Too Big to Fail (Gaming)

by CruelLEGACEY , Toronto, Wednesday, April 06, 2016, 14:37 (3156 days ago) @ MacAddictXIV

Cutting edge games get played because they are cutting edge. Especially in the age of the internet, word spreads fast. People thirst for quality, and if it's out there it will be found.

So you are saying that if a game is cutting edge enough, that word of mouth is all that is needed? I have some indie dev friends that would disagree.

I agree that games can flourish with word of mouth, but most still need a marketing boost. Regardless of this, a cutting edge game isn't defined by how many people play it. It should be defined by whether it brakes the edge of how we perceive games to be played and enjoyed and so on.

You'll also run into a lot of different reactions based on personal taste. Speaking for myself, while I appreciate any game that breaks new ground or has cutting-edge features, that is never enough on its own for me to enjoy it. More often than not, my favorite games are sequels. I find a lot of new IP are rough around the edges, or just don't quite have themselves totally figured out, but the sequel comes along and nails it. This was particularly true for me back in the 360 days: Assassin's Creed 2, Mass Effect 2, Gears of War 2, Bad Company 2, Transformers Fall of Cybertron, ODST & Reach, Splinter Cell Blacklist... almost every single one of my favorite games on the 360 were sequels. Even with franchises that predated the 360 (Halo, Splinter Cell), I found that it took developers more than 1 shot at the new hardware to really hit their stride.

Of course, that's just me. All I'm saying is that being "cutting edge" is not the end-all, be-all for everyone :)