Let's Make a Franchise - Part 1

What does it take to create a successful franchise?

This is a question developers and publishers have been asking themselves for decades. Some have figured out specific secrets regarding strategies to give their products a greater chance (bundled in games are almost guaranteed to be successful if the console sells well), but for most companies, much like the movie industry, nobody knows anything. What’s the gaming version of Paranormal Activity or Get Out? I might say Dark Souls, the series I just wrote about last entry that on paper seems to make no sense but in practice became a huge success. Limiting the accessibility and taking things backward surely would be a tough pitch to publishers, but over 13 million copies sold later developer From Software is laughing its way to the bank (not to mention, exclusivity deals which lead to Bloodborne being only on the PS4).

Regardless, I sought to find a way to get a better understanding of how franchises are born, specifically what might give a new property the best opportunity to become a successful franchise. My hypothesis was that launching a new property in congruence with a console launch was the best recipe for long term success. I was influenced not only by classics like Mario and Sonic (Sonic not originally being bundled in with the Genesis, but after doing so became a colossal success), but by more recent entries like the game Knack, which was considered an average platform but was recently greenlit for a sequel last year, largely because it sold well given the PS4’s limited launch titles. In order to father data for analysis, I look specifically at three generations of consoles: the Sega Saturn/Sony PlayStation/Nintendo 64 generation, the Sega Dreamcast/Sony PlayStation 2/Nintendo GameCube/Microsoft generation, and the Sony PlayStation 3/Nintendo Wii/Microsoft Xbox 360 generation. This post will focus specifically on the earliest group of consoles, and will move forward in time over the next few posts.

The data parameters I gathered were the following:

From here my mentor, Professor Jenny Escalas, and I were able to gather some extremely interesting insights that just may provide help to anyone looking to launch a new game in the future without previous experience. Without further ado, here are some of the insights we found in regards to the 5^th generation of console launch games.

Overall Metrics:

1.      18 games available across the 3 consoles (10 for Sony, 6 for Sega, 2 for Nintendo)

2.      14 out of 18 games received sequels

3.      10 out of 18 games received multiple sequels

4.      Average review was 71

5.      Average sales figure was 1.4 million units

                                   

                              (I’m sure you know this gentleman. Credit: Wikipedia.com)

Insight 1 – Platformers and Fighting Games Ruled the Era

In what should not be a surprise for the mid ‘90’s timeline, platformers and fighting games were the genre that had the greatest chance of success. All 3 platformers released across the consoles received a sequel, and 2 out of 3 of the fighting games did as well. Even more impressive, 4 out of the 6 games did not have a previous iteration, the two that did were Super Mario 64 and Street Fighter: The Movie (although this game fared poorly and was the one game that did receive a “true” sequel; however, the franchise Street Fighter exists to this day, but no movie specific follow ups). Even more impressive is of the 6 games, 4 continued with multiple sequels. Among the 6 games was Rayman, a name that is familiar with most gamers and can effectively be considered one of the early mascots for Sony (Rayman himself would be supplanted by Crash Bandicoot in the future, but Ubisoft struck at the right time and took full advantage of the system). Coming off the 16-bit era where platformers and fighting games were at their peak though, it was not much of a surprise to see these genres create effective long term success.

                                                 

(A very cool new franchise, Panzer Dragoon. Credit: HardcoreGaming101)

Insight 2 – Review Scores Play a Direct Role in Creating a Sequel

In this generation critical reception had leverage over consumer reception. That’s not to say that commercial sales did not play a role in creating a sequel, but they did not have as great a direct factor. All 11 games that had an average review of 75 or higher received sequels, even though 2 titles were lacking in sales (Clockwork Knight – 90,000, Panzer Dragoon – 110,000). Panzer Dragoon was actually the second highest rated game of the generation behind Super Mario 64, so it’s fair to assume that Sega believed the critical success would lead to future sales even if it was not obvious in the first game. Still, making a better than average game for this generation essentially guaranteed a sequel, and to a degree, a franchise, as 9 of the 11 games received multiple sequels, truly a nice feat for the generation.

                                  

(It all started with this radical box art. Credit: Wikipedia.com)

Insight 3 – Single Player Games Had a Perfect Record in Sequels

Honestly, see subject line. Single player games did exceptionally well in this generation. Even poorly reviewed games like Total Eclipse: Turbo and Kileak: The DNA Imperative which had aggregate review scores of 57 and 48 respectively managed to get a sequel. While this trend would not continue going forward, it is fair to infer that this generation was the final great one for Single Player games before multiplayer options became more commonplace.

