Call of Duty: World at War, case in point. Another iteration of historical World War 2, a war that has been put into games since time immemorial. The same generic weapons, the same generic enemies, the same generic gameplay. All it has in this generation that separates it from the old Battlefield 1942s and the Medal of Honors is a graphical rehash. So basically, it's like a sports game: the same way that Madden 07 and 08 are only separated by graphics upgrades.

So why are people buying it like crazy? Just for the Call of Duty license? The deeper question really is, why do people like buying generic games? I learned this the hard way. After buying NBA Live for years and years in a row, I finally called it quits as my eyes finally realized that I was playing essentially the same game all over again. Ever since I stopped buying my NBA games, I've called it quits on all generic things as well.

So is the majority of the gaming public just too ignorant to see past the marketing and realize that they're only buying a rehash?

Look at the new Animal Crossing game for the Wii. Lots of people are saying it looks and feels exactly like the previous iteration done 6 years ago, yet people are still buying it. Dynasty Warriors, even with the jump to nex-gen systems, still plays exactly the same as the previous iterations.

Now why can't developers add even a little bit of innovation to their games anymore? A game like Resistance, which also revisits World War 1 and 2, changes the gameplay by making the war between humans and aliens. At least, with weapons that do all different and strange things, the gameplay isn't just like any other shooter out there. With the sequel, they added a whole slew of things that made it totally different from it's predecessor.

But contrast that with huge games like Gears of War that are extremely suspect to rehashing. A lot of reviewers are sorta ignoring Gears 2 as game of the year because in the beginning, it was criticized as some form of Gears 1.5, with very little innovation added into it. Essentially, Gears 2 was the same game as Gears 1.

Even Grand Theft Auto has become completely stale. In contrast with San Andreas in a last gen system, you actually get to do less in the nex-gen system. Part 4 feels exactly like the previous installments, the only difference being a graphical rehash. But what do we do? We buy it in droves, encouraging Rockstar to make another GTA that does the same thing. I was foolish enough to buy it due to the "10" scores it got from most reviewers (including IGN, which I trust), but even they, professional game reviewers, fell into the trap.

But perhaps consumers did kill off a few rehashes in the form of Unreal Tournament, which offered exactly the same visuals, weapons, and setting as its previous iterations, as the latest version never got off the ground in the sales department.

I suppose that in the end, we have no one to blame but ourselves. The more we buy rehashes and generic games, the more developers will abandon innovation in favor of old fashion. The moral of the story? Stop buying rehashes and generic games to encourage developers to make innovative games.

Yeah, I agree with you.

But it's kinda hopeless to sell your argument when in the last single year we've seen GTA 4 and CoD 4 sell 10 million copies, and World at War is on track to reach at least 8 million.

Of course. For all the bitching people do about games being the same old, same old, games like Mirror's Edge are a huge risk while the profitability of a game like Call of Duty: So Many Sequels We Ran Out of Numbers and Have to Use Subtitles is a lock. But I think it's only forum dwellers who care that much, actually, because the mass market buys these games in droves, and so they will continue to be made (at least until they start tanking in sales, like Need for Speed).

CoD: WaW had different missions yes, but fighting the same enemies with the same weapons. it has like 5 different machine guns or something, but they all do the same thing. worse of all, these weapons have been in all the previous WW2 games as well.

Mirrors Edge's problem is execution. they have the right idea, and they only need to polish it. Dead Space if a fabulous game that offers plenty of customization, and it has the survival horror atmosphere that the genre has forgotten over the years.

Thank you for not mentioning Killzone 2 in your OP, because from what I've heard, it's anything BUT generic.

You can't really blame the reviewers for GTA IV. They hadn't seen a proper Grand Theft Auto in four years, Rockstar could have released crap in a box and everybody would love it. People only started disliking it after they saw how unnecessarily realistic it was. That's why IGN hasn't given it Game of The Year. That's why GameSpot hasn't given it Game of The Year. They replayed it.

Clearly, most people who gave it the overall award didn't replay it.

People didn't like it because it WASN'T a rehash. People wanted a rehash. GTA went in a new direction, and people didn't like it. A direction where realism > fun. That was never what GTA was about. People wanted a generic game. They didn't get one.

Gears 2 was very similar to Gears, but that's no bad thing. God of War II was similar to God of War, and it was brilliant, even better than the original.

The only game which I think has changed greatly from its predecessor is Resistance 2.

EDIT: Let me elaborate. They did some things right, and some things wrong.

Right: Online co-op, improved controls, updated graphics, improved competitive online.

Wrong: Two weapons at a time, no co-op campaign, no vehicles.

Unchanged: Story makes little sense and is hard to follow, the base ideas for the weapons, the somewhat likeable main character who may or may not be in Resistance 3. <Resistance 2 spoilers

i didn't mention killzone 2 in the OP because it's not out yet. but i suspect it's going to be generic as well. look at all that black and grey.

gta4 hasn't been awarded game of the year by the major sites because they realized that it was less than the predecessor. i don't think people wanted a rehash. that's crazy.

god of war 2 was a vast improvement to the original. yeah, it's the same kind of gameplay, but they added a lot of nuances in the storyline, especially with the bosses. but yeah, that's still suspect to being rehashed.

but there's no way in my book that a rehash is good. no. if gears is still the same after 4 installations, people will get bored. just like gta4 is being treated now by major reviewers. innovation is always a good thing.

I agree, it's sad seeing that the industry is suffocating under the weight of the big name franchises that don't do anything innovative or interesting. Everything is so formulaic when only a single generation ago I was playing Shenmue, Jet Grind Radio, Katamari Damacy, Shadow of the Colossus, Crush and so many other original games.

Can't agree with many things you said:

1) GTA4 doesn't play like the old GTA games. It's totally different. That's the problem and everyone is hating on it, because it's way too realistic and should focus on what the GTA series is meant to be: fun
So right here you failed. Rockstar tried something new (realistic driving physics, cover system) and they failed in the eyes of many fans.

2) Call of Duty is quality and that's the important thing: atmosphere. They are some of the few WWII developer (Infinity Ward or even Treyarch now) who can tell us emotional stories in their games.
Looking at World at War: How many FPS are there, where you can play the Pacific War ? Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault and uhm... well maybe BF1942..... if you know more, be my guest and name them.

3) As for Gears 2. Why change a winning team ? The 1st game recieved so high scores why would you change the gameplay ? They've added nice new weapons and gave us the opportunity to ride a Brumak and a Reaver.
Of course you're praising Resistance 2, because it has evolved. Yeah it has, but that's so easy when the first game only recieved scores in the 80's

I personally can't wait for Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Treyarch's next Call of Duty Project in 2010, Gears of War 3 and even a GTA spin-off, if Rockstar can deliver us the fantastic gameplay from it's previous games before GTA IV

^ well if you like rehashes then that's you. i personally can't stand them.

and no, the problem with gta is not in the so called realism. if anything, that was a step forward in the right direction. reviewers praised that move, including IGN. the problem with gta is that it was less than the predecessor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_video_games

and there's your massive list of world war 2 based games. world at war is a rehash.