I was just reminded (on another board) about a video I saw on YouTube awhile back. It tackles "inovation" in gaming and gives some good stats. GameTheory's "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q&feature=youtu.be"

What do you think? Do you seek innovation in your games? Maybe you want the tried and true? Is there a mix somewhere in the middle that fits you best?

I'm not surprised that AAA studios go for the tried and tested formula, because let's face it, there is a lot of risk when it comes to the games.

Any feedback loops come about 1-7 years later (depending on the game) and if the game is a flop, the studio is likely to go bankrupt.

The only way I see AAA studios innovating is to have bite-size episodic titles, as there's less risk and TV networks do it all the time.

I would love innovation, to be honest.

Episodic games that aren't mainstream are kinda a pain too, cause if they sell well they will end before all the episodes are out and forever be stuck in a cliffhanger.

Things doesn't look good for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D4:_Dark_Dreams_Don%27t_Die which was released for XB1 last year and 2 months ago for PC, no word on when we can expect more of it, if we can. And SiN Episode 1 was released back in 2006 and there's still no episode 2.

But there's always hope, I guess. Shenmue 2 been stuck in a cliffhanger for almost 15 years, and now thanks to a recent kickstarter Shenmue 3 is finally on it's way.

But it's better to have a 拢250k flop than a 拢30m one.

In general I like some innovation, I like to try new things, that being said, I am against innovation for the sake of innovation.

If a studio wants to innovate or have to innovate in order to make the product they want to make, then bring it on. But yeah, I don't know.

I think Jim Sterling manages to sum up how I feel about it. I guess a slight language warning is in order as well. Anyways,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abLspv3bgRo.

I like INnoVation's playstyle, even though he's a terran player.

Capitalism and it's foundation principle greed is destroying video games. Instead of catering to a core number of gamers who enjoy good quality games, big companies are trying to attract as many possible customers as possible with the least amount of effort. There are a few outliers. Bethesda and Rockstar are two of them. Although Rockstar has gone a bit off course with its Multiplayer and paying for Shark cards. There has been no singleplayer dlc for GTA v. The gaming core has wanted what it has always wanted. Bringing swathes of casual gamers into the mix has created unreasonable sales expectations with more niche games being cancelled or changed due to too few sales relative to cardboard cut outs like Call of Duty. An example is Mafia 3 becoming GTA 1968. It has also been seen with Ubisoft's poor treatment of developers and pumping out annual releases. Even cheats in AC games are now monetised. Terribel.

In agreement and another good video! Innovation "for innovation's sake" is not good. I mean, how many ways can I swing a sword? Or cast a spell? Or drive a car? Or play a sports game?

The worst "innovation" for me was quick time events, or QTE's. I won't play a game that uses these in any form. I know other players that either do not mind them or even enjoy them, but I am just too uncoordinated for them

There is something to be said about "comfortable", in my opinion. Having to learn each new game can get tedious and I may give up instead of sticking with it.

I guess I am more a fan of "refinement" over "innovations"

You have some good points, too. A lot of games are beiong "mashed together" so they are losing their identities, all to bring in more players that would not play the games as they were made. Even Bethesda is going away from die rolls/skill checks to button mashing reflexes, in order to appeal to those kinds of players. And it works. They sell more games with each release.

If I want to play Doom, I want a first person shooter, not a character that has abilities and skills that improve throughout the game. I play other games for that experience.

But, leave it to capitalism. The more players a game can appeal to in some way, the more copies they sell. Who can fight that logic?