+- The VG Resource (https://www.vg-resource.com)
+-- Forum: Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-65.html)
+--- Forum: July 2014 Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-139.html)
+---- Forum: Other Stuff (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-6.html)
+----- Forum: Gaming Discussion (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-18.html)
+----- Thread: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay (/thread-24777.html)
Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - Koh - 04-01-2014
This is a topic I thought would be interesting to discuss after watching Game Theorist's new video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q
To be honest, it surprises me that we hear so much talk about innovation, but the sales aren't matching up to fill that quota. What is it about innovative games that makes them not sell as well as rehashes? What are your views on the matter?
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - Gwen - 04-01-2014
What people don't realize is that Innovation doesn't automatically = good. Sometimes you take a risk and it works out, and other times you get a dud. I find the best is a mixture of both. Take a concept that's already in place and improve it or change it dramatically.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - Koh - 04-01-2014
That's exactly how I feel. Which is why I cite the transition of the first 6 Final Fantasy games as a perfect example.
FF1 was first, so there's nothing to say here.
FF2 changed up the gameplay style by making it so you level individual stats and skills, thus allowing you to tailor each character in whatever way you desire.
FF3 introduced the first class change system, with a lot of different jobs and abilities to use.
FF4 went back to fixed classes, but was more story driven and introduced the ATB system.
FF5 continued to use the ATB system, but introduced a more versatile Job and Ability system.
FF6 also continued to use the ATB system, but introduced Magicite as a way to acquire magic and more ways to battle such as Pincer and Side attacks.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - E-Man - 04-01-2014
I can agree why being too different from the original formula could cause trouble. Take Paper Mario: Sticker Star for example. It would have been a fine game, but the fact that they changed several key elements of the game that made it so good (and I don't mean just completely changing the RPG system). Basically, when creating a sequel, you need to preserve what made to original very great and build up on it in areas that would benefit the most from it.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - puggsoy - 04-01-2014
(04-01-2014, 08:49 PM)E-Man Wrote: Basically, when creating a sequel, you need to preserve what made to original very great and build up on it in areas that would benefit the most from it.
This sentence right here. The usual problem though, is that these "areas" aren't clearly defined, and developers sometimes pick the wrong ones. In LoZ: Spirit Tracks, they hit the nail on the head. Remake PH with a new story, train instead of a boat, new items (as is always necessary in Zelda sequels), and fix all the problems that PH had. Other games don't really do it that well.
Completely new, innovative ideas are always good, in my opinion. Maybe the games themselves aren't that great, but I think it's always good to try out new things. Sometimes it fails, sure, but that means that you then know that it doesn't work, and you can either ditch it or think of ways to improve it. That's how any great idea grows. Mario was innovative when it started.
That's why I love indie games, they often try to do something new. Sometimes it doesn't quite work out as well as it could have, but some really awesome ideas get out that can really redefine what a game is.
The biggest issue with innovation, especially with big companies, is that they can lose quite a bit if it doesn't sell. Indie developers don't really have such a big problem (since they usually develop their games fairly cheaply, at least in comparison to big companies), but they will still have wasted a lot of time and resources if it doesn't work out.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - Koopaul - 04-02-2014
Exactly, when making a sequel you gotta make sure it keeps the very basic idea of the previous game intact. Mario games should always have jumping, coins, power-ups. But you can also do something really strange too.
Like stick a water pack on Mario's back and have it set on a tropical island. Despite these weird ideas, the game still has what it needs to be a Mario game.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - Sengir - 04-02-2014
Sometimes I don't want to play innovative games. I often go back to more "formulaic" games at times because:
1. I want to relax, not learn a new gameplay mechanism.
2. The gameplay was fine as it is.
RE: Innovation Versus Formulaic Gameplay - E-Man - 04-02-2014
That's why Banjo-Tooie is extremely successful. Even though they pretty much left the original game allow, they added new elements and the separation system to provide new ways to experience this game.
This video right here does a very good job of explaining what I mean.