Category General Gaming

EA, Listen, Gamers Aren’t Thick!

Sean Alexander 2 Comments

The gift that keeps on giving aren’t they?

 

Update: As Noted by Andrew Reiner on Twitter, there’s some hallmarks of mobile free to start games here too:

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Reiner/status/930209923505557504

Update 2: EA removed in-app purchases temporarily after backlash from Disney, said they would return later, and most recently had the same criticisms levelled at Need for Speed: Payback and a new UFC title. To compound this, after saying “They didn’t want to offer cosmetics because it violates Star Wars canon” for Battlefront 2, they were reminded not only did they do that for the first game in 2015, but Battlefront 2 has cosmetics in the game data!

Plus, violates canon? We have a game, this very game in fact, where Yoda can battle Kylo Ren on a planet that has been blown up.

So brace yourselves, Reddit has a new record for most down-voted post ever. It’s EA’s Official PR guys too, on the Battlefront sub-Reddit. Oh boy!

The intent is to provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different heroes.
As for cost, we selected initial values based upon data from the Open Beta and other adjustments made to milestone rewards before launch. Among other things, we’re looking at average per-player credit earn rates on a daily basis, and we’ll be making constant adjustments to ensure that players have challenges that are compelling, rewarding, and of course attainable via gameplay.
We appreciate the candid feedback, and the passion the community has put forth around the current topics here on Reddit, our forums and across numerous social media outlets.
Our team will continue to make changes and monitor community feedback and update everyone as soon and as often as we can.

Link

EA said that!

battlefront-2-star-cards

So for those not in the know, Star Wars Battlefront 2 (The second one with that name, yes it’s confusing) has loot boxes and in–app purchases which in a $60 game as we have already discussed is a bit much. Now, people did some number crunching, showing that for a character like Darth Vader, you need to play for 40 hours, or cough up.

Now, EA has revised this down by 75% so the total number of “Points” is far less. This is good. Granted…it’s not for us. It’s for the shareholders.

You know, without a shred of doubt, a shareholder sat and saw that backlash, and felt his vault empty. Sure, it’s 490,000 people (It’s insane and climbing) but to an investor, that’s 490k $60 sales that just said “I might not buy it”. And then add in the lost revenue from in=-app purchases? Yeah.

Now there is no guarantee this will happen, because after all, who can say how many people just hopped on the train. But to a shareholder, there is no greater fear than the potential of lost revenue.

vader-nooooo

What’s more, that potential lost revenue is likely too great for them to sit back and worry. It’s now more valuable for them to cut the amount of micro transactions they’d have to sell, to instead maintain those $60 purchases. Just on the chance they lose sales.

Truthfully speaking, I expect the developers don’t even want this. They just want a game that’s good. But the money talks, and in this instance you can put some Monopoly bucks down on some tight-fisted gents breaking their fine china as their hands tense.

untitled3

What bothers me about EA’s statement though, ignoring the background economics of the matter, is that “A sense of accomplishment” isn’t going to be earned from 40 hours of grinding, while people pay up around you and beat you down online.

Frankly, this model, or at least these extremes, are parting the player base like Moses parted the Red Sea: A huge gulf with no bridge unless you build it yourself , or pay the piper. On one side, people who pay, and the other those who don’t.

This ultimately was “Dictated by the Open Beta” but if EA paid attention, the feedback to that was of trepidation and concern around potential pay 2 win shenanigans. With the track record of a company like EA, well deserved, and now, proven.

dead-space-3-standard-edition_pdp_3840x2160_en_WW

What concerns me most is the phrase “Constant adjustments”. I don’t now what that implies…but it would seem like as they say, an effort to keep things attainable with engaging challenges. Now that to me, sounds like discounts of purchases, or rather, how many point you need.

