How often have we seen it, people crying out for innovation in the gaming industry. How come there are not enough new IP's? Why do we keep getting the same old reruns, the same game over and over again with only minor tweaks and improvements? Bobby Kotick, the CEO of Activision, was chastised in the gaming press for saying, essentially, that his company is only interested in IP's that can be annualized again and again? I wonder why so many people were disturbed by this comment? Is it because we were somehow upset by the statement that no innovation is required, just give us, basically, the same thing over and over again and we'll be happy?
Then we have Halo: ODST, a game that may be well implemented, but certainly does not really innovate significantly, and should properly be regarded as an expansion pack-offered at full price-and met with absolutely stellar reviews in the gaming press! Are the reviewers in the gaming press so willing to completely abdicate their critically important consumer protection role as long as the IP is big enough? After all, if ODST is not seen as a massively important release, then we are just left with Activision's COD sequel to carry the fall gaming season.
So the next time you hear someone go on a rant about the lack of innovation in the gaming industry, think of Bobby Kotick, looking out over the horizon of the gaming world at the reception of Halo: ODST-I'm sure it will only provide him with more than enough reason to reconsider his views.
No comments:
Post a Comment