Insight 4 – A Bad Era for Sports’ Games

Unlike the forthcoming generations, the Sports genre suffered terribly with its outings[1]. Of the five games released only two received sequels, and one had been a pre-existing franchise. Granted, both successes continued into multiple sequels, which meant there was some success, but indications are that this timeframe was one that was not kind to sports initially. This is likely due to the large shift from 2D to 3D graphics, forcing developers to take their time before launching a new franchise or an update to one. The shift in graphics was extremely detrimental for several genres and franchises (this generation could also be considered the last great Platformer generation). Once developers got used to the new graphical interfaces, Sports’ games would find themselves in the thick of every future console launch.

                            

(It’s so…90’s. Credit: GameOldies.com)

Insight 5 – The Golden Child of Console Launch Titles is Ridge Racer

Coming into the 5^th generation Sony had the most to prove. Yes, it was appealing to many individuals given the lower price tag (Sony’s product was at least $100 less than any competitor product) but it had no franchises or previous intellectual property to rely on for software sales. Thus, it needed to try to throw as many potential franchises at the system as possible, leading to games like Rayman from Ubisoft and Ridge Racer from Namco (later Bandai Namco). I’ve already discussed the success Ubisoft had with Rayman in Insight 1, but Ridge Racer took the console launch game to a new level. What I mean is that for every forthcoming generation, Namco launched a Ridge Racer game alongside it for Sony. Ridge Racer 5 was in the PlayStation 2 lineup and Ridge Racer 6 was part of the PlayStation 3 lineup. Even the PlayStation Portable had a Ridge Racer title at launch. Why did Namco employ this strategy? It’s simple: the games reviewed better than average and sold well for their time period until Ridge Racer 6. The original Ridge Racer had an aggregate review score of 81 and sold just under 800,000 units, which should definitely be considered a success for a brand new IP. Ridge Racer 5 had an aggregate score of 80 along with 1,240,000 units sold, once again showing the series was both high quality and easy to market. Things went astray in the 7^th generation as Ridge Racer 6 had a lower aggregate score of 74 and managed only 200,000 in sales, but at this point, Namco had reaped the reward of a successful franchise all through betting big on the success of Sony consoles.

Conclusion:

Without spoiling the upcoming posts, what we see here in the fifth generation is a bit of an outlier. These trends did not continue into the future for the most part, but instead showcase the end of an era. The shift from 2D to 3D was a difficult one, and with the games released we see a majority sticking to the old norms (Platformers, Fighting) instead of the more commonly found games today at launch (First Person Shooters, Sports). Regardless, there definitely stand out hits at the time, such as Super Mario 64, alongside new franchises like Rayman and Ridge Racer. These two specific games were definitely highlights, especially the birth of Rayman. As we’ll see going forward, Ubisoft has been extremely shrewd in its strategy to bet big on console launches, which has kept them not only creating new franchises but also raking in sales compared to its competition.

Next time things will get a little more interesting as this brand new company called Microsoft decides to enter the fray with its original Xbox while Sega makes a last stand with its Dreamcast. Thanks for reading!

Notes:

Special thanks to Gamerankings.com, VGChartz.com, and SegaRetro.org for providing a substantial amount of the data points needed to conduct this research

---

[1] Note – I consider Sports and Racing two separate genres

JCR Hot Take: Cool to be Hard

                                                               

                                                  (What a rush. Credit: Gamespot.com)

My heart is pounding. After nearly 30 deaths to Gerhman, The First Hunter, the penultimate final boss of Bloodborne, I’m on the precipice of victory. Dodging right and left as his very fast and damaging scythe comes towards me, I know that this is my chance. He comes forward with a roll, one in which will leave him open for a parry and visceral attack. I shoot, he falls to a knee, after which I run up to him and finish him off with my axe. The moment is exhilarating, it’s 12:30 a.m., I have class in 8 hours, and I am completely satisfied. I then find out I triggered the secret boss, the Moon Presence, and get walloped in my first time trying to beat it. That’s no matter at this point though, because after hopelessly losing time after time, I finally vanquished Gehrman, and despite the losses and frustration, the fight was a highlight I won’t forget.

Back in the glory days of the Nintendo Entertainment System and Sega Genesis, games were hard. Brutally hard. The term “Nintendo Hard” began to gain traction in the industry, as games for the era were frustrating, unforgiving, and required precise inputs. With that came the complexities of learning the systems of different games, making players sharper with their control and recognition of enemy patterns. With every crushing defeat a player came that much closer to victory, and once that victory was achieved a sense of euphoria came over the player, making the effort seem that much more worthwhile.