Honestly, discounting the points needed for some time seems like a way to push purchases just a little more. Sell a lesser purchase to more people, making it attractive. This doesn’t sit well with me. That feels legitimately predatory, not to mention the upcoming (Announced before launch) discount to coincide with the upcoming Star Wars Episode 8.

fbf146d521509678306fd828b82b6f8458c28c5f92c013b11c4705762635be24.jpg

 

Ultimately, I have mixed feelings. On one hand, great, EA listened. On the other, I know it is only self-serving in the end, and their statement has the potential to open a whole other bag of worms. Honestly, this entire game is surrounded with negativity and questionable motives.

But at the end of the day, it’s got Star Wars on the box, and when discounted in the hype of a movie, what will the average Joe go and buy? This game.

The tactic is going to work in the end, this is just a move to soften a blow to shareholders and keep gamers on board. The money from the average consumer will be huge regardless, but nothing sells certainty to money-makers than a show of faith, especially when the cash has legs and vows to run away.

 

 

I had a little too much fun writing this one up. If you have some thoughts why not share or comment on social media with your friends, and I’ll see you next time! Happy Gaming!

The Problem of AAA Development: Money and Vultures

Sean Alexander 2 Comments

The news of EA buying Respawn Entertainment (May they rest in peace) has spurred a thought: Is AAA game development actually sustainable?

 

So EA closed Visceral in late 2017, suddenly but to the surprise of no one. As it happens this was just yet another in their hit list: Be it studios swallowed whole or internal studios biting the dust.

Now EA, not long after disbanding Visceral and their single player Star Wars project, has bought Respawn and the IP for Titanfall.

Titanfall 2 was actually surprisingly awesome, and it even made a little marketing push on having no DLC, no micro transactions, and just being a solid game you got the entirety of with one purchase.

untitled

And EA, the publisher, put it right in between Call of Duty, and it’s OWN Battlefield 1, effectively cannibalizing its sales. We now also know with this acquisition that Titanfall 3 is a thing in the works. Taking bets as to how that will turn? Well let’s look back at Dead Space.

 

EA wanted Dead Space to be a multimedia thing. It didn’t happen, but the first two games sold really well. Dead Space 3 however, needed 5 million sales for a future, and had micro transactions and modes added that frankly had no place in a game like that: Sales tanked, Visceral got moved to Battlefield Hardline, that didn’t do too well, and now they are gone.

You can probably tell what Titanfall 3 will be like can’t you? Oh, and the developers get bonuses based on how well the games review. Money talks apparently.

 

Respawn is just yet another studio with talented staff, good IP and a drive to make good games snatched up by proverbial vultures. When, and it isn’t a case of “If”, Respawn is closed by EA, it will be for not meeting expectations. But what are those expectations?

activision

Let’s look at Activision’s Q4 2016 sales figures:

 

Activision Blizzard confirmed during their Q4 2016 Earnings Call that the entire company, across Activision and Blizzard titles, made over $3.6 billion just from in-game content sales. In-game content sales includes Call of Duty Points, Overwatch Loot Boxes, and more.

Link

Now let’s look at Take Two:

“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company. It may not always be an online model, it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board,” Zelnick said.

Link

EA themselves have quoted games as a service model as a key driver.

 

Let’s be honest though, is this shocking? No. Businesses exist to make money, but the more staff they have to hire, the more the consumer demands better graphics, the more capable the hardware for games becomes, and the longer games take to make, means bigger budgets, more wages, and ultimately, a need to sell more copies. Far, far more.

Free-Overwatch-Loot-Boxes

Part of this is the “$60” price tag of games. One time purchase, that’s it. No more money for the publishers and developers. So what do they do? Find a way to increase monetization: A constant stream of revenue. Lootboxes, In-app purchases, DLC, it all goes straight to them. But it doesn’t stop at covering costs, it continues to making as much money as humanly possible, often with minimal effort and some very dodgy practices.

Take Call of Duty: WWII for instance. The game has lootboxes, with a twist. Others can see what you get, with the aim of seemingly spurring jealously.

