I was reading this article on IGN and felt it was appropriate here.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/121/1215457p1.html

An excerpt:

"Ultimately, though, what people really need to do is ask themselves if any of the games they recently adored are really original. I love Call of Duty, but it really just expands upon what John Carmack and id did with Doom, Quake and other shooters. Or hey, I love Star Wars: The Old Republic, but I'd be crazy if I couldn't admit it learns from, and is heavily inspired by, World of Warcraft. Warcraft also wasn't the first RTS, either, but developer Blizzard helped tweak the genre in ways that have subsequently defined it for years."

I completely agree, and have for a long time,  if you look hard enough you can see a clear evolution in each genre,  if you want to look hard enough.  It doesn't mean everything is exactly the same,  but much of what we have now, has been done before in some fashion or another -- and that doesn't make them bad.   

Consider it this way, can you really come up with an original concept? Its extremely hard since so much has already been done before. Sure, you can make it more original with effort, but your still going to infringe on something else. Think up an idea  in your head and google it. Chances are, its already done or its so wack no one would even know what to do with it. 

Oh, and if you thought "Mutant penguins where you got to bash those penguins with a bat and stop them from going to a doomsday scale to start the end of the world", sorry that game exists.

kinda right that originality is almost gone, but there's really no silver lining for the topic i know is on your mind. swtor is not an evolution of the genre, because it didn't even do VO first. the first time i played swtor(PAX East), i played another MMO 5 hours later that also was story driven and had heavy use of VO. 

It's hard to be original when "original" games don't sell very well. Look at the game Psychonauts, that was a very well designed and written game that almost nobody bought. Yet people flock to buy the newest Madden or Call of Duty, which bring almost nothing new from one game to the next.

So many games have been made that it's hard to find an idea NO ONE has thought of before. 

And the South Park episode about the Simpson is a perfect quote for you thought, just like TV where the "Simpsons did it" some other game is always going to have used whatever idea you may think of first, short of things that weren't possible but now are due to new technology.

Originally posted by Purutzil

Consider it this way, can you really come up with an original concept? Its extremely hard since so much has already been done before. Sure, you can make it more original with effort, but your still going to infringe on something else. Think up an idea  in your head and google it. Chances are, its already done or its so wack no one would even know what to do with it. 

Oh, and if you thought "Mutant penguins where you got to bash those penguins with a bat and stop them from going to a doomsday scale to start the end of the world", sorry that game exists.

Solomon said "There is nothing new under the sun.". This is still true, I think.

As for the highlighted portion above: I recently took to trying to design what I would call my perfect board game. I planned two of them out quite far and began bug testing in my head. Then a quick trip to Boardgamegeek revealed that both concepts have already been done. Quite well, in fact. Though neither was identical to what I had come up with, they were close enough that my ideas likely wouldn't fly commercially.

Originally posted by maskedweasel

I was reading this article on IGN and felt it was appropriate here.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/121/1215457p1.html

 

An excerpt:

"Ultimately, though, what people really need to do is ask themselves if any of the games they recently adored are really original. I love Call of Duty, but it really just expands upon what John Carmack and id did with Doom, Quake and other shooters. Or hey, I love Star Wars: The Old Republic, but I'd be crazy if I couldn't admit it learns from, and is heavily inspired by, World of Warcraft. Warcraft also wasn't the first RTS, either, but developer Blizzard helped tweak the genre in ways that have subsequently defined it for years."

 

I completely agree, and have for a long time,  if you look hard enough you can see a clear evolution in each genre,  if you want to look hard enough.  It doesn't mean everything is exactly the same,  but much of what we have now, has been done before in some fashion or another -- and that doesn't make them bad.   

 

Read that yesterday, and my first thought was to quote some of it here, heh. I also agree with what the writer had to say.

Originally posted by fony

kinda right that originality is almost gone, but there's really no silver lining for the topic i know is on your mind. swtor is not an evolution of the genre, because it didn't even do VO first. the first time i played swtor(PAX East), i played another MMO 5 hours later that also was story driven and had heavy use of VO. 

