I would agree that this is a good analogy, however, probably not for the same reasons as others. I would venture to say (based on what I hear) that most people would claim that the older product was superior then that of the new one; and that the manufacturers were forced to change back to the original one as a result. But in the case of the Coca-Cola, that wasn’t necessarily the case.
Surprisingly, most people did actually like the taste of reformulated Coke. In many blind tests conducted by Coke prior to its release, tasters overwhelming liked reformulated Coke over Pepsi. AND they even preferred it over the original formula.
Now this is probably caused in part by a slight gimmick built into the test itself. The reason the Pepsi Challenge was so successful for Pepsi is that in small samples (like those used for taste tests), sweeter products are usually preferred over biting flavors. So Pepsi basically convinced customers, using a test which favored them highly, that it was a better product.
Pepsi had also managed to switch focus from the product to the consumer. They basically promoted the drinker of their product, rather than the drink itself…IE…The taste of a new generation campaign. Coke was losing out to Pepsi as a result. And unless it made changes in response, it would seriously run the risk of losing out to this competitor.
So Coca-Cola did make those changes. And for a while, the new strategy appeared to be working. Pepsi was even afraid it would lose all the ground it had made against Coca-Cola. But Coca-Cola failed to anticipate something which I think ultimately caused the real public backlash.
The unexpected tipping factor was that people hated that Coca-Cola changed its formula (which is made even more surprising when you consider that they had done so a few times before without as much outcry). People were more upset with the loss of nostalgia and history than they were about the taste. It was about the “emotional attachment” to the original that people were upset about.
That being said, some studies also suggest that part of the uproar was that the switch took place without involving the entire public. The whole argument of, “Why are you making big changes based on focus groups’ decisions? You obviously are neglecting my wants and catering toward the larger target market now.”
Ironically, even despite all the backlash and finger wagging, the reformulated Coke was still selling well, except for maybe in the Southern U.S.A (where Coca-Cola was originally from). After three-month’s time, because of fear, the original formula was put back into production under the name of Classic Coke.
Now some say that this brought back a lot of Coca-Cola’s original fan base and made them a closer community. And eventually sales of Classic did start to outstrip that of reformulated Coke, and it ultimately replacing it altogether. But some studies also suggest that Coca-Cola didn’t really fully recover from the Cola Wars until they introduced, quietly this time, Cherry Coke…which is ironically…hehe…a sweeter tasting product than the original flavor. But at least this time Coca-Cola honored a bit of the past with this flavor, being one that did exist “back-in-the-day”. Plus, they didn’t give up their support for the existing products.
So, again, I wouldn’t say that the original Halos were superior to Halo 4. It may be that Halo 4 is a better game. But like reformulated Coke, it will have to deal with the emotional attachment that people have had with those past games. There may well be an uproar and backlash to return to those early days of Halo, just like with Coca-Cola. It’s also possible that 343i is upsetting the existing community by following the market too much and trying to be like the other products out there. Maybe Halo 5 will be the Classic Coke that brings those people back. Though, I wouldn’t mind it being the Cherry Coke either, that honors the past, but takes us forward. It’s a real balancing act that 343i will have to deal with.
But anyways, that’s why I like this analogy. Good job.
=d
