Should games be punished for lack of originality?

[Brotherofwill]

Yes, yes we've all heard of Dante's Inferno at this point. I played the demo and looked at some video reviews and honestly I'm shocked: How could they so blatantly rip off another game?

The double jump, the gore, the combos and combat. The big endbosses with QTEs thrown in, the provocative female breasts... the list goes on and on. It's not like they simply copied some stuff, it's more like they just ransacked the design documents and copy-pasted them.

Yeah, at this point haters will probably be like: "It's still a good game".
My question is: what's the point? Why not make a game that atleast uses a unique combination of generic features from other games (kind of like ME2), thus creating atleast some sort of identity?

I'm tired of rip-offs and I'm glad that people are slamming the game with less than average reviews. What we need now are some fresh ideas and confident developers that follow their own noses for a change. Anyone that has played games like ICO, SotC, Portal or Banjo Kazooie knows that interesting art design + original ideas that developers weren't afraid to cut out can go a long way to improve and carry a game. They also tend to be the games that you remember the longest. We need games with personality. We need more games that are made by lone, visionary developers instead of big design teams.

So what do you think?

 

[Benjeezy]

Ransacked is the perfect word.

Also "raped" and "pillaged".

Nice to see the shit that is DI being publicly exposed for what it is.

 

[JEBWrench]

Lone, visionary developers don't make much money for the publishers.

Big design teams who give the majority what they want do.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Because original games don't sell as well as the big corporations want them too, just look at ICO, SotC, Okami, Beyond good and evil. Do they sell as well as Halo and CoD? No. Why? Because the vast majority of gamers are a bunch of drooling, homophobic idiots who just like to kill things. Sorry if that offended anyone but the games industry is a business, and like a business, does not like to take risks.

 

[Pingieking]

Sure. It's a nice ideal, but fairly hard to put in practice.

Interesting art design + Original idea can often end up being a game with great ideas and not-so-great execution (Mirror's Edge might be a good example for this). This leads to not-so-great review scores, and the lack of familiarity to gamers can lead to bad sales.

The games with personality that you speak of are usually a gamble for publishers. Companies generally like surefire moneymakers (at least, as much as possible; there's always risk involved) more than experiments. Clones represent a much lower risk than original ideas.

 

[JEBWrench]

A friend of mine is of the masses, and he makes a very reasonable point for why he sticks with what's familiar. That being if he's going to shell out his hard-earned money for a game, why should he take too big of a risk in it being garbage?

He likes his CoD, so he buys his CoD.

 

[Benjeezy]

A friend of mine is of the masses, and he makes a very reasonable point for why he sticks with what's familiar. That being if he's going to shell out his hard-earned money for a game, why should he take too big of a risk in it being garbage?

He likes his CoD, so he buys his CoD.

Maybe try a demo b4 you buy the game?

I'm not trying to be an ass (for once) but I'm just trying to bring up more options.

 

[Crosshead]

It comes down, as always, to what sells. Video game production is a business after all. You can't punish a game company for un-originality if it's latest clone makes a ton of money. What are you going to do, make nasty forum posts about them?
It strikes me that un-original games are very clearly noted as such in any decent review. It's then up to the consumer whether to buy it or not. And seeing people are still buying those endless football games, I suspect clone games are going to be around for a while yet. It's the same in any industry. Success spawns imitation. I swear I saw an advert on the telly last night for "Percy Jackson and the Lightning wind" or something like that. My girlfriend turned and asked me "Is that some parallel universe Harry Potter or something?".

 

[Amnestic]

No, because doing so highlights the oh-so-juicy double standards of people crying about lack of originality in a new IP but going along with it for a sequel.

But only for sequels they like, right? I mean, MW2 didn't do a great deal of innovative things but it sells stupid well and gets rave reviews.

Now let's look at...say, Dynasty Warriors 6 or Madden 2010.

Does it recieve the same reception, even when they have the same innovative curve that MW1->MW2 did?

 

[MasterKirov]

I agree with this, but punishment? Nah, karma will bite them in the ass. It's what happened to the EA C&C team after all.

