Are variations inherently limited

I was reading about the new games that were displayed at the G2 and as expected I see an onslaught of BJ variations or a type of 3 card poker, Holdem or even war. I suppose if they didn't work people wouldn't continue to crank them out but it sure seems like there's a whole lot of putting an interesting cherry on top as opposed to making a brand new Sunday. We live in a trend setting type world where swarms of people will flock together heading one way or another. But I would think just like no particular person is flawless, no trend is guaranteed to be headed in the right direction. There's just something about true creativity that you just know and feel it comes from a sacred space where natural originality is born. There's no substitute for it. Look at movie sequels. I'm sure we can all think of a few exceptions but for the most part there is usually a serious decline in quality that's so apparent it's undeniable when comparing a sequel to the original. Is it possible the same holds true for table games? Frankly, these games do sound pretty cool but at the end of the day if I want to play BJ I'm going to play the original.

Hopefully, the many genius's on this site will dig deep and tap into that sacred source and develop some new never seen before games that are true originals instead of making another Rocky. Who knows maybe if that happened we might actually come up w something to give BJ a run.

I hear ya, kobalj, and I once held that same line of reasoning ... until I discovered that the 'unfamiliar' is not accepted in the industry. If it's not based on blackjack, poker, baccarat, pai gow, craps or roulette, it has very little chance of getting a second look. Just the way it is.

Some variations improve the game and become larger.
Ultimate Texas Hold 'em - a huge hit - came after Texas Hold 'em Bonus as a variation in the casino-banked Hold 'em genre, and eclipsed it strongly.

EZ Baccarat (commission-free Bacc) has 700 installs, just huge.

My Commission-free Pai Gow is doing very well, and is growing.

Just about all BJ games have side bets attached to them now, when there was a time when none had side bets.

I'd say not true. If it betters the game as an evolutionary improvement, it'll stay around and grow.

I think there are several niches in the table games market that haven't been hit on yet.

I also think the old mentality of "it has to be familiar" is ready to die off, if you can find the idea to kill it.

My opinion is that a game has to be easily accessible as the primary rule, more than familiar. The reason familiar works is because it helps you overcome that accessibility hurdle - they already know blackjack, so a large portion of the ruleset is already common knowledge.

If you create a whole new niche, you have to make sure that the learning curve is almost a flat line. Simple decisions, easy game play.