Should games always bring something new?

eyetrip · 10 Dec 2007 at 16:19

Its a hard question to put forward properly, but its brought on by many, many, many people always saying things like "This game was just like any other RTS/FPS/ETC and offered nothing new."

Quite frankly, there are set genres to work within so what more can you honestly be expecting? Why do we always expect a game to "bring something new" to the genre?

An FPS is an FPS. An RTS is an RTS. An RPG is an RPG. Sure, while some of them may offer a little something another does not, it is always going to be confined to its genre, and will hardly ever offer something new.

What do people actually expect them to do?

Herojuana · 10 Dec 2007 at 16:22

I think its because games are constantly evolving at the moment and coming through with more innovative features that people are expecting cool new stuff from every game that is released. I think though that if a game has a strong story and is entertaining enough then it doesn't really matter.

Sherbs · 10 Dec 2007 at 17:47

ffallic said:
What do people actually expect them to do?

Think of new ideas.

This thread is pointless imo.

barf0r · 10 Dec 2007 at 18:04

SherberT* said:
Think of new ideas.

This thread is pointless imo.

Not if it the question was asked slightly differently, I think.

Should every game introduce something new, or is it acceptable to simply copy what other games have done and implement it well?

I don't think a game necessarily has to innovate to be good.

eyetrip · 10 Dec 2007 at 18:11

Like I said originally, its hard to word my question properly.

Take COD4 for example, I see so many saying it brought nothing new, and basically imply the game is lacking for that. Whereas I thought it delivered an intense and well presented story, even if not wholely original.

The game did bring nothing new to the genre. Theres nothing there that has not been done before. It was just presented very well.

When people say they want a game to bring something new, do they mean gameplay or storyline?

Dunno, am bloody tired and while I no what I want to ask, just cant forumalte the question properly in my head. Will sleep on it and get back to this tomorrow

Buffman · 10 Dec 2007 at 18:13

I'm all for new things and stuff but I also like old things to be well refined for example halo 3, CoD4

chrissss · 10 Dec 2007 at 19:05

New games aren't appreciated by most gamers. Although people complain that games are too linear, games that give choice arent liked.

Not to mention games become more easy, so they can attract more people who buy it. Games like Deus Ex1 will never be released, because the mainstream of customers dont like it.

HangTime · 10 Dec 2007 at 19:58

chrissss said:
Games like Deus Ex1 will never be released, because the mainstream of customers dont like it.

Bioshock is vaguely like Deus Ex, and has proved very popular in terms of winning awards and topping the sales charts.

To answer the original question - no, games don't always need to bring something new. Games like Painkiller and Serious Sam were very similar to the FPS games of the mid90s, but that didn't stop them being a lot of fun.

Admittedly, when appraising a game I will sometimes use a phrase like "it brings nothing new to the table", but that is usually a critisism I would level at titles which are not only unimaginative, but also don't even executre a tried-and-trusted premise very well. Another phrase I roll out from time to time is "it's more of the same, which isn't necessarily a bad thing" - this time referring to high quality sequels which refine the original concept, making few major changes and yet remain highly enjoyable. Examples being CoD:UO or Civ3.

howdydoody · 11 Dec 2007 at 02:17

Personally, the only thing a game has to bring is an interesting and immersive story!

agnes · 11 Dec 2007 at 02:30

howdydoody said:
Personally, the only thing a game has to bring is an interesting and immersive story!

agree strongly, i think when people cry about the game being the same as the other. its mainly down the point that they are sick of playing the same 'thing' over and over again. where as if you were to get a inviteing and clever story into a brilliantly designed game, it goes a long way.

take for example COD4... just like all its older brothers, but yet it was so strong becuase of the story and the way the game made it movie like.

ags

aob · 11 Dec 2007 at 02:40

nah, definately doesn't always have to bring something new.

Doesn't have to be something completely revolutionary so long as it's good/fun.

I think people just have a gripe about playing bad clones, devs see a popular game make money and plop out a clone for easy $$$.