Oh, so it is about marketability not pure lack of originality...
Still, I wonder, Around The World which you sell right now is a match3 game. There are hundreds of these, maybe even thousands. Compared to this Museum Director is extremely original... Or maybe is it that you found out the rule about "only original games sells" after you released it?
Well, it's quite funny that Around the World is probably my least original game released, and it's the game that brought me the more money ...
![;)](http://public.gamedev.net/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif)
but:
When I made Around the World 5 years ago ( ! ), it was
meant to be a classic match-3 game to get on portals (bigfish, reflexive (now dead)...). I really don't know how a game like this would be doing these days, however I think that very few people would talk about it (reviews for instance). Once again, I don't say that there is no audience for non-original games, I say that it would be
extremely difficult for that audience to find the games. I realized through my experience on previous releases that visibility is my biggest problem: people who would like my games don't know they exist! I think originality creates the buzz and is the solution to this specific problem.
I find it very difficult to make/design original games. I often market my last game (Spring Up Harmony) by explicitly saying it's highly inspired by Peggle, admitting its lack of originality (people usually like the original twist in it, though).
Also, when doing researches for my current project, I find many similar games out there.
Anyway, as I'm not doing games for a living, I can try different things.
And as a last note : to be honest, if I knew Museum Director could be completed easily with a tight budget, I would have released it, even knowing it's not the most original game ever. The "lack of originality" reason should probably not be the first listed in my article.