You know your name shows the complete opposite of your viewpoint. TheAntipop that totally supports the pop culture.
Anyway, I never said those games aren't good or great, neither are they totally unoriginal but the idea was already there, so they're not exactly new either. They're not a total replica mind you, but based on something that existed before. Yes Halflife had something of a B-Movie storyline but it was afterall a FPS shoot'em up. As far as the story goes, wasn't it something like some aliens from a different dimension get transported to earth. Wasn't that the storyline of Duke nukem? What about Doom and Doom 2? I never said no game is truly great unless nothing like it has been before. But I am saying it is not an original game.
Just to help you out here I'll tell you which games I have played in the typical "copy the last" types. I played Wolfenstein 3D, I haven't played Spear of Destiny. Wolf3D was good cos I never played anything like it before. It never got to the wide public though. Doom was published well, got a lot of good and bad publicity. But the way I see it if it helps to sell, then there is no such thing as bad publicity. Doom also was a good game as this genre was still scarce. Doom 2 appealed to me first because I was left hungry for more after the first one, but after a while I got bored, just gave up and stopped playing it. By this time a lot of other people started to copy this Idea. I played a bit of the Aliens game before saying no. Kinda the same with Duke Nukem 3D. Heretic and Hexen kind of had a new idea of intertwining different levels. But still that wasn't enough to keep me interested.
Quake was another game that appealed to me. It looked new and different. The gameplay was different because it wasn't a game where the monsters jumped at you from all directions simultaneously but it still had something. It was also pretty good in multiplayer which was kinda new as multiplayer in the games before this was just crap. Quake2 again was good and everything. There was a big improement in graphics. But gameplay tasted like quake. I don't think the multiplayer was as good as quake. Then every other developer jumped the bandwagon making games hardly any better and thats where I said enough is enough. I played some of halflife and some of Sin, but neither got me saying I need to finish this game. I only bothered playing the first level of unreal.
Quake 3 was refreshing. Do you remember how much flak John Carmack had to take when that game was being released. All the critics were saying this game is rubbish and will not sell. Whats the point of having just half a game i.e. the multiplayer part without the story mode single player. But it sold like hotcakes. This was a game that was radically different to the rest. UT also sold well but wasn't exactly radically different since it does what quake 3 already did, but in a better way in the opinion of some.
Same with The RTS genre, a successful formula starting with Dune 2 and more importantly C&C. Tiberian sun was just like Dune 2, what with the good, the bad, the forgotten and sand/tiberium monsters. Homeworld was something that was radical in that arena.
Now let me tell you of a game that is new, different and original. Black and White. Now tell me how successful this game would have been if it did not come from someone like Peter Molyneux. Would it have made its author in excess of £10m? Would it have even been accepted by the publisher? Do you remember the guy who made worms and how much grief he went through before that game would get published?
<font color=red><i>99% of statistics are made up!</i></font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.ud.com/home.htm" target="_new">Help cure cancer.</A>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram