Problems With New Games: “Annualisation” (aka. Madden Syndrome)
Deja Vu? This could be what all gaming will feel like, soon.
As well as the big pile o’ unplayed games, I keep a list of games that I hear/see/read about, both already released games that I’m yet to get (some examples: Bayonetta and The Saboteur), and games yet to come out (like Heavy Rain, Alan Wake, and Rage). As the examples show, there’s definitely still new stories, new gameplay ideas, and new stories grafted onto old ideas coming out of game publishers. However, these new ideas have to fight very hard to get any traction. On my list of 31 upcoming games to watch, 22 are either direct sequels or part of an already established series. Mass Effect 2, Crackdown 2, Max Payne 3, Diablo 3, Thief 4…
I suppose I’m the sucker; it’s my own list, after all. And it’s probably what a large section of the gaming public wants – why wouldn’t you want more of a good thing? But it makes me wonder, are these games being released in addition to games with original ideas and settings, with as many new properties being released as there has ever been, or are they the replacement for new ideas? I worry when I see things like Activision (oh, you have come a long way since Pitfall, haven’t you) talking about not releasing new games unless they can be “annualised.” That statement does perhaps imply new ideas in gaming, but it implies ‘safe’ new ideas. Does it prevent any resources being put into the next Psychonauts, Ico, or Okami?
Call of Duty, Guitar Hero - these sort of series will be cranked out on a yearly basis, quality or need be damned. As game budgets and therefore the number of units needed to sell to make a profit rise, the will to take on risk evaporates, and thus these sort of sequels or annual installments will be prevalent. GTAIV, as an example, had a lot of ambition, and in some ways its reach exceeded its grasp, but at the core it was largely the same game as every GTA game since GTA3 – and stuck largely to what people look for in a GTA game. I can see the Madden Syndrome threaten to take over before too long, where the game title just becomes ‘Call of Duty 2011‘, and any gameplay changes are minor and incremental. It seems like the only games that will join these existing series’, at least from major publishers, will be games that are derivative of them.
Repitition and sequels are old as games themselves: Look at Pac Man and Ms. Pac Man, Galaxian and Galaga. There’s been a million Zelda sequels, give or take, and that’s down to a fine art by now, which is pretty much exactly why I struggle to take much interest in the Zelda series anymore. You can contrast this with the (western versions of the) Super Mario Bros. series, which up to Super Mario 64 (at the very least) did something different in every game. But the development cycles were long, and games were relatively less expensive to make – the pressure was undoubtably there to make a hit, but would be unlikely to sink the company if one game in a series wasn’t quite the blockbuster they were hoping for. There was time to experiment when a game didn’t have to come out every year, and even if games were released annually, they didn’t need the scores of graphic and sound resources that games do now.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t want a good sequel to a game I enjoy, but getting one every year is a bit ridiculous and can make you tired of even the best ideas. I mean, I like pizza, but I don’t want to eat it every night, you know?
Image from Sports Rubbish, done over with my 1337 chopping skillz.
