View Single Post

Default 

January 7th, 2007, 22:12
Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer View Post
It's strange how few of the really creative and innovative games might be bought by the masses (I've got no data, this is just a mere assumption), so this hints out to one point : Maybe they are too innovative ? Maybe the masses don't want too creative and innovative games ?

In a way, this could be kind of right : Some people rather stick to things they already know, instead of buying newer things. Hence the success of franchises.
You are absolutely correct (although I think we are all collectively part of this, not just the "masses").

I've read a lot of material from Chris Bateman (Kult: Heretic Kingdoms) who has done a lot of research on why players like different games, commercial viability and so on. There are a number of reasons why truly innovative games can find it difficult and your Sacrifice example is a very good one (I never really "got" Sacrifice, either). First, it's difficult to communicate these games to potential buyers in store - people tend to categorise and generalise: "I like FPSs" or "I like RPGs". A game that falls out of these clear genre classifications (or has features that fall out of the norm) is harder to judge. Research shows a lot of people have trouble adapting to new paradigms (like you and I with Sacrifice).

On the other hand, there's that shiny new FPS (RTS, sports game, whatever…) sitting on the shelf next to the innovative game. It's familiar and we know we like FPSs (or RTSs, or RPGs…) but this one one 342 different weapons — so it's something we like only better!

Of course, innovation isn't always "fun". Classic genre types are tried and true because the gaming formula is proven (obviously).

-= RPGWatch =-
Dhruin is offline

Dhruin

Dhruin's Avatar
Watcher
Super Moderator
RPGWatch Team

#53

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 11,964