According to redditor cuzseile, who uploaded the video, the supply drop exists in the game world but other players can’t steal it, which you’d expect. But cuzseile reports other players can see what you get from a supply drop

Link

The psychology of reward and feeling good is at full use here, akin to gambling, and of course, Activision also has that patent, where matchmaking can be based on pushing you via losses and other players into purchasing lootboxes.

Publishers have leapt to the furthest end of the spectrum in seeking additional monetization. Honestly, as many have noted, if the game was free it could easily sustain itself on in-app purchases just on player base. Any game could in theory. In practice though, its not just a case of making ends meet as they claim: Now it’s predatory, and now it is about milking as much as possible.

dead-space-3-standard-edition_pdp_3840x2160_en_WW.png

Even smaller studios, to loop back to the start of the article, are in need of money. It is why studios are bought up: They need publishers, and a source of income. Why wouldn’t you take that opportunity if presented? But the publishers typically twist and gut the studio into their vision of maximised profits.

 

Personally, I would be fine with a $10 price increase on games. That could go a surprisingly long way to meeting costs and break even points. Sadly though, the big publishers have already tasted the blood in the water, and won’t settle for the more market friendly lesser revenue.

3d1d0f3b71238adbce45e0e5b1da757a

AAA gaming is a vulture. Or maybe a parasite is more apt? Either way, it swallows creativity whole, and turns studios most people knew and loved of all sizes into factories, producing not games but products.

As an aside, during my time studying Games Design at university, this is the model we were taught: Not to produce games, but products. Plan ahead from the mere conception of a game to form ways of further monetizing, be it DLC, removing content to sell later, or in app purchases. This is something I heartedly disagree with. Yes, in-app purchases have a place, mostly in free games, but not in a title already paid for.

header2

The games industry is a ravenous beast, hungry for the taste of as much revenue as possible, and all the talent it can absorb to get that revenue. As consumers want more from games, studios need to fund that. They turn to publishers who want as much money as possible, then in a few years see more hardware come out, games look better, cost more to make, and the cycle continues.

 

The industry isn’t unsustainable, at least not yet. It needs change. Perhaps the biggest problem is that it is noticeably cannibalising itself, breaking down what talent it has and the bright futures and ideas of many, in the sake of the now, the money, the gain, and it isn’t looking to the future, where games are solely predatory and more expensive than ever, without any reason to be that way.

I’ve said it before, and I will probably say it forever: Minimal Effort, Maximum Profit.

 

As always if you enjoyed this article leave a comment with your thoguhts, share with your friends, and happy gaming!

 

 

Review: Sonic Mania

Sean Alexander 1 Comment

Title: Sonic Mania

Platform: PlayStation 4, Xbox One, PC, Nintendo Switch

Reviewed On: Nintendo Switch

Developer: Christian Whitehead, Headcannon, Pagoda West

Publisher: SEGA

Copy Provided By: Bought it with my own money!

 

Sonic Mania is a fantastic game: A showing of true potential and design skills, held back from true greatness by technical and development choices.

 

Sonic Mania is a simple game. It asks nothing more than you enjoy 2D classic pixel Sonic with all its physics based platforming and speed. For a game attempting to relive and reinvigorate this branch of the franchise, it’s truly a great game.

The problem is it most certainly “Relives” a lot. But more on that later.

 

Whether you control Sonic, Tails, or Knuckles, it’s like jumping in to old games. All are fast, Sonic has a new Drop Dash for quick burst of speed and is a great way to keep flow going. Tails can fly, and even carry Sonic or Knuckles without a second player being present, and Knuckles can glide and has a slightly lower jump height, and can climb walls. It’s all as you knew it. You can even unlock the Super Peel-Out from Sonic CD or the Insta Shield from Sonic 3, but you can only use one of Sonic’s 3 abilities at a time.

man4

Before a patch however, there was an issue: To do any of them secondary abilities of any character, you had to press Jump in the air. This is also how you transform into your Super forms. In mid air, or if you need to glide with Knuckles as is often mandatory, prepare to fall to your death. A patch did recently fix this, and many other issues, by adding a dedicated separate button combination to transform.

