BioWare "think of games as franchises"

By Robert Purchese Published 11 March, 2010

Sequels are fun to make, says Muzyka.

BioWare once steered clear of sequels, but today the EA-owned company has a very different mindset.

"‬We think of our games now in our group as franchises,‭" BioWare co-leader Ray Muzyka said yesterday at GDC. "‬We really do."

He went on to tell an audience (thanks Gamasutra) that "franchises include a lot more than just games" and may span books, comics and films. As such, BioWare has to think as far as a decade in advance of each game's launch.

This strategy was most evident with Dragon Age, a self-described franchise started by Origins last autumn but expected to run and run through expansions, sequels and considerable DLC.

A similar approach is now being taken with Mass Effect 2, which launched in late January and became one of the highest-rated games ever on Xbox 360 (it was also released on PC).

Muzyka said sequels not only make sense, but that the development teams have fun making them.

"If you're not going to take the innovativee risks that you need to, ‬then yeah, you're setting yourself up to be in a death spiral,‭ ‬and that's a bad thing," he added. "You have to invest and innovate.‭ ‬‭‬That what's keeps sequels selling more."

‭"You gotta listen to fans.‭ ‬That's the most important thing you can do."

With Mass Effect 2 out of the door and Dragon Age expansion Awakening ready for launch next Tuesday, 16th March, BioWare still has Star Wars: The Old Republic - EA's "largest ever" project - and ME3 to think about.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (39) Latest comment 10 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Hantheman #1 2 years ago

    New and interesting.

  • cattypat #2 2 years ago

    I would think of my games as never ending money making machines if I had EA as my publisher...

  • Plewt #3 2 years ago

    I can see why they went for Star Wars seeing how desperate they are to enter the toymaking business.

    I really wish those two doctors would stfu.

  • VicViper #4 2 years ago

    So far so good Bioware, Do not mess up Mass effect 3 thats all I ask.
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/10 @ 12:03

  • Bravestinsane #5 2 years ago

    @yao

    Well done your the perfect example of a stupid American

    WERE IN FUCKING EUROPE

    We don't use the pissing dollar you fucking tit, Jesus chist if your going to spam do it fucking right.
    Edited by 2 at 11/03/10 @ 12:08

  • Baranga #6 2 years ago

    Right, now go make a Jade Empire sequel please!

  • miiiguel #7 2 years ago

    ME comic books are not very good, I'm afraid. It's very curious to realize, that, for example Halo, which might be considered a product aimed at a younger audience spawned some quite interesting and "bold" other products.
    ME comics have a very "teen" aesthetics and they don't explore the political context so present in the games.
    Edited by 3 at 11/03/10 @ 12:17

  • davisorle #8 2 years ago

    I just love Bioware's latest franchises. If it wasnt for them RPGs would be dead the past couple of years. The best RPGs are by far Dragon age and Masss Effect in that timeframe so I cant do anything but thank God they made those gems for us. As much as against I was in the expansions of Dragon Age in the first place things have been shaping up good again :)

    Keep up the good work.

  • Murton #9 2 years ago

    It kinda makes sense for Bioware to do this. They make these massive and extremely well detailed worlds/universes that we only really get to experience a fraction of within the game. Neverwinter Nights and Dragon Age Origins for example make mention of distant lands and thousands of years of history that we don't really get a chance to explore.

    Sequels do tend to get a bit stale after a while, but new game in old setting, that's something I'd like to see Bioware do.

  • clockworkzombie #10 2 years ago

    Jade Empire stuff thanks.

  • Miths #11 2 years ago

    I certainly agree with them on that approach. It would be a shame to throw away a fantastic setting like the Mass Effect universe after just one game. And possibly even three for that matter (let's see how the third one turns out, but ME2 was the best game experience I've had in my ~25 years as a gamer, so I'm naturally quite optimistic).

  • Shikasama #12 2 years ago

    I hate how every game has to be a franchise these days. The more sequels that are being made, the less original games are being made and if all of the big boys are always working on the same two or three franchises we end up with every game becoming FIFA-like.

