Support NeoGAF

[dark10x]

I don't really love innovation just for the sake of it.

The thing is, while there may be a large number of games that share genres, there are very few truly refined, super high quality games in those genres. I'd rather see games that refine already explored concepts into perfection.

The OP named ICO as an innovative game but I'm not so sure that's true at all. It was a game that followed well explored territory - it simply did it better than just about anything else out there. It wasn't JUST the gameplay that made ICO a classic, you know. Okami wasn't really innovative either - it simply introduced its own unique wrinkle in an already established genre.

Super Mario World - not an innovative game when it was released but it was so finely tuned and perfectly crafted that it remains one of the finest platformers ever made.

I'd rather see more developer focus on polishing their gameplay mechanics to a perfect sheen.

Nintendo has delivered plenty of innovation over the years - but that only applies to a select few titles that hit at just the right time. Many of their best games are anything but innovative. Rather, they focus on already established ideas and polish them into the best possible game they could deliver.

 

[YianGaruga]

Sadly, I think I am.

You still haven't said why that is actually a problem.

 

[FStop7]

A lot of the "innovation" presented to us is garbage. Namely: Kinect and the original Xbox One strategy. It's hard not to be cynical when "innovation" is often gimmicky or simply a means to extract more money from you while reducing control of your game library.

 

[Nekofrog]

Innovation doesn't instantly mean good.

FLUDD was garbage.

 

[MrBadger]

No.

"Us gamers" are the ones funding kickstarters and buying indie games that innovate. FTL & Bastion for example.

The most successful kick-starters in recent memory have been a carbon copy of Mega Man, a carbon copy of Banjo Kazooie and a carbon copy of Castlevania. Not like that is a bad thing because I'm beyond hyped for Yooka Laylee, but not because it looks innovative.

 

[Hans.Gruber]

Well yearly FIFA and Call of Duty sales say that's correct.

Please watch the video to fully understand the point.

FIFA is a football game bound by specific rules. Should EA sports implement a 2nd ball or 12 men on the pitch to "innovate"?
CoD is also a really bad example, it started out as a WWII simulator and turned into a SciFi shooter (CoDII - MW - AW) . That's not innovation?
This whole point makes no sense, customers vote with their wallets and these votes have to be respected by the industry. Marvel movies, boy bands or FPS and Sports games will always sell well because that's what people want.
There is still a big enough market for niche games like Bloodborne, Sunset Overdrive or Hohokum to co exist. Just like indie bands and arthouse films will always exist.

 

[DocSeuss]

Nobody hates innovation. It's where games like Minecraft and Grand Theft Auto 3 come from.

What they hate are hard-to-grok mechanics. A lot of "innovative" games have mechanics that don't connect with the player on a base, instinctual level. A lot of them have just plain bad mechanics.

But innovation, when it's easy to pick up and play? People eat that stuff like candy.

Iteration, however, is basically our cocaine. Just about everybody loves iteration.

The simpler a game is, the more people will want to play it. The more complex it is, the harder it will be for most people to appreciate. That's just the way this stuff works. If it didn't, we'd all be chained to our computers zoning out to Crusader Kings 2. But we're not. Because it's insanely complex in comparison to a 2D Mario platformer.

Additionally: most human interactions have been translated into game mechanics. As a result, there's not a lot of new concepts to be had. I can pretty much guarantee no one will come up with an entirely new genre like "third person game" or "first person game" because, well, we only have first- and third-person perspectives in real life. So... y'know, nothing new to make there. Racing games? Already been done. Flight games? You bet. Walking games? Absolutely.

There's just not a lot of room to grow.

Also:

I was going to say that for every Okami, Ico and Valkyria Chronicles that sell just good enough there's a slew of Maddens, FIFAs, Assassin's Creeds, Call of Dutys and whatnot that sell millions and millions.About how badass and new was Super Mario Galaxy and yet New Super Mario Bros Wii (a great, but by-the-numbers 2D Mario that did nothing new) sold three times as much as SMG did.

Zelda clone and JRPG? Really?

Those games do poorly because they're a pain to get into. If you grew up with them, they might not seem to be as annoying as they are, but trust me, they are. Okami's just minutes upon agonizing minutes of text, text, text, and more text. It's one of the worst introductions I've ever played to a game. It's nothing new.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

innovation (along a slew of other things) are keeping F-Zero dead because Miyamoto says he can't come up with new ideas.

there's no innovation necessary. they just need to put together the best from every F-Zero game into an HD entry to make a new and fresh game (track editor would be new outside japan)

What Miyamoto means is that he can't come up with new ideas to help the franchise sell

 

[Lightning Count]

Gaming is in a bit of a rut, creatively, developers are too scared to gamble on new ideas.

