Can a split fanbase be a good thing for a franchise?

[Spirit]

They certainly make things more interesting but can they ever be a good thing given that you can't please everyone?

 

[Dio]

NO! Look at the sales of WW and Suckward Sword. How is it ever a good thing? Also it leads to massive arguments in the community which aren't good either.

 

[DekuNut]

Not at all. For a great example of why not, look at Sonic. That series pretty much has two fanbases that hate the requests of the other side. The 2D players hate the 3D games, the 3D players hate the 2D games, and so Sega is never sure what to do with the franchise. They keep getting mixed reviews on what's good and what's bad, and in trying to please both sides they please neither.

 

[Mido]

If there is any silver lining to a split fanbase, I would say that it often occurs within a property that is well-regarded by many, many individuals. I think one can argue that it is a reflection that a company has done itself some good, having earned the good graces of fans. This being said, splits often happen because of decisions made during the development of a specific game that are either questionable or extremely polarizing. In addition to the mentioned examples thus far, I throw in the Ace Attorney series as another. I don't think it is as split as say, how Wind Waker or Sonic Adventure splintered their fanbases, but there is some substance to this case.

The original trilogy is loved by virtually all fans of the series. Usually, there's not much debate as to the merits of the original three games in the big picture. Then, comes Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney. From what I hear, the game sold very well, but the reception was more mixed. Fans didn't like the cases; they were underwhelmed by Apollo; too much/too little Phoenix; the list goes on. No matter one's issues with the game, there was enough of a concern about the game that the fans did become somewhat split. I don't think this split was patched up much by Dual Destinies. Interestingly, it seems to me that fans of AJ: AA tend to be more critical of DD and SoJ while those more critical of the game in question tend to more positively receive the two games succeeding Apollo Justice. Of course, I'm operating on generalizations based in my own observations, so they only go so far. I'm also not taking into account the spinoff titles, since I haven't played them yet. Ultimately, while a split appears evident, I don't think it's a horribly strong split, as most fans seem to agree that each of the games are good, none truly bad.

View attachment 38928
Not at all. For a great example of why not, look at Sonic. That series pretty much has two fanbases that hate the requests of the other side. The 2D players hate the 3D games, the 3D players hate the 2D games, and so Sega is never sure what to do with the franchise. They keep getting mixed reviews on what's good and what's bad, and in trying to please both sides they please neither.

I haven't played either game yet, but thinking about Mania and Forces within this context, it makes me wonder why attempts to cater to both sides so delicately are even made anymore? The former caters to the 2D purists and the latter should have acted similarly with its respective "side," I suppose. Classic Sonic seemed very much shoehorned into Forces just to play the pleaser, a point you talk about with SEGA's attempt to please the jaded fans. Heck, I think the direction of the 3D games since Unleashed have tried to cater to both factions as cleanly as possible. At this point, I think SEGA, much like how their most recent games operated, could go the route of Nintendo with how they handle 2D and 3D Mario. Each have their audience, may be best to divide and conquer as the saying goes.

 

[YIGAhim]

Yes and no. Split on whether a game is good or not (like in WW) is bad, while "I'm a Stormcloak" vs "I'm an imperial" is still a split fanbase, but all in favor of the same game, but different sides of the story

 

[Zelda18]

I think that it depends on the way they are split, as YIGAhim mentioned. Questioning the quality or relevance of a game is bad for the franchise (obviously), while a good split is when fans get deeper into the game. One such split is when fans ship characters (this is a lame example, I know). You get fans arguing about who a certain fan should be with. These splits aren't bad because people still love the game, just have opposing views about it. They can be good for the franchise, because it often boosts the games' fanbase/awareness. Fans share their ideas, which causes others to take a second look at the game, and then share their own ideas.

 

[the8thark]

No.

A cohesive fanbase is always better. However a split fanbase is better than no fanbase. Anything to keep the games relevant and talked about is better than letting the games fade away into obscurity.

 

[Castle]

A split fanbase is a sign that your creative work has lost direction. Something specific about it appealed to its audience, then it did something that polarized people. Obviously, whatever it did was wrong, since it turned people away from whatever interested them in the first place. So now the work isn't true to itself anymore. This is why I argue that Wind Waker and Suckward aren't Zelda games. I would even go so far as to suggest BotW isn't Zelda either because it is far too derivative of other modern main stream open world games. The identity has been lost if you change the nature of something until it's no longer what it used to be.

So a split fanbase isn't just unhealthy to a creative work, it means it doesn't even exist anymore.

 

[the8thark]

The identity has been lost if you change the nature of something until it's no longer what it used to be.

One could also argue that this is improving and changing the stale nature of something that has been in existance for a long time. Does this also change the identity of said thing? I think the answer would be quite polarising.

 

[Castle]

One could also argue that this is improving and changing the stale nature of something that has been in existance for a long time. Does this also change the identity of said thing? I think the answer would be quite polarising.

If change is so necessary then the reason would be that there is something wrong with it in the first place. Which obviously is not true in Zelda's case considering that it appealed to so many people to begin with. It still doesn't alter the fact that if you change something to the point people are split on it, you've ended up with something different than what you had. So yeah, it does also change the identity of the thing. Enough "improvement" and you will still end up with something completely different. This is a philosophical concept going back to the greeks. Say a smith has a hammer. The head breaks so he replaces the head. Then the haft breaks so he replaces that too. Is it the same hammer? It's not the best analogy in this case because in the case of a video game like Zelda you're also changing its function.

But was it even necessary to change what already worked? If it's been in existence for so long that it has become stale, why not just do away with it? I've said it before, that Wind Waker and Skyward aren't Zelda games. In most recent respects I contend that Twilight Princess was the last real Zelda game. I've even argued that Wind Waker would be better off it it wasn't a Zelda game, another example of how Ninty could stand to release some fresh new IPs. Don't change the identity of something so radically it kills it. Just create something else with its own unique personal identity.

 

[Spirit]

I've even argued that Wind Waker would be better off it it wasn't a Zelda game.

 

[Stitch]

A split fanbase probably means that the franchise is trying new things, so in my opinion a split fanbase is almost healthier than a united one, at least for the franchise's sake. You can never please everybody, it is ridiculous to think otherwise.

 

[Castle]

LOL But why not? @Spirit ? Wind Waker is a decent enough game on its own, with plenty of its own charm and character. More than worthy of its own identity. I think it would be doing the game a service, instead of trying to fit into being something it's not.

@Lazarus But at least one portion of that split fanbase might end up giving up on it if they have come to understand that it's no longer what they recognize anymore.

 

[YIGAhim]

But you can be certain Nintendo loses money like that. Maybe an 80-20 split, but Wind Waker was almost a dead even split. Fans lost (and gained) and money lost

 

[misskitten]

People are different, tastes are different. I don't think there is such a thing as a fully united fanbase. It all comes down to how the creators caters to the fanbase. If they try to compromise everything, then the end result is more likely going to be mediocre or worse. If they have more of a clear vision and stick to it, regardless of how a portion of the fanbase isn't going to be receptive to it. It's better they create something that part of the fanbase will love than something no one will. And I know people here wish certain Zelda titles never got made, but you know what? I don't. Even the titles I'm not a fan of, I'm glad they happened (strictly talking about the official ones), because I see the people who love those titles.