Innovation is extinct and our favourite hobby is suffering because of it

If you have been following Gamescom, then maybe you will agree that there doesn’t seem to be much new going on. Not in the sense of reveals, but more in the sense that we've seen all these kind of reveals before. I have been getting that feeling a lot. It seems that innovation is dying out, and that scares me. 

Over on AppSpy this week, I took a look at PUBG Mobile and its new asymmetrical PvP mode, and I can’t really get a better example of this. PUBG Mobile is one of the biggest mobile games in the world, and even they are not taking risks. Worse, they are going the other way.

If you are rehashing a popular genre at least make it interesting

The new PUBG Mobile mode, Unfail, is basically a pared-back Dead by Daylight, another wildly popular game. You have four survivors and one predator. Survivors try to activate terminals, just like the generators in Ead By Daylight, and escape. The Predator tries to kill them. The thing is, there doesn’t look like there will be multiple choices for characters. So what is the point? It is a novelty mode that will grow old quickly, because there is nothing new.

At least when Fortnite burst onto the scene, copying PUBG, it added building. Yeah, I sucked at it and could barely build a box before someone had produced Fort Knox, but it was something fresh and exciting. We don’t get that anymore. All we seem to see are safe bets, or worse, an over-reliance on existing franchises. 

Staying in an established series is safe but a bit boring

Let’s take a look at Arknights: Endfield, for another example. The original Arknights is a tower defence type of affair, whereas Endfield is more of an action RPG. Why couldn’t Hypergryph have created a whole new world instead? The answer there is obvious; it is to coast on the original's success. That is dangerous thinking, however.

It is the obvious safe decision, but it kills innovation. People will be expecting the characters they love, or the world they know. By keeping it in the same series, you are pigeon-holing yourself. Of course, if you are doing a sequel, it has to be the same, but Endfield is not even the same genre.

I strongly believe that doing this is unhealthy for the gaming world. You can’t stop trying to create new properties, or things will stagnate, and that will ultimately start to affect development. If you get too comfortable, gameplay will suffer because there will be no new mechanics.

HoYoVerse shows us that diversifying can be incredibly successful. Genshin Impact came out and was a massive hit, but did HoYo milk that? Well, yes, with gacha — but they also kept experimenting. Honkai: Star Rail came out with a brand new cast of characters and setting, it wasn't Genshin: Endfield with a turn-based mechanic. 

The good examples are few and far between

There are rare examples of when this can be beneficial, mind you. Video games based on existing franchises, like the upcoming The Seven Deadly Sins: Origin. There have been multiple games based on SDS, but fans go to them specifically for lore or fan service. That shouldn’t be the mindset of developers, pandering to an existing fanbase.

Sadly, the reason this happens is plain as day. With depressing regularity, we see how one flop can sink an entire studio. Developers are scared to take risks because if it does not work, then it is literally game over for them and their colleagues. So, they don’t gamble; they cling to what has worked in the past.

It is completely understandable why developers want to be cautious, but it is a tactic that is going to destroy the industry. We need risks, new IPs, and experimentation to move forward.

Otherwise, we are going to be stuck with another open-world anime RPG, another battle royale, and another spin-off of the same tired franchise.