Most gamers don't appreciate the immense amounts of time put into the making of video games. Dozens, and sometimes hundreds, of people work on a single title for two years, sometimes longer.

Most know what C++ is, but the majority cannot write it (hell, I can't), let alone devise complex algorithms and programs. Many don't know the numerous steps that go into art assets, from conceptual drawings, to character modeling, texturing, skinning, rigging, lighting, rendering, more textures, Nurbs, subdivisions, animating.. and probably a few others. And art is less complicated than code. Not to mention other things like sound, voice, UI, story, controls, marketing, publishing. You don'treally think about it, but someone has to sit down and figure out where controls should be, what buttons do which. Same with menus and the interface, someone went in and made sure that all worked.

Not even to mention multiplayer. Immense amounts of time go into code-writing and structuring for matchmaking systems, along with balanced maps, weapons, classes, clans, a progression system, if there is one.

And if any of these are low in quality, especially if high quality is expected, everyone will notice and cry out.

Making games is a hard business, but many studios, independent, normal, and in house publishers do it perfectly. I think the biggest problem is devs and pubs don't know or care what gamers actually want. Fortunately, gamers want just about everything under the sun, and many people are happy to oblige. But publishers think solely in a business sense (its their job), about marketing and demographics. They will force devs to add in multiplayer, taking up precious time and money, just to appeal to the multiplayer crowd.

In some cases, gamers don't even know what they want until they see it. Take BioShock: before it released, if you mentioned you'd like to see a game set in the 50s, underwater, with magic, and deep undercurrents of objectivism and moral relativism, you would have got some awkward glances.. or what amounts to an awkward glance on a Ventrilo or Teamspeak server. Yet, when BioShock released, everyone agreed it was outstanding.

Another example, Portal: A game where you are trapped in a lab by a psycho computer (still in the realm of normality), but where your only weapon is a gun that lets you pass through walls and a cube with a heart on it, which the player grows an affection with; and through the final boss battle you are given the recipe for cake. And then the villain sings to you. Sound crazy? Maybe, but the game that came out of it was amazing.

No developer, in his creative heaven, wants to release a game that already exists (except Madden, of course), but things don't always work out. Sequels are money-makers, and everyone knows it, especially the people making the money.

However, devs and pubs cannot take gamers for granted. Gamers, as a sweeping demographic, comprise of simultaneously the dumbest and smartest people out there. But we know what we like, and very few of us like the same thing from a few years ago. Sequels are designed to build upon the original, to extend the story. But in the game industry, a sequel is a chance to jump onto upgraded tech, more gameplay features, along with that story, if a continuation exists at all.

No dev wants to release a bad game, but shit happens. But the worst thing is not to listen to the people who play your games. Because we know what we like.