There are three guarantees in life: death, taxes, and a yearly Far Cry game. Ubisoft has basically paid for the collective college funds of their employees with 11 games in 12 years—a track record that puts all non-sports franchises to shame.

But the shame should be on Ubi, as the recycled shooter has a few highlights, many lowlights and more head scratchers than a lice-infested kindergarten class. Their other big franchise, Assassin’s Creed, is taking a year off, but it took a flop so bad that it nearly destroyed the brand to motivate the French publisher to pump their brakes. While Far Cry has yet to become a financial boondoggle, they are getting dangerously close with each half-baked release. Here are five reasons why Far Cry just needs to stop.

Release Fatigue

This is the most obvious. Nearly a dozen releases in as many years is a recipe for burnout, and while they have tried to switch up the setting and landscapes, the nuts and bolts of Far Cry has stayed exactly the same. The shooting is serviceable, but it hasn’t really evolved in that time span, and neither have the mission types, the vehicles, or the moment-to-moment gameplay.

And while Call of Duty has gone to space and back, Far Cry decided to go backwards, with the most recent game, Far Cry Primal, heading back to caveman days in order to spice up the franchise. Unfortunately, removing modern weaponry and English for spears and grunts turned out not to be a hot idea for Ubisoft. A few years off and a retooling of what works would be a great idea at this stage of the game’s legacy.

Ubisoft DNA

All you have to do to verify if the game you are playing was created by Ubisoft is to hit the pause button. Is the map filled with hundreds of icons indicating collectible locations? Are there high-altitude vantage points that reveal more of the map? Does the menu bombard you with sign ups and sign ins for your Ubisoft Club account? If so, welcome to the world Ubi has created in their image. Be it Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, or even a freaking driving game in The Crew, these rinse-and-repeat mechanics are so tired in 2016 and open world games can do and have done better. If the next game ditches the old guard, bucking the Ubisoft trend, and actually tries to innovate, it would go a long way towards revitalizing the franchise.

Bad Characters

Pop quiz: Name your favorite Far Cry character. I’ll wait… 

If you said “Pagan Min” or “Vaas,” congrats, as you’ve named literally the only two worthwhile people that have appeared in the franchise to date. And they are both villains, fighting against pointless, witless, bland protagonists that you, unfortunately, have had to control over the years. While the motion capture has been quite good and the acting some of the best for both of the aforementioned people, two characters is not enough. Defining either a hero or villain that can sustain a few games might help to keep people engaged between releases. Far Cry: Blood Dragon leaned heavily toward ‘80s films and had awesome dialogue and characters to go with it, but the main numbered campaigns still often miss the point with stereotypical island people, stereotypical jungle people and stereotypical cave people.

Lack of Innovation

Far Cry 2 was an incredibly ambitious game. Be it the brilliant fire mechanics, the insane open world dynamics, disruptive gun jamming, or the constant fear of malaria infection, it did things most games would never try. But that was eight years ago. And while the graphics, sound and framerate have all kept up with the digital Joneses, the soul of the franchise has not. Far Cry 3 won Game of the Year honors for a lot of outlets, as the gorgeous visuals and open world insanity grabbed people in a way no game on the last generation of consoles had up until that point. But we live in a post-GTAV world, and rehashing the same fetch quests, camp takeovers, and mystical drug-fueled romps just don’t cut it.

Declining Reception

First off, it’s important to note that each Far Cry game has outsold its predecessor by a healthy margin. Ubisoft has been rolling in the cash, built on the back of each title, marching toward a Scrooge-McDuck-like vault filled with Bitcoin and microtransactions. And while the people have spoken using their money, the critics are a little less thrilled.

Each title has dropped in overall scores, using Metacritic as a proper aggregate for reviews, and word of mouth has definitely gotten more and more sour with each game. All it takes is a single return to form to get all the people back on their side, and maybe Ubisoft could care less about critical reception, but eventually there comes a breaking point where only your loyal subjects are buying your game and no new money is coming into the system (see Call of Duty). Hopefully it doesn’t take this financial calamity to start making something new and exciting.