Broken
Toys
Random comments about
games and tractors
Dodging Falling Dinosaurs
Every so often, Raph pops up and reminds us that yes, he does actually know what he’s talking about.
Go read; but don’t think he’s talking about the future. Most of what he’s describing (collapse of PC gaming distribution channels, the budgetary version of Mutual Assured Destruction) is the present.
About 15 years ago (dear Cthulhu I’m old) I used to dabble in video production. Back then, the “Big Iron” dominated that market too. Video production companies had huge investments in massive, mostly analog systems costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I helped set up an advertising agency that did the same thing, on a Macintosh that didn’t cost hundreds of thousands of dollars with a few Frankenstinian-level video editing addons and gewgaws. Where the “Big Iron” companies charged huge hourly fees for professional level video production, we cranked out the stuff for FREE – the real money, after all, was in placing the resulting exclusive ads that were produced.
Five years later our wacky Frankenstein project was the industry standard. Funny how things change.
(By the way, if you work on digital video today, pity our little Frankenbox – since hard drives of the day couldn’t import broadcast-quality video at 30fps, we had to get it digitized the hard way – one steenkin frame at a time. Took 14 hours for 20 minutes of footage, which saved out as a then-mindblowing “entire gigabyte!!1″ of file storage. Nowadays my phone makes that look sad. My phone does better video. I have a PC hooked to my TV that digitizes video on the fly so I can watch the Daily Show when I feel like it. Things change.)
| Print article |
about 4 years ago
The only thing that I would disagree with in Raph’s article is that consoles will go away with Big Developers. Xbox Live Arcade has all the things that Raph is extoling … small games, electronic distribution, episodic content (through downloadable add-on packs). On my 360 I own more XBLA games than I have full games … and I’m always looking for more, because they’re cheap, easy to learn and fun.
about 4 years ago
> The only thing that I would disagree with in Raph\’e2\’80\’99s article is that consoles
> will go away with Big Developers. Xbox Live Arcade has all the things that
> Raph is extoling \’e2\’80\’a6
I agree, and so does he. He mentions as one of his bullet points the convergence of networked consoles and what PCs are thought of as now.
Right now MS still has a pretty tight stranglehold on what goes up on Xbox360 Live, but I suspect competition will lighten that up in the coming year or two.
about 4 years ago
My reality check must have bounced.
Big Developers are spending $100m per game and have a 90% failure rate? What are they spending the money on? It sure as hell is not game developement.
My mind boggles. Surely, the entire industry is not this incompetent. Video games are not a new market any more. How is it that Big Developers can continue to dissapoint their customers like this?
about 4 years ago
$100 million is the top tier, the exception, not the rule. For this, you get the latest version fo Final Fantasy, et al. The average PS2 or Xbox game dev spending is still around $5 million, although it appears to be higher for Xbox 360 and there are fears that will double with the PS3. Add in marketing and it can rise to $8-10 mill pretty easily. However, it is not unusual for the top games to spend $25-50 million on dev and marketing.
And most of the spending is on art and animation and general salaries. The industry can survive a 1-in10 hit rate because that 1 hit brings in enough money to pay for the other 9 and more.
Raph makes a good point; only the top publishers can really afford to produce a Triple-A title anymore and at $5 million, even ‘A’ games are being pushed out of reach. Of course, we’ve known this for years, which is why we’ve been hearing for years that Internet distribution will beat up Retail and steal it’s lunch money some day ‘soon.’ It has just taken longer than anyone expected… as always. We’re all pretty sure it will happen, we just suck at figuring out when.
He is also right in that the main problem now for smaller developers of more compact games is finding ways to cut through the noise and get noticed. That’s why efforts such as Greg Costikyan’s Manifesto are of such interest to me; if he can get a hearing in the court of public opinion, we’ll see whether the concept has a chance to work. Much depends on the content, of course.
about 4 years ago
Surely, the entire industry is not this incompetent. Video games are not a new market any more. How is it that Big Developers can continue to dissapoint their customers like this?
Actually, yes, it can all be incompetent. And is.
It’s not that all the individuals are no good. There are plenty of highly skilled people out there working in the industry. The problem is that the way the industry is structured very few of those people actually get to use their strengths on their product, and are instead forced to combine their weaknesses together when working on a project. It’s the rare exception when someone with talent is able to shine through that mess.
about 4 years ago
I don’t think it was the $100m that threw me, so much as the 90%. I work in New Product Development. Not software, mind you, but the basic precepts of project management should be the same. If any company in any sector at any budget level had a success rate this low, they would be soon crowded out of the market and force to compete on price with firms that have already outsourced damn near everything.
forced to combine their weaknesses
TPRJones’ comment ties in nicely with the main source of my confusion. Why the hell have software companies not figured this shit out? Game companies must create new games to survive. It goes beyond hiring good project managers (which it sounds like they can’t do anyway). The entire system from the CEO, to the marketing critters, to the PR flacks, to the code monkeys, to the CSR droids, to the guy who spread cream cheese on Lum’s bagel. The whole thing needs to be set up to make the best new games.