The game sees you chase Dr Robotnik all through…time and space I guess (Sonic Forces complicates how much of this game is real by trying to explain a core element) as he and his newly upgraded Hard Boiled Heavies play a game of keep away with the Phantom Ruby: A mystical stone that can warp reality. This leads to the Heavies being upgraded and Robotnik gaining control of Little Planet again, from Sonic CD.

man1

 

The Ruby is also how you get from zone to zone…though…not all zones have transitions between them. Some simply fade to black and you are back on a zone that was seen on Angel Island…after just being in a zone that’s on Little Planet. The inconsistency with continuity is jarring especially as the game, seemingly at random, decides whether or not to fade to black: As if they couldn’t explain the zones being in the game half the time.

With the zones themselves though, they all maintain the high speed, many different routes to take, goodies sprinkled all over approach that past 2D Sonic games also did. Find a giant ring in a zone and go to one of the Special Stages, and win a Chaos Emerald. These are fun little chase sequences and a fresh idea: Collect rings to extend your timer, and spheres to go faster and catch the UFO, though by the time you reach the final one the truth is you’ll find them rather easy.

man6

If you have 25 Rings and hit a checkpoint though, prepare to play one of over 30 Blue Sphere mini-games, returning from Sonic 3. These are far too long to be mere checkpoint mini-games that you’ll have the chance of doing multiple times per act, and frankly they are a bit boring. But they are they, if you want to flesh out that Extras Menu with goodies.

Back to the zones though, while the level design itself is top notch, the bosses can range from great call backs with new twists, great new ideas, or sadly, straight up repeated ideas. Part way through the game the bosses seem to start reusing a lot of past game ideas, without sprinkling in anything new. It’s as though the bosses range from great to seen it before. It’s a little disappointing, especially with how long some of them can potentially take.

man5

The zones themselves though, are actually my main point of contention for this game. The phrase “Missed Potential” will be used a lot on this site I feel, but here it goes. 4 of the 12 zones are totally new ideas and environments we have never seen in past games. 8 are stages returning from Sonic 1, 2, 3 and CD. After seeing the sheer brilliance of the 4 new stages and how unique and fun they are, it’s such a shame to see the game fall back on old ideas.  One or two old zones would have been fine, but this is a majority, and it does bog down the experience. The game very much does “Relive” the past.

man2

Visually the game is fantastic. Bright and colourful, wonderfully smooth and detailed, this is what a great 2D sprite based Sonic game can look like. Audibly as well, the game has a fantastic jazzy feel throughout, and it does scream Classic era Sonic. I couldn’t fault that aspect of the game at all.

Sadly though, the game even after patching is prone to some rather funny glitches and softlocks, though most have been removed at the time of this review, some persist. Some scripted events also fail to play out, and has happened a few times over a good 50 hours of play time.

man3

 

 

To be fair, this game is still an absolute blast to play, except when the occasional glitch rears it’s head. The gameplay is fun and very re-playable, even if the bosses are at times drawn out or unimaginative, and the zones, while screaming of missed potential, are still a treat to play. I can highly recommend this game to anyone interested: Just don’t expect the Sonic 4 you always wanted. It’s close, but it’s not nearly new enough.

If you are getting this game, I do highly recommend the Switch version. From what is seen it only missed Trophy/Achievement support, and the game looks just as good undocked as it does docked – I personally can’t imagine playing it any other way, though any version is fantastic – It’s all the same game after all!

 

As always, if you liked this review or have your own opinions, leave a comment down below about Sonic Mania – And share this with your friends and on social media – and as always: Happy Gaming!

