Game franchises that have regressed

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I'm having a hard time thinking of a franchise that has not regressed in some capacity tbh.

Kirby thanks to Forgotten Land and Return to Dreamland Deluxe.

Donkey Kong with Tropical Freeze and the upcoming Bananza (hopefully).

Mario Bros thanks to Wonders.

 

[moonbits]

Mario Bros thanks to Wonders.

*New Super Mario Brothers teleports behind you*
Nothing personal, kid..

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

*New Super Mario Brothers teleports behind you*
Nothing personal, kid..

I'm talking about the latest entry.

Regressed means about the last game of a series becoming worse.

Also NSMB on the DS was an actually good game that improved upon the side scroller formula we haven't seen any original game since Mario Land 2.

I understand the nostalgia for Land 1 and 2 but they're also short games and I think that the second one is a bit too easy as well.

 

[Sunnyside]

Kirby thanks to Forgotten Land and Return to Dreamland Deluxe.

Donkey Kong with Tropical Freeze and the upcoming Bananza (hopefully).

Mario Bros thanks to Wonders.

All solid picks there.

 

[dropsmegamega]

Kirby thanks to Forgotten Land and Return to Dreamland Deluxe.

Donkey Kong with Tropical Freeze and the upcoming Bananza (hopefully).

Mario Bros thanks to Wonders.

seriously? none of these are particularly interesting, let alone revolutionary as these series once were.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Seriously? None of these are particularly interesting, let alone revolutionary as these series once were.

Not being revolutionary doesn't mean that these franchises have regressed. You can still make newer games that don't reinvent the wheel.

But even then Kirby and the Forgotten Land is the first fully-fledged, bigger scope 3D entry that isn't a smaller scaled nor a spin-off like Air Ride, Blowout Blast nor Battle Royale.

Then again what was the revolutionary game in the Kirby franchise before? Maybe Superstar? It was two decades ago and while it was a great 16-bits platformer it didn't revolutionise the genre. Return to Dreamland? It was the first major home console game since Kirby 64 but yet again it improved upon Superstar's formula while adding its own flair but nothing that was groundbreaking for the platformer genre.

I'd even argue that the only revolutionary thing about Donkey Kong Country was the pre-rendered Silicon Graphics 3D but aside from that it only has built upon the Mario Bros series. Maybe the heavier emphasis on collectathon compared to other platformers of its time may be an innovation but then again I think Super Mario 64 and later Banjo & Kazooie did it much better.

I would agree about Mario Bros as a whole but I'd argue that the most revolutionary game was the very first Super Mario Bros game for platformers in general and that each subsequent game has built upon it. Wonders still feels much more original and unique, almost like Mario World was back then compared to every other game since (not counting the Land games).

 

[dropsmegamega]

Not being revolutionary doesn't mean that these franchises have regressed. You can still make newer games that don't reinvent the wheel.

But even then Kirby and the Forgotten Land is the first fully-fledged, bigger scope 3D entry that isn't a smaller scaled nor a spin-off like Air Ride, Blowout Blast nor Battle Royale.

Then again what was the revolutionary game in the Kirby franchise before? Maybe Superstar? It was two decades ago and while it was a great 16-bits platformer it didn't revolutionise the genre. Return to Dreamland? It was the first major home console game since Kirby 64 but yet again it improved upon Superstar's formula while adding its own flair but nothing that was groundbreaking for the platformer genre.

I'd even argue that the only revolutionary thing about Donkey Kong Country was the pre-rendered Silicon Graphics 3D but aside from that it only has built upon the Mario Bros series. Maybe the heavier emphasis on collectathon compared to other platformers of its time may be an innovation but then again I think Super Mario 64 and later Banjo & Kazooie did it much better.

I would agree about Mario Bros as a whole but I'd argue that the most revolutionary game was the very first Super Mario Bros game for platformers in general and that each subsequent game has built upon it. Wonders still feels much more original and unique, almost like Mario World was back then compared to every other game since (not counting the Land games).

Maybe revolutionary was an exaggeration, but I would argue that series that used to be creative but got stale for decades would constitute regression, yes. Like Forgotten Land is indeed ambitious specifically in the context of modern kirby, but compared to other 3d platformers is nowhere as impressive as what Super Star was compared to other 16 bit platformers. I feel similarly about the others.

