Where's the fresh IP?

[yerkyerk]

It's understandable that fans want to see the series they loved expanded and it's understandable from an economical perspective that (big) companies don't want to take risks by doing something new.

But doesn't this stale the evolution of gaming? And how far are we, as players, responsible for bringing the umptieth title in a series to realization, instead of fresh IP?

Ofcourse, a new title in a series can be quite different from the previous (look at Dawn of War), but a lot of investors don't like seeing these changes, nor does the playerbase (again, look at Dawn of War).

Looking at the big games released this year, the situation is looking quite grim for fresh IP. Duke Nukem, Forever, Dungeon Siege 3, Portal 2, Witcher 2, Call of Duty: Black Ops (part 7 or something), Fable 3, FEAR 3, Dirt 3... no real innovation anywhere, at best dumbing down of ideas. And the original IP's from big companies are usually just superficially different from these.
Are indie devs really the only group we have to depend on to get some fresh ideas in the market? It seems like such a shame and wasted potential.

[Renevent]

I agree the big boys are playing it way too safe lately...gotta ask though what do you consider "innovation" as it it relates to games? Purely unique game concepts? Advancing a genre technologically and enriching gameplay?

For instance, I think the physics/destructibility/sound/ect in Bad Company 2 is VERY innovative and goes beyond just technological gimmickry. It is just another modern shooter though...so I can see people saying it's not innovative.

What do you think about Dead Island? For me the concept is really unique. Open world zombie RPG? Yes please! With that said I can see the counter point which is of course...ugh...another zombie game?!?!?!

This is from a small(er) developer but how do you feel about Rock of Ages? Very unique gameplay and really amazing art...but is it really innovative?

[yerkyerk]

Well, there are ofcourse different gradations of innovation. I haven't played Bad Company 2, but imho, fully destructible environments doesn't sound very innovative, it's been around for ages - and will make it into any shooter with a big enough budget. Besides, it's not a major focus of the game, is it?

Dead Island might be interesting, probably not terrible innovative, I'd have to play it to be really sure though. And it's not out yet.

I'd call Magicka a good example of an innovative game, although it's an indie game. The gameplay is completely based around mixing up your elements and casting them in various ways.

Well, a somewhat older big budget game, but Mirror's Edge was quite innovative. Not good, but at least they tried something quite a bit different. Backed up by EA, of all publishers, no less.
Also, Psychonauts was a very good game regarding fresh IP.

[jiaco]

It seems to be the way of movies too. Imagine the amount of money wasted on Tron2, which was actually worse than Tron1 and had basically the same storyline. TV has some crazy examples too, who ever thought it would be a good idea to release a series based on the Teen Wolf bomb-of-a-movie?

I only wish they could do it with music too. Image a Led Zepplin 2 or a Metallica 2 that actually start their careers sounding like LZ-I and Kill'emAll, that would be cool. I miss going to concerts but the music today obviously completely forgot my demographic.

But then again, the innovation that is the Wii or the Kinetic and such has me scared that I wont even want to play games in the future. I really do not see where the game companies are headed.

One thing is for sure, the driving game market is saturated. I was shopping for used PS3 games the other day and there must be like a 1000 different driving games. What-ever!

[Renevent]

Destruction has been around for a long time, nobody implemented it as well as BC2 though and in such a way that actually effects gameplay in a fundamental way, at least in a competitive multiplayer shooter. The other part of it is the fidelity of it...it's excellent. Looking at BC2's direct competition (MW:2) and it doesn't even come close.

Magicka...kinda illustrates my point a bit. I really don't find Magicka that innovative. The spell system is cool, but everything else is pretty standard fare.

Never played Mirror's Edge though, but from what I have seen I would agree it did look innovative in the way it created a great sense of movement.

I guess my point is what people consider to be an innovative game varies greatly :p

[Skellt]

Well imo, a new IP would need quite simply a new intresting story and fun gameplay, because lets face it, pretty much everything has been done, argueably.

Sure there are those that stand out, but you can always refer the gamplay of one game to another.

