|
.jpg)
It seems like people are always clamoring for the next big thing, but maybe what they should be clamoring for is the sequel to last year's big thing. In a world that's still staring into the depths of a recession, new IPs for videogames are few and far between. That isn't necessarily a doom and gloom situation though. Game sequels have often outpaced their originators, both monetarily and game-mechanically, so it comes as no surprise that many of the most highly regarded games of the year are sequels or iterations on already-known franchises.
And you know what? That's okay. We really don't need a constant stream of new ideas when we can improve on and perfect the old ideas and the old ways of thinking. That's what the oft-referred to term "iteration" is all about. Over on The Brainy Gamer, Michael Abbott pretty much nails it by saying that iteration isn't practice because that "implies doing something over and over again until you get it right". Iteration should be seen more like a rehearsal where each time through the process, new information is gleaned and new processes are thoughtout.
True, sometimes these ‘new' processes aren't truly new but some sort of late-to-the-game addition. Anyone who has played a game that felt needlessly contrived knows the pitfalls of this well. But that isn't the case for each and every sequel. Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and any number of other sequels and/or iterations showcase what can only be described as a refinement of ideas; making the various processes more focused and relevant without diluting them. We can only assume that Modern Warfare 2 will further justify this cause, if only because Infinity Ward seems to shit gold with the Call of Duty franchise.
All this talk of iteration isn't meant to devalue new ideas, but the money is in refining old ones, a fact that investors know all too well. Imagine yourself as an investor, with the option of putting your money into a completely new venture dedicated to "expanding the ways we think" or putting your money behind Blizzard's latest iteration of Diablo. From an investment standpoint, there certainly only seems to be one answer to that question.
Even if you were to take the first option, using every last imaginary dime you had, it would require a massive amount of exposure to establish the franchise well enough to justify further iterations. We all remember 2007's Assassin's Creed, right? Well, according to an article on GameIndustry.biz, it was the fastest-selling new IP since 2002's The Getaway. That's five years between strong-selling new IP, people. It's not like the industry as a whole decided to just stop producing new content. It just so happens that to produce new IPs that actually make money is more difficult than most people care to imagine. It takes a massive income resembling a small nation's GDP to even drum up enough interest for fair-to-middlin' level sales. Not only that, but the game has to be good. That might not sound terribly difficult, but in a land where Bratz and Barbie Horse Adventure games exist, you can come to your own conclusions.
For a medium often compared to film, sequels seem to get a bad rap in videogames. But if you ask around, Spider-Man 2, X-Men 2, and Terminator 2 are all constantly viewed as a step up from and better movie than previous ones. (There are limits, however. Perhaps there should never be a third movie iteration?) With a holiday season full of blockbuster sequels like Uncharted 2, Modern Warfare 2 and Tekken 6, maybe it's time we reconsider our bad attitude towards them.
|
