Originality? WTF is that?

[Thespian]

Originality doesn't have to be an entirely new thing. It can be taking one thing and expressing it in a different way. Look at what Cowboy Bebop did for Western Jazz, and it's widely credited as one of the best animes of it's time. It can be using an abstract artform, it can be using post-modernism, it can be avant garde, it can be an objet d'art, it can be reproducing an old classic with a different art style, it can be changing the setting of something, or it's genre, or tone. A good writer I once had the pleasure of meeting said that too much originality is a plague. You could make a novel based on Jupiter where all the characters are gas based life forms with an entirely new social structure, but that's asking a lot of your readers to buy into. Eventually it becomes more about the reader's attempt to comprehend something and less about the skill in which it is told. I believe this works for all mediums. A clever twist on something, or bringing together two contrasting cultures or genres can generally create originality.

As for games specifically, a lot of the best games of today are based on original ideas that now seem mundane as we are so used to them. I'm sure a lot of more successful games will be surprisingly original.

 

[s0m3th1ng]

I'm still waiting on a true post-apocalyptic survival game that's fun. Doesn't have to be zombies either. I'm talking finding shit to eat, places to sleep, weapons to defend yourself, and eventually starting civilization anew.

 

[badgersprite]

I think when people talk about originality, it's more a complaint about strict adherence to realism or other specific styles that seem to dominate the market today. It's not that things necessarily have to be original, it's just that so many games today can be summarised by any of the following:

Military Shooter
Space Marine
Standard Fantasy Setting
GTA Clone
God Of War Clone

etc etc etc. You all know what the usual games are. Adhering to this isn't bad, but they can afford to be shaken up a bit. Why can't I be a space marine in the standard fantasy setting with a FPS gun that shoots God Of War style chains at night elves?

 

[Daipire]

What do you WANT. What would originality LOOK LIKE?

That's kinda the point isn't it? If you know what originality would look like, it would no longer be original. It's about expecting the unexpected.

By that logic, the most original rpg wouldn't be an rpg...

OT: People only complain about unoriginality when the game does the 'unoriginal
feature badly.

The bullet-time in Red Dead worked well (dead eye or something), sure there were people complaining, but not as many as could have.
Because zey did ze bullet-time vell.

 

[gl1koz3]

For each his own, but less absolutely apparent copycats could do fine too.

And the copycats should be the sequels, so that you don't fck with fans of original. Want a completely new game? Start from scratch. Give new incentive to care about, not change established things. Devs often getting it wrong these days.

 

[Sacman]

The thing about originality is that it has to be good too...

 

[Kurokami]

I had a bad case of the facepalm when I was talking about originality to one of my friends once.

He casually tells me "I don't get why they don't just make a new genre, it can't be that hard".
Then I ask him what new genres he had in mind and I just got a long silence followed by "surely they can think of something".

It's difficult to be original these days, especially when you're talking about gameplay. And the bigger game developers aren't going to risk making their game batshit crazy just for the sake of being different.

The combination of elements isn't too hard to achieve, I'm sure. As for story they often times go for the contra-standard shit to try and achieve originallity, or simply back shit up with nice reasoning. Personally I loved the approach DA:O took with Mages/Templars, I found it quite interesting cause for me it was original (feel free to correct me, it was new to me but I'm sure its been done before).

 

[Sacman]

What do you WANT. What would originality LOOK LIKE?

That's kinda the point isn't it? If you know what originality would look like, it would no longer be original. It's about expecting the unexpected.

By that logic, the most original rpg wouldn't be an rpg...

and at this time I would point at Deus Ex... it's an RPG that walks like an FPS, OMG...

 

[Daipire]

What do you WANT. What would originality LOOK LIKE?

That's kinda the point isn't it? If you know what originality would look like, it would no longer be original. It's about expecting the unexpected.

By that logic, the most original rpg wouldn't be an rpg...

and at this time I would point at Deus Ex... it's an RPG that walks like an FPS, OMG...

I hated Deus Ex....
Am I a bad person?

 

[Sacman]

What do you WANT. What would originality LOOK LIKE?

That's kinda the point isn't it? If you know what originality would look like, it would no longer be original. It's about expecting the unexpected.

By that logic, the most original rpg wouldn't be an rpg...

and at this time I would point at Deus Ex... it's an RPG that walks like an FPS, OMG...

I hated Deus Ex....
Am I a bad person?

In my eyes, yes... I'm not sorry...
Then how about we use Fallout 3 as an example even though I didn't like Fallout 3...