It would be very intresting though to see a brand new game, some are heading towards that, namely blizzard with their "Titan" project, though it is an MMO and im kinda tired of those, i like the idea but i dont play to pay 2 play on a monthly basis anymore.

Could argue that in the MMO genre, Tera is innovative in its own way.

but i think the reason Indie are more and more successful is that most indie game, focus on gameplay rather than on a graphic engine and whatnot.

Take Mount & blade for instance, sure it has been out for quite a bit but.. graphic wise its really sub par to today standards, but gameplay wise, its far better than mosxt "AAA" titles, and can get you involved MUCH longer than those "AAA".

feels like studios such as UBI, Bioware etc are too scared to attempt a new compeling story, something that feels new, a brand new universe, i'm not asking for a new type of gameplay, but for a fun gameplay that will take me more than 20h to get through.


Another thing i HATE ALOT.. but i mean ALOT.... is that most of the new games RELY on acheivements to get players intrested in the game, to get people to replay the game...

I mean who else misses old games back when acheivements didnt really exist, the only thing you'd have to back up your claims of "beating that boss" is fraps and save data..
Who else grinded hours and hours to kill the bloody weapons in FF7?

Who else spent hours and even days to find all the hidden areas all hidden chest, all optional quests in RGPs... thats what i miss.

Imo Acheivements have became the backbone everybody relies on

[TECHNOmancer]

As has been stated a number of ways above, the concepts in our media -- movies, books, games -- are variations on a limited number of themes. Put differently: "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." (Ecc 1:9 (NIV))

Also, and not to launch into a discussion of market economics, there's little inducement to innovate when a profit margin is razor-thin.

TECHNOmancer

[Oreo_Addict]

It's a disease which has infected every entertainment avenue I've been interested in: games, action figures, movies, comics, TV shows, etc. Even if it's a 'new IP' more often than not it's just a repackaging of the same product.

It's gotten to the point where I now only buy 2-3 games each year. I just go back to the old classics I still own - the Ultima series, Eye of the Beholder, early Lucasarts adventure games, etc

[Father Squid]

I tried the Champions game when it went free on Steam a little while ago... There's achievements for you! There's over 700 I think, or something ridiculous like that....

But I do think there are signs of innovation... I saw a preview for a game, I think it was called Dust - which seems to be taking god games to a whole new level... And like someone said earlier, it all depends on the type of innovation you look for - I even expect there will be innovation in games like Skyrim, even though they will probably be very closely tied to earlier RPG's, particularly the Elder Scrolls series.

And it depends on where you draw the line between inspiration and innovation... Plato wrote about 4000 years ago that the best way to achieve success in your chosen field is to find the masters of that art, whatever it might be, and copy their works... that is the way to achieve success, and as we've already been pointed out, it occurs everywhere... I think of HBO's new success Game of Thrones, which copies a book, which in turn is part of a successful series of books, with more to come... Does this mean there is a lack of innovation in his storytelling? Or is there more of the tale that can be truly told...

Honestly, I don't really mind playing a second or third game in a series, much like I don't mind watching sequels in movies, or shows on TV that are similar to other series (i.e., Law & Order or C.S.I.), or read comics... I get my enjoyment from the story, and being engrossed in the world that is created... the originality, while refreshing at times, is not always necessary... Sometimes the oldest stories are best... Probably explains why Superman and Batman are still successful today...

[Father Squid]

I just go back to the old classics I still own - the Ultima series, Eye of the Beholder, early Lucasarts adventure games, etc

But very few of those can be truly called original... they all copied from earlier inspirations... although Loom from LucasArts was original in a lot of respects, and that is what each of these games introduced - new elements of originality, not so much truly original works.

[yerkyerk]

While you can argue about the very definition of innovation (something Plato is fond of), we're still left with the fact that nearly all high budget titles can very accurately fit in half a dozen of genre definitions.

Perhaps it's just bad nostalgics, but I remember when games like Wolfenstein and Doom were still not considered to have a genre. X-Com could fit in no definition, yet it's often considered to be one of the greatest videogames of all time. Castles is not a game you see anymore.
Ofcourse, perhaps that's because those were the days of the point-and-click adventure genre and the 2d platformers...

