It feels like absolutely everything is a franchise now. Any time anything becomes a hit, there comes pressure for it to get a sequel so it can capitalise on its success and produce a guaranteed cash cow. This is often the case even when sequels don’t need to be made at all – people find ways, create plot holes, do whatever they can to continue a story that’s already over. This is creativity under capitalism, wringing blood from stones.
I hate that this is the case. I’m sick of seeing sequels made for the sake of continuing to make money. I’m not saying that sequels can’t be good, or even great, of course. The constraint of making games within an established canon can be great for creativity. The power of limitations is the reason that writing prompts exist. Established rules can be a great starting point.
But at the same time, I’m glad thatThe Last of Us might not get a third game. Neil Druckmann has previously said thata third game might be possible if it has the right story, and that’s really the only reason thereshouldbe another game. Why extend a series past its natural stopping point for no reason other than because fans want it? If it’s finished, it’s finished.
Spin-Offs Are More Interesting Than Sequels
On a related note, I’ve been enjoyingAvowed. Obsidian’s latest game is set within the Pillars of Eternity universe, but it isn’t a sequel, it’s a spin-off. It doesn’t continue the story of the Pillars of Eternity games, though it references it at certain points. It doesn’t have the same characters. It isn’t even really the same type of game – while it’s still an RPG, it’s a much smaller one (albeit with higher production values) and has different mechanics. It plays in the same sandbox, but being a spin-off gives it freedom to try new things. It’s not as limited by what came before.
I think spin-offs are far more interesting than sequels. We’ve seen many long-running game series lose their way because their developers feel beholden to continue the legacies of things that no longer really matter.Assassin’s Creed’s modern day timeline ispossibly the most convoluted story known to gamerkind, because the series is built on sequel after sequel, extending its story far beyond where itshouldhave ended.
Dragon Age: The Veilguardhas also been damaged by its attempts to hold on to its wildly player-dependent canon. The fourquel alluded to its lore in the vaguest possible ways, telling a new story while shoehorning in continuity with its previous games as best as it could. It hand-waved away specificity, when it could have done away with the problem of preexisting player choices entirely by being a spin-off instead of a sequel. Instead, it was forced to follow up on Inquisition’s storyby leaving massive plot holes.
Is There A Middle Ground Between Sequels And Spin-Offs?
Whatdoestend to work is when games aren’t afraid to reinvent themselves. As always, I’m thinking about theYakuzagames. The series has long used spin-offs to fill in the gaps between mainline releases, with the incredibly namedLike a Dragon: Pirate Yakuza in Hawaiibeing the most recent example.
These spin-offs act as playgrounds for the developers to try new things between its behemoth RPG releases.Judgmentdid a detective thing.Ishindid a samurai thing.The Man Who Erased His Namedid a spy thing. Pirate Yakuza did a pirate thing. These games aren’t perfect, and maybe aren’t asgoodas the mainline games, but they’re novel. They’re experimental. They’refun.
And that spirit of experimentation extends, in some ways, to the mainline games. For years, we followed Kazuma Kiryu on a journey that spanned nearly his entire adult life, and then the mantle was passed on to a new protagonist: Ichiban Kasuga,my favourite video game guy of all time. With Ichiban, the setting, characters, and even combat changed.
It’s still the same series in a lot of ways, especially considering RGG is able to keep up its pace of releases by reusing concepts and assets from previous games, but in some sense, itfeelslike a spin-off. With Ichiban’s solidification as protagonist even came a new naming convention (at least outside Japan): Like a Dragon instead of Yakuza. There’s a separation there, a kind of reinvention.
Then there’s the God of War games, where a reboot changed the direction of the series entirely. Its second era explored a new mythological pantheon, changed the gameplay, and explored entirely new themes. It was a radical shift within the franchise, still using Kratos as a protagonist but maintaining itself as an entirely standalone experience that didn’t require knowledge of previous games. It’s spiritually so different from the original games that the series' creatorgot really mad about it. It’s not a spin-off, technically, but it plays in the sandbox. It creates something new.
I’m sick of sequels. I’m sick of seeing the same things repeated ad infinitum, the same old tricks and faces. I want more spin-offs, more experimentation, somethingdifferent, for god’s sake. Without developers willing to take the plunge, gaming will only stagnate, but spin-offs offer a familiar, yet new, path forward.