                             

(If you played Silver Surfer on the NES... Credit: areyoubadenough.blogspot.com)

In the early ‘90’s things began to change. While the Super Nintendo had its fair share of difficult properties it did not rival its predecessor. However, it was around the mid to late ‘90s where the difficulty of old faded away. With the advent of new technology, specifically around the Nintendo 64, PlayStation, and Sega Saturn era, games began to shy away from extreme difficulty to not lose players. Lengthy tutorials became a mainstay, and continues/save points were extremely prevalent to prevent losing progress. This trend continued through the sixth and into the seventh generation of consoles. A particularly hard game was an anomaly.

                                                   

(It’s called Prepare to Die Edition for a reason. Credit: Steam)

Then, something changed, and harder games began popping up again. Starting with Demon’s Souls in 2009 and hitting it big with Dark Souls in 2011, developer From Software has been bringing ultra-hard games to the masses. The premise of the games is simple, while lore is rich within the universes. The game boils down to creating a character to battle the way through western fantasy environments and villains, including some truly punishing bosses. From Software is longtime developer in the industry, but these games have just become their recent phenomenon, and include Demon’s Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls 2, Dark Souls 3, and Bloodborne. The company has come out and said the third installment is the final in the series, having it go out on a high note before things get stale in the universe.

The From Software games are a display of minimalism, at least at first glance. The games have very short tutorials that end in a tough boss fight, showing that it’s better to learn the game’s tropes through failure as opposed to being told all the essentials without experimentation. The environments are large and intertwining, which proves to be a joy for discovery. The trick of these difficult games is that when you perish, you lose all your experience points, and have one chance to recover them in the spot where you died, which can be particularly daunting if you’re a far distance from your point of death. The beauty of the game is that it is a trial in risk and reward, one that can be customized for the player liking. Do you enjoy using a short sword for rapid attacks? Great, but be warned you will not have distance in attacks for ranged foes. Prefer magic? OK, but when an enemy gets in close then long casting times will likely lead to your demise. Either way, the game does an incredible job educating the player on how to be successful while not simply rewarding progress made.

                             

(The Abyss Watchers, an excellent boss from Dark Souls 3. Credit: From Software)

In my opinion, the true appeal of the game lies in the boss fights. Boss fights are meant to test the player’s skills, to see if what he or she has learned is enough to handle a huge monstrosity or worthy opponent. The thing is, in these games there are only few new techniques to learn after the early stages, so instead, the boss battles rely on learning the opponent’s move set, pinpointing the exact times to either parry, block, or dodge an attack, and then punish the fiend. The rub is that each boss is supremely different, some might require aggressive play while others have a more patient approach. Each boss has its own individual orchestrated theme as well, and while the other environments have very little music, adding this touch only furthers the intensity of the experience. It is difficult to articulate the rush of these fights, but after gaming for more than 25 years, I can safely say that some of these boss fights are the best I’ve ever encountered, and will last long with me after I finish completing the games.

                                    

(A wolf holding a giant sword? Only in Dark Souls. Credit: Dorkly.com)

Numerous gamers tend to agree with these opinions, as the community for the From Software games is quite passionate and involved. There are copious boss rankings and lore dissections (two of my favorite YouTube personalities are theDeModcracy and VaatyVidya)[1]. Even more impressive is that games like these that may not seem approachable due to the difficulty have found a very welcoming audience. The Dark Souls series has surpassed 13 million units, and Dark Souls 3 had the best launch week of any From Software game and the best launch of Bandai Namco, a publisher with a storied history (Namco created Pac Man)[2][3]. As a result, similarly styled “Souls” games have been popping up, one of which is Nioh, a samurai styled take on the intensely difficult but rewarding adventure, filled with devilish bosses and demon like enemies. It will be interesting to see how the developer moves forward after Dark Souls, something we’re likely to find out next week at the Electronic Entertainment Expo, or E3 for short.

                                                              

(Don’t love Dark Souls 2 but Looking Glass Knight battle is awesome. Credit: wikia.com)

Now I want to make sure I make note that just because a game is hard does not make it fun. While I love Bloodborne and Dark Souls 3, Dark Souls 2 was a letdown in comparison. I’ll freely admit that I haven’t fully played the previous two entries yet, but they will be my next big adventures, regardless of upcoming releases. What I did not care about 2 was that it was challenging in more of a frustrating way. Yes there are a handful of ultra-difficult encounters in the games I care for, but in 2 it just seems relentless. Contrarily, some of the bosses are absolute pushovers that I could defeat in my first try, which really should not happen on a first play through. There just seems to be a lack of balance and I found myself wondering what to do next instead of inherently craving it like the other games. It seems to be the black sheep in the community as well, as certain fans consider it beloved while a fair share of others do not care for it whatsoever. The point is that being difficult for the sake of being difficult does not make these games great. What makes them great is that they are difficult but act as a teaching experience, each individual area and battle is a puzzle, one that can be overcome with dedication and practice.