 

[Potapota]

I would argue that all of the mainline kirby games are pretty basic platformers at the end of the day and forgotten land doesn't really change that all that much. It's still a pretty decent platformer. Far from being "regressed" at least. I had fun with it. Same with super mario wonder.
Nintendo has a pretty good track record with their games overall imho.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Maybe revolutionary was an exaggeration, but I would argue that series that used to be creative but got stale for decades would constitute regression, yes. Like Forgotten Land is indeed ambitious specifically in the context of modern kirby, but compared to other 3d platformers is nowhere as impressive as what Super Star was compared to other 16 bit platformers. I feel similarly about the others.

I'd still argue that Return to Dreamland was the breath of fresh air the franchise needed after a full decade of handheld only spin-offs, remakes and games not developed by HAL themselves.

I still like some of them like Canvas Curse for bringing the Soul Boss trend to the series and Superstar Ultra for having many more side games added to it but in the same way I regret that the Gamecube Kirby game got cancelled.

Kirby is primarily a handheld franchise (it even started on the Gameboy after all) so I understand why they focused mostly on it (that's also why the 3DS had more Kirby games overall).

On a side note I think that Planet Robobot is up there with Superstar as one of the best entries in the franchise, both pushing it forward while also keeping its roots.

The playerbase of the Kirby franchise still agrees that RTDL is one of the best entries in the entire saga as well (even if I've discovered it quite late I do agree despite the quality of life the subsequent games have added).

I wouldn't say it got stale for decades, only one for the 00's.

I would argue that all of the mainline kirby games are pretty basic platformers at the end of the day and forgotten land doesn't really change that all that much. It's still a pretty decent platformer. Far from being "regressed" at least. I had fun with it. Same with super mario wonder.
Nintendo has a pretty good track record with their games overall imho.

Wasn't it seen as one of the best selling game and almost as good as RTDL was for the side scroller series?

Wonders is what NSMB 2 should've been imo.

I almost expected 3D Land and 3D World to replace NSMB back in the 3DS/Wii U days.

 

[dropsmegamega]

I'd still argue that Return to Dreamland was the breath of fresh air the franchise needed after a full decade of handheld only spin-offs, remakes and games not developed by HAL themselves.

I still like some of them like Canvas Curse for bringing the Soul Boss trend to the series and Superstar Ultra for having many more side games added to it but in the same way I regret that the Gamecube Kirby game got cancelled.

Kirby is primarily a handheld franchise (it even started on the Gameboy after all) so I understand why they focused mostly on it (that's also why the 3DS had more Kirby games overall).

On a side note I think that Planet Robobot is up there with Superstar as one of the best entries in the franchise, both pushing it forward while also keeping its roots.

The playerbase of the Kirby franchise still agrees that RTDL is one of the best entries in the entire saga as well (even if I've discovered it quite late I do agree despite the quality of life the subsequent games have added).

I wouldn't say it got stale for decades, only one for the 00's.

I believe RTDL came in an era people were really starved for a new console kirby game, so it was kinda destined to be praised unless it really messed up; I myself was a big kirby fan back then and it was kind of a big deal after being disappointed that epic yarn wasn't a real kirby game. It definitely wasn't a bad game, but I wouldn't call it brilliant either. I'd say RTDL and the original NSMB are similar in the sense that they were both decent, but fairly unambitious and standard "revivals" that became base for several extremely similar sequels.

 

[thanonyx thanonyx]

Kingdom Hearts

 

[Lena CE]

Truthfully, it's harder for me to think of franchises that have surpassed or even maintained their level of quality. It's not that I think almost every sequel is abysmal dogshit or anything, but I certainly can't think of many franchises that haven't gotten at least a little less exciting. Even something like Resident Evil - a franchise that has never released a mainline title I dislike - doesn't end up hitting the same anymore. Even its best recent titles like RE2R and RE4R feel more content being more generic over the shoulder action games and ditching any of those iconic or unique aspects of old RE design.

Maybe I'm just getting older, idk. I could be really mean and just start slagging damn near everything, but eh.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I believe RTDL came in an era people were really starved for a new console kirby game, so it was kinda destined to be praised unless it really messed up; I myself was a big kirby fan back then and it was kind of a big deal after being disappointed that epic yarn wasn't a real kirby game. It definitely wasn't a bad game, but I wouldn't call it brilliant either. I'd say RTDL and the original NSMB are similar in the sense that they were both decent, but fairly unambitious and standard "revivals" that became base for several extremely similar sequels.

Sorry but ambition doesn't systematically equal "quality" nor "great" game.

Also I'd still argue that Wonders is different enough from NSMB and Planet Robobot from RtDL to be seen as extremely similar sequels.