 

[Goldmund]

Gaming has reached the mainstream, that is all, and for many new gamers playing these mainstream franchises is mere consumption. There's not much innovation in bread, you know. It's not a fear of change, people aren't afraid. It's just not their bread anymore if you change the ingredients or how it's made too much and people will look for the same type of bread from a different brand because, hey, they want the bread that goes with the other stuff they eat.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I think he exaggerated to make his point across but what he means is the GC did have the strangest and most divisive 3D Mario, the strangest and most divisive 3D Zelda, the strangest and most divisive (at least before launch) Metroid game, one of the weirdest new Nintendo IPs with Pikmin, so on and so forth.

Compared to the Wii, the GC took more chances with new IPs and weird sequels to some of its most beloved franchises. Thats what he meant and I think he was correct.

But that gets into a question of what type of innovation are you talking about? Are you talking about innovation in terms of being unlike any other game or innovation for specific series? Because a game like Wind Waker wasn't doing anything new as far as other games go. Even the visuals had been done before. People reacted the way they did because they didn't like being shown a tech demo of Zelda that looked like a visual evolution of OoT or MM only to end up with a game that had a more animated appearance. But if it's just a case of being innovative for that one franchise, then NSMB Wii was the first game in the series to have 4 player co-op.

Personally I don't dislike innovation. I just don't really think about it much. Actual innovation at this point is pretty rare. If it happens then that's great. But i'm not going to enjoy a game less because it really isn't doing anything new. If anything games that are polishing on existing concepts often turn out to be the best games.

 

[Applecot]

I would probably refer to as them gamers within this forum. You could almost categorise the collective Neogaf as a little hipster in terms of game tastes.

 

[GavinGT]

I can't stand that video.

Minecraft and the rise of MOBAs make this ring false to me. Big publishers are becoming risk-averse, true, but that's not the same thing as what the OP is positing. "Publishers hate losing money" would be a more apt, although less flashy, thread title.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Guess what, a lot of people like simple things that are easy to understand.
I like The Avengers cause a lot of things go boom and the green guy punches the metal guy. When I go see a movie in a theater it's usually some big dumb blockbuster, and not a Czech Indie movie about the love between two goats.
And a lot of people like to play Call of Duty cause a lot of things go boom and they can shoot people.

Nothing to be ashamed of and not really a problem. That's how all entertainment works.

 

[Roshin]

This is one of those threads where we look down our nose at the filthy mainstream. You know the ones who play CoD, some mobile game with fucking fruit or peasants in it, and sure enough, they hate innovation too.

Fucking gamers. They're the worst.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

You mean GAF is only a vocal minority? I for one am shocked.

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Same holds true for film, music and theatre. An adaptation of a well-established play from the 1400s is gonna draw a bigger audience than a contemporary avant-garde theatre piece. And that's fine. Because those things can still exist outside of the mainstream. And once in a while the little indie darling even gains mainstream recognition.

 

[Backfoggen]

I like good games. That's literally it.

 

[Crocodile]

Humans like familiarity, news at 11

Execution (or quality refinement on well known concepts) is not to be underestimated. Strong execution > mediocre innovation

innovation (along a slew of other things) are keeping F-Zero dead because Miyamoto says he can't come up with new ideas.

there's no innovation necessary. they just need to put together the best from every F-Zero game into an HD entry to make a new and fresh game (track editor would be new outside japan)

No what's keeping F-Zero dead (and Wipeout and probably some other IPs I can't remember) is that few people buy futuristic racers in large quantities anymore.

 

[foxbeldin]

Or this one about...well Innovation

Yeah even better ^^
I only had the sonic episode in mind because i watched it a few days ago.

 

[Dr.Acula]

GTA V was the biggest game of 2014, and that's a pretty great game. [edit: maybe it was call of duty, but if we include this years sales, like they do with box office, it could be GTA]

Biggest band that year was One-Direction. Barf.

Biggest movie was Transformers. Horrible.

Biggest book was Gone Girl. Airport trash from 2012 that got a bump because it was made into a movie.

Gamers don't suck, people suck.

 

[akachan ningen]

No, we love innovation when it's done well. It's not enough for a game to be fresh, it has to be GOOD. I guess what you're thinking about is our tendency to forgive a game for being unoriginal as long as it's GOOD. Uncharted sequels, for example.

 

[AHA-Lambda]

https://youtu.be/Cxhs-GLE29Q

Uh yeah that video is BS, it describes the habits of mainstream consumers not the same "gamers" who lament the lack of innovation. Even the arguments made with the sales of mario games is full of fallacies.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

I like innovation as long as it doesn't distract or take away from the things that make me actually want to play video games in the first place.