                                   

(As difficult as it is gross, Bloodborne knows its boss fights. Credit: beatthatboss.blogspot.com)

In the end, what does From Software’s accomplishments teach us about the industry? For one, in what is a seemingly developed market, innovation still has a way to upend what consumers consider entertainment. I myself recall when Demon’s Souls and Dark Souls came out and chose not to pursue either because of reviews stating that the increased difficulty would lead to numerous amounts of deaths. I pondered why anyone would event want to play that type of game. I actually only tried Bloodborne because I had still only recently received my PS4 and saw it on sale with its Downloadable Content at a ridiculously low price. Without question though, these games have been the most gripping gaming experiences I’ve had in quite some time. Even after playing through the new Zelda, which was by all accounts an unforgettable experience and a landmark moment for gaming, I could not stop thinking about my experience with Bloodborne. Turns out even an old seasoned gamer like myself can learn a few new tricks.

---

[1] Check out their high quality stuff here - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtcUKdcAXfVCo5YlgBMkfjA https://www.youtube.com/user/VaatiVidya

[2] http://www.shacknews.com/article/94599/dark-souls-3-sales-reach-3-million-units-dark-souls-series-shipments-reach-13-million-units

[3] http://nerdist.com/dark-souls-3-is-breaking-all-sorts-of-sales-records/

Entrepreneurship and Gaming - A Chat With Yacht Club Games

Entrepreneurship in the gaming industry is not the most common practice. Gaming is largely run by the big name publishers and developers, and the most successful startups tend to be acquired quickly while those who have difficulties tend to fall apart. Having said that, in the last 10 years there has been an independent game revolution, with young, upstart developers channeling their passion into smaller, but still extremely rewarding games. One such developer is Yacht Club Games. Formed in 2011, Yacht Club Games is best known for its 2014 smash hit Shovel Knight, which pits the titular character against 8 enemy knights and the enchantress, in a fully realized world that would fit in perfectly with NES classics. It consists of old school graphics, gameplay mechanics reminiscent of Mega Man, Ducktales, Super Mario Bros. 3, and one of the best soundtracks in the last few years. What’s so impressive is that even while it is a love letter to gaming of old, it creates its own identity, one that I look forward to see growing over time. Given this was Yacht Club’s first official release, I wanted to learn more about the process of forming a company and becoming successful. I was fortunate enough to correspond with Sean Velasco, designer and director at Yacht Club Games on the formation of the company and building a business in a sometimes unforgiving industry. A special thanks to him and his team for their willingness to speak with me and for crafting a classic in Shovel Knight.

Currently Playing - The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and NieR: Automata 

I cannot remember a period of time with this much excellence at once, 2017 is already shaping up to be an amazing year for games.

                      

                                

      (Promo art of Shovel Knight and his enemies. Credit: Kickstarter.com)

1.      Where did the idea behind Yacht Club and Shovel Knight come from? How did you all start up in the industry?

SV: We all started in different ways, but our paths mostly crossed at another developer called WayForward, which is known for licensed titles and classic side scrollers. As players that loved these kinds of games, we were all drawn to WayForward, and we developed many titles. But after several years, we decided we wanted to break off and do our own thing. That’s how the idea for the Yacht Club came about. Shovel Knight was born from the idea of making a classic NES style game that was built around a single mechanic. We chose it because we thought it would be a good Kickstarter game, and something we were passionate about and also capable of doing ourselves.

2.      In the early days in 2011 how was funding acquired? I know Kickstarter played a huge role by 2013, but did Yacht Club go through a similar process to tech firms with venture capital or self-fund?

SV: We weren’t really assembled as a company until shortly before we put the Kickstarter together, around November of 2012. Until then, we were all working full-time jobs at other companies and doing YCG stuff on the side. We never tried to get capital from other places, but if the Kickstarter had failed, we might have tried.

                              (The titular blue knight himself. Credit: Wikipedia.org)

3.      How did you enjoy working with Kickstarter? Would you recommend it to future game developers? It seems like one of the most viable funding locations for games.

