Innovative games are "broken" for a reason (Bitmob)

Why do we treat innovative games the same as those that offer "more of the same" when they both have been created in the same amount of time? We should be more tolerant with glitches and design flaws in original titles compared to the same problems in sequels.

[rod_furlong]

Yeahhhh maybe, but is it necessarily the consumer's job to sponsor innovation? The game has to be good first!

[soundslike]

"but is it necessarily the consumer's job to sponsor innovation?"

not sure if serious...

"but is it the citizen's job to vote?"

[hazelamy]

but you don't support bad innovations just because they're new.
any innovation has to make things better or it's worthless.

i mean a racing game where you don't have any control over the throttle might be considered innovative, but is it better?
i don't think so.

[admiralvic]

A lot of people buy into the fallacy that different is automatically better. Over writing a long thing no one is going to read ill make it simple (yays?)

If people arnt critical of your work; then how do you know what is right and wrong? If we expect QA teams to do everything... then how does a game like BRINK come off as acceptable?

[Xof]

A lot of the problem stems from the fact that a lot of people don't know what "innovative" means.

A lot of gamers (and a lot of people in the gaming media these days) really have VERY little experience with older games, so when they see any game that does something different than the generic shooter they expect, they declare it innovative. They deem it new and, by virtue of its newness, better, simply because they're ignorant of the precedent.

Whereas older gamers and/or gamers who have more experience are better able to examine these games side-by-side with games that took a similar approach, and judge them more objectively.

Too many people these days, both the public and professionals, are too quick to lavish anything "new to them" with praise and overlook the faults simply because the gaming, in general, has become increasinly homogenous over the past five years and they are simply ignorant of much of what came before. This allows them to ignore the many faults and legitimate complaints, and tout these games as pinnacles of their respective genres when it simply isn't true. See Heavy Rain, Mass Effect, or any RTS or FPS published in the last decade.