Capcom, We Need To Talk…

Sean Alexander 2 Comments

Capcom has a bit of an odd relationship with the industry but recently they are not only banking big on one single release, but watching others flop and ignoring key markets…

 

So Capcom. Sometimes I do wonder if you don’t like money. I mean, Marvel Vs Capcom Infinite would have been a great deal and a big success if it was properly funded…

 

Street Fighter V could have been big if it was a finished game with balanced methods of unlocking content.

And what is this excuse regarding Nintendo Switch support?

According to a spokesperson for the company, it noted that it’s general procedure for third-party software developers to make re-releases for a new console within the first year of launch, mainly because there’s just not enough time to work on new titles within the timeframe.

Link

Come on Capcom. Every has seen your early support for other systems. We know that’s BS.

Why not localise Monster Hunter XX? In your recent earnings report you listed it as a reason you did so well, along with Ultra Street Fighter 2! Oh, is it because of Monster Hunter World? Don’t worry, I’ll get to that.

maxresdefault

A collection of Mega Man games came out on PS4, PC, Xbox One, and later, 3DS. The 3DS version sold the most units. Where is the second Collection at, Capcom? If not on 3DS then why not Switch? In fact data was found pointing to the 3DS version existing.

A dataminer named Greigamaster recently found some code that indicates a multiplayer battle mode for a supposed 3DS version. Additionally, code was found referring to saves and replays for an SD card, and the 3DS has its own directory file, too. As the source article points out, this either means that the game is coming to 3DS, was initially coming to 3DS before getting canned, or it’s completely unrelated to the collection at all and is just simply code belonging to another project by the same team.

Link

What? Okami HD (Again.)? That did pretty well back on Wii. Why not make a Switch port? Easy money again right?

 

Capcom, I know for whatever reason, you don’t want to make money. I know that taking a game to it’s biggest market is alien to you. But come on. Someone there has to see the writing on the wall. There are markets, not even just Nintendo, that would do wonders for some of your games, and others that wouldn’t. And yet you do the opposite of the logical thing.

 

Monster-Hunter-World

Now let’s talk about Monster Hunter World.

You want your game to reach a global audience right? Increased revenue. Okay, fair enough.

This game will obviously cost far more to produce than the 3DS entries. It will need to sell far more to make back that investment. But part of me thinks this is a very dangerous move. Sure it could boost the popularity of the franchise internationally….but that will be at a cost.

The game is coming to PS4, Xbox One and PC. But only on PS4 in Japan. 5 million potential sales right there, in the biggest market for the game. Compared to the 20+ million for 3DS, but of a fall. We know Nintendo Switch is eating away at that too, already past 2 million units, but that’s neither here nor there.

But Japan isn’t really into stationary consoles. They want portable experiences, it’s part of their culture and lifestyle. You’re potentially alienating the domestic market, and largest market, for a franchise you just invested more than ever into.

And let’s not get started on the Western situation. The series hit untold highs in the West on 3DS, and it is well documented the series sells best on portables, even back in the days of PSP/PS2. Is there any guarantee that the Western console markets will pick this up and that fans will migrate from 3DS/Switch where the fanbase grew?

No. Not at all.

This is a huge risk Capcom, I hope you understand that. Taking the game from it’s proven largest domestic market, and it’s largest Western market, spending far more money to do so therefore demanding more sales…all in the hope of a bigger audience.

I hope you appreciate how insane that sounds.

 

Look, if it works it works. But for a company so averse to doing the logical thing and making more money than they would otherwise, this feels like a huge risk, and if it fails…well you better start rethinking your strategy at long last. I don’t think this can go the way of Street Fighter V.

Controllers: Why They Matter, And How I Learned To Love Overwatch

Sean Alexander 2 Comments

Controls are the most important aspect of how you interface with a game. They come in all shapes and sizes but sometimes they aren’t ideal for the player.

 

Sometimes controls can be weird. Or fun. Or intuitive. Sometimes they can be downright bad.

