I have been gaming, to some extent or other, for the the last eighteen years or so. I have been, with varying levels of interest, following gaming news for around fourteen years, roughly since the days of the PS1. Now, I’m not going to say that this makes me the most experienced person in the world, or that I was around for the entire history of gaming. Those facts patently aren’t true of me but I think I have been around for long enough to use the phrase “I can’t remember a time.” I mean, fourteen years isn’t the longest time in the world, certainly, but I think it’s probably long enough, right?
[drop]Anyway… I can’t remember a time when we’ve seen franchises so strong. Sequels are by no means new, they’ve been around since the early days of gaming. They’re a pretty obvious part of any entertainment medium really. If you make something people like, they are always going to want more. I’m certainly guilty of this, happily gobbling up any and all content from the Halo universe. I’m not just talking games here – DVDs, books, figures, Xbox 360 controllers, if Microsoft license it I will probably at least look longingly at it. This has, in all seriousness, happened to me at least twice in the last week alone. You wouldn’t expect I’d encounter things attached to Halo that often, but it happens with startling regularity, somehow.Sorry, I seem to have gotten distracted talking about Halo for a moment there. My point is that right now the market seems to be dominated by franchises and sequels. That’s not an inherently bad thing, just because a game is a sequel or a prequel or even an interquel (apparently that’s when something fits between two pieces of fiction that already exist, and yes I had to look it up) it’s not worthy of scorn. I mean, even with yearly updates there can be some incredible games coming out, just look at Assassin’s Creed. This will be the third year where we’ve seen an Assassin’s Creed title on home consoles and, if I’m honest, I can’t wait; particularly after the ending of Brotherhood.
However, while there’s no reason for a sequel/prequel/interquel to be bad, the industry generally seems to have forgotten that you get to a successful franchise by building some new IP. Even Call of Duty was new once and, if you think of Modern Warfare as a relaunch for the series, it wasn’t all that long ago that this was all brand new. We need new ideas and characters if we’re ever going to get new series.
That’s why when EA announced their commitment to new IP my initial reaction was to applaud. Well it was for the first instant, then when I read “two new IPs a year” I became a little less enthused. Is two really that many? EA may have lost their ‘biggest publisher’ crown to Activision, but they are still putting out a pretty significant number of games. I know that new IP is obviously a significant business risk, particularly given the cost of developing games these days, but even so, two doesn’t seem that many to me.
[drop2]However, then I thought again. That’s right, I managed to think about the same thing three times in a row. I’m impressed by my own level of focused thought about something that isn’t working out how awesome Batman is (the correct answer is ‘super freaking awesome’).Lets return to Call of Duty again. Compare Call of Duty 3 to Modern Warfare and it becomes clear that it wasn’t just a relaunch for the series, it was pretty much a brand new IP; they just kept the name for marketing reasons. And then I thought about some other franchises like Need for Speed. Look at the variety in the different Need for Speed titles EA are bringing out. Shift 2 really wasn’t anything like Hot Pursuit, and The Run looks to be unique again (although harking back to older Need for Speed titles). Yes, they all revolve around racing but it seems that Need for Speed is pretty much just the brand name for racing games that come out of EA. If they created an EA Racing division and used that to mark all their racers we’d happily mark it down as new IP, but by using an established brand they’ve seemingly forfeited this.
So really all I can say is: judge games based on how good they are, not whether or not they’re new. I’m not subtle with my messages am I? Perhaps I need to write about monkeys and trees.
Frontpage image credit: Glogster
Death_In_Flamez
Please tell me I’m not the only person to click on this article cos of Master Chief having a cupper :P In all fairness innovation is not really something that sits well with me….probably why I’m not the biggest fan of LittleBigPlanet. I like the “same old” shooter and racing genres and although I appreciate new ideas within that context in terms of stuff like Journey I’m just not interested.
HoboCastro
Great article. But for me it brings up a bigger point. I have no problem with sequels, with sequels they will never be revolutionary but sequels that don’t evolve the game makes it seem lazy.
Not many game genres can evole during sequels but one that has and consistantly changes the mechanics is FPS games. The general premis never changes but the reward system and enviroments do. I caused a bit of flame recently by saying BF3 is just a prettier version of BF2. My point was lost in the conversation. Call of Duty, Medal of Honour, Homefront and Crysis have evolved but Battlefield hasn’t.
This means two things to me. One, my whole arguement is void due to a tried and tested formula works so why change. Secondly, are developers too scared to change things incase they lose fan support.
Innovation isn’t the key but evolution in my opinion is.
nofi
Is this article about Portal 2? It should be.
halbpro
No and it never will be now. NEVER.
The Lone Steven
See what you have done Nofi? Now Peter will be forced to annoy Kris forever. Oh wait, that’s a good thing. :D :p
colossalblue
I think that all of us highly informed gaming types should just think of the Need for Speed branding as something they put on to make idiots realise it’s a decent quality game that has cars in it.
Similarly, consider anything with “Call of Duty” as a branding exercise for tabloids to know what they’re supposed to give millions of pounds worth of free publicity too in the weeks before release.
Also, gamers call for sequels as much, if not more, as they call for new ideas. Shenmue 3, anyone?
Grabacr
So according to you anyone who has a life and just plays games for fun is an idiot?
Get your head out of your arse you pompous moron.
gideon1451
Now now.
Jakster123x
Interquel? Interesting. Would I be right in saying that the PSP spinoff Daxter was an interquel, then? Seeing as it takes play between Jaks 1 and 2 (yup, anything can be related to J&D :) )
Anyway, I’ve become distracted, everyone loves sequels and it’s always nice to try something new.
Also, stick to monkeys, i liked that article. ;)
Rocket_345
Although i love devs trying new stuff and will be more than happy to purchase i actually like sequels as if i in some way, shape or form enjoyed the original then 9 times out of 10 i’ll enjoy the sequel. If i had played Uncharted 1 and disliked it would i of picked up 2 despite the praise. Probably not. Sequels of a successful game will allways be successful and devs trying to change things couls stop sales so they keep to the successful formula. Simple.
Foxhound_Solid
Great read.
tantalus_blank
Heh, I remember the monkey/tree article =)
I have to say I thought the same thing when they mentioned it would only be 2 new IPs
The Lone Steven
Sequels and remakes can be good but innovation is what made the gaming industry the giant it is today. There are so many sequels to a game that a developer can do before it gets stale and people get fed up with it. Take a certain FPS that comes out on a yearly basis. That doesn’t change much every year and i think the franchise is starting to lose a lot of fans.
Without Innovation, the industry would probably end up dying. I like a good innovative game as i like to see what the developer has done with the genre. Mirror’s edge was a unique twist on the FPS genre and it worked well.
Excellent article Kris. :)
xdarkmagician
Sequels pay the bills! Without any sequels the industry would collapse, because most new IPs don’t make enough profit to pay the costs of developing new IPs. In this age one under performing game can sink a developer, we see it a few times every year, but with the success most sequels have they can counter that failure and give the developer another chance at creating a new IP, or another sequel. Sequels also help create a buzz for the industry too. Uncharted 3 is going to help Sony in more ways then just sales, it helps get the Sony name out there and adds to name recognition. Sequels also give the player refined gameplay, deeper stories, and inspire new IPs. People want sequels, look at Half Life ep3, people want it. When a publisher puts out another sequel they’re only listening to the customer. The trick is finding the perfect balance of sequels to pay the bills and new IPs to keep the industry fresh enough so it keeps evolving and doesn’t grow stale.