[SHODANFreeman]

Don't forget Zelda 16, Mario Kart 7, Super Mario 12, Paper Mario 4, and remakes of Star Fox 2 and Zelda 5.

[matthewfarmery]

I also think consoles have a hand in the way games have gone, simplified controls or way too easy, plus games are also getting shorter, compare Duke Nukem 3D to DNF? there is a vast difference, many FPS are the same, hardly any break any new ground, I think EA also have a lot to answer for, closing some of the best studios going, bioware who used to make some very good games, now making shoddy titles, the dragon age series I'm not impressed with, at least 1 was semi decent, 2 2 is terrible, dumbed down and more action based, not really a true dungeons and dragons game in the least

but yeah, in general, films are getting shoddy as well, there are plenty of books, that could easy be good films, but no one takes risks to do them, instead we are seeing endless cash cows and sequels, only a few I might add are hardly worth seeing in the cinema, it seems to be a pretty bad at the rate things are going, I groan at the list of remakes that have come out and are coming out, Logan's Run (classic film) but going to be remade and I'm sure Hollywood will do a fine job of messing it up and changing what the film is about

hardly any originality these days, and yes this is happening across the board, but who is to really blame? maybe its the economic climate as well? but the way that Hollywood seems to spend loads on films, it doesn't seem to bother them at all, yet they seem to have a good habit of killing / ruining many good classic films, so they are to blame there

as for games, the big publishers are to blame, but so are we, as we keep buying them, but I don't really support or buy that many games now, I usually prefer to invest my money in indie titles, which are the future, I only wish many publishers would take note on how successful many are, and realise that its not always about pretty graphics that makes a good game, but gameplay, something it seems that many big publishers have forgotten about

just my two cents

[jiaco]

there are plenty of books, that could easy be good films,

Therein lies the catch. Humans are still creative at least in the literary sense. I have been reading fiction nightly for a long time and still manage to always have some excellent books to read. Many of them are new, recently released written by currently living authors. With the sad state of films, I am quite glad that most of them are not made into films, but with each new masterpiece that I find, I truly wonder why nobody has made a film from the creative ideas that are still being released in book form.

[yerkyerk]

Well, I'd like to note that I don't think it's a problem that there are so many sequels and rip-offs per se, I do think it's a problem that there hardly seems to come anything else from the bigger companies. With the budgets they have, it should be interesting to see something come from them.

Than again, Psychonauts was an extremely good game, but never got the attention it should have from the public. So even if they make a retardedly good game they run the risk of not getting any commercial profit out of it.

[Renevent]

I think that was pre-digital though...tides have changed imo which is why we are seeing a lot of quality indie games lately :D

If Psychonauts was released on Steam/D2D/Gamersgate/ect in addition to XBLive/PS3Whatever I think it could have definitely found commercial success.

[Father Squid]

It is... GOG has Psychonauts... $9.99

Maybe the problem is that we are in a minority here... a critical elite group who is very picky over their entertainment... I don't think the masses who buy their games at Walmart based on the cover picture, or what the clerk says is good... are worried over the originality or innovation in their games... kids play them until they are bored and take them to EB and trade them for something else that keeps them occupied for a few more hours... the more explosions, the louder the noise, the better it is...

On the other hand, hardcore gamers (such as those who join forums for games not even available yet :) ), we're probably like those snooty movie or music critics who give their opinions, and everybody else says well if a critic likes it, it probably sucks... or if the critic doesn't like it, then it'll be good....

Then again, I'm probably being a little too cynical :)

[Roros]

I'm pretty jaded/cynical (maybe even a little bitter?) about this stuff as well.

A great recent example is Bayonetta which is a brand new IP and ended up with a metacritic score of 90, but still almost flopped commercially due to poor sales. People just can't get invested in new franchises when they're already looking forward to the next god of war, cod, and halos. Most people judge Bayonetta by it's box cover, there's just no reason to research it further when they're content with what they're already invested in and already know is good.

