So I have become disgusted with the gaming scene recently. It seems that a company can release 2 or 3 games, which are basically the same game, over the course of 2-3 years and still make millions of money. Also it seems developers can release a very similar game to another developer's game, and still sell millions and earn praise.

Does anyone remember gaming even 10 years ago? Games were "Zelda Clones," "Mario Clones," "Quake clones," "Diablo Clones," "Half-Life Clones" etc. etc. Do you remember any game lebeled as a clone would automatically be labeled as such and the grading would automatically start off at 6 points, and THEN the reviewers and people would start marking down for problems in the game? Remember when sequels were actually that, sequels? Half-Life to Half-Life 2 is an undbouted sequel, Diablo to Diablo 2 was undoubetly a sequel, Zelda OoT was undoubtedly a sequel, Mario 64 was undboutedly a sequel. Do you remember Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction, it cost $30, which was considered a lot of money for the game, and probably expanded the game and offered more new content and play time than most of today's new $60 games? Remember how that was an expansion, and not a seque, and priced as suchl?

Now that you are all done remembering, let's look at what we have today. Best example is Modern Warfare 2. Same engine, same gameplay, a handful of additions and tweaks, $60. Look at Uncharted 2 (yes, I went there), same engine, same gameplay, a handful of additions and tweaks, $60. Left 4 Dead 2, same engine, same gameplay, FEW MINOR additions and tweaks, $60 (or $50). It seems only Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy 13, and Gran Turismo 5 are a few of the handful of true sequels this generation. Everything else would have fit right under Expansion Pack, and cost accordingly, 10 years ago.

My other point was all the "clones" this generatoin has. It seems that every game needs to get over an 80. Spin it however you want Killzone 2 is a clone of Halo. Is it different? Yes it is, is it a clone? Yes it is. What scores did it get? Too high for a clone. Then we have the whole Forza 3, which spin it however you want, is a clone of Gran Turismo. Don't even start me on all the JRPGs that have come out recently, I think only Valkyria Chronicles wouldn't fall under the "clone" category this entire generation. Why do such games sell so many units, even worse, why are they allowed to have any reviews above a 7? The best "diablo Clone" would be considered Titan Quest, by most, and what's its rating? 80, it also came out 5 years after Diablo 2.

Final issue that I have with modern gaming, DLC. Some guy did the math on LBP DLC, it totaled to $142.45. What.. the... f***k....? I don't feel like I have too explain this point more other than the fact they charge for skins and appearences.

In my last paragraph, I really don't wanna wag fingers and play the blame game, but I really want to know why developers think they can push off expansion packs and clones at full prices, sell millions, and get reiewed so highly. The original games this generation can be counted on your fingers, original games that also inovavated can probably be counted on 1 hand.

/end of rant

Wats your definition clone?

You seem to be mixing up a few different things here.  Most of the "true sequels" you mention for consoles are all the first game in their generation.  Ocarina, Mario 64, MGS4, FF13, GT5.  Uncharted (and essentially Modern Warfare) are brand new franchises.  Why do they not get credit for doing something completely new with their first entries in the generation?  (also depending on how you look at it, modern warfare would be a "true sequel" to CoD2.)

The main thing to complain about is that PC developers have pretty much taken up the console approach.  Full priced sequels rather than expansions, paid DLC rather than free updates, and that doesn't even touch on other things like what IW has done with MW2 PC.

If you have to ask then you probably wouldn't understand my ranting since I don't know how much you played back when game clones were considered bad. But anyhow a clone is a game which has similar gameplay to another game. It make have better/different graphics, "cool" additions, and other such things, but in the end it's still the same old as the game it clones.

I will agree that Killzone 2's multiplayer is different than Halo 3's, that's for sure.

Well, yes, they are the first game of their generation, but that's what makes them a true sequel.They improved significantly upon the games before them. Uncharted and CoD4 are a few of the games that you can count as roiginal that I mentioned in the end. Their "sequels" are not.

If it's a good game why break what's broken?

Yeah, your rant makes since on a high level but when you get bogged down in it, you see why publishers do what they do.

Making a AAA games is a huge risk that has a very high possibility of blowing up in your face. If you have something that you know works, you keep it.   Even worse, it's a huge risk that doesn't even always pay out huge when it works!

You do everything you can to keep risk as low as possible so that means you keep the same engine, you make only basic tweaks, and you just improve upon what you already have.

Since AAA games cost a stupid amount of money and there's already a stupid high risk, it doesn't make since to take 5 years to make a game with a new engine and completely new unproven play mechanics.

Well then wouldn't it turn into a "survival of the fittest" scenario? The developers who make the good games will continue making them, the ones that don't go bankrupt. If anything that would be better for gaming as a whole.

Business-wsie that doesn't make sense, I agree. So that just leaves the consumers to realize the crap the publishers are pulling and call them out on it.

So you want two or three games a year?

Make an expansion for them. Starcraft has lasted over 10 years, Diablo 2 as well. Good games can be played for a long period of time. If those 2 or 3 games were of the quality of Baldur's Gate 2, DIablo 2, Zelda OoT, Mario 64, etc. then having just 2 or 3 a year would not be a problem at all. Also sorry, I sneaked in an edit, but it pertained to something else.