lolage said: do you know how good system shock was? (1) and do you know that it failed commercially? do you know Clive Barkers' undying ?( GOTY back than) did you know how it failed? many great games/movies/music fail commercially, while microsoft can push shitty games like Halo (it's sad ) |
Your comment didn't call for you throwing Halo under the bus. Halo put FPS on the map as a viable genre for consoles the way no other game did. It works, and people like it. Keep in mind that just because you don't like it, it doesn't make it garbage.
The issue of "ahead of its time" can be seen looked at in this article:
http://www.ncnlocal.com/buisinessbeat/ncn_roi.asp
Companies that introduce new products to the market have a better chance of success than those that do not. But this alone won’t guarantee success. Despite a dismal record for “successful” new product introductions (40-90 percent fail), it is clear that to succeed a company must be able to predict customer behavior. Might this, then, be why innovative products fail despite extraordinary benefits?
The quest for the answer has stimulated no small amount of study to determine the minds of buyer and seller. Among those who have delivered practical solutions to this vexing problem is psychologist Daniel Kahneman, whose work on the psychology of economics won him the Nobel Prize in 2002. What he discovered is simply this: New products typically ask of consumers a change in behavior that entails some costs. They may be reconfigured costs such as those associated with the addition of memory to an off-the-shelf computer, or learning costs such as those attending a new computer operating system, or gaining familiarity with the GPS system you ordered with your new car. These are called “economic switching costs,” and they are common to the adoption of most innovative new products.
What product companies fail to consider carefully, according to Dr. Kahneman’s model, are the psychological costs associated with behavioral change. Products often fail because of psychological biases that exist in both buyer and seller—“people irrationally overvalue benefits they currently possess relative to those they don’t.” The effect: buyers tend to value the benefits of products they own over the benefits of new ones, and sellers tend to value the benefits of new products they’ve created over existing alternatives. The result: customers reject new products even though they may be better, and companies with new products don’t know how to anticipate their failure in the market.
People value what they have to a far greater degree than they do innovation. They want what is comfortable and works, and not normally up for change.