SV: Kickstarter is cool because the power goes into the hands of the developers! But, it’s a ton of work to launch a Kickstarter and communicate with your backers and audience. Publishers and self-funding can work really well too, but Kickstarter is certainly viable. I’m not sure if we would do it again, but it’s certainly a great funding model if used correctly. Just be aware that it’s a project in and of itself!

4.      How did you find and recruit your team? What channels do you think are the best ways to find strong developers and business minds?

SV: Our team came from WayForward, where we were already used to working together as a team on various projects. Working alongside people is the best way to find like minds, even if it’s on something smaller. For people with no team, I would try to join a game development club, meet other devs that are already working, do internships, anything to try and meet people and get familiar!

                                 

(Shovel Knight’s villains have also gotten moments in the sun. Here we see the latest downloadable content Specter of Torment. Credit: Gamespot.com)

5.      In the beginning of the company what were the hardest obstacles to overcome? How did you and your team maintain focus throughout the early process when uncertainty is high?

SV: We are a team that has historically managed to stay focused through crazy development schedules and company drama. This practiced focus discipline helped us to get Shovel Knight done. But we worked crazy hours, testing our sanity. We worked with very thin resources, testing our finances to the limit. As time went on, it felt like we were all going to go insane. And we did! Some of us are still recovering…. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

6.      This may seem a bit broad, but how did you segment your target audience? Shovel Knight clearly hit hard with a lot of passionate gamers, but how did you know that was the group you wanted to make a game for?

SV: We tried to make Shovel Knight for ages 8-80: for kids that have never played a platformer, for lapsed gamers, for nostalgic players, for everyone. That meant we had to carefully balance difficulty and try to make our game intuitive and easy to learn. We built something that we really loved, and tested it with lots of players, adjusting along the way, even if we disagreed with their feedback sometimes! In the end, Shovel Knight became appealing to players of all ages, but I think the difficulty is still a turn-off for some.

                              

 

(One of Shovel Knight’s biggest influences – Mega Man. Credit: USGamer.com)

7.      I love the early investment in the Nintendo Switch, but do you ever see yourself developing for bigger platforms such as iOS or Android?

SV: Shovel Knight is a game that demands tactile control methods, so iOS and Android are a poor fit. It just wouldn’t be playable! But we still think that touch screens and other control methods are cool. There is definitely interest in doing something someday. We’d just need the right game.

8.      What recommendations would you make for future entrepreneurs in the gaming industry?

SV: I have no idea, haha! We got really lucky, I think. I guess I would say: make sure your team is great, you all know what you want to make, your games are great (and confirm it with many, many non-biased parties), your marketing is great, and never ever give up! Success has a lot to do with persistence. Note: I started a company and failed before we ever started Yacht Club Games!

The Triforce of Greatness

(I don’t not have this as a poster…Credit: Collider)

This week, the latest iteration in The Legend of Zelda franchise will hit store shelves. The game is titled The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and has received copious amounts of praise at game shows prior to the official release. Regardless, I’ve learned very little about the game outside of the release trailers to keep some surprises for the game, as gaming journalism can reveal quite a bit of information. I have learned that the game will be enormous in size and scope, and has me extremely excited to try it out and dust off my dying Wii U[1]. Although Mega Man has been and always will be my favorite franchise, Zelda more often than not has held down the number 2 spot (occasionally Sonic makes a claim but usually lives in 3^rd place). I hold The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time as the greatest game ever made, and one of my cherished gaming memories. I was 10 when the game came out, and can still remember playing it on Christmas morning. My personal favorite is The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask, which came out shortly after Ocarina of Time. With overwhelming themes of loneliness and isolation, Majora’s Mask transcends traditional storytelling for an enthralling experience. While the most recent console entry, Skyward Sword, lacked the awe and wonder of previous entries, the franchise has been largely established as a gaming cornerstone, and will look to reassert its dominance shortly.

                                                 

        (So close. Credit: Zelda.com)

First and foremost though, repeat after me: Zelda is the girl, you play as Link, the hero traditionally clad in green. This is undeniably the most common misconception regarding Zelda, so much so there’s a T shirt about it[2]!

