend to be along the lines of "hit buttons and dodge" while standstill games tend to have a lot more in-depth strategy and thinking put into them, which goes against that "casual" ideology
not defending reasonless action games but still
And like I said this is generalizations, many action games require a lot of thinking and strategy, and many standstills are less stratagem and more about the experience, etc. Honestly it really depends on what spectrums of the wider gaming sphere youre in
Honestly absurd that we ever got to the point where common wisdom was that turn based rpgs were outdated, you'd think with the success of Baldur's Gate 3, the Newer Yakuza games, and Metaphor that myth would finally be dispelled but people still argue otherwise.
Resident Evil was already a relatively action focused franchise, at least in comparison to other survival horror of the era. RE4 just shifted the perspective and amped up the gunplay and downplayed the survival horror aspects. It wasn't a hard genre shift.
Something I always flash back to was a review for Pokémon Sun and Moon that went “why does Pokémon never change up their gameplay, why not make it an action RPG”
"These games are getting stale"
⬇️
*Pokemon tries something new*
⬇️
"wtf this gameplay is new and scary, i don't like it 0/10"
⬇️
*Pokemon goes back to old formula*
⬇️
"why is GameFreak so afraid to experiment??"
phantasy star online did it's numbers, but i'm sure the PSIV sales were hindered by the ghoulish attempts at undercutting it's relevance by Sega of America.
There is a weird defensive possessiveness I see w/ new fans in a series who jumped on w/ an entry that Massively Changed Things, where they love to like...chide oldheads for not just either giving up on the series or just learn to love the completely different new thing.
the only example I can remember of that massive swing working is with RE shifting to first person - and that was in many ways a move back to the gameplay styles of the original games
If you can’t sit down and enjoy a good turn based game and thus demand that it uproot its entire identity just so you can hit buttons your brain is cooked. Sorry!
The difference is that Mass Effect was already an action game, resident evil got major pushback for the action elements, and the primary audience of metal gear solid and metal gear rising are not the same as the original metal gear
When I think resident evil going full action game I think re5 and 6 whereas I can see the obvious throughline between the original and 4, but yeah it was still an action game in terms of having a higher execution bar than a turn based rpg
Was about to say Fallout as well. Fallout 1 and 2 were massive parts of my childhood, but I can't deny the series was wildly more popular when Fallout 3 switched to first person from isometric.
Seeing Resident Evil 4 mentioned but that's not a good example. At its core the genre and style of play between 1-3 and 4 is the exact same, you just have to aim now. It's an iteration of the formula.
Comments
Like 16 would've been 3X better if it didn't try to be the Witcher and got bored of it halfway through
Though, CyGames committing to the spinoffs being actually VERY good licensed games probably helped.
And CyGames was VERY VERY upfront about what to expect with these games in the build up to their release through their Anniversary (March), Summer and Christmas streams.
And due to the relatively high amount of polish for an AA game, they also had very good word of mouth.
Because, despite higher sales, most primarily the turn-based Paper Mario purist regard it as their least favored in the series, well aside from Sticker Star, of course. Personally, I think SPM is solid.
I really think it's as simple as
turn-based game: no execution barrier
action game: execution barrier
obviously the first one has a bigger pool of potential customers
Thats what made it so accessible
I agree that turn based is fantastic and in no way inferior. But it’s not superior either. Designers should always do what they think is best, rather than tradition
It's still pseudo-turn-based, in a way.
It's also funny that there is quibbling over this classification since Bioware HAS made an actual turn-based RPG (Star Wars: KOTOR)
not defending reasonless action games but still
⬇️
*Pokemon tries something new*
⬇️
"wtf this gameplay is new and scary, i don't like it 0/10"
⬇️
*Pokemon goes back to old formula*
⬇️
"why is GameFreak so afraid to experiment??"
Repeat ad infinitum
Not to mention FF16 touting around "we worked with the dmc devs!" and then the combat apparently felt underwhelming by action game standards.
the Remake titles are still providing third person and Village ended up adding a third person mode as well
I get what you’re saying though, it’s definitely an unnecessary gamble, but you can’t deny SOME success sometimes.
The last 2 also apply to fallout
also yea ME was an action title since day 1, it was just more of an RPG than its sequels