Sequels
By SteveWhile watching some of the footage of StarCraft II from Blizzcon, I had a minor epiphany: You shouldn’t release a sequel 2-3 years after the original. Why? Because if you wait long enough, you can pretty much re-release the original game with a few improvements. Obviously there’d be an enormous differences in the visuals, and there’d be a few tweaks to the interface. But the longer you wait, the fewer changes people expect. In fact, they almost demand an identical experience. The original design becomes sacrosanct.
This isn’t a criticism of Blizzard. Lord knows my knowledge of StarCraft or StarCraft II is about as comprehensive as my understanding of string theory. (Which is to say, I’m probably totally wrong and the changes between the sequel and original are significant.)
But if I’m right, and StarCraft II is a prettier version of StarCraft with some interface tweaks (and a new storyline, and amazing cut scenes, blah blah blah), would people be as hot for in 2000 as they are for it nearly a decade after the original dragged and clicked its way into our hearts? Chances are, a lot of the people excited about its release would be saying, “Is that it? Shouldn’t there be more improvements?” because we have greater expectations for major leaps in a franchise when the gaps between releases are shorter. The bigger the gap between releases, the more you can rely on—and cash in on—nostalgia.
So, instead of reinventing the wheel every 2-3 years with a sequel, wait 10 years and just give it a fresh coat of next-gen paint.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:47 am
You’re absolutely right. If Duke Nukem Forever ever ships, it will be an event because it’s been so freaking long between games. I think the return of DOOM a couple years ago was also helped tremendously by being released so far from the original game.
It’s easy to see both sides of the story. You don’t release that sequel two years later and maybe your next game bombs and you’re out of business. Release it and it’s too much the same and maybe the same thing happens, but it’s much less likely to bomb than some new idea since you’re riding the success of the first game.
Blizzard simply has the luxury of time because they’ve never really sacrificed quality to ship a game and people will pay for quality games.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Well, it certainly doesn’t hurt if your game was a monster hit 10 years ago. Otherwise, you get the Fallout Effect: a vocal minority celebrating/decrying the long-awaited sequel while gamers at large go “Huh?”
But Blizzard is a special case anyway. How many other developers have the luxury to wait this long to make a follow-up to such a franchise? Other than id, Valve is the only one I can think of, and they had a hell of a lot more riding on Half-Life 2 than Blizzard does on StarCraft II. Not even Rockstar can pursue Bully or Manhunt as their primary IP and hold off on GTA IV until 2014.
And then there’s the Fallout Effect, Part 2: sequels that come out after periods of longer than five years generally have had the IP switch hands. The fact that Blizzard is actually making the sequel to their own game this far down the line puts them in a pretty exclusive club.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
I think Nintendo is the only exception to this rule. The Mario and Zelda franchises have had several very large gaps (or at least gaps that appeared to be large to me – I’m not going to do any research for a blog response) and almost all of them have had major new features and most of them a different focus.
August 11th, 2007 at 12:18 am
Yeah, the “Blizzard Effect” has to be considered here, but I suspect you’d see a similar reaction to a modern remake of X-COM or Master of Magic, and neither was a huge hit in their day (relatively speaking).
Nintendo is another exception, though they’re using the other tact: Making their old games playable, with no changes, on their new console through emulation.
August 12th, 2007 at 1:59 am
Hi. I like the Starcraft bag of food! If you have any more pics of such merch, could you send them to t62tml@aol.com? Thanks!
August 12th, 2007 at 1:59 am
Err, that’s t62tml@aol.com . No question mark!