Should innovative games get a free pass?

Destructoid writes:
In the case of Mirror's Edge, what I see is a game that has meticulously gone out of its way to be "different." From the unique first-person-action elements, to the bright colors, clear skies and even the Asian, brunette, modestly chested female protagonist, this game is one that has tried to lay the exact trap that Stuart has fallen into -- inflation of a game's merits simply because it's pretending to be some brand new innovation. Frankly, the games press has actually surprised me by seeing through all that for once and giving the game an honest appraisal, whatever their opinions may be.

[bomboclaat_gamer]

no. we need innovation with quality.

[Pebz]

^What he/she said.

Innovation is merely a part of the whole, just like graphics, gameplay, sound, story etc.

I understand why people review the more tangible parts of games, since putting words on a feeling, so that someone else might understand that feeling is hard. But if a game lacks the feelings one gets from playing a good game, it simply isn't a good game, no matter how innovative.

That said, I'm still all for people trying for new innovating games, regardless of how bad they end up, since they do pave way for new and better games.

[The Matrix]

I take off points for the "modestly chested" character. :)

[ThanatosDMC]

Resistance 2 is too innovative with it's lagless online coop and copetitive modes. It got it's stomach slashed open.

Killzone 2 would be too graphically innovative. It will be spit upon.

Gears of War 2 added a few touch-ups and copied MGS4 with it's Brumak ride plus host advantage. It shall be glorified.

Fable 2 is an upgrade comparable to Black and White 1 to Black and White 2, it's fantastic. (BW2's was lame, btw)

LBP is the new 3D Mario with lots and lots of user created levels and editors and Sackboy is too cute. It must fail.

What is up with reviewers and the media????

[ukilnme]

@ ThanatosDMC

Let me guess. The gaming media is conspiring against Sony again?

[DiabloRising]

Why does it have to be a conspiracy? It's a simple fact that reviewers are biased, just like any other human.

[Aclay]

@ThanatosDMC,

I don't think that graphics can make a game innovative as in the case of Killzone 2. In my opinion what will make Killzone 2 innovative is the First Person Cover System that keeps everything in First Person. As we all know Rainbow Six Vegas had a Cover system, but it was nothing like Killzone 2's.

Also, the use of the Sixaxis while Sniping in KZ2 to keep the controller steady is pretty innovative in Killzone 2 to me as well because it will actually take a little more skill to pull off a Sniper kill and because it's never been done before. In some ways to me, the use of Sixaxis while Sniping in KZ2 adds a little more realism to Sniping in the game because if you are Sniping in real life, you have to keep your hands steady.

Graphics are always good, but I don't think that graphics alone can make a game innovative.... Just look at Crysis. Crysis had some of the best graphics ever, but it wasn't all that innovative.

But in reference to this article, I don't think that Innovative games should get a Free Pass... NO game whatsoever should get a free pass.

[Sam Fisher]

Innovation - Something, such as a method or product, newly introduced.

graphics are not innovating any more. Little-Big Planet has innovating elements to it. But Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 are not innovating

[Bodhi]

DMC, you're taking this really personal now. A review is an opinion, chill out.

Resistance 2 had weird AI flaws, it seems they only centered on you and never attacked your teammates. Invisible walls and weird textures glitches too. Weak boss fights. Online Co-op is the real meat of Resistance 2.

Killzone 2, you're just conspiring hardcore now. From the looks of it, it's a solid 9.

Gears of War 2... If it was a touch up from Gears of War, it's the amazing because the first one was amazing also. Gears of War 2 was great, aside from it's multiplayer issues, it's small share of glitches, and even weaker boss battles then Resistance 2.

Fable 2 was amazing, plain and simple, sure it had glitches but no game has it's charm and complexity and simplicity at the same time, really amazing game.

LittleBigPlanet is amazing, it has as much charm as Fable 2, the problem so far I have with it is the slight control issue, it seems that Sackboy floats longer in jumps then most platformers. I haven't seen anything really eye popping yet in LittleBigPlanet except the one Azure Palace and the Mirror's Edge one.

Almost all those games aren't THAT innovative at all, with the exception of:

Resistance 2: 8 person co-op. 60 player online isn't special as Frontlines: Fuel of War was already at 58 players.

Killzone 2: Since when was graphical prowess innovative?

Gears of War 2: Cover system galore, changes multiplayer a lot.

Fable II: Insane art style and feel, evil and good system is deep.

LittleBigPlanet: Deeper online sharing then Halo 3.

Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 don't bring anything too special to the table, they are great titles though.

No game should ever be given a pass for innovation, with that thinking, I could hypothetically develop a game where you're a dragon breathing fire all over a castle in first person view, but you can't control the dragon or breath fire very well and the graphics are toss. I should get a pass right? For being the first dragon breating first person shooter ever right?

Nope.

BTW, I'm going go ahead and actually develop a game like this on the XNA. :)

[callahan09]

"Resistance 2 had weird AI flaws, it seems they only centered on you and never attacked your teammates. "

Oh and that doesn't happen in ... hmm let's see, just about every other game ever made?

Edit: Oh, and by the way, when you say "it seems," you were right on the money, because they do NOT "never attack your teammates." They do in fact attack your teammates. And your teammates attack them. There are numerous scenarios in the game that can be beaten by literally standing back and letting your teammates do all of the work. It's not efficient because they don't work as fast as you would (they're more... let me say "careful") but the enemies will attack them if you stay back, and they will attack the enemies.