    What's wrong with having an awesome stand alone game? If you manage that then people will still buy your next original game. It's purely a marketing decision and has nothing to do with wanting to support a game or being fun to work or what have you.

    I'd also like to point out this is EXACTLY the way Mr Kotick thinks and has said so many times.

  • Pulsar_t #13 2 years ago

    I'd also like to point out this is EXACTLY the way Mr Kotick thinks and has said so many times.

    Oooh I hate hearing the name of that prick. Sequel hell is already here.

  • djed #14 2 years ago

    ‭"You gotta listen to fans.‭ ‬That's the most important thing you can do."

    Hahahahahahaha... oh.. wow..

  • speedjack #15 2 years ago

    If there's a better game than ME2 this year I'll be amazed.

    Its the best argument for 'sequels suck' there is.
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/10 @ 12:31

  • kangarootoo #16 2 years ago

    @Shikasama

    Another way of looking at it is that if you budget to make 3 games in a franchise, you have a larger starting budget. You can also invest more in tech that is common to all three games, raising the overall quality.

    A sequel being evolution rather than revolution CAN be a problem if the sequels birng nothing new, but it can also be an advantage. A sequel that is 50% high quality solid gameplay used throughout a franchise, and 50% brand new stuff unique to each release, is better than 3 completely independant games that have nothing in common except beingh rubbish.

  • Akuma #17 2 years ago

    Can't really complain when their sequels are as good as Mass Effect 2.

  • LiveForever #18 2 years ago

    EA Influence but as long as they keep making good sequels who cares.

  • Shikasama #19 2 years ago

    Kanga - Yes but your comparison is between a high quality sequel and a low quality original release. I'd rather see high quality original releases than high quality sequels. A sequel can only do so much that is 'new' because it is limited by the conventions of the first. Take Dragon Age for example. There is relatively little they can do in terms of the gameplay whilst there are hundreds f things they can do with the story. Sequels are almost impossible to revolutionise because you are dependant on the people who liked the last game. A sequel that has 50% new stuff still has 50% of the game you have already played and completed. Behold my glass is half empty!

    I'm not saying that sequels are a bad thing. I'll happily play a sequel and I'll happily play an original game, but it is a dangerous mindset for developers to constantly think 'right, lets make this next block of three games over the next ten years.' If every developer did that you would never get anything new. I think Bioware games in particular (although I love most of them - to this day I think I'm the one person in the universe that didn't like Mass Effect) are susceptible to not changing things. At the very core a lot of the games they have produced over the last few years have been the same in different wrapping paper. Production values, polish and writing may be at a very high standard, but they have done little to move themselves on. Hopefully SWTOR will be a good leap in the right direction.

  • Stomp224 #20 2 years ago

    If their sequels improve on the original as much as ME2 improved on ME1, I ain't complaining!

  • kangarootoo #21 2 years ago

    @Shikasama

    "I'd rather see high quality original releases than high quality sequels"

    Me too most of the time, but my point is that neing a sequel can (if the franchise is well managed) contribute to the likelyhood of the end result being of high quality. Sharing resources between projects is a good thing, and a franchise is an opportunity (not the only one of course) to do just that.


    "A sequel that has 50% new stuff still has 50% of the game you have already played and completed"

    Well not really. A sequel can often just be a game set in the same universe with similar mechanics. To say that you have "already completed" parts of the game is like saying that playing one level of MW2 means you have "already completed" many aspects of the levels that follow, or that playing one hole of Tiger Woods Golf means you have "already completed" most of the other holes in the course.


    "it is a dangerous mindset for developers to constantly think 'right, lets make this next block of three games over the next ten years.' If every developer did that you would never get anything new."

    I would agree completely if all developers were part of the same mind, or if Bioware (in this example) were the only developer on the planet. But of course, we have lots of developers working on their own projects. If every developer on the planet started making games in frachised 3 release blocks, it wouldn't change the face of gaming that much because there would still be so many different types of game/franchise for us to choose from.

