3 ms·

I'm not surprised, they have been cranking out the same game over and over again, re-branded and/or adding slightly different abilities without changing the bas

I'm not surprised, they have been cranking out the same game over and over again, re-branded and/or adding slightly different abilities without changing the basic game. After playing the Star Wars version for a little while I deleted it because the concept (while initially fun and interesting) had gotten old. They did release something called "Bad Piggies" too which I thought was a fun different game but along the same theme but that didn't seem to take off.

phn 11y ago
They also tried publishing different games, Amazing Alex for example. The truth is, for such simple things and for this definition of "success" (i.e. being the global hit of the moment) there is no formula. For a comparison, look at King, what success do they have outside of candy crush? And it's not for the lack of games as they have quite a few.
- chkuendig 11y ago
  As a counter-example, Supercell is extremely successful with Hay Day and Boom Beach besides Clash of Clans. Maybe it isn't all just luck.
  - phn 11y ago
    It isn't all luck, but they spend a HUGE amount of money to keep the ad ball rolling. And I may be being unfair not having played their games, but they follow the same mechanic, just being different themed, right? It is too early to be sure, but I'd bet they're still riding their particular wave.
    - ido 11y ago
      BoomBeach is the same genre as CoC but it's not a clone - it has quite a few changes in it (maybe an appropriate analogy would be C&C compared to Dune2, or Quake compared to Doom).
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
Interesting that you mention Star Wars, because it's one of the few franchises that has been able to continually reinvent itself over the years, while raking it in from various video games, comic books, furniture etc. Angry Birds tried to do the same. A few years ago you couldn't walk past a park or school without seeing a kid in an Angry Birds shirt or carrying one of those goody stuffed pigs. Only problem is that they milked the franchise without letting it evolve, or invest the profits in other opportunities (they tried, but how can you go from mega-hit to fresh start and hit the same lightning rod twice?). Just like that tacky wall-mounted singing fish, Angry Birds had a typical product lifetime, and Rovio should have expected their one trick pony to obey the currents of time.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Except Star Wars is a universe and a huge story, and one which many people connect to. AB is just a dumb game for casuals. I don't think its remotely possible to turn AB into a Star Wars-like franchise. Its amazing to me they've lasted this long or got as big as they got. The casual spending of the lowest common denominator always kinda surprises me. Who is buying all this stupid swag? Where is it now? I guess its all in landfills after wearing an AB t-shirt or a backpack a few times and getting tired of the novelty. I wish society could have a conversation about novelty and waste. I don't think future generations will judge us kindly. Meanwhile, I have so much Star Wars stuff in my home, much of it decades old. Comics, old toys in boxes, etc. I think there's a difference between things we value and things that just have a temporary novelty. Sure, I'll die and it'll end up in a landfill also, but it lasted much longer than all the AB t-shirts I saw for sale, pretty much everywhere. Hell, there was an AB vendor outside the Colosseum in Rome a few years ago. This shit is completely out of control.
  - logfromblammo 11y ago
    Angry Birds did not have a heroic epic to hang everything on. Here's its story: pigs steal eggs, then birds get angry and fight back. In the very short period of time that I was paying attention to it, I am not even aware of an effort to name the various birds, much less develop a backstory or personality for them. Gaming, and particularly mobile gaming, is a hits-based industry. Angry Birds 2 is actually Angry Birds 15. They lasted 6 years, which in the mobile gaming world is a success probably comparable with one show lasting 12 years on television. It was a very good run. Unfortunately, to achieve real staying power, you have to develop your franchise story, usually across multiple platforms. When people become bored with it, your franchise dies. You have to keep it fresh and at least recognizable in the popular culture for decades, in order to become a permanent fixture. Otherwise, you simply have to make do with the occasional nostalgic revivals.
nsxwolf 11y ago
Even so, Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. If there's such thing as a AAA casual game, this is it. Which really shows how sad this business is -- a true sequel to a smash hit that goes way beyond the original sells so poorly that it leads to mass layoffs.
- stefanmielke 11y ago
  It's probably because it was too late for a true sequel to arrive. When the market was ready to receive another Angry Birds they threw 2 or 3 other games that where exactly like the first one. If the second was Angry Birds 2, it would be better received.
- onion2k 11y ago
  Even so, Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. If there's such thing as a AAA casual game, this is it. This is absolutely true, but for me it just drives home the message that indie gaming is far more interesting than the latest AAA titles. The sequel is just the same game without any of the originality of the first one, and it was that originality, that joy you get from finding something new and exciting, that made the first game worth playing.
- nacs 11y ago
  > Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. The game's quality isn't the problem. It's the forced in-app purchases (or wait massive amounts of time) they made with this new version that makes it horrible. They went overkill on the IAP and the reviews reflect that.
wvenable 11y ago
It's the same thing Nintendo does with Mario.
- kedean 11y ago
  It's the exact opposite of what Nintendo does with Mario. Mario is used to brand a wide variety of different games. If Nintendo isn't sure whether a game will be successful, they slap Mario and his friend on it and call it a Mario game. Golf, racing, party games, pinball, platformers, EVERYTHING has had the mario label used to pull in potential audience. Rovio has done precisely the opposite, and tried to rebrand the same game with different themes, like Star Wars. There's nothing new under the aesthetic changes.