Argh. Must restrain fists of rage.
about 4 years ago
Agreed, but it’s an uphill struggle to fix it. The problem is these larger companies are old enough and large enough to have moved past their Prime stage. Most are in either Recrimination or Bureaucracy (or, of course, Death), which means that new ideas are slow to be accepted, punishment for failure is swift and usually misdirected to the wrong places in the corporate structure, and they are completely unable to adapt to changes in the market.
At the same time, the industry is growing and changing more rapidly than any other industry of it’s size in history. There’s simply no way for any company past it’s Prime stage to even hope to keep up and provide innovative products of any reasonable quality. Yet only the big companies have the cash resources to compete at the highest levels. It is a quandry.
The only answer is a radical change in the marketplace, as Raph outlined. I don’t know that I agree with all his particulars, but his overall thesis is spot on IMO.
For more on the nature of these sorts of business problems, I recommend the works of Ichak Adizes. He’s written some very insightful books on the topic, and while some of his writing gets a bit thick in places it will certainly provide some enlightenment.
about 4 years ago
As to which part I’d disagree with, I think he’s discounting potential breakthroughs in high-quality algolrythmical content creation. It’s been done before, sure, but the results have usually been limp at best. Currently most of the good art and content in these massive games is constructed retail, if you will; hands on most every step of the way by individual writers and artists. I foresee more wholesale quality content construction, requiring fewer artists and a smaller investment of time and resources to create the same content. That just might save the industry from imploding if ti comes in time.
I don’t think the games will get smaller, just the costs of producing them.
I wish I could remember the name of that game I’ve been so excited about, where you essentially take an aomeba and evolve it into an interstellar empire. Spore? Whatever, it’s content is mostly created algolrythmically, and it looks to be a good forerunner of the type of content creation methedologies I suspect we’ll see in the future.
about 4 years ago
“$100 million is the top tier, the exception, not the rule. For this, you get the latest version fo Final Fantasy, et al. The average PS2 or Xbox game dev spending is still around $5 million, although it appears to be higher for Xbox 360 and there are fears that will double with the PS3. Add in marketing and it can rise to $8-10 mill pretty easily. However, it is not unusual for the top games to spend $25-50 million on dev and marketing.”
I had something different to say but canned it as to not offend to many people. Why would any company want or even imagine producing a game and having it distributed any other way then the way they are produced now? It is big business and to many dollars floating around for it to ever change. Unless we have a similar gaming crash like we did in the 80′s.
Unlikely.
“Raph makes a good point; only the top publishers can really afford to produce a Triple-A title anymore and at $5 million, even \’e2\’80\’98A\’e2\’80\’99 games are being pushed out of reach. Of course, we\’e2\’80\’99ve known this for years, which is why we\’e2\’80\’99ve been hearing for years that Internet distribution will beat up Retail and steal it\’e2\’80\’99s lunch money some day \’e2\’80\’99soon.\’e2\’80\’99 It has just taken longer than anyone expected\’e2\’80\’a6 as always. We\’e2\’80\’99re all pretty sure it will happen, we just suck at figuring out when.”
It will happen when they are not paying outrageous money to hire talent, and marketing. Sure you will get some indies doing some off mainstream stuff. You might even get a “low budget indie flick type” to take off once in awhile. But face it folks gaming has gone the way of hollywood now
good luck on ever stealing muscle from the corporate machine. And even if a piped indie does take off, I am sure they would sell out for a bagel.
about 4 years ago
“Outrageous money to hire talent”? Dude, compare to Hollywood. It’s not even close. Game development salaries are (now finally) close to in line with regular software development. For an entertainment industry, that’s way outta whack; in all entertainment industries, you have a huge earnings disparity between the high and low end. Gaming does not yet have the “star power” effect. If it develops it, then the cost of development will get even MORE expensive.
about 4 years ago
If you’re going to compare the movie biz to the game biz, consider that only in the past three years have all the major movie studios started “indie” or “art” distribution arms (Universal’s Focus Features, Fox’s Searchlight, etc.), and mid-level production companies emerged as the purveyors of cheap but popular and lucrative movie projects.
Movies also only have to rely on two distribution methods that also represent the two media available — theater film and DVD — whereas games reaching a large market are obligated to be compatible and take advantage of the latest generation’s ability to serve content. Several big-name movie features are being shot in IMAX nowadays, but that’s about the only equivalent to game productions having to support a whole host of platforms. In general, movie production methods have improved in efficiency and lowered in cost as (some) producers and directors learn to work quickly and cheaply. I’m hard pressed to find many game studios who champion this; it’s always bigger, better, more expensive, more time, and don’t tell me about the latest production methods, because we fly by the seat of our pants around here.