 

[Lono Shrugged]

There are only seven stories in the world. Can't be original all the time. I want a Video Game version of Hyperion by Dan Simmons. Any other examples I can think of have been done. They just need to be done better. I would love a game where you explore alien planets in total freeform

that seven stories thing isn't true. Especially in games where the story is not only told through words and actions but the way the actions are performed and other parts of gameplay. Even then, the point of alot of games is just "survive". that isn't included.

I would argue that the seven stories concept/rule applies even to games. Obviously you need a narrative but even if you don't have one you can apply one. Tetris is a never ending struggle against the forces that dispense the blocks like a benign god raining slow death. (Overcoming the Monster) Any of these examples can apply to any game. And that I think is a great thing to say about the relevence of video games. Minecraft could be half these stories depending on how you play it.

1. 'Tragedy'. Hero with a fatal flaw meets tragic end. Macbeth or
Madame Bovary.
2. 'Comedy'. Not necessary laugh-out-loud, but always with a happy ending, typically of romantic fulfilment, as in Jane Austen.
3. 'Overcoming the Monster'. As in Frankenstein or 'Jaws'. Its psychological appeal is obvious and eternal.
4. 'Voyage and Return'. as diverse as Alice
in Wonderland and H G Wells' The Time Machine and Coleridge's The Rime of the Ancient Mariner follow the same archetypal structure of personal development through leaving, then returning home.
5. 'Quest'. Whether the quest is for a holy grail, a whale, or a kidnapped child it is the plot that links a lot of the most popular fiction. The quest plot links Lords of the Rings with Moby Dick and a thousand others in between.
6. 'Rags to Riches'. The riches in question can be literal or metaphoric. See Cinderella, David Copperfield, Pygmalion.
7. 'Rebirth'. The 'rebirth' plot - where a central character suddenly finds a new reason for living - can be seen in A Christmas Carol, It's a Wonderful Life, Crime and Punishment and Peer Gynt.

(Taken from Penguin.com)

 

[Cowabungaa]

How does originality look like? Like this:
That's the kind of weird shit I want to see more of. Games like Katamari, Zeno Clash, Rock of Ages, games that almost defy genres.

I completely agree with you there, but I don't think the problem rests in a lack of originality. It's entirely possible to tell a story that's been told before and make it seem fresh.

For example, Red Dead Redemption; it's the classic "one last time" story, very common in Westerns. The hero's been retired for a long time, but has to come out of retirement and be a gunfighter "one last time", usually for his family's sake. Any coinnesseur of Western films could have told you how Red Dead Redemption was going to end. That's just the way those stories go. In that way, RDR was unoriginal. But did this make it boring, or bad? Depends on who you ask, but the general consensus seems to be that the game's story was pretty great. Despite being copy-pasted right out of "Unforgiven", RDR's story was appreciated because it was told well, in a way that made it seem new and exciting again.

If you're pumping out story-based games where the only thing you're changing is the twist at the end, the problem isn't a lack of originality, it's poor storytelling.

Very well put, and I think Mafia 2 is an example of the opposite; how not to do it. It's story is pretty much a direct copy of your average mafia flick, and even the relatively small twist at the end is one you could see coming a mile away. It wasn't told any differently either.

I do love the game, but not for it's story.

Originality is an urban myth, like "innovation" or "immersion".

Nonsense. Everything has to start somewhere, from everything there's a first (though whether that's applicable to time and the universe is still the question, but that's a wee bit off-topic). Everything was original at one point.

As for immersion, that's anything but an 'urban myth'. It's what I strive for when playing games, reading books and watching movies. To be engulfed by them, swamped, completely forgetting about actual reality. And that has happened every now and then.

Most games I end up playing just end up being fun, and sometimes I too play a game just for fun, but sometimes I truly get immersed. When that happens, the game/book/movie in question is a masterpiece for me.

 

[Lono Shrugged]

does not include "survive" I win.

And here I thought we were having a friendly discussion sharing opinions for our mutual good. All of the seven stories relate to survival. Either metaphorical or physical. All drama is conflict and all conflict is the struggle for survival between opposing views. Maybe not physical survival but the domination of one force over another. What video games need to learn is that conflict of a physical nature is not the be all and end all.

Many, many stories are about the survival of an idea at the expense of life and form the basis for some of the most influential parts of history and works of fiction.

So the last objective in Halo Reach is pretty original for a game, but not original in the slightest in terms of dramatic narrative. At that point the story was wrapped up and you were a loose end of the story that had to be tied off.

