>> This baffles me. Who are these people that buy games like MK11, a new FIFA game every year(?)

I see your point, but Mortal Kombat is not really the best example of a cash-cow franchise that keeps selling the same game over and over. The successive games in this series have huge differences, especially since the reboot a few years back. If you like this style of fighting games, there are plenty of reasons to buy the latest version every few years.

FIFA on the other hand is terrible in this regard. I can say with confidence because I've been buying each entry since FIFA'09, and while there have been a few major changes in 10 years that are worthwhile improvements, you are indeed more or less buying the same game every year. I sometimes wonder why I even keep doing it, I guess it's just because it's become a tradition I cannot get away from, getting the game on release date and inviting my brother to play it until deep in the night.

Isn't part of the draw of FIFA and other sports games that the players change every year, since they're based on real players? I figured sports fans enjoy playing avatars of the players they follow.

>a tradition I cannot get away from, getting the game on release date and inviting my brother to play it until deep in the night

Probably well worth the cost just to spend the time with your brother. I wish I lived close enough to my brother to do a yearly video game night with him--and wouldn't care what the video game was or how much it cost (within sane reason of course).

If you can't do every year, what about every 2 or every 3 years?

>Do some people genuinely find these things really enjoyable?

Yes. Why is it difficult to understand that other people can like things that you don't like? Is your ego truly so ingrained you can't even imagine the experiences of someone just a little bit different from you?

the question was not about why people like such games, but why they keep buying the latest ones for full price, when they are just slight reskin with updated player stats. I don't get it either, but it ain't my money being spent so couldn't care less.

There are much worse ways to spend your money, ie cigarettes.

the question was pure arrogant nerdshit. no one owes the self-appointed lords of HN an explanation for liking anything

The question was literally whether they find them enjoyable.

> go watch obviously purely commercial 'blockbusters' at the cinema, etc.?

> Do some people genuinely find these things really enjoyable?

Of course. But come on, you can't possibly be seriously asking this.

Behold a humblebrag wrapped in feigned ignorance.

GP knows people buy games that interest them. In my family we buy select indie games and select AAAs just like everyone else.

It probably is a humblebrag. But since I have no interest in many of these things that appear to be very popular, I am also genuinely curious about what is it that people find enjoyable about these things.

Is it the fact that these things are a 'common denominator' and as such are a 'neutral' choice of something to enjoy with friends that may have otherwise diverse interests? Or do people genuinely prefer these things, even if they were the only person left on Earth?

I can talk about some blockbusters. I like the Marvel's MCU movies (though each one progressively less, my favorite still being Iron Man 1). For me, they have a near-optimal composition of plot cadence, special effects, music and cliches. They're usually pretty polished. I find them good for light enjoyment, and since they also appeal to a very wide audience, it's something I'll immediately get to talk about with a lot of people, or something I can watch with my SO without worrying it'll bore her out of her mind.

It's fast food of entertainment. A composition optimized to appeal to senses, even though it's of questionable nutritional value. I think it's fine from time to time.

Are you asking us to explain or generalize the behavior of billions of people? How much time do you have because there's about a billion reasons

Assuming the Marvel movies fall into the category you're talking about... I adore the Marvel movies, as does everyone else I talk to about them. They're fun to watch, I'm fully vested in the characters (which, to some extent, is based on my reading of comic books so many decades ago), and the shared storyline/world is great.

They're pretty much everyone else. New releases of these "same games" bring better graphics, or animations, or gameplay, or story, or any combination of the previous. FIFA, in addition I assume they also include the new players and trades that happened since the last version (but I don't play FIFA so I could be wrong here).

Nostalgia is also a big factor, with so many reboots and adaptations of source material to new media, today's adults will pay to see all the Marvel blockbusters because they read the comics or saw the TV show as kids. I'd bet many people that bought MK9 - which rebooted the saga - did it for nostalgia. The same probably happened with the new Tomb Raiders, also a reboot of the series. Have you heard of the new The Lion King? Or Dumbo? Or Aladdin? Or any of the 500 new remakes Disney wants to make? Same thing.

If one is a fan of football, and video games, buying FIFA every year isn't that baffling. I actually do it every year - till 2009 it was new PES every year, and since 2010 it was FIFA every year (as fifa got greatly improved on that year and PES is still exactly where it was 10 years ago) It is the best football game on the market, and every year there are some new features, to which I look forward to. It's always cool to see what changed, what is better than it was, what was fixed, what was broken.

I am lucky enough to not care about spending $60 per year on a single video game. So yeah, I will happily do it and play with my friends for a year. But is it honestly worth it? I can list feature breaking bugs that have been in the game for 3+ years, never touched. I can list features which got broken by new features, never fixed, for years. Considering how much money the product makes, for me it just shows what matters for EA.