So what is Zelda, and why has it been so successful? Simply put, the Zelda series puts players on adventures that define excellence at almost every step, and it is likely that each player has an individual favorite quality about the Zelda games. It redefined targeting in action games with its “Z Targeting” in Ocarina of Time, which has made for intense boss battles and tricky enemy encounters. It gave players a large world to explore in the original The Legend of Zelda, and gave little instructions. It typically utilizes the highest graphical output a system is capable of, and always brings forth puzzles that force players to think outside the box and use their arsenal of items and weapons. What’s kept it fresh though is that with each iteration there is always a unique theme to draw the player in: in A Link to the Past has players travel back and forth between the light world and dark world to complete dungeons, Majora’s Mask gives the player masks to change them into different species encountered such as the water based Zora, and Twilight Princess allowed Link to turn into a wolf for a different take on the formula. Each game has one very unique story mechanic to make it different from the others, but at the end of the day, Zelda revolves around core elements. Zelda is typically under duress or kidnapped by the evil Ganon, and it is up to the hero Link to save her[3]. To do so he needs to traverse the world known as Hyrule, entering dungeons of different elements to gather what is required of a final duel with Ganon. Dungeons are tricky, and a good test of the capabilities of the player.

                                        

                                       (Ocarina of Time, one of gaming’s finest. Credit: Forbes)

While this may sound like common fare in the gaming world today, starting in 1986 this was a huge movement. Players now had a world to explore with endless possibilities of what they could accomplish. Furthermore, given that each installment adds something new while refining what has made it great previously only adds to the fanfare. Add in the variety of dungeons, bosses, characters, etc. and you have the makings of a great franchise. Personally, I love the music of Zelda. Koji Kondo and his team have created themes that have been with me since childhood, ones that are difficult to tire of, even after you’ve heard them hundreds of times over. Critics and fans alike have agreed about Zelda’s excellence, the games have almost always been over 1 million in sales and the Metacritic scores above 90. See below for details.

                                         

              (This is just the front page, insane. Credit: Metacritic.com)

                                  

(It isn’t until #24 do we see a title dip below 1 million sales, incredible. Credit: Vgchartz.com)

Now while the validity of VGChartz is occasionally in question, what cannot be denied is how financially successful Zelda has been. Even more impressive are the Metacritic scores. Metacritic is known for compiling all reviews across the industry in a place for 1 singular total score, making it easy to decide whether to purchase or not. Naturally most games fall closer to the middle of the 0 – 100 spectrum, and for games anything above an 80 is listed as “Generally Favorable Reviews” while anything above 90 is listed as “Universal Acclaim”. Games that hit the 90+ rating are few and far between (there were 5 console games last year in what was considered an excellent year for gaming). To see Zelda have such a handle on these extremely rare scores further emphasizes its excellence, and if early reports hold true, it is likely that trend will continue with Breath of the Wild.

So I’ve heaped a lot of praise on Zelda at this point, are there any negatives? Well yes, in fact. Since Ocarina of Time, Zelda has largely fell prey to making games somewhat similar to landmark classic, with the exception of Majora’s Mask whose time travel and intricate storytelling created a vacuum of fun side quests and superb character development. Furthermore, Wind Waker which offered a fresh take on a water filled Hyrule, along with a more cartoon like Link loaded with personality. On the more critical side though, Twilight Princess, while refined in gameplay, lacked the pizzazz of Ocarina and the wolf mechanic was more of a chore in the early game than an exciting, fresh twist. It was the sequel Ocarina deserved in terms of dungeon quality but lacked the freedom. It’s still an excellent game, but it will never be my favorite. It sold exceptionally well too, launching it at the same time as the Wii was a brilliant move by Nintendo, which appears like it will pay off again with Breath of The Wild and the Switch. The handheld titles have largely been hit or miss for me as well. While I loved the first few (Link’s Awakening, Oracle of Seasons/Ages, The Minish Cap), I was extremely disappointed with both Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks. Forcing me as the player to use stylus controls was frustrating, especially with no options to use a traditional control support. Furthermore, Phantom Hourglass had my second least favorite trope when it forced the player to return to the same dungeon over and over (plus, no new music for dungeons? Just cave themes? C’mon Nintendo, you’re better than that). Spirit Tracks was better, but with these games I felt like I was being forced to finish, less like I wanted to actually finish them. Again, the linearity played a role here.