But you miss the point,  of course BioWare didn't do anything original,  hell, it was hardly even original in the genre,  but that doesn't mean it isn't an evolution,  or at least a change in direction.

Its not always about being original, or being innovative, or what have you,  sometimes its just about branching genres, or just being different, while utilizing genre similarities.

I could rattle off games that not only have the same basic concepts but utilize the same exact control schemes, in the same genre, yet they are both still popular.  

While I do feel SWTOR is an evolution of sorts,  it doesn't mean it doesn't have a lot of strong similarities to other games spanning different genres,  and that doesn't mean its a bad game.  Likewise to other games releasing soon in this genre, (or have already released in other places)  Such as TERA,  or  TSW,  or GW2.

This is also not new.

Entertertainment does NOT have to be original to be entertaining.

Avatar is just Dances with Wolves with Aliens & better action/sfx.

Games are really not about being original or new ... but implemented well with a lot of polish. I wont play something for the sake that it is new.

It's basically true that no game is going to be 100% original, and honestly, I don't think anyone would want that.

What I don't like about this sentiment is that it can be used as an excuse for mediocrity.  Just because nothing is truly original, it doesn't mean that it's "OK" to just copy problematic systems into your game en masse.

There are still many "problems" in modern MMORPGs that are desperately in need of innovations to solve them.  For example, in an effort to reduce grind and make the games more interesting, MMORPGs have been drifting closer and closer to normal multiplayer games ever since WoW.  We've gotten to the point where we can honestly compare modern MMORPGs to lobby games like Diablo and not be far off.  In fact, the line has gotten so blurry, that Diablo 3 is being designed as almost a quasi-MMORPG with auction house and everything.

The problem here is that this really threatens the identity of MMORPGs.  I personally, would not like the concept of a virtual world to completely die off and be replaced by a bunch of CORPGs masquerading as MMORPGs.

But you can't just say "go back to how it was before" because there were problems there too.  So, if nothing is original, it would seem that you're stuck to returning to the old ways of endless, directionless grinding.  Or staying with the new way of SPRPG quests with a lobby game attached to it that takes place in a virtual world that is so insanely sharded that it feels like an SPRPG.

This is where we need innovation.  Someone has to come up with an idea to make MMORPGs interesting without turning them into normal multiplayer games.  The virtual world HAS to be preserved, because that's all that really differentiates an MMORPG from a multiplayer game.

In conclusion, I can see where folks can get confused and think that there is nothing really original.  Most innovations are incremental in that they make minor changes to an already existing concept.  So when you look at games that came out in immediate succession...it looks like there is hardly any innovation.  But try looking at games that came out a long time apart.  Look at Neverwinter Nights compared to the old SSI gold box games...there is plenty of innovation to be seen there.

Majority i think 99% of gamings community wants WoW-SWtor or korean F2P themepark mmo's so dont think it will improve soon, forget it won't happen. Where stuck with mediocre disgusting themeparks that makes me sick and sad at same time.

So ill eather play solo or dont play at all. Will not spent one dime anymore on all the crap released in last few years.

As someone already pointed out where on verge of comming into era where DIABLO 3 will be new generation thats been called a mmorpg lol the genre is becomming joke realy.

This is where virtual reality games will come in to disrupt the pattern. Soon, soon they will come...

There are people trying to innovate, make huge sweeping changes, and so forth. But they don't necessarily have any money to actually make and publish and sell the game.

Originally posted by Creslin321

It's basically true that no game is going to be 100% original, and honestly, I don't think anyone would want that.

What I don't like about this sentiment is that it can be used as an excuse for mediocrity.  Just because nothing is truly original, it doesn't mean that it's "OK" to just copy problematic systems into your game en masse.