 

[TheSpoonyBard]

GTA V was the biggest game of 2014, and that's a pretty great game. [edit: maybe it was call of duty, but if we include this years sales, like they do with box office, it could be GTA]

Biggest band that year was One-Direction. Barf.

Biggest movie was Transformers. Horrible.

Biggest book was Gone Girl. Airport trash from 2012 that got a bump because it was made into a movie.

Gamers don't suck, people suck.

Gone Girl was actually not a bad book, and the 'bump' was because it was reviewed well by tons of respected publications in 2012, well before there was even a movie.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Game developers have a very bad track record when it comes to innovation. Things that seem exciting to them often end up having very little appeal to gamers in the finished product. This leaves people not really caring about innovation and actively finding it to be a negative feature unless proved not to be after release.

Just look at Spore for example.

And something like Star Citizen is probably going to be the same sort of thing. People want from it some sort of updated version of a classic space simulator but the devs are going so wild with it that it is probably going to be a disaster. Lots of developers doing stuff that is exciting for them that is likely to end up with a buggy game that performs horribly with deeply middle of the road gameplay.

 

[Dr.Acula]

Gone Girl was actually not a bad book, and the 'bump' was because it was reviewed well by tons of respected publications in 2012, well before there was even a movie.

Okay, maybe I was a little harsh, but the point remains that gamers aren't exceptional in their inconspicuous consumption of middling fare.

 

[FiggyCal]

This is true for many other places. People are more comfortable with the familiar.

Look at how innovative hollywood or the music industry has been. Look at all the new New Coke flavors we have on the shelves today.

 

[GoonerTRON]

The biggest game on the planet for kids is a open world game where you can chop down trees and make cities out of them.

I think that is pretty innovative.

 

[KKRT00]

No we dont!
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

 

[PKrockin]

We appreciate innovation, we just don't buy it. Or if we do buy it, we don't play it. Why? Because playing something new and different requires us to use our brains more. If we're feeling adventurous we might try something new, but most of the time after a long, hard day of posting on gaf we just don't have the mental energy to learn anything. What are we, machines? It's easier to zone out in front of TF2 or the 6th playthrough of RE4.

 

[TheSpoonyBard]

Gaming isn't innovative because they are literally hundreds and millions of gamers now, and much like movies and music, the best way to appeal to hundreds of millions is to go with the lowest common denominator i.e. the sequel after sequel of Call of Duties and so forth.

Yes, this is annoying, but consider the alternative: That gaming is such a niche market that no money at all is invested in it, and its existence teeters on the interest and talent of a few. Yes, you'd get more 'genuine' games, but only genuine as thought of by a much smaller group, which may mean more unique, innovate games, but far less of them.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

"Us"

It is unfortunately true that a combination or catering to the lowest common denominator and finding comfort in mediocrity have led the industry/hobby to this point.

 

[Shuggananas]

The biggest game on the planet for kids is a open world game where you can chop down trees and make cities out of them.

I think that is pretty innovative.

Minecraft didn't invent sandboxes afaik
Its simplicity allows it to have many features though, that's true

 

[redcrayon]

Zelda clone and JRPG? Really?

Those games do poorly because they're a pain to get into. If you grew up with them, they might not seem to be as annoying as they are, but trust me, they are. Okami's just minutes upon agonizing minutes of text, text, text, and more text. It's one of the worst introductions I've ever played to a game. It's nothing new.

Have you played Valkyria Chronicles? It isn't a JRPG. It's more like X-com with a tank and a gorgeous art style. If you're trying to claim it offers no innovation from DQ/FF, it isn't even in the same genre, and was a decent example of something relatively fresh that was almost completely ignored. It doesn't have an 'annoying' opening either.

Plenty of great games sell poorly, it's not always because they are hard to get into, sometimes they are just less popular genres. It's much easier to sell a game with a bloke with a gun or a sword on the cover, a game that's a bit harder to pigeonhole isn't going to get much interest from customers with a firm idea of what they want.

 

[GoonerTRON]

Minecraft didn't invent sandboxes afaik
Its simplicity allows it to have many features though, that's true

I'd never seen anything like it before hand.

If you could post a video it would be very much appreciated.

 

[Magic Mushroom]

Of course I'm talking about the general population of gamers.

It's true that the general public flocks to mass marketed lowest denominator stuff like CoD and AC and it pains me to see innovative and creative new IP like Vanquish, Wonderful 101, Bulletstorm and others suffer in sales. At least there are a few breakout successes like the Souls series though.

 

[PillarEN]

We appreciate innovation, we just don't buy it. Or if we do buy it, we don't play it. Why? Because playing something new and different requires us to use our brains more. If we're feeling adventurous we might try something new, but most of the time after a long, hard day of posting on gaf we just don't have the mental energy to learn anything. What are we, machines? It's easier to zone out in front of TF2 or the 6th playthrough of RE4.