Now for reference when talking about “Controls” in this context I am referring strictly to the device in your hands that you use to move the player controlled object and interface with the game, not the actual movement of a character, as that’s an entirely different discussion.

So why do controls matter? Well it’s simple. If the way you are playing the game isn’t comfortable, then…well you won’t have as much fun, obviously. This is down to a few things, namely preference, necessity, and layout.

HPC2500_hp_c2500_keyboard_and_mouse_combo

For instance with controller layouts, there are some that just end up with your hand like a pretzel, the immediate thought being Terraria on PS3. That is definitely a doable experience but is in no way optimal, given the game and it’s design is based around a keyboard layout.

For preference, let’s take aiming in a FPS or Third-Person Shooter. Using an analog stick for this, while doable, is miles from using a mouse or gyroscopic aiming. For note, in Splatoon I use gyro controls for aiming with the analog stick being reserved solely for minor movements on the x axis. Attempting to play something like DOOM (2016) on PS4, while certainly doable, feels slow and clunkier compared to a mouse or gyro. Most likely this is an issue with precision and how fast a mouse/your arm can move compared to an analog stick. Sure, sensitivity adjustment helps, but on an analog stick you lose the ability to stop precisely. You’ll aim in a direction pretty quickly, but stopping where you want is a hassle.

 

Another famous anecdote from across the web is that keyboard and mouse is “Superior”. Now, this is true: But it depends on the game. I can wholeheartedly say playing a 3D platformer with a keyboard is the definition of a nightmare, and actually crosses with something I’ll bring up on a personal level later. But something like ARMA III, you won’t play that in any way other than a keyboard, out of necessity.

header

 

And now we come to the personal anecdote, and I realise that most likely no one else will ever play this game in this way, but it works for me.

 

So I was gifted Overwatch on PC by a friend and after many months of just…well never booting it really, I finally gave it an honest go, keyboard and mouse. And I hated it. The main complaint I had is both personal and one I have stemming from consoles.

So my personal complaint is that keyboard and mouse is just uncomfortable for me. My right hand has injuries that make prolonged mouse use not fun and my left hand doesn’t mesh well to a keyboard for jumping between inputs on a moments notice given the sheer volume of keys.

Sega_master_system_d-pad

The issue stemming from console gaming is actually that of the D-pad. See, WASD at the end of the day on most keyboards is basically a D-pad. The keys are digital, meaning they are either on or off. There are no precise movements like those gained with an analog stick (And Overwatch does in fact have this built in, just you can’t do it with most keyboards), and another huge problem is that Overwatch is a game in a 3D Space, that is based heavily around movement.

Now for the life of me, no matter what it is, I can’t stand the imprecision of digital movement in a 3D space. 2D is more bearable, but in 3D there is more precise movements to be made, due to the nature of the space. Further to that, using WASD is effectively using a D-pad (Only not in an exact + formation, which I admit is fun for muscle memory in 2D games!). You have what is ultimately 8 directions of movement, via 4 digital buttons. It’s a D-Pad in principle. And in Overwatch, as I started to play it, I found not only was I mis-clicking, but also suffering from awkward movement, and my hands were aching. This was a truly miserable experience.

So, with some Discord game development friends they suggested I try a controller. Now that would mean I have to aim with a stick, but we gave it a shot. Now I don’t own an Xbox branded controller anymore (Because of my hand issues that right analog stick is discomfort incarnate) so we went to my next best thing – My default PC controller: The Switch Pro Controller.

61-qnGU+ExL._SL1500_

And It’s not supported by Overwatch (Figures, it’s a DInput controller not XInput) but we whipped out some keybinding software, and have it an honest go. Movement with an analog stick, despite still being digital at the end of the day, felt better due to how the analog moves compared to, again, 4 buttons in a 3D Space. So my movement grievances were solved! But then came the aiming.

