For the Publisher. Why you allways want new things?

ArchivedUser

Hello, 
I have a generell question for all publisher around the world. 
Why allways the people want new innovativ games to create? 95% of them are shit like hell. 
The user realy want good old games with new grafics and maybe more comfortable tools ingame 
so many good games like 
Settlers
C&C 
Sim City
Diablo
now Lineage 
(Lineage eternal got a new "mobile" layout to make it worse like hell)
Are worse like hell right now because the publisher wanted too much instad to make the good old things just better. 

thx for your attension .. and enjoy my greates english .. i realy tryed my best  

ArchivedUser

well ashes is a new game and has no tie-ins with other games so there are no change only innovations  

ArchivedUser

All of the games you mentioned are crap/ok in my oppinion.

ArchivedUser

For one because no one likes giving money to lawyers when they get sued. If you blatantly copy other peoples work, they are going to come looking for a payday. For a recent example, look at the PUBG/Fortnite dust-up. Video game producers are loath to open that pandora's box of who holds the patent/trademark/copyright for what intellectual property. One example is the term "orc" because someone is going to come along with a competing claim and cost you money. Nobody wants to be the person that loses that fight.
http://ask.metafilter.com/234724/Are-Orcs-copyrighted

ArchivedUser

I guess from my perspective new games are created to be used on better faster technology the games created today generally look better and also run better than previous games. I will not say they are better at this point because I really think games have been dumbed down so much in the past decade, that's from an MMO perspective.
A game being shit is really only a personal view point, you may feel that way yet others may love or enjoy what has been offered up. There has been a real shift in what mmo's were 15+ years ago compared to newer mmo's of today, they are almost like two different types of games when you compare them now. 
I hope that AOC can capture some of the old school feel that has been lost over the years, some will hate it while other's will love it, its not going to be for everyone I just hope Steve and the team can stick to their vision and bring it to reality. 

ArchivedUser

I think what the OP was driving at here is the seeming need for each new game to be "groundbreaking" or "innovative" and really shakeup an entire genre by reinventing the wheel.

What is wrong with simply creating an awesome game that will make people happy? It is great when a game here or there pushes a genre into new territory, but it does seem as if the mark of success is to be seen as innovative or groundbreaking.

This happened in Diablo 3, changing too much for the sake of "innovating" while alienating a large portion of the potential playerbase because it "felt" so much different from the previous.

The first goal of any capitalistic endeavour is always going to be making money, but the main artistic goal of creating a game is to entertain people, to make people happy. I think that some developers need to realise that people are happy when they are comfortable. 

Make a game that has one or two aspects that can innovate on a mechanic as long as they aren't a core mechanic that people have enjoyed and feel comfortable with. If every design decision that is made is based on "we need to do something new and groundbreaking" then you will create a game that many feel uncomfortable in.

I like the way Intrepid is approaching their design. They aren't trying to reinvent the MMO genre, they are trying to add in a couple of new mechanics that will drive the genre forward, but coupling that with the successful aspects of MMOs from the beginning of the genre up to the present day.

Use what works, don't sit down and create something entirely new for every aspect (combat, crafting, levelling, classes, economy, itemisation, etc). 

I think it is similar to movie sequels. Instead of making a movie similar to a popular money-making film, following the same basic structure but tweaking one or two aspects, there is a tendency to have to have everything twice as big, twice as splodey, twice as loud, twice as many characters, etc.

You change so much of what made the original great that you lose sight of what you are doing and the audience becomes dissatisfied. There are very few exceptions to this, and those are due to the quality of those attached to the project.

ArchivedUser

I would disagree with the 95% of all new games suck statement.
I would be tempted to agree if the statement included a price range, like all new games under 29.99$ suck, but that's because I don't like side-scroll/rogue-like/top-down-view/8-bit/etc.

I think if you just keep putting out the same type of game with better graphics everyone would be playing Dynasty Warriors 9, or any other equivalent, and there would be no reason to make new games.

Graphics do get better quick, but over the course of 3-4 years the difference so far has not been, imo, OMG Amazing. If I waited to only buy new games when the games I own experienced a graphics update my life would be way more boring.

ArchivedUser

Fleelix said:

All of the games you mentioned are crap/ok in my oppinion.

Azathoth said:

I would disagree with the 95% of all new games suck statement.

idk ... how old you are guys. But im 28 years old played as little boy with 4. on a Amiga ... played "the settlers" (first game) and settlers 2. 
the first C&C games and Dune II
Diablo 1 & 2 
and Lineage 2
you realy dont know the games i think. 
The grafiks on a game are the unimportants things ever .. when the gameplay sucks ... still the gameplay sucks! 

Bajjer said:

I think what the OP was driving at here is the seeming need for each new game to be "groundbreaking" or "innovative" and really shakeup an entire genre by reinventing the wheel.

What is wrong with simply creating an awesome game that will make people happy? It is great when a game here or there pushes a genre into new territory, but it does seem as if the mark of success is to be seen as innovative or groundbreaking.

This happened in Diablo 3, changing too much for the sake of "innovating" while alienating a large portion of the potential playerbase because it "felt" so much different from the previous.

The first goal of any capitalistic endeavour is always going to be making money, but the main artistic goal of creating a game is to entertain people, to make people happy. I think that some developers need to realise that people are happy when they are comfortable. 

Make a game that has one or two aspects that can innovate on a mechanic as long as they aren't a core mechanic that people have enjoyed and feel comfortable with. If every design decision that is made is based on "we need to do something new and groundbreaking" then you will create a game that many feel uncomfortable in.

I like the way Intrepid is approaching their design. They aren't trying to reinvent the MMO genre, they are trying to add in a couple of new mechanics that will drive the genre forward, but coupling that with the successful aspects of MMOs from the beginning of the genre up to the present day.

Use what works, don't sit down and create something entirely new for every aspect (combat, crafting, levelling, classes, economy, itemisation, etc). 

I think it is similar to movie sequels. Instead of making a movie similar to a popular money-making film, following the same basic structure but tweaking one or two aspects, there is a tendency to have to have everything twice as big, twice as splodey, twice as loud, twice as many characters, etc.

You change so much of what made the original great that you lose sight of what you are doing and the audience becomes dissatisfied. There are very few exceptions to this, and those are due to the quality of those attached to the project.

your right 100% dude. 
thanks for that.