Think for a bit about your sentence and what it implies :)
(solution: that you've seen 100% of all great games ever submitted to the app store, which seems doubtful)
I'd guess it's more common in mobile and indie, but don't know for sure. I'd be really curious to see an in-depth analysis of it.
Okami was rereleased on a newer console at one point wasn't it? I think it probably did a little better.
But yeah, in general, I think that because AAA games cost so much to make and usually cost more to buy, they have to cater to the masses more in order to be successful, whereas indie game devs are more like startups.... lean and mean. So, they don't require the same level of sales to be a success, and they are also free to make more niche and obscure games.
Also thanks for your comment, that's the reply I was hoping for. I think a lot of the reasons why and how games fail (commercially) have changed with things like social media and increased usage of stock game engines. Unfortunately most of the post mortems of failed (indie) games I've read are of rather bad games. This is what I've meant when I said I've never heard of a great failed game. The most vocal group are people with a bad game who feel like they're entitled to earn millions (rethoric hyperbole intended).
Being "great" (whatever that means) has nothing whatsoever to do with success. There are plenty of "great" things, games included, that fail. The whole idea of "building a better mouse-trap and people will beat a path to your door" is a fantasy. And this is particularly true for any app --game or not-- in something like Apple's App Store.
You can take crap, add great marketing and turn it into solid cash-flow.
In an ecosystem like the app store any app without a solid and aggressive marketing program is almost guaranteed to fail.
Yes, "great" is better than "lame" but they don't succeed or fail on their own.
Regardless, if you're making something special, you're in a much better position to be able to promote it. In business terms, go for the niche that's not currently being served, and execute well.
Do that, and the marketing is easy. Games journalists want to know about unique games that they'll love. They definitely don't want to cover the ten thousandth mediocre clone of whatever's popular at the moment.
Not sure if that's entirely true, but it doesn't seem to support your argument.
Battlecruiser 3000AD, Beyond Good & Evil, Brütal Legend, Grim Fandango, The Last Express, Psychonauts, and Shenmue are often said to be pretty good.
Also, 500 iOS games per day. Mostly, games fail because it's cut-throat. Yeah, a lot are generic, but some are probably pretty good.
What's the standard of "great"? Popular? Well reviewed? In your opinion? Because there's well-reviewed games that flopped, and there's games I've personally liked that didn't make much money. There's even reasonably popular games that are complete commercial failures.
Yes, if you have a AAA company, and a AAA marketing budget, it will drive some sales. But even then, they can flop.
There are tons of cloned games sold well, and there are also many great original games aren't.