But you're right, just like in every other game I've ever played, if you go running about and acting all headstrong and aggressive, who are the enemies going to attack? That's right: you, the madman spraying bullets everywhere. Also, Daedalus picked Nathan Hale out personally, as anybody who actually played the game through would realize. He communicates with Hale on a personal level throughout the story. You are the primary target for the Chimerans, plain and simple. It even makes sense that they'd all attack you before the other lowly humans based on the plot.

People are just overly critical of Resistance 2, plain and simple.

[Bodhi]

Funny, you have no qualms of me criticizing Gears of War 2.

[ThanatosDMC]

LPB got boring real after the whole wow factor of playing through the single player with a friend. Fun times when your pull a friend for suicide or drop a bomb or having the bombs accidentally blowing up on the cart of the jail break level. But afterwards something was just missing.

I downloaded and played the online levels. Some levels actually let you get 7 trophies in less than a minute. Cheap... but i wasnt gonna pass it up. Anyway, i wonder if im the only one who just felt empty about the game after playing it for say 8 hours or so total?

About Resistance 2's complaints of you being the only one shot in multiplayer is utter bull made up by those who hasnt played the game in full. Have they played the levels after you get the fussion bomb then defending it from the so-called ambush in which two Ravegers come plus a load of Hybrids and armored Hybrids. They werent actually shooting at just Hale but every Sentinel they saw. This happens in all the levels, except Hale is the main enemy for them. Why didnt they complain about this in Halo or COD4 or Gears?

@ Bodhi

What did Gears2 bring to the table?

I swear, everytime they give me the option to have the satelite beam of death gun, you're practically god-like. Using it against the deformed Brumac turned Queen (Aliens movie cuz of the mouth) was just so easy. We never even fought it. They should have at least made us control another Brumak and fight the thing even if we had to use time button whatever like GoW (God of War). I mean, if one of their main hook is to use chainsaws let the Brumak rip out it's heart or spine or something before it exploded. Then i would be willing to accept the random WTF voice ending.

Oh, for the graphic innovation. I was merely talking about in the world of consoles. Something that graphically superior will be destroyed by the media.

I finished Resistance 2 sp, Gears of War 2 sp, LPB sp, and im still not satisfied. Resistance 2 servers seems to be always full now full of Network Errors, Gears2 is a lags with host teleporting to your face with a chainsaw, LPB doesnt really have very defining levels.

Seems that Fallout 3 had the best value out of all of them. Also, i dont need to chill out. I'm just rambling. I just read several case studies and the voluminous opinion of Chief Justice Marshall about the Worcester v. Georgia. I needed a break from all that stuff. N4G is always an entertaining outlet.

Yes, bringing out Fallout 3 is rather random.

Edit:

Wow, my typing is going down the drain fast. I'm on my 23rd page on this paper i need to turn in by tomorrow. They probably wont even read it. Hell, i wouldnt.

[GWAVE]

Games that are innovative tend to be slapped with the label "too different" (as if that's a bad thing). It's funny that the article shows a picture of Mirror's Edge because that game is getting slammed for its innovation. Innovative games will get 7.5/10s and 8/10s from most reviewers despite the advancements the game has made. You'll see a game like Halo 3 or Gears praised for "innovation", but if you're not an idiot you can see that these games blatantly imitate much older games like Tribes 2 and Kill.switch. There was even this obscure Xbox game called Something Something Delta Strike or something like that which was basically a more in-depth version of Gears of War and it even had more mission variety and vehicle usage.

[CEO OF N4G]

Well said bomboclaat_gamer.This is one of the first time i agree with u.

[DiabloRising]

Innovative games should not get a free pass, especially if they ignore the fundamentals of solid game design.

What needs to change is our arcane reviewing methods. This score based crap doesn't apply to today's game environment I feel.

[socomnick]

no, to some lair was innovative too should that game get a free pass ?

[ukilnme]

Lair did not get a free pass. It was torn apart...just like Too Human.

Edit:

My bad. I see your point now.

[CEO OF N4G]

Too human tryied ad failed hard,so did lair...and now it looks like mirros edge is the latest victim.I liked the demo but the trial and erros killed it for me, i tried so may times to get a jump and it just would not work........

[Yi-Long]

... and when I played the Mirror's Edge demo, it just kinda 'clicked' with me, and I really loved it.

But this really seems to be a 'love it or hate it' kinda game. I can see that people who are more into 'shooters' not caring for it. This aint a shooter. This is a platformer, and probably the first 3d platformer that REALLY plays well, as in you can run, jump and 'flow' through the levels like you could do in the old Sonic and Mario classic.

I wont buy it full-price though. I'm not buying a game fullprice when they're already boasting about the DLC they will release with the sole intention to empty my wallets even more!

[QQcrybaby]

no, stupid question.

[caladbolg777]

It's a slanted question. Should innovative games (sub-text: Mirror's Edge, which obviously the writer doesn't enjoy) get a free pass?

It's like asking "Does your mom know that you're gay?" If you're hetero, you can't answer yes or no.

[Sari]

No. It shouldn't. No game should be given a free pass. If there were exceptions, then who's to say that other games would just be passed off with the same label?

Innovation doesn't make a good game. It's that and how it ties to the other aspects of gaming that makes it good (graphics, story, gameplay).

As for the game in question, I wouldn't know. I haven't played it, but I like the idea of it.

[360 is fer gayzzz]

All of Sonys innovative games dont need a free pass because their awesomeness speaks for itself!

[IzKyD1331]

don't start a fanboy war, this entire news post will be spammed

[BLUR111]

well IzKyD1331 that is why you are here right??

since you support 360 bashing along with all the other geeks.

[IzKyD1331]

omg, you caught me....

[pp]

All of Sonys innovative games are Flops that's the sad truth.