On a side note, while I understand how good it was for a 16-bits game, (old school) Kirby fans are overrating Superstar a bit too much. Yes it's a great showcase of Sakurai's game design that would lay the groundwork for Smash Bros, especially the Subspace Emissary (I noticed that when I saw that teleport effect that the second player had when going too far from the camera) yet it clearly shows that it doesn't have a single cohesive story/gameplay but more akin to a compilation of small games.

I understand that philosophy but I would've rather seen one big adventure with one leading story than a remake of Kirby's Dream Land (minus Castle Lololo that merged with Float Island), a racing platforming game and a game about fetching treasures.

Only Meta Knight's Revenge and Milky Way Wishes felt like proper adventures to the point I'm wondering why they couldn't have built a full game about these (especially with MWW's deluxe ability system).


Return to Dreamland actually took the best elements from both Sakurai and Shimomura's game design for Kirby and created one big story without going all over the place.

Playing the Deluxe remake on the Switch simply confirmed that it was indeed the best refinement of the formula of the game.

Telling that Kirby has "regressed" because it didn't try to reinvent the wheel but rather make it turn better is a bit disingenuous imo.

 

[Yousef]

I believe Kingdom Hearts is textbook definition of this. I think Nomura did have largely pure intentions, but things quickly grew out of his reach and goals when he switched dev teams and just couldn’t really maintain the same work ethic. KH2 and onwards are all practically different games because they quite literally are. It’s thanks to Yuichi Kanemori that kh2 was half as good as it was.

He’s the real heart and soul of the series, but had sadly had diminishing influence as KH shifted dev teams and studios around and was unfortunately still left in the misguided hands of our old buddy Nomura, who still wouldn’t direct game properly even if the project was given to him on a silver platter, which it practically was, given that KH was quite literally an elevator pitch LOL.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

I believe Kingdom Hearts is textbook definition of this. I think Nomura did have largely pure intentions, but things quickly grew out of his reach and goals when he switched dev teams and just couldn’t really maintain the same work ethic. KH2 and onwards are all practically different games because they quite literally are. It’s thanks to Yuichi Kanemori that kh2 was half as good as it was.

He’s the real heart and soul of the series, but had sadly had diminishing influence as KH shifted dev teams and studios around and was unfortunately still left in the misguided hands of our old buddy Nomura, who still wouldn’t direct game properly even if the project was given to him on a silver platter, which it practically was, given that KH was quite literally an elevator pitch LOL.

KH1 may have had tedious platforming sections but I don't like how button mashy the ARPG gameplay became with the subsequent games. Nomura should've handled the story and some game design elements only.

Also KH basically profited from the success of the first game just to make a ton of spinoffs which makes the series harder to follow.



Wasn't there a similar thing with MGS where another dev helped Kojima?

 

[Yousef]

KH1 may have had tedious platforming sections but I don't like how button mashy the ARPG gameplay became with the subsequent games. Nomura should've handled the story and some game design elements only.

I’d say this happened after 2 specifically, once they switched to the Osaka team with BBS.

Also KH basically profited from the success of the first game just to make a ton of spinoffs which makes the series harder to follow.

I would say this is half true. There was no direct plans for a sequel, just seeds being planted in hopes for one. Kh1 has an insane number of untied loose ends that were left there because there was no guarantee for a sequel.

KH was heavily damaged by the existence of multiple platforms. Nomura just wanted to keep experimenting with his shiny new toys so he made so many games for so many different handhelds with accompanying gimmicks.

Wasn't there a similar thing with MGS where another dev helped Kojima?

Yeah absolutely. For sure.

 

[dropsmegamega]

Sorry but ambition doesn't systematically equal "quality" nor "great" game.

Also I'd still argue that Wonders is different enough from NSMB and Planet Robobot from RtDL to be seen as extremely similar sequels.


On a side note, while I understand how good it was for a 16-bits game, (old school) Kirby fans are overrating Superstar a bit too much. Yes it's a great showcase of Sakurai's game design that would lay the groundwork for Smash Bros, especially the Subspace Emissary (I noticed that when I saw that teleport effect that the second player had when going too far from the camera) yet it clearly shows that it doesn't have a single cohesive story/gameplay but more akin to a compilation of small games.

I understand that philosophy but I would've rather seen one big adventure with one leading story than a remake of Kirby's Dream Land (minus Castle Lololo that merged with Float Island), a racing platforming game and a game about fetching treasures.

Only Meta Knight's Revenge and Milky Way Wishes felt like proper adventures to the point I'm wondering why they couldn't have built a full game about these (especially with MWW's deluxe ability system).


Return to Dreamland actually took the best elements from both Sakurai and Shimomura's game design for Kirby and created one big story without going all over the place.