                                                

                                                            (Sigh…Credit:WhatCulture)

This brings me to my main critique: linearity became a staple of the franchise after Ocarina of Time. The two exceptions notwithstanding, the linearity became my chief issue for a while, and there was no better example of how criminal it was than in Skyward Sword. The game used the Wii’s motion controls to have the player use Link’s sword 1:1, and it worked pretty well overall. The game sold nearly 4 million copies, indicating it was a huge success. However, this is by far my least favorite Zelda game. The game is entirely too linear, forcing the player to follow a strict path to go from objective to objective with very little in between. The gameplay is nice, but the dungeons are small, and a little overwhelming (Lanayru Mines and Sandship notwithstanding). The lack of optional activities cannot be underscored though, as the game left me wanting a lot more, despite a nearly 40 hour adventure. Furthermore, two of the bosses in the game you need to fight 3 times, including one which I consider one of the worst bosses ever, Zelda or otherwise[4]. Add to this the cartoon-like graphics that were not as animated as Wind Waker and not as realistic as Twilight Princess and you’re left in a boring middle ground. Finally, the music is uninspired in comparison to all other entries, and I struggle to recall a theme off the top of my head even now, even though I could think of any of the dungeon themes from earlier games. The game ends with a new boss that supposedly inspires Ganon, but it’s nonsensical and unnecessary. It was the first Zelda game I finished and didn’t think “OK, what did I miss, let’s see what else is out there”. Instead, I finished the game and moved on, and haven’t looked back. It’s too long for me to do another play through nowadays. Perhaps my disdain comes from my aging (I was 24 back then and had grown accustomed to Zelda) or perhaps I knew way too much about it prior to playing it, which is something I’ve tried very hard to avoid this time, but this game never clicked with me, and I doubt I’ll play it again.

 

                                              

                                 (A Link Between Worlds – A new beginning. Credit: Zelda.com)

Now I’m sure if you’re reading this and loved Skyward Sword you’re probably offended, and truth be told I might be wrong given the critical and commercial success, but I think Nintendo knew they were exhausting a bad path of linearity. I say this because in 2013 Nintendo said screw it and gave us A Link Between Worlds, a game that takes players to an updated world based on A Link to The Past as the environment and then turns the Zelda formula upside down. Instead of telling player where to go and what to do, it gives the individual all of the key items and weapons up front and allows them to figure it out on their own, and I for one, loved the change. I could go to any dungeon I wanted to right away, even if I was unprepared. You get punished for dying and lose all your weapons, but opening the landscape almost entirely from the start was brilliant. There were still certain items needed for maximum story progression, but the player could go at his or her own pace, and could explore the world in full if interested. Furthermore, the gameplay mechanic of turning into a painting on a wall added new puzzle elements and exploration motives, it was absolutely brilliant. Finally, the visuals looked great and the soundtrack was quality, while not as iconic as other games it still had individual dungeon themes, which I am a bit of a stickler about[5]. The game was another huge success, both commercially and critically. In my opinion it’s what inspired the huge open world in Breath of the Wild as the simple switch totally reinvigorated the series. Now as the wait finally comes to an end, the adventure begins. I’d be remiss to say I did not follow Breath of the Wild as closely as the last Zelda releases in the past 15 years, but honestly I’m looking forward to the surprise, the experience, the music, and the world the game has to offer. So cheers to Nintendo, which has been able to once again define excellence for over 30 years, and here’s to my next steps in Hyrule.

For those interested, I’ve listed below my favorite Zelda titles followed by my least favorite.

Favorite Zelda Games:

1.      Majora’s Mask

2.      Ocarina of Time

3.      A Link to the Past

4.      The Legend of Zelda

5.      A Link Between Worlds

Least Favorite Zelda Games:

1.      Skyward Sword

2.      Phantom Hourglass

3.      The Adventure of Link

Currently playing: Bloodborne, buying a system 3 years after its launch (PS4) left me with a bunch of cheap games to try, and I have to bring this game up because it’s incredible. It’s brutally difficult, but a joy to play.

 

---

[1] I purchased a PS4 Pro back in November so I’m going to wait a bit before I jump on the Nintendo Switch hype train

[2] http://www.bustedtees.com/zeldaisthegirl

[3] There are other main villains such as Vaati or Demise (ugh, the worst), but Ganon is the mainstay

[4] The Imprisoned, in case you were wondering.

[5] Also the Swamp Palace theme was awesome

JCR Hot Take: VR + Unfulfilled Expectations

Author's Note - Hi Everyone! Apologies for the hiatus, among finishing graduate school, finding a job and attempting to catch up on my backlog time has seemed to escape me. Regardless, I'm happy to be back up and running and working on new posts for 2017. I'm happy to kick things off with a JCR Hot Take, basically, my unfiltered opinion on a certain subject. My hope is to bring a few of these to the blog to incur discussion or interest outside of my case studies. If you have any interest in contributing to the blog please let me know, I'm always happy to add in other entries. Enjoy.