There are still many "problems" in modern MMORPGs that are desperately in need of innovations to solve them.  For example, in an effort to reduce grind and make the games more interesting, MMORPGs have been drifting closer and closer to normal multiplayer games ever since WoW.  We've gotten to the point where we can honestly compare modern MMORPGs to lobby games like Diablo and not be far off.  In fact, the line has gotten so blurry, that Diablo 3 is being designed as almost a quasi-MMORPG with auction house and everything.

The problem here is that this really threatens the identity of MMORPGs.  I personally, would not like the concept of a virtual world to completely die off and be replaced by a bunch of CORPGs masquerading as MMORPGs.

But you can't just say "go back to how it was before" because there were problems there too.  So, if nothing is original, it would seem that you're stuck to returning to the old ways of endless, directionless grinding.  Or staying with the new way of SPRPG quests with a lobby game attached to it that takes place in a virtual world that is so insanely sharded that it feels like an SPRPG.

This is where we need innovation.  Someone has to come up with an idea to make MMORPGs interesting without turning them into normal multiplayer games.  The virtual world HAS to be preserved, because that's all that really differentiates an MMORPG from a multiplayer game.

In conclusion, I can see where folks can get confused and think that there is nothing really original.  Most innovations are incremental in that they make minor changes to an already existing concept.  So when you look at games that came out in immediate succession...it looks like there is hardly any innovation.  But try looking at games that came out a long time apart.  Look at Neverwinter Nights compared to the old SSI gold box games...there is plenty of innovation to be seen there.

I don't think its necessarily innovation we need,  I think its diversity.  And not just in the systems we have and the games we play,  but in what players actually play.  

We have a lot of MMO junkies out there that are tired of seeing the "same" games,  yet, if they're playing the same game and same genre for 8 years, how is it not understandable that they'd get tired of - not just similar systems - but the genre as a whole.

Perhaps thats one reason I enjoy SWTOR for what it is,  because in the last year I didn't sit around pining for MMOs or playing the same genre,  I played racing, sports, action adventure, FPS games,  and so on.  

While I agree to a point, that we shouldn't settle for less, or allow the same concepts breed mediocrity,  I also think many people lose sight of how good some of the more up to date traditional (or "defined") systems really are - even if they aren't strikingly new.  Maybe its time for a change in genre for players just as much as it is important for us to find a genre changer.

Well sure, if you ignore all the games that do anything original, then you're likely to conclude that the rest of the games don't.

Can you name any other game ever that did something along the lines of the adventuring discoveries in Uncharted Waters Online?  Single player, online, PC, console, anything?  I can't.  Of course, that's probably a big reason why it confuses people.  People come in thinking it's going to be similar to Pirates of the Burning Sea or Voyage Century Online or some such (or worse yet, WoW), and can't figure out what to do when it isn't.

But it doesn't even take a completely original game mechanic to make an original game.  Plenty of games have combat vaguely similar to that of Spiral Knights.  Twenty years ago, plenty of games had combat vaguely similar to Spiral Knights.  But how many other such games put the game online with a good PUG system in semi-randomly generated levels?

---

Originally posted by JohnnyBravol
This is where virtual reality games will come in to disrupt the pattern. Soon, soon they will come...

---

Well, you know what Einstein said:

The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.

You can draw on some relatively obscure sources and come across as original. Nothing wrong with that. It's not like design is a race of coming up with an idea that's not been thought of, it's about not boring your audience. 

When it comes to MMOs, for many players, a game copying the design philosophy of not WOW but UO will feel like a breath of fresh air now. 

And of course there are degrees to originality. Portal was a hybrid of puzzle games and FPS mechanics, but I don't think many people would disagree that it was original.

But yeah, generally speaking, in the last years originality is more about new takes on familiar stuff rather than outright new systems. Going by this, there are quite some original indie games out there. Also stuff like LA Noire is semi-original. :)

Originally posted by solarine

Well, you know what Einstein said:

The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.

Bingo!

It really is about taking your influences and makning them your own.

Originally posted by Creslin321

It's basically true that no game is going to be 100% original, and honestly, I don't think anyone would want that.