 

[Folio]

YES! A fellow fan of originality! (you are one, aren't you?)

Games today are like Hollywood films. Lots of action, lots of succesfull formulas and as long as it's visually good, anything is good.

Then the independant film/game comes along which is creatively done with a lower budget and sometimes better than anything remotely high budget.

I want a game with balls. Not action, but balls. Halo doesn't have balls, it has aliens and zombies. Mario doesn't have balls, it has a princess and a monster and a hero, time and time again.

Katamari Damacy has balls (literally) because it does something the 'Hollywood' games don't: something new that doesn't involve killing or death.

Portal on the other hand has balls (or cubes, whatever) because it uses something new and creates a game around that. Plus it puts you in a place where you normally wouldn't think about.

Also: Swearing and sex doesn't make a game more adult. Without it, you'll just get something like He-Man or G.I. Joe.

I want a game that goes to a diffrent path instead of: You Good, He Bad, KILL!
What if you were from a noble family or heroes only to find out that your heritage is nothing but some muscular sick-o raped your grand grand grand grand grand mother. Adult? Yes. Gripping? Yes. Interesting? It might be!

 

[Folio]

Nintendo had it removed from the dictionary.

*opens mouth* ... *closes mouth*

:'( The truth hurts a little...

 

[Hosker]

Original games don't sell as well as ones that use a tried and tested formula (COD). So it's much safer being unoriginal, as games cost a lot to make.

 

[Folio]

Original games don't sell as well as ones that use a tried and tested formula (COD). So it's much safer being unoriginal, as games cost a lot to make.

Extra Credits discussed this. It's true that games nowadays cost more to make. But the publishers don't want to take risks because... well... 'risk' for them is equal to 'losing money'.

Original games should still be good and sell well. But the publishers aren't as creative and open minded as developers or most gamers. They want to live inside the box, not think outside of it.

 

[JuryNelson]

But the publishers aren't as creative and open minded as developers or most gamers.

This is sort of the crux of it. The people who make games and love games and understand games aren't the same people who sell games.

There's games as gamers and developers understand them, and then there's "the gamer's understanding of a game" as understood by the people who publish games.

Which is why developers that are also publishers (Ubisoft) tend to have more unique games. And publishers that clearly get their money from elsewhere (EA) can afford from time to time to take a risk.

 

[JuryNelson]

Spoiler: to avoid a wall of text, I'm putting my post here

When something original comes out, people either don't buy it, or bash it when anything similar to it comes out. There's a difference between being unoriginal and taking what works and using it.

They say there are too many sequels, but sequels tend to be the biggest sellers, meaning people must really like it. That's NOT a bad thing. Sure, some times a series catches "sequel-itis" like CoD, Guitar Hero, Street Fighter 2 (which has been cure with 4, which will in time catch it's own case of sequel-itis. Just give it time...), and so on, but having a sequel doesn't make the series unoriginal, just sucessful.

Complaining about unoriginal stories: See Unrulyhandbag's post.

Plus, just because it's original doesn't automatically make it good. I can't think of any right now, but there were some things that, while nobody ever did it before, it's certian it will never be done again. Because it was awful.

Just because it's unoriginal doesn't instantly make it bad. Hell, Mario has just been the same story for 20 years, and remaking either Mario 3 or Mario 64, and the games are still great, because of great level design, new mechanics, music, and just overall FUN.

And (as much as I hate this), oringal games don't garuntee SALES. Why make something new and risk a big monetary loss when you can make a sequel to a game with an existing fanbase, possibly expand it, and have an almost certian profit. As said before: "We'll stop making *insert current trend* games when people stop buying them".

I could go on for a while with this, but honestly, there are videos on youtube, blogs, and this very site that can sum it up better than I can.

There are more youtube videos, blogs, and articles on this very site that do exactly the opposite; claim that because something has not redefined the medium, it has no business even existing.

The "Every RPG Ever" flow chart even had a huge picture of Cloud Strife in the middle. Now, not to belabor a point, but when FFVII came out, how many people played that game who had never, ever played an RPG before?

I just wish people would stop complaining when genre stories turn out to be generic. "Fantasy story, huh? I bet there's a dragon. BORING." NO, it isn't boring. It's fantastic.

 

[Geekosaurus]

I'm studying literature and have come across a theory that nothing is ever original, and that everything we do is influenced by everything else we do. You might think it's complete BS, but it's interesting nonetheless.