phn 11y ago

They also tried publishing different games, Amazing Alex for example. The truth is, for such simple things and for this definition of "success" (i.e. being the global hit of the moment) there is no formula. For a comparison, look at King, what success do they have outside of candy crush? And it's not for the lack of games as they have quite a few.

chkuendig 11y ago
As a counter-example, Supercell is extremely successful with Hay Day and Boom Beach besides Clash of Clans. Maybe it isn't all just luck.
- phn 11y ago
  It isn't all luck, but they spend a HUGE amount of money to keep the ad ball rolling. And I may be being unfair not having played their games, but they follow the same mechanic, just being different themed, right? It is too early to be sure, but I'd bet they're still riding their particular wave.
  - ido 11y ago
    BoomBeach is the same genre as CoC but it's not a clone - it has quite a few changes in it (maybe an appropriate analogy would be C&C compared to Dune2, or Quake compared to Doom).

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

Interesting that you mention Star Wars, because it's one of the few franchises that has been able to continually reinvent itself over the years, while raking it in from various video games, comic books, furniture etc. Angry Birds tried to do the same. A few years ago you couldn't walk past a park or school without seeing a kid in an Angry Birds shirt or carrying one of those goody stuffed pigs. Only problem is that they milked the franchise without letting it evolve, or invest the profits in other opportunities (they tried, but how can you go from mega-hit to fresh start and hit the same lightning rod twice?). Just like that tacky wall-mounted singing fish, Angry Birds had a typical product lifetime, and Rovio should have expected their one trick pony to obey the currents of time.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Except Star Wars is a universe and a huge story, and one which many people connect to. AB is just a dumb game for casuals. I don't think its remotely possible to turn AB into a Star Wars-like franchise. Its amazing to me they've lasted this long or got as big as they got. The casual spending of the lowest common denominator always kinda surprises me. Who is buying all this stupid swag? Where is it now? I guess its all in landfills after wearing an AB t-shirt or a backpack a few times and getting tired of the novelty. I wish society could have a conversation about novelty and waste. I don't think future generations will judge us kindly. Meanwhile, I have so much Star Wars stuff in my home, much of it decades old. Comics, old toys in boxes, etc. I think there's a difference between things we value and things that just have a temporary novelty. Sure, I'll die and it'll end up in a landfill also, but it lasted much longer than all the AB t-shirts I saw for sale, pretty much everywhere. Hell, there was an AB vendor outside the Colosseum in Rome a few years ago. This shit is completely out of control.
- logfromblammo 11y ago
  Angry Birds did not have a heroic epic to hang everything on. Here's its story: pigs steal eggs, then birds get angry and fight back. In the very short period of time that I was paying attention to it, I am not even aware of an effort to name the various birds, much less develop a backstory or personality for them. Gaming, and particularly mobile gaming, is a hits-based industry. Angry Birds 2 is actually Angry Birds 15. They lasted 6 years, which in the mobile gaming world is a success probably comparable with one show lasting 12 years on television. It was a very good run. Unfortunately, to achieve real staying power, you have to develop your franchise story, usually across multiple platforms. When people become bored with it, your franchise dies. You have to keep it fresh and at least recognizable in the popular culture for decades, in order to become a permanent fixture. Otherwise, you simply have to make do with the occasional nostalgic revivals.

nsxwolf 11y ago

Even so, Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. If there's such thing as a AAA casual game, this is it. Which really shows how sad this business is -- a true sequel to a smash hit that goes way beyond the original sells so poorly that it leads to mass layoffs.

stefanmielke 11y ago
It's probably because it was too late for a true sequel to arrive. When the market was ready to receive another Angry Birds they threw 2 or 3 other games that where exactly like the first one. If the second was Angry Birds 2, it would be better received.
onion2k 11y ago
Even so, Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. If there's such thing as a AAA casual game, this is it. This is absolutely true, but for me it just drives home the message that indie gaming is far more interesting than the latest AAA titles. The sequel is just the same game without any of the originality of the first one, and it was that originality, that joy you get from finding something new and exciting, that made the first game worth playing.
nacs 11y ago
> Angry Birds 2 has a level of polish that makes the original look like some indie side project. The game's quality isn't the problem. It's the forced in-app purchases (or wait massive amounts of time) they made with this new version that makes it horrible. They went overkill on the IAP and the reviews reflect that.

wvenable 11y ago

It's the same thing Nintendo does with Mario.

kedean 11y ago
It's the exact opposite of what Nintendo does with Mario. Mario is used to brand a wide variety of different games. If Nintendo isn't sure whether a game will be successful, they slap Mario and his friend on it and call it a Mario game. Golf, racing, party games, pinball, platformers, EVERYTHING has had the mario label used to pull in potential audience. Rovio has done precisely the opposite, and tried to rebrand the same game with different themes, like Star Wars. There's nothing new under the aesthetic changes.