(Content or product? Credit: www.recode.com)

Over the past year, virtual reality has been continually hyped as the revolutionary product that would turn gaming and many other industries upside down. After reading through approximately 20 final exams on the subject as a Teaching Assistant for the core marketing course at school, I figured it was my turn to weigh in on the subject. Although receiving much hype and making promises, I believe that virtual reality at this point in time has landed with a resounding thud. I want to emphasize this point in time because I believe there is a lot of potential for the product, but currently it lacks intrigue or a distinct path forward.

The poster child for the product has to be the Oculus Rift or the Samsung Gear VR. Both are exceptionally different. Oculus Rift Kickstarter began back in 2012, it exceeded its expectations, and the general public waited to see how it would change the world. Sales were strong from the outset, but have since dropped off. Samsung was able to push its product through advertising and a lower price point to currently sit as the leader in VR sales. However, Samsung’s VR solution is little more than mobile technology, and it lacks the richness and depth that the Oculus has. Oculus meanwhile needs to be connected to an incredibly strong desktop computer, and has a relatively small cord connecting it to the unit. Sony has also entered the fray with a unit that connects to its PlayStation 4 in an attempt to leverage its over 50 million user base. These are just a few of the peripherals available. Clearly there is significant interest in the technology; however, there are numerous issues with the current state of the platforms.

                                     

(PlayStation VR – My guess for the likely sustainable system. Credit: Sony)

Issue 1 – The Absence of a Killer App – In my opinion, the platform lacks a true killer app, especially for consumers. Although there are definitely opportunities in the Business 2 Business segment, such as in defense, travel, or medical fields, there is nothing in the consumer field that makes VR a must have item. Yes, there have been entertaining games, movies, experiences, and more, but nothing that the platform offers makes you say I need to buy this item. Instead it’s a neat concept that is fun, but not worth the investment, especially in a gaming sense. There is currently nothing on the platform that made me think I should give up pursuing my PlayStation 4 Pro for a VR Headset. While I know that there is a lot of potential for the platform (Facebook did buy Oculus for that reason I think), I do know what it is at this point. Only time will tell whether or not it will enthrall gamers enough to make the move over, but given the fierce competition between Sony and Microsoft and a renewed fervor for Nintendo from the recent mobile work and the inception of the Switch, I do not believe gamers are going to flock away from current console mainstays.

Issue 2 – Price of Entry – Without question, one of the biggest roadblocks with consumers is the steep price point. It’s for that exact reason Samsung has been able to develop a market with its Gear VR system. For the higher end models such as Oculus or HTC’s Vive, the base platform costs at least $600. If that weren’t enough, there’s still more to deal with. These headsets are so far advanced that they need extremely strong computers to function, the average computer that can handle a VR headset goes for around $800. Therefore, before we even begin purchasing software there is nearly $1500 to obtain the product in the fullest, which is unquestionably a hard sell. I may be a hardcore gamer, but I do not have that kind of cash around, not to mention I prefer gaming on a console over a PC.

Issue 3 – Fragmentation – Finally, there are currently a lot of different platforms and different headsets, so much so, that there is not one singular one to rally around. If that sounds confusing, think of it this way: VR is currently like Android phones, the problem is that VR systems do not use the same operating platform and there is no iPhone. I mention the iPhone because as much as it pains me to say it as an Android user, the iPhone is the benchmark smartphone others try to measure up to. It has a huge install base and a platform in iOS that can be used across multiple peripherals (desktop, iPad, etc.). VR currently does not have that market leader. While I do believe something will inevitably have to break through, I have no idea how and where that will come from. Perhaps in the Samsung Gear VR due to the market leading status, but Gear VR versus PlayStation VR versus Oculus are 3 very different products with different segments and goals. That leaves us with an extremely muddy situation, one that will not be figured out in my estimation in the near future.

                                     

         (Is it really worth it? Credit: Geekologie.com)

In conclusion, VR represents a lot of potential, but that’s all it is currently. My fear for these platforms is that due to the relatively slow start that they will begin to fade quickly or take a backseat to tried and true games and television. Already I’ve read on Twitter about how individuals bought the product and have no idea what to do with it months later, that’s a terrible sign. I actually asked Blake Harris (the author of Console Wars) about whether or not VR would succeed or just become the next 3D TV. He seemed put off by my question (to be fair, he’s currently writing a book on Virtual Reality) which I felt bad about, but our conversation was back in March of 2016. Sitting now in January 2017 I feel even more emphatic that VR has been a massive disappointment. Perhaps one of the products that has not been released yet will be able to accomplish a breakthrough to the mainstream in the vein of what the Wii did for motion control. At this point though, I’m yet to be truly impressed.