    And in my example above, if all developers worked on games in set of three, my question might be "would the overall quality increase or decrease?". I'm not saying it would increase, I'm just posing the question. I've seen plenty of projects go badly wrong in the name of being original, when what I think we really want most as gamers is GOOD games that are FUN.

    To summarise what I am saying, originality is nice of course, but it is a poor substitute for good old fashioned quality. If you can have both, hurrah, but if you can only have one it simply MUST be quality. And I believe that a well run franchise sacrifices a bit of originality in the name of increasing quality across the whole set.

  • icematt12 #22 2 years ago

    I absolutely love Mass Effect and there is so much they can do with it, you have a whole galaxy to explore even. Looking for some DLC set after the ending of ME2 with characters from the first talking to Shep. Assuming Shepard survives, I believe that almost everyone that imports a character won't want theirs killed in the second one.
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/10 @ 13:24

  • Plewt #23 2 years ago

    Whether it's a sequel or not I want things that can stand on its own feet, that can be interesting in itself and valued as a whole single product, all these side stuff just takes away from that.

  • Dr.Frappers #24 2 years ago

    I really enjoyed ME1 but hadn't played it since shortly after it was released, 2007/2008 or whenever it was.
    Then...playing through ME2 twice with 2 different imported characters, and then going back to ME1 again, the difference in quality with the sequel was absolutely striking for me.
    So long as sequels strive to improve and go beyond their predeccesors (like ME2 has done) i think sequels are then a very good thing. Depends who handles them i guess.
    Edited by 1 at 11/03/10 @ 13:48

  • TeaFiend #25 2 years ago

    Games are going the same way of movies, more exposure than just what the focus is. How many of you when growing up had bed covers, lunch boxes, posters, etc with branding from TV or a movie? Now we are getting there with games. There is more media than just the medium it is released under. People do buy the action figures, tshirts, bags. It just happens (some) of the things sold are marketed towards older markets than pre-10s.

  • HermitArcader #26 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 09:17:39 22-12-2011

  • GamesConnoisseur #27 2 years ago

    Sequels can be very successful and quite enjoyed if done right, what we would not want to see is too many crass spin offs to milk the cash cows. I dont think we need to worry about that from BioWare/EA, but Activision yup.

    Another one asking for another helping of Jade Empire please! There is still lots of potential in that game especially in HD gen.

  • kangarootoo #28 2 years ago

    @Vertical Stand

    When it comes to what a customer wants, I agree that it is a very personal issue. Regardless of the quality of the gameplay, one person sees a sequel and maybe thinks "Oh, more of the same, I want something new" whereas another gamer might see the same sequel and think "Whoohoo, more of the same, I loved the first one".

    When it comes to TV series, we LOVE sequels. First season of The Wire was great? Can't wait for the next season. Loved everything Buffy related? Can't wait for the next installment. Massive Star Trek fan? Gutted when it got cancelled.


    As for Jade Empire, I guess it gets the best of both worlds. A fresh game universe with new characters and lore, but built on a technical harness that is well established.

  • Eraysor #29 2 years ago

    Well ME2 was a masterpiece in my opinion and probable GOTY, and I love the books set in the ME universe, so I think the more they churn out the better.

  • Mr.DNA #30 2 years ago

    @Vertical Stand

    "The other thing is, as Jade Empire showed, a spiritual rather than direct sequel to KOTOR freed them up to move it in places they couldn't go if they had remained tied to the license and to the expectations built up by fans. I wish more developers did that sort of thing rather than planning out a series years in advance."

    Oh, come on now! Jade Empire was a shallow, forgettable mess next to the sublime KOTOR. I wish that BioWare had made KOTOR 2 themselves instead of faffing about with an Eastern-themed RPG-"light" with crappy fighting mechanics.

    And in what might also prove to be an unpopular comment: Bioware, you know all of those RPG elements that you absolutely crammed into Dragon Age? Well, if you also put them into that (admittedly stellar) talky-action-game that you recently released, I'll fly over to Edmonton and give you all a big sloppery kiss.