Never map a mouse to an analog stick. Just don’t. That’s a sensitivity mess that just doesn’t work, as you map the free movement of mouse to a more limited stick.

So we ended up (And props to Nintendo for making Joy-Con individual controllers) a controller setup now dubbed “Controller and Mouse”. And my God, does it work.

controls

So on the Joy-Con I mapped Jump to ZL, Ability 1 and 2 to ZR and Up, Ultimate to a click of the Stick, and reload to SL where my finger rests. On the mouse is just Fire and Ability 3/Alt Fire where applicable. This obviously requires reconfiguring based on which hero I use, but man. The free aim of the mouse and movement of the Joy-Con has opened this game up to me.

Is this ideal? Probably not. I’m sure Blizzard wants me using keyboard and mouse but again, if you aren’t comfortable in playing the game, you want to stop playing. I was determined to give Overwatch a go, and I did, and I really enjoy it. I don’t love it, but it’s fun.

And across the internet you can find people using special controllers, really kickass fighting game players who are blind, some who swear by fight sticks, and hell, you can even find Super Smash Bros. Melee players who use the Gamecube controller…upside down! That controller is still supported in the series to this day.

 

Controls are a huge factor of a game: The single most important if you ask me. If the game is unintuitive or uncomfortable to play, people will seek a work around where possible.

 

What do our readers think? Leave a comment down below with any games you had hard times controlling, or crazy control schemes you’ve seen, and as always, share the article and happy gaming! 🙂

Can Multiplayer Focused Games Have Sequels?

Sean Alexander

The reaction to Splatoon 2 not being “new enough” makes us wonder…can these multiplayer focused games really get sequels?

 

So this is a strange topic. Multiplayer focused games, be it MMOs, fighting games, MOBAs, so on and so forth, build communities around themselves competitively, primarily from the mechanics being engaging and enjoyable to play.

In some franchises, such as first person shooters like Call of Duty, the frequent sequels don’t impact the game much. But for genres that exist with single entries for years at a time, a sequel is a big shake up.  Something like Super Smash Bros. for instance, only gets a new entry every few years. But with it comes a well documented problem: Change.

So within fighting games especially, mechanical changes are hot topics. To this day, there are known showings of events where Smash 4 is played, only for the crowd to demand Melee immediately after due to “Superiority”. Brawl is almost reviled by the community for its mechanics. The change was seen as a bad thing – Too far from Melee, is a bad game for those communities.

So jump ahead to Splatoon. A game that absolutely lives on its mechanics. But the sequel released 2 years later, most likely to bolster the console it was on early in its life, was met with near universal complaints that it “Isn’t new enough”. But the thing is, how much could they change? Too much, it falls into the Brawl trap. Too little, and this complaint arises. With Splatoon, a game so focused on it’s mechanics to stand out, if too much is changed…is it even the same game?

overwatch-share-3d5a268515283007bdf3452e877adac466d579f4b44abbd05aa0a98aba582eeaebc4541f1154e57ec5a43693345bebda953381a7b75b58adbd29d3f3e

With other games like this, such as League of Legends, or Overwatch, try to consider a sequel. How much would they actually be able to evolve the gameplay, while keeping it the same game, before hitting the Brawl problem? These games, like Splatoon, live on expansions, some paid and some free.

But then we hit another issue – World of Warcraft is getting expansions-less servers! A basic experience is being touted as a good thing, in the face of how much the game has evolved and changed.

Screen-Shot-2017-11-03-at-12.30.23-PM

This is a delicate balance – Multiplayer focused games really can get sequels, but the balance between keeping it similar enough for the community while also doing enough to make it new…is difficult. Who knows, maybe Splatoon 3 will be a big hit and change a lot. Maybe an issue with Splatoon 2 was how quick it arrived in stores?

 

All I know is it will be very interesting to see how other game in the field evolve – if sequels ever come on new consoles like the PS5 or if the game just gets re-released.