An interesting thing I'm seeing lately though (and I don't know if it's related or even intentional) is IP squatting. Resident Evil 5 is a completely different game than it's predecessors, as is Lost Planet 2 and (as far as I've seen) Prey 2. What I suspect is going on is that the devs are wanting to make a new game, but rather than risking a new IP they borrow some elements from an existing one to make it familiar and bring in an existing playerbase.
I don't strictly mind myself, I just want new (as in design wise) fun games, but it's inevitable that people expecting a Resident Evil 4 2 will be upset when they made it too different, and end up rejecting it.

[Renevent]

It is... GOG has Psychonauts... $9.99

Maybe the problem is that we are in a minority here... a critical elite group who is very picky over their entertainment... I don't think the masses who buy their games at Walmart based on the cover picture, or what the clerk says is good... are worried over the originality or innovation in their games... kids play them until they are bored and take them to EB and trade them for something else that keeps them occupied for a few more hours... the more explosions, the louder the noise, the better it is...

On the other hand, hardcore gamers (such as those who join forums for games not even available yet :) ), we're probably like those snooty movie or music critics who give their opinions, and everybody else says well if a critic likes it, it probably sucks... or if the critic doesn't like it, then it'll be good....

Then again, I'm probably being a little too cynical :)

It is now, I was referring to had all this been available when it first released.

[yerkyerk]

Well, this is the rant section, it's alright to be cynical. It's almost a requirement even :)

[Renevent]

Oh of course :)

[Kluga]

On the other hand, hardcore gamers (such as those who join forums for games not even available yet :) ), we're probably like those snooty movie or music critics who give their opinions, and everybody else says well if a critic likes it, it probably sucks... or if the critic doesn't like it, then it'll be good....

Then again, I'm probably being a little too cynical :)

I have the exact same attitude, although I look at it as realism (which may in fact be even more cynical :p). One of my main passions is music, and many people I know absolutely eat up the unoriginal drivel they hear on the radio, which frustrates me to no end. I explain concisely what I think is wrong with this sort of music and I am met with dumbfounded looks, as if I'm the idiot.

This problem isn't confined to the gaming world (as others have said). I haven't been to the movies in ages because none of the recent titles seem worth the time and money to go and see. And like others, I haven't been buying any new games lately because they are just re-hashed versions of their predecessors.

So to conclude a labored point, I don't think we are overly picky or anything of that nature. We are cursed with the ability of critical thinking, and in my case I tend to be condemned for it. I guess in a way we all are because we are forced to put up with all the useless games and other media big companies are publishing

[Mind Dragon]

there are plenty of books, that could easy be good films,

It takes a well crafted scene to represent even a small part of a good book and there are only so many scenes you can have in a movie.

That's why great books fail to be transcribed into movies and why attempts often result into pale experiences that only fans appreciate -- maybe because it bring to life a few images that could be only imagined beforehand or because the author or work of art is being paid a "tribute" by being worthy of a movie.

Perhaps they have the mostly misguided idea that the actually weak movie will promote the book or series to the populace.


Serials would have a better chance but the pacing, cost and audience are issues.

[Josho]

Going back to the OP, why wasn't FarCry 2 simply named something else given the complete change in setting away from the original. And FarCry 3 looks to follow that trend of new setting, new character. I guess there is some inherent power in a name, almost like some sort of subliminal comfort that comes from the familiar title that can be easily marketed. The Civilization series likewise is proof of that. Civ also has the benefit of gradually evolving over time as well. Another benefit for expanding on an IP is for people who might have been living under a rock for a few years. My time away from the internet, I knew nothing of this game called "Mass Effect" until people made a big deal about Mass Effect 2... last year? And it was only until recently did I purchase Mass Effect and play it, and I can appreciate why. But if there was no Mass Effect 2, I would never have known about the first, and would never have bought it.

As a gamer, I personally take the approach of not putting games into broad generic boxes. There are still a number of games out there that do try and tackle new and different settings, or may try something new and interesting gameplay wise. That said, most of the raw creativity seems to stem from the realm of indie developers where they can make the game they want to play.