Playing the Deluxe remake on the Switch simply confirmed that it was indeed the best refinement of the formula of the game.

Telling that Kirby has "regressed" because it didn't try to reinvent the wheel but rather make it turn better is a bit disingenuous imo.

Lack of ambition definitely does equal a mid game, principally when said game cuts several features that past games already had and takes a super safe direction. It's very telling that the cancelled GCN game seemed more advanced than RTDL- and when despite settling for only making copies of Super Star it still took like 4 games for then to be able to add back the helper system.

And I'd say the idea of a compilation of smaller games is one of the things that makes Super Star still more memorable and superior compared to the games that built upon it. Kirby was a fairly experimental series after all and SS is consistently more creative than RTDL. RTDL basically recycled Milky Way Wishes story and yet it still feels inferior because it lacks the moody fairytale esque quality that Milky Way had.

 

[JoueurCitoyen]

Two franchises that have regressed in my opinion:
- Fire Emblem, because of the relationship system
- Yakuza/Like a Dragon, since the turn-based battles and Goof… Ichiban were introduced

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Lack of ambition definitely does equal a mid game

Not necessarily, if a game doesn't reinvent the wheel but is still fun and good why would it be mid?

An ambitious yet glitchy game is worse to my eyes.

It's very telling that the cancelled GCN game seemed more advanced than RTDL

"Seemed" yet we didn't get it so you cannot objectively know if it would've ultimately ended up being better and more advanced in every ways.

RTDL basically recycled Milky Way Wishes story and yet it still feels inferior because it lacks the moody fairytale esque quality that Milky Way had.

That's entirely subjective there. I don't care about the "moody fairytale" because it's gameplay that matters ultimately.

RtDL having 4 players and varied worlds is already a plus to me.

And I'd still argue that Planet Robobot is, despite being a solo game, one of the best entries in the series for various reasons, the level design, the soundtrack the lore and because it's simply doing the best at what Kirby does.

The Kirby franchise is also one of the few that almost never had any bad game per se. I don't see any regression with Forgotten Land nor RTDL Deluxe.

 

[KaiserMk7]

Lack of ambition definitely does equal a mid game, principally when said game cuts several features that past games already had and takes a super safe direction.

Even if the story, music, and battle system are good enough, Bravely Default 2 is still much simpler and less substantial in terms of combat, growth systems, and side content than the likes of Flying Fairy and End Layer. The optional endgame rematches against the asterisk bearer bosses don't even have plot, new dialogue, or any shred of agency or self-awareness; they're simply shoved in groups of 3 or 4 into pocket dimensions around the map to gate access to chest loot and be farmed for their weapons and growth items. People also hate that the new counterattack system reached its logical extreme early such that the latter half of the game's bosses have a chance to counter your every action instead of just being interesting and well-balanced fights.

 

[dropsmegamega]

Not necessarily, if a game doesn't reinvent the wheel but is still fun and good why would it be mid?

Seems like the philosophy behind modern Ubisoft. Honestly I think I'd rather play some glitchy indie game over yet another samey game of big franchise, but that's clearly not a sentiment shared by nintendo fans.

"Seemed" yet we didn't get it so you cannot objectively know if it would've ultimately ended up being better and more advanced in every ways.

True, but it doesn't take away the fact that features that were in decade old games were dropped for no good reason, looking at the helper system or the klonoa inspired 2.5d of kirby 64.

That's entirely subjective there. I don't care about the "moody fairytale" because it's gameplay that matters ultimately.

I was talking specifically about story in response to your criticism of SS' smaller adventures. Specifically about gameplay, I still rate it below SS because of more formulaic gameplay and a few annoyances, I didn't like the super abilities which in practice were just filler sections and also the boss battles felt longer and didn't flow as well as SS, I principally disliked the phase system in which the boss starts easy, interrupts battle after half life bar drops with the I am angry animation and the finally get serious.

 

[Lena CE]

Lack of ambition definitely does equal a mid game, principally when said game cuts several features that past games already had and takes a super safe direction. It's very telling that the cancelled GCN game seemed more advanced than RTDL- and when despite settling for only making copies of Super Star it still took like 4 games for then to be able to add back the helper system.

And I'd say the idea of a compilation of smaller games is one of the things that makes Super Star still more memorable and superior compared to the games that built upon it. Kirby was a fairly experimental series after all and SS is consistently more creative than RTDL. RTDL basically recycled Milky Way Wishes story and yet it still feels inferior because it lacks the moody fairytale esque quality that Milky Way had.

