The CEO of Electronic Arts, John Riccitiello, has condemned the games industry's reliance on sequels and a "rinse-and-repeat" mentality, making perhaps one of the most ironic statements of the year. EA is, of course, the king of repetition and sequels that make only minor updates, something the company has become incredibly well known for. "There's been lots of product that looked like last year's product, that looked a lot like the year before," Riccitiello said, failing to include that EA was likely responsible for a vast percentage of them. "We're boring people to death and making games that are harder and harder to play."
Despite the almost hypocritical nature of Riccitiello's comments, I do find myself agreeing with him. While sequels to great games are always welcome, it's no secret that originality and risky new ventures are not in abundance. With EA committing itself to so-called 'casual' games and the Wii in particular, it's not surprising that the company would want to come across as the new standard bearer for innovation, but it will take more than Boogie to convince me of its dreamy ideals.
As I have admitted, EA's CEO makes a very fair point about the state of the market, but a huge reason why we're in the situation we're in isn't the industry's fault. I'd venture to say that a hefty portion of the responsibility lies with the consumers, perhaps more than anything else. There's always pressure to produce a sequel to a popular game, and fans often want more of the same, threatening death to those who deviate from the beaten track. When a new, totally original game does make it to retail, the low sales figures often tell the story, while a slew of sports titles and movie licences easily shoot into the top sale slots. In this world of supply-and-demand, it's the customer who is often more at fault than the producer who is, after all, just giving the public what it wants. Is it any wonder that the industry is scared to try new things when most of the time, it's simply not rewarded for it?
[Burling tipped us, though I found it first. Burling's awesome and deserves to be credited anyway]
Contest:
3:19 PM on 07.09.2007
| 
I have no regrets.
I do blame the consumer as well, shit like 50 Cent Bulletproof sells 2 million copies and stuff like God Hand and Okami festers on the shelves.
Nintendo, Square Enix and EA are the worst offenders, IMO. Though Nintendo does create a lot of original titles, too (just none I want to play).
Or would it be Jim-Joe?
Kettle: Shut the fuck up.
I must agree though that there are too many cookie-cutter games that nobody wants. I wouldn't expect you to say otherwise Mr. Sterling, what with your self-proclaimed love of Koei games (which I cannot stand by the way). Despite my previous statement approving innovation and new ideas in the industry, I still like a good traditional game as much as the next person. I would be quite dissapointed for example if people suddenly stopped making realistic tactical shooters because "there are too many Tom Clancy games" or something. I just don't think we need Gears of War 2': Turbo: Hyperfighting.
Ironically, he already was President of EA once, but resigned in 2004:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/07/technology/ea_resign/index.htm
Back on topic, has anyone else noticed that all of EA's so called "innovation" almost invariably involves the overuse of the right analog stick? It's true in Madden, NBA Live, the NHL series, Fight Night and now SKATE. I've been saying this for over a year, but nobody else seems to have noticed. They just take the same gimmick and use it in every game.
Don't include Square Enix in the 'rinse and repeat' group. If anything, most hardcore Final Fantasy fans are criticizing Squeenix for deviating from the proven path, choosing to release games that have alternate ways of playing and forgo the done-to-death random time based battle system. Final Fantasy XII, anyone?
You could fault the company for whoring the Final Fantasy name out to five too many titles, but you can't say they aren't trying new things every time.