And EA's focus seem to be solely Ultimate team, on making sure that they will resell the same shitty game with minimal improvement and people will spend buttloads of money on packs, which they have to do from scratch every year (Personally I do not touch microtransactions, too easy to pay few bucks here and there and this is never worth it in the long run). (IMO the fact that they release new version every year shows how predatory their business model is)

So yeah, you can find some enjoyment out of it, but I would say that in case of FIFA it is despite EAs best efforts.

And re MK11, I do not beleive it is released every year. I think the first 4 games were came out in quick(ish) succession, than it was quiet for few years, than several others...? So it's a different case from 'I'm a footbal fan and this way I can play with my current team'

People find comfort in franchises, especially characters they've grown up with. Instead of investing time in making new intellectual property, some fans would rather make expansions and sequels despite the risk of cease-and-desist orders.

I don't blame this mentality – it's the kind of loyalty that creative and loved stories naturally engender. It's really hard to imagine Super Smash Bros. having a fraction of its appeal if it had the same mechanics but completely new non-Nintendo characters. Or even the original Super Mario Kart for that matter.

> Who are these people

Pro tip: it's not the same people. You can buy XX on game console XYZ and buy XX3 on game console XYZ2 3 years later.

Just like cars, cameras or PC parts, they're release every year but almost no one buys the new version at release.

Mortal Kombat games are coming out at a clip of about every 4 years now. People get fighting games to play competitively. You'll find thousands of these people at the EVO tournament next weekend.

I imagine the competitive aspect holds water for FIFA as well.

Yeah, the sequel sneering in other posts in this tree is not a great look. Mortal Kombat changes significantly between iterations and while 2D fighters are not my cup of tea the depth and intricacy of the way MK11 plays is really well done (even separate from the self-aware and campy story stuff, which is good for a couple evenings of fun--we popped when the final boss threw a dang dinosaur at me!). Ed Boon and crew do good work and writing it off as "psh, sequels" is just not smart.

Some people just don't like sequels, or they don't like a genre and then all the hype about the sequels is for nothing (for that person). For example, I got nothing with MOBAs. Never had. Doesn't interest me. If I was younger back when these got popular I might've enjoyed them thoroughly but I grew up with Dune 2 and Command & Conquer.

I played MK2 and MK3 on the arcade back in the days. Looked it up, there were 2 years between those 2 versions (1993 and 1995). MK3 and MK4 I also played on PC, and MK4 is from 1997 (2 years again after MK3). So yeah, back in the 90s there were 2 years between each MK2/3/4. And MK (MK1) was from 1992...

People, me included, watch 2+ Marvel movies every year for like past 10 years. Nothing strange about it.

Because its fun.

I used to buy Call of Duty every year. I love playing FPS games, and getting the newest game meant new guns, new maps, and just new ways to enjoy an FPS. Sure, you could argue that it is just a reskin, but I really enjoy playing FPS games and I'm okay with paying the retail price.

It baffles me that you are gatekeeping the concept of fun.

>Do some people genuinely find these things really enjoyable?

Well it's not like there hasn't been any changes between Mortal Kombat and Mortal Kombat 11. If you developed original IP that continued to be popular after decades, would you toss it in the garbage on some principle of "being original"? They continue to innovate.

The comment at the top of this chain mentioned Paradox. They sell DLC for their games every year, which the players for the most part buy. This seems basically the same?

do you genuinely not get that your opinion isn’t the only one?

fighting games are basically cartels: you have a couple strong sets of IP, outside of which it's insanely hard to get traction - uber small community to start with and new titles often need bootstrapping and refining [no tournaments/scenes/bad or no online experience, etc.])

it also works backwards: since everyone moves to the latest and greatest, the community evaporates when a new version comes out: nobody still plays street fighter (version - 1) basically as soon as the latest comes out, as tournaments pick it up (=> you need to learn it)

the one dark horse was smash, which had insane longevity but nintendo didn't want that IP associated with the fighting game community/streams for a long while - not sure what current state is

> The "masses" go consume what they are told to. The (n)th remake of some series is about to come up, the marketing ramps up, adverts, product placement, discussions, reviews, interviews. It all drives demand.

>Do you really not notice this? Even if it is a "here we go again, groundhog day" type of noticing?

Except not all titles are like this. Smash Bros., Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat are not franchise re-skins. There are major balance updates, character updates, game mode updates, and sometimes an entirely new mechanic to address balance issues.

Supersonic Acrobatic Rocket-Powered Battle-Cars was the predecessor to Rocket League, but they don't play alike at all.

World of Warcraft is on it's 8th iteration. No matter if you like the the current version, each expansion brings lots of new content, balance, and class overhauls.

Are they worth it? Some people say no. Are they Madden-like re-skins? Definitely not.

>The "masses" go consume what they are told to.

Thankfully us enlightened folk aren't interested in anything mainstream!

>Why do you think advertising is a multi-billion dollar industry.

Is your implication that only garbage products sold to the "masses" advertise?

> Is your implication that only garbage products sold to the "masses" advertise?

That's not the logical corollary to the parent's statement; it's that some of the sellers of non-garbage products are interested in having "the masses" buying their stuff too.