It’s an age-old question, really, and one that crops up time and again, but it’s one that might just bubble to the surface once more this week.
It’s being reported that Pokémon director Junichi Masuda has teased ‘an announcement’ of some kind this week related to the world-dominating property of collectible pocket monsters with signs pointing towards a reveal of ‘Pokemon Grey’ for 3DS - natural, of course, following the release of Pokemon Black and White.
The Question of the Day is:
Do developers owe innovation to gamers?
We could be cynical (and realistic) and say that a so-called Pokemon Grey would take the exact same form as Pokemon Black and White, only with a new story and new monsters to collect, except Nintendo would sell another few million copies.
Or we could take the view that a supposed Pokemon Grey (if it even exists) would bring all-new features and enhancements to the series to turn it on its head… but is this likely? Does Nintendo, Game Freak and the Pokemon Company owe it to their fans to introduce innovation to earn their million units sales?
Irrespective of your feelings for Pokemon, the same sentiment could be applied to other franchises. Do game developers owe it to fans to introduce innovation, game after game, in order to earn our respect and money, or can they coast by ‘simply’ giving us more of what we enjoy?
(If you have a Question of the Day that you would like to put to the El33tonline community, mail it to oliver[@]el33tonline.com and we’ll send it out, with credit of course!)
- Editorial: E3 2012 - What we hope to see, what we dream to be
- Kingdoms of Amalur's 38 Studios and Big Huge Games suffer massive layoffs following $75 million state loan default
- LittleBigPlanet PS Vita box art revealed, plus new trailer
- El33t's Question of the Day: What questions do you have for developers at E3 2012?
- Xbox LIVE Activity for week of May 14th: Minecraft overtakes Black Ops
- Skyrim gets mounted combat in next update
- The Arrival of Azmodan: A Desperate Plea to the Armies of Light
- Why is War fighting against Death in this Darksiders II screenshot?
- Minecraft: Xbox 360 Edition Review
- Exclusive: Halo Infinity Multiplayer revealed for Halo 4, innovative online modes detailed
- Exclusive: Halo 4 Limited Edition announced with South African pricing and pre-order details
- CoD Elite members can cash in on Double XP now, but also welcome your new Call of Duty community manager
Comments:
If a game developer has already brought innovation to a game, and established an excellent series (say like Uncharted) then I think they can bring us more of what we enjoy for a while. But in general I think game developers do owe us innovation when we're spending our hard-earned cash on their games, and before long we will get tired of the coasting, even if it's an excellent game, and desire something new to entertain us.
i don't expect them to give innovation every time they bring out a game. If the game is fun and it works then I'm happy. But I like it when they start pushing the boundaries. Look at FEAR 3, It a FPS but has a awesome Third Person cover system... I like that. if they keep the games fresh and awesome then I'm happy.
i agree with lisa. naughty dog is an excellent example of a studio that is satisfying the fans of the uncharted series on the one hand but also bringing a new IP to the table with the last of us. it's also important that series continue to evolve in order to offer something new and innovative to fans. look at the super mario series for a good example of this. nintendo manages to keep most of its franchises fresh by offering developers innovative new hardware to work on every few years, but i would still like to see them bring out a new IP every two years or so.
The game industry is a business, their job is to provide what the market wants. If churning out sequels is what the buying public will reward, then they have to do that.
It's great that some developers see themselves as creators rather than just a production line, and will try and innovate in their products, but at the end of the day they owe us nothing, they provide a product which we then choose whether or not to purchase. Maybe a lack of innovation might start hurting sales after a while, but generally the buying public at large seems unconcerned.
I don't think developers owe gamer, per say, innovation; developers owe the industry innovation.
If there is no innovation in an industry that industry can not grow. What brought about the modern day gaming situation where every other person own an xbox360 or a ps3? It was bringing more diverse services to consoles. It was innovation that led us to be able to stream movies online via the internet, for example.
With regards to developers, yes, they do owe gamers innovation. Why? Simple: if you want people to continually support your products, innovate. That is a rule of business and I don't think game developers can be exempted from that. Though, truly innovative titles don't sell well (Enslaved: Odyssey to the West and Heavy Rain) but they garner critical acclaim and certain standing. But, for publishers those things don't count. It is all about cash!
I want to conclude with a question: what makes the indie market so awesome? Is it big budget titles? Is it because they deliver the same usual crap time-after-time? Or is it innovation that drives it?
No.
Developers owe nothing to the gamer, especially if gamers are stupid enough to keep buying the same uninnovative stuff over and over and over again.
Dang, I didn't have a chance to check answers yesterday but everybody brought excellent thoughts to the table! Very nice! ;)
And that's an intriguing thought you left off with there, Thanticore ;)