This is hitting a little too close to home.

You are correct that it is nice and easy to sit down with something familiar already or to return to something you know already worked well with you. I'm looking at a few games that I have yet to play and I'm thinking "ooo. That game sure does look interesting. But do I want to learn these new mechanics right now? Ah I'll just fire up some Smash Bros and know I'll have a good time for the next 60 minutes"

Promise I'll get around to playing Valkyria Chronicles.

 

[KJRS_1993]

GTA V was the biggest game of 2014, and that's a pretty great game. [edit: maybe it was call of duty, but if we include this years sales, like they do with box office, it could be GTA]

Biggest band that year was One-Direction. Barf.

Biggest movie was Transformers. Horrible.

Biggest book was Gone Girl. Airport trash from 2012 that got a bump because it was made into a movie.

Gamers don't suck, people suck.

If only all of the common folk shared your exquisite taste and cultured opinions my humble gentlesir.

 

[kiguel182]

This has nothing to do with gamers. People usually like what's familiar. Playing video games have nothing to do with it.

I personally like both things. Some times is good to enjoy something familiar and others it's cool to experience something totally different.

 

[Nightbird]

While i Game Theory is my favorite Gaming-Talk Channel on Youtube, and i can clearly see Matpats point, i have to say:

He's wrong.

The biggest Mistake in his whole calculation was to think that the Opinion of the Core-Crowd represents those of the complete Gaming Landscape.

It's like a Gourmet saying "everyone wants the best food possible, and not McDonalds" This Gourmet would have a point when talking about other Gourmets, but the average Joe doesn't care, he just want a quick fix for his Hunger.

Same with Games, we Core Gamer ask a lot for innovation, but that doesn't represent everyone who buys Games. Heck, even we are buying rehashes of our favorite Franchises.

Thats why i think it's pointless to argue about that. Innovation is great, but it's not what will save the Industry.

 

[SliceSabre]

We want other games we don't play to innovate and not the games we play and like because we don't want them to change.

i.e. The biggest complainers about CoD's gameplay are people who don't play CoD. Fire Emblem Awakening changes things up a bit, old guard wails and gnashes their teeth over it.

 

[Caronte]

Looking at Kickstarter:

Star Citizen - Wing Commander Privateer
Mighty No 9 - Rockman
Yooka Laylee - Banjo Kazooie
Torment - Planescape
Wasteland 2 - Wasteland
Pillars of Eternity - Baldur's Gate
Bloodstained - Symphony of the Night
Planetary Annihilation - Total Annihilation

Kickstarter relies on nostalgia to make people pay years before the game is done. That doesn't mean gamers hate innovation, just that they rather not risk their money on something that might not work before even seeing a single video.

 

[2+2=5]

Not true at all(maybe because i'm an EU gamer? XD), i usually play only one game in a series because i feel the others being almost the same game, so you can imagine how much i like copycat games

I usually don't like "artistic" or "innovative" games that don't offer solid gameplay though, gameplay will always be the king for me, in fact i can easily close an eye on some technical issues and bad graphics for a fun game, i often enjoy some "mediocre" games more than some "awesome" games.

 

[Wreck-It Ralph]

Yeah. It's pretty much true. Even here on GAF, new and innovative games will often get ignored while sequel number X fills up multiple OTs.

The good thing is that new things can start small and get bigger. Look at how Demon's Souls started, just some obscure Japanese RPG. Now look at how Bloodborne is a major tentpole for the PS4. Similar story with The Witcher series. I'm personally not a fan of either game (and if I'm being frank, I'm a little sick of hearing about how great their fans think they are), but it's nice to see these kinds of games grow in popularity.

 

[SatansReverence]

Or this one about...well Innovation

343i need to have this video on a loop, 24/7 on the several screens all throughout the building...

 

[three_muffins]

In europe we don´t mind innovation.

Im from europe. Who is this "we"?

 

[BibiMaghoo]

Innovation is fantastic...

When it is not at the expense of a standard, which it often is.

 

[kyser73]

Hobbyists & enthusiasts are often conservative about accepting anything new about their hobby, especially if it's disruptive - but by the same chalk some welcome disruption. The discussions over VR are a good example of this, as are the narrative vs. game mechanic driven debates.

It's why I find VR so exciting. It is a truly new way to experience a digital world. I was thinking in the car earlier today that when I was a child I was firtunste enough to hear the beginnings of electronic music - sounds that has never before existed in the world, possibly the universe.

To me VR is like that - there's a completely new realm of experience to be had.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Speak for yourself. I'll enjoy anything that's legitimately good. Innovative or not.