Quote:
Originally posted by Eagle of Fire@Mar 28 2006, 04:04 PM
To me it's the contrary. I hardly ever play a "new" game without first having to compare it to an older game. I never said originality is easy to come by... But when you played Dune 2, C&C, Starcraft, Warcraft 1 and 2 and Red Alert... Other "new" RTS really feel bland. New graphics are not going to help here, on the contrary.
|
Homeworld, Rise of Nations, Sacrifice, Blitzkrieg series, etc. Even if you argue that neither of them are at all original, then I have to ask you, why must "original" must be so important, even more so than a game being good?
I do not "buy" that new games must be original or they are not good. And from the looks of it most gamers don't either. Example, Darwinia and Perimeter. Were they original in their own field? Hell yes, nothing like them (in parts or total). Have they sold many? HA!
Reason for this? I can't say for Darwinia, but Perimeter had a lot of advertising space before its release, and both games had many good reviews. Gamers did not buy them en mass. I didn't buy them. Why? Didn't like their original ideas, or at least how they sound on paper. Perimeter sounded like a lot of micromanagement, and Darwinia like a bit too different, I am not in the mood of trying new concepts of games for some time now.
Not exactly sure my points on this post either.