 

[JeanLuc761]

Because original games don't sell as well as the big corporations want them too, just look at ICO, SotC, Okami, Beyond good and evil. Do they sell as well as Halo and CoD? No. Why? Because the vast majority of gamers are a bunch of drooling, homophobic idiots who just like to kill things. Sorry if that offended anyone but the games industry is a business, and like a business, does not like to take risks.

Essentially this. Also, games that are clearly derivative are capable of being outstanding titles on their own right (looking at you Uncharted 2).

*returns to playing Beyond Good & Evil, desperately waiting for a sequel.*

 

[Croaker42]

On a personal leve I think they should be.
However, the way I see it, the community hates innovation. The bigest seller of 09 was a pollished coppy of its predicessor. (Of course they made it shinny and riped a ton of stuff out.)
So on an honest level I think it will always just slide. No point in punishing the machines that keep the industry going.

 

[AngloDoom]

Only if they make no attempt to put something new in. Every if they just tie in two unoriginal ideas together, that's something.

 

[Fappy]

I have been talking about this topic all month for some reason. Publishers usually run the show and publisher's are businesses. What do businesses do? Try to make money? How do they do it? With minimal effort because a majority of their demographic is full of retarded sheep.

 

[Jodah]

The way I look at is as follows : If the game it ripped off did not exist at all would this game have been a good game? If the answer is yes then I will buy it. If the only problems people list on reviews are that it is a "god of war rip off" or a "halo clone" then I will buy it (or try a demo depending on how adventurous I feel).

Yes originality would be nice but true originality is a crap shoot. You might get a winner once in awhile but most of them will fail. From a business perspective it is better to have a 90% chance to get 10 million dollars then it is to have a 20% chance to get 30 million. And yes, I did make those numbers up to show my point.

 

[WorkerMurphey]

Most things aren't original - movies, games, tv shows, food, days of the week. Mostly the same stuff just a little different, but once in a while there's a good one.

If you're good at picking the gems out of the crap it might be worth the smell and dirty fingers.

 

[JEBWrench]

A friend of mine is of the masses, and he makes a very reasonable point for why he sticks with what's familiar. That being if he's going to shell out his hard-earned money for a game, why should he take too big of a risk in it being garbage?

He likes his CoD, so he buys his CoD.

Maybe try a demo b4 you buy the game?

I'm not trying to be an ass (for once) but I'm just trying to bring up more options.

He goes through lots of demos, actually. But after liking the Oblivion demo, then buying the game and not liking it very well, he usually just sticks with what he knows.

No, because doing so highlights the oh-so-juicy double standards of people crying about lack of originality in a new IP but going along with it for a sequel.

But only for sequels they like, right? I mean, MW2 didn't do a great deal of innovative things but it sells stupid well and gets rave reviews.

Now let's look at...say, Dynasty Warriors 6 or Madden 2010.

Does it recieve the same reception, even when they have the same innovative curve that MW1->MW2 did?

I always enjoy when you post.

Regarding the official Madden complaint "lol rostur update duh" - has anyone constantly whining about that actually played a football game on a computer or video game console? There's a very easy way to see how much really get improved between iterations. Play the newer version, then play the one from two or three seasons ago.

Regarding Dynasty Warriors, I can't think of many IPs that have changed so drastically from their initial games.

 

[Killerbunny001]

These days it`s all about if your Frankenstein lives or not. Dante`s Inferno may not but ME2 does even if the intro is ripped off from the Odyssey, they imported Battlestar Galactica and many, many more.

The question is : Where is the line and what the developer must do to cross it ?

 

[TPiddy]

Just as gamers are hesitant to buy a new and unproven title for fear of them being let down, developers and publishers are hesitant to put out a new experimental title lest they lose money.

Building or even leeching off something else's success is what capitalism is all about

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I think it's harder to be original than most people think. Coming up with an utterly new system would be very tricky, even the first video games evolved from board games or other real world concepts (pong being tennis and all that)

Also, no matter how often gamers cry for innovation and new things, when the new things arrive the cry comes a second later of 'gimmicky' and 'innovation for the sake of innovation' 'don't fix what ain't broke.'

What people who cry for innovation really mean is "I want to see my ideas put into a game, no matter how impossible they would be to implement in a balanced system."

For myself I am quite fine as long as the systems are well implemented, and as long as the story (the real reason I'm here) is good.