What I don't like about this sentiment is that it can be used as an excuse for mediocrity.  Just because nothing is truly original, it doesn't mean that it's "OK" to just copy problematic systems into your game en masse.

There are still many "problems" in modern MMORPGs that are desperately in need of innovations to solve them.  For example, in an effort to reduce grind and make the games more interesting, MMORPGs have been drifting closer and closer to normal multiplayer games ever since WoW.  We've gotten to the point where we can honestly compare modern MMORPGs to lobby games like Diablo and not be far off.  In fact, the line has gotten so blurry, that Diablo 3 is being designed as almost a quasi-MMORPG with auction house and everything.

The problem here is that this really threatens the identity of MMORPGs.  I personally, would not like the concept of a virtual world to completely die off and be replaced by a bunch of CORPGs masquerading as MMORPGs.

It is a good thing. WOW & Diablo has shown that it is more fun to focus on what people like to do .. i.e. killing stuff and getting rewarded for doing so ... then giving them a virtual world.

Some are reluctant to embrace the new world because they are nostalgic about the old, boring past. They will be left behind. I am more excited about Diablo3 than any MMO. I think it will be a much better game.

I don't understand this obsession with virtual worlds. Second Life is a virtual world.You cannot pay me enough to "play" it. I would MUCH rather play Diablo.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Creslin321

....

It is a good thing. WOW & Diablo has shown that it is more fun to focus on what people like to do .. i.e. killing stuff and getting rewarded for doing so ... then giving them a virtual world.

Some are reluctant to embrace the new world because they are nostalgic about the old, boring past. They will be left behind. I am more excited about Diablo3 than any MMO. I think it will be a much better game.

I don't understand this obsession with virtual worlds. Second Life is a virtual world.You cannot pay me enough to "play" it. I would MUCH rather play Diablo.

 It is a good thing...to you.  Personally, I would like to see a game that emphasizes the virtual world more, and we actually have a few of them on the way like GW2 and Archeage.  There are others that feel like I do as well.

Maybe it's time for a genre split.  IMO, some games are getting too CORPG-like to be considered MMORPGs anymore.  And that's fine, just call them CORPGs though.  I would be cool with that.

Originally posted by maskedweasel

I completely agree, and have for a long time,  if you look hard enough you can see a clear evolution in each genre,  if you want to look hard enough.  It doesn't mean everything is exactly the same,  but much of what we have now, has been done before in some fashion or another -- and that doesn't make them bad.   

 

There is a differnce between similar and the same or less than another game is offering.

The call of duty games can fall under this to a degree, but graphics and other optiosn do keep expanding. BF3 was not really that much beeter gameplay than bf2 if nota downgrade, But tis graphics are vastly superior, and other things as well.

Lets look at MMOs We have seen mmos come out with much better graphics then wow, and others with some different ideas... But has any of them came out with better graphic style and quality? Maybe one or two of which failed to even met the gameplay of wow.. So. Many peopel say ehh more of the same ... no benifit in playing a new mmo, when the old one is superior.

Lets look at swtor, it did quest text better, its voiced and there a cut scene. But the graphics may be a bit higher quality with less style. So thast not really attractive. End game? Token/chest raid system. PVP BGs for "points" to buy gear. I mean classes, equipment, etc. pretty much very similar.

Crafting; a bit different, i love it, by lvl 40 on all my toons i have maxed crafting (because its new and different, i haven't done it over and over for years).

Yeah i like compaions / part of crafting... other than that the game it self doesn't play as well as wow, has far less options for specs (but not by much pretty similar). UI is far worse as they have it locked, i mean there really isn't any differnce that would entertian you for more than a few months.

Now this isn't true of all mmos , GW2 is trying new and old stuff most mmos forgot. There is terra, wildstar, even PS2 (while similar to itself rare in the market).

The issue isn't that coping = bad, its no new experinces , no improvement, no REASON to play the next mmo IS BAD.