I wouldn't say a lack of ambition equals something mid. But I'd also disagree that Kirby was all that experimental beyond its fundamentals (infinite jumps and copy abilities) that never really changed. Kirby as a franchise has always been pretty unambitious from its inception. If that core connects with you, you love the pink fluffball. People can certainly point to differences between the entries but ultimately it is one of the most samey and safe franchises in all of video games. It doesn't even have the spin-off series that Mega Man does to save it from similar critiques despite the games within those subseries being incredibly safe and similar to one another (minus the X series cause that did have some big shakeups).

You look at NES or early SNES era Kirby and nothing really changed between then and now as far as 2D installments go. Even within the NES to SNES era the games remained largely the same even though I do think that installments like SS and KA3 did at least try to do things a little differently.

 

[dropsmegamega]

I wouldn't say a lack of ambition equals something mid. But I'd also disagree that Kirby was all that experimental beyond its fundamentals (infinite jumps and copy abilities) that never really changed. Kirby as a franchise has always been pretty unambitious from its inception. If that core connects with you, you love the pink fluffball. People can certainly point to differences between the entries but ultimately it is one of the most samey and safe franchises in all of video games. It doesn't even have the spin-off series that Mega Man does to save it from similar critiques despite the games within those subseries being incredibly safe and similar to one another (minus the X series cause that did have some big shakeups).

You look at NES or early SNES era Kirby and nothing really changed between then and now as far as 2D installments go. Even within the NES to SNES era the games remained largely the same even though I do think that installments like SS and KA3 did at least try to do things a little differently.

What are you talking about, Kirby Adventure and Super Star are objectively among the most ambitious platformers in their respective consoles. The jump from DL1 (no copy abilities) to Adventure and then to Superstar (copy abilities with full movesets) is huge.

Also you are severely underestimating the differences of each game early in the franchise, SS and DL3 didn't just "try to do things a little differently" they are extremely different games despite being on the same console, not only because of their completely different artstyle and presentation, but structure, pacing and use of copy abilities are completely different. And 64 again made big changes by adding the ability to mix copy abilities and limiting the infinite jump.

 

[DragonMals]

what gaming franchises do you think have gotten worse overtime?

The Legend of Dark Witch (Developer stopped knowing how to make excellent quality games since Dark Witch Episode 3 for the 3DS),
Klonoa (every single Klonoa game besides the recent Fantasy Reverie Series are spinoffs and even if there are two connected Klonoa games on the GBA, they don't take place in the same continuity as the PlayStation games),
Earthworm Jim (1 and 2 were goated, but ever since the rights to the game had changed, the game had never seen a resurgence. No, Earthworm Jim HD and the one on the DSi doesn't count as both of them are remasters/remakes of the first)
Gradius* (I put an asterisk becuase Salamander III is looking very promising, BUT if you don't count that, Gradius had been on a nostalgia bating trip since the fourth game with the last one being the most typical one of all (Gradius ReBirth). Although I will mention that there has been some good Gradius games but they don't get regonized much)
Terraria (hot take, I think that the current state of my previously most favorite game is horrible than what it used to be since the devs are putting every single popular person in the community in their game. Sure Terraria is a community-centric game with some community members and the devs themselves having paintings in the game, but when you literally do every single popular person who is heavily associated with Terraria, they get it, and I've seen some other people that didn't make the cut. I could go on all and all about this but nah)

And that's all I can think of.

 

[Ikagura Ikagura]

Klonoa (every single Klonoa game besides the recent Fantasy Reverie Series are spinoffs and even if there are two connected Klonoa games on the GBA, they don't take place in the same continuity as the PlayStation games).

While it's true can we say it became "worse" if the games are still good?

Gradius* (I put an asterisk becuase Salamander III is looking very promising, BUT if you don't count that, Gradius had been on a nostalgia bating trip since the fourth game with the last one being the most typical one of all (Gradius ReBirth). Although I will mention that there has been some good Gradius games but they don't get regonized much).

Gradius IV was a bit disappointing but Gradius V was truly a masterpiece made by Treasure (and I think G-Rev as well). It still pushed forward the series.

Terraria (hot take, I think that the current state of my previously most favorite game is horrible than what it used to be since the devs are putting every single popular person in the community in their game. Sure Terraria is a community-centric game with some community members and the devs themselves having paintings in the game, but when you literally do every single popular person who is heavily associated with Terraria, they get it, and I've seen some other people that didn't make the cut. I could go on all and all about this but nah).

While I see that it's a hot take I think that the 1.3 could've been the last major update it wouldn't have been a problem at all.

Journey's End has the same issues I got with Microsoft era Minecraft. Sometimes it's better to have a mod API and only focus on bugfixing.