Let's say they made infamous 2:good karma and infamous2:bad karma with maybe infamous2:neutral karma…..wouldn't this be a better choice for dead ideas publisher? They can make two games with stories similar, paying only once the writer and get three games that will make cash, and especially if autistic people buy all of them too
Or am I missing something here?
Are you aware of how annoyed people would be about that shit? Locking out 2 thirds of a game's content, making a total of $180 for the full experience on launch.
The writer would demand pay for all 3 games separately
That is assuming you want all of the story.
You pick a path and stay on that path
plus what's the difference between this and locking it behind DLC like mass effect 3 or hitman?
But it wouldn't be user. It would be three separate fully fledged games based on the outcome of the original game. There would be similarities, but only so they can contrast.
make the ending a 20 dollar expansion thats 1 hour
its fun of thinking of shit ways to make money in games i would be the worst director
...
At best, you can only get away with selling the "true ending" as dlc.
So it's kind of like those episodic games but actually keeping to the promises of changes and input affecting the next part in the series instead of just being telltale games style episodes.
I was thinking of something similar to OP but instead just have diferent games entirely branching off different endings of the first game.
for example, if you have a RPG or something about killing the big bad you kill him and win the game, then the sequel is a strategy game about being the new king of the realm. then we can have another sequel but this time the hero joins the big bad and the game is all about taking over the rest of the world with the help of the big bad dude.
would probably end up being retarded multiverse stuff but it would be interesting to see if any developer could handle this kind of expanded universe.
Yeah, but instead of releasing a series of games that say they will use the outcomes
Shit would get retarded 2 or 3 games in - it would give you retarded amounts of games to develop
SERIES REBOOT
every 2 entries?
Well it kind of worked for fire emblem and pokemon. If you had a big enough fanbase to milk, I could see it working. You'd also need to have some kind of template so that you could make the content fairly easily, otherwise you'd essentially be developing two different games which would defeat the purpose i think.
Well, if nothing they sure do love money so I don't see why not. They could even reuse most assets, I'm sure.
Prey's rebooting after only one game.
I bet you can't even play blackjack.
The only game that I know of that did this is Drakengard
...
I would actually buy that shit. No more illusion of choice, is actually happening
...
How about fucking no?
How about instead of your maximum jew idea, you instead provide two distinct gameplay paths in the singular sequel. Actually put some fucking effort for a god damn change.
The joke is that devs haven't put effort into their games for over 10 years now.
goddamn I don't want to fucking have 4 copies of the same game with the same mechanics with the same characters just to see how the story branches out
...
So, Pokemon, but with an actual reason?
Why not intead of wearing shoes, he has rollerskates? And he does random extreme tricks? And says things like rad?
Drakengard did this, ending A was Drakengard 2, ending E was Nier.
OP gave you 3 fucking endings, not 5 or 9 or 12. A game per ending to show how reality brached off into that specific time line. This could be really good or really bad depending on how lazy the devs are. In the past it may have worked but now most devs are not creative enough.
That's just an example of devs being fucking lazy. Even more so when the two games meant jack shit once you got the third game.
People love Pokemon user. They'd eat that shit right up. Also that newest Fire Emblem game sold pretty decently and did something similar by splitting it up into two games.