- swvjdirector
- |
- Honorable Heroic Member
"What are we holding on to, Sam?"
"That there's some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for."
Posted by: iRuN KFC
Posted by: swvjdirector
I think it's an interesting question, because it has more impact than you might imagine: By changing the formula too much, you risk alienating people who were fans of the game. This happened to me and most of my friends with H4, and Reach as well, for that matter. But by keeping it with a formula we loved, they would also make a fairly poor financial decision. Honestly, it seems like a lose/lose situation.
It might be me being cynical but I think developers will always aim to interest people who wouldn't usually buy their games over those who already do. At the end of the day there'll always be more of them so you have the potential, if you get the forumla right, to increase sales far past what you would do if you just cater to your existing fanbase.
As you said though you do run the risk of alienating your existing fans and, like you, most of the people I used to play H3 moved on to other games after Reach came out.
You've effectively hit on the point that isn't really refutable; developers have to make money, and they want to make as much as possible. Would a Halo 3.5 have sold as well? I doubt it (although I would have bought five copies). However, this knowledge doesn't stop me from feeling disappointed at the game that actually happened.