Irridium said:
This reminds me of a game made by the great Tim Schafer. A game so amazingly unique, so fun, and so charming. A game praised by all who played it, a game that was amazing.
This game was Psychonauts, and the general gaming public fucking ignored it. Until it faded into obscurity, then its popularity skyrocketed somehow. Gamers be hipsters I guess.
Gamers all cry for new things, but few are actually willing to take the risk and buy the new thing. If your not willing to spend $50-$60 on a new IP, then why should the publishers/developers be willing to drop $20-$50 million on making the games?
This stuff takes risks. From both sides. And if your not willing to dive in and take a chance, then what you'll get are tons of sequels.
It's a vicious cycle, isn't it?
Right now I'm strapped for cash, so I'm deciding between Portal 2, L.A. Noire, InFamous 2, or Brink. Portal 2 just for the sake of more portals, L.A. Noire because I've been dieing for a detective game, InFamous 2 because I liked the first one and want to see what happens next, and Brink because it looks like it's trying
something different in FPSs and it's genuinely interesting.
And that's not even getting into the games that will be coming out even later in the year (Uncharted 3, Skyrim, Arkham City, etc...).
So, really, the question is do I go for something that I know for sure I will enjoy to a large extent (InFamous 2, Portal 2, both sequels....hmmm...) or do I show my support for uniqueness (L.A. Noire, Brink) and if so which one do I show support for?
But that's just me ranting. It is a shame that some games do go under the radar, but with prices these days, can you really blame people for going with the safe investment while at the same time demanding more? Probably.