  • photoboy #31 2 years ago

    If you're listening to the fans, can we have some more Yeoman Kelly stuff in DLC for Mass Effect 2 and a bigger role for her in Mass Effect 3?

  • Eraysor #32 2 years ago

    If you're listening to the fans, can we have some more Yeoman Kelly stuff in DLC for Mass Effect 2 and a bigger role for her in Mass Effect 3?

  • Gastrian #33 2 years ago

    @Shikisama,

    We can't tar all companies with the same brush regarding sequelitis because there are many companies that aren't Activision and as long as the company doesn't take the mick sequels are a good thing.

    Dragon Age was in development for six years and built from scratch, not just a graphics engine but characters, story, setting, history, game engine, etc. Now just think how much that cost Bioware, not just in physical costs but also lost revenue from having staff dedicated to a project for six years and not working on anything else to bring in profit. Even with its high sales figures I don't think Dragon Age alone would have made the type of profit that most other companies would have been comfortable with for such a high initial investment. Sequels and expansion packs would have a considerably lower initial investment because a lot of the work has already been done, you can refine the graphics engine, tweak the rule set and game engine and update the storyline but this isn't from scratch so even of the sales figures are even a quarter of the original release the profit margin would be higher so companies would be safer in funding new original games because of it.

    Now if we look at actual sequels, ME2, God of War 2/3, Gears of War 2, Uncharted 2 and Halo 2/3 were all sequels to fantastic games that were original titles. These are some of the best examples of original titles but in the vast majority of opinions the sequels were better which is quite logical. Even the most highly refined original game is only a beta test for a franchise, its the lessons learned and feedback given on the first game which leads to the improvements that makes the sequels so brilliant.

    Sequels also allow trilogies which is brilliant for storytelling as epitomised by the original Star Wars movies and the reason why Mass Effect was designed to be a trilogy. A trilogy allows for four stories, the three individual stories and the over-arching story which is told at a different pace. Now I could probably write an essay on this (I did film studies for A Levels) but to keep it simple the focus on each individual episode allows the over-arching storyline to unfold with considerable subtlety but also to build up a lot more emotional attachment to the characters and story than the quicker pace of an individual episode would allow. Would the "I am your father" moment have been as memorable if we didn't have A New Hope to setup Luke and Vader's characters and storyline? No it wouldn't and that's what trilogies allow.

    Now a final point is that franchises aren't always about sequels its also about spin-offs both in games and other media. There's the Dragon Age novels and Penny Arcade comics, there's Halo Wars, the Street Fighter Puzzle game, Final Fantasy Tactics, X-Com Interceptor (I liked that game), Four Swords and many others which either innovate a genre by bringing in ideas from the original IP which weren't there before (X-Com Interceptor) or bring in new audiences to other genres (Final Fantasy Tactics Advance got me into Tactics games).

    There are a lot of companies that are treating sequels/franchises with respect for the consumer and the IP as they do bring benefits but much like the Wii its a case of bad and/or lazy developers and publishers out-numbering the good developers.

  • Razorus #34 2 years ago

    Jade Empire 2 would be swell.

  • kangarootoo #35 2 years ago

    I liked Jade Empire.

    If someone else didn't, that is cool.

  • bionutz #36 2 years ago

    Bring back Baldur's Gate !!

  • jsimpson121 #37 1 year ago

    When you own or start a franchise business, you’re in business for yourself, but not by yourself. And when you use [link url=http://www.FranchiseExpo.com,]http://www.FranchiseExp o.com,[/link] you’re searching the leading franchise opportunities directory.

  • jsimpson121 #38 1 year ago

    When you own or start a franchise business, you’re in business for yourself, but not by yourself. And when you use [link url=http://www.FranchiseExpo.com,]http://www.FranchiseExp o.com,[/link] you’re searching the leading franchise opportunities directory.

  • jbanks #39 10 months ago

    Thanks for the post! I never thought of video games as franchises. The way that BioWare explains does make sense of why they think this way.
    Franchise Directory