Meanwhile, it was pointed out that the budgets of the five movies that were up for Best Picture at the recent Oscars — Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Crash, Good Night And Good Luck, and Munich — put together didn’t reach that of King Kong’s $200 million budget (which it’s only just barely breaking even on.) I didn’t even see King Kong, but besides Munich, I saw all the other four nominees in theaters.
Compared to games, however, I have trouble taking “indie” gaming seriously. Yeah, the big publishers exert all kinds of control and screw projects over, indies are more nimble and creative and are going to save the industry from itself, blah blah blah. Not from where I’m sitting. Independents still require capital to be in business, and too many of them keep griping that it’s not available. Further, too many “indie devs” are using their status as an excuse to never get their projects finished, or specialize in lower-end titles that you’d have to pull teeth out of my head to get me to download and play, because lately I’m feeling burned. (Darwinia fucking sucks.) Meanwhile, EA made The Godfather Game, which everyone was expecting to be a ridiculous, overproduced flop, but by most accounts it didn’t outright suck. That’s phenomenal in my mind, and reinforces the idea that games made by the “big boys” are just as likely to bomb as those by the “little guys.”
Raph, I still remember your AGC panel where you dropped the $50 million development question. I remember thinking that if anyone spent that much money on a game project, I’d laugh at them. Then Blizzard spent that much on World of Warcraft.
And their live team fell apart.
And it doesn’t cure cancer or fight terrorism.
about 4 years ago
“consider that only in the past three years have all the major movie studios started \’e2\’80\’9cindie\’e2\’80\’9d or \’e2\’80\’9cart\’e2\’80\’9d distribution arms (Universal\’e2\’80\’99s Focus Features, Fox\’e2\’80\’99s Searchlight, etc.), and mid-level production companies emerged as the purveyors of cheap but popular and lucrative movie projects.”
Dude, pretty much the entire “indie” scene is owned by the studios in one way or another and always has been, until you get to the true indie fringes.
You were one of the few who saw those flicks in the theaters, you realize…
But in general, I’d avoid comparing to Hollywood — the whole models are different. The game biz is more like Hollywood was under the old studios system ages ago than it is like Hollywood today.
about 4 years ago
>Further, too many \’e2\’80\’9cindie devs\’e2\’80\’9d are using their status as an excuse to never >get their projects finished, or specialize in lower-end titles that you\’e2\’80\’99d have to >pull teeth out of my head to get me to download and play, because lately I\’e2\’80\’99m >feeling burned. (Darwinia fucking sucks.)
Am I the only one that liked Darwinia? I keep talking to all these people that hated it, but I thought it was great.
about 4 years ago
Wow, those > marks look like crap.
about 4 years ago
“\’e2\’80\’9cOutrageous money to hire talent\’e2\’80\’9d? Dude, compare to Hollywood. It\’e2\’80\’99s not even close. Game development salaries are (now finally) close to in line with regular software development. For an entertainment industry, that\’e2\’80\’99s way outta whack; in all entertainment industries, you have a huge earnings disparity between the high and low end. Gaming does not yet have the \’e2\’80\’9cstar power\’e2\’80\’9d effect. If it develops it, then the cost of development will get even MORE expensive. “
It’s not the “star power” effect that is lacking it’s the basic supply and demand of creating a product with a wide enough appeal to earn the money to pay people.
I know many are just amazed at WoW’s customer base. Frankly, it’s for crap. Most, no the vast majority, of entertainment events in peoples lives last at most 3 hours once a week.
I know most don’t understand what I’m talking about so I’ll try and explain.
People want to be entertained and they want some finality to that entertainment right now. When online games finally understand that concept of finality, at weekly 3-hour increments, that online game will be a blockbuster like no other has been.
The idea of online games still favoring cat-ass, even though cat-ass design has been proven to be obsolete just sickens me. Some developer, some day, will finally figure out that the cat-asses of the world are ruining their profitability from a purely marketing standpoint.
Imagine people have two or three or four favorite games at the same time rather than one. What’s the value in having a crushing effect? You know the, “if you play X then you really have to give up on Y sooner or later due to progression limitations. You can’t play both games!” I digress.
about 4 years ago
” I think he\’e2\’80\’99s discounting potential breakthroughs in high-quality algolrythmical content creation.”
You mean “AI”.
about 4 years ago
Sure, Raph know some things…just not about game design.
about 4 years ago
Just me, or does Raph says ‘dude’ a lot more when he’s not working.
about 4 years ago
Darwinia and Uplink kicked ass. If only for the refreshing change of gameplay. Uplink was the better of the two but Darwinia is still a damn good game.
I think all this navel gazing is bullshit. Internet distribution is impossible without portal sites that people actually go to. People don’t use portals flat out, its just in our ADHD mindset.
Sadly Babbages will be with us in some form hocking Rainbow Six 72 : Magenta Shillegah long into my retirement.
Honestly most of the AAA uber graphic games are just show cases for the new graphics. They rarely justify the expense put into them whne it comes down to gameplay.
about 4 years ago
I say dude a lot in person.
about 4 years ago
You guys really do think too much.
about 4 years ago
i like eggs