|
What do you think about the future
of, you know, people being able to create high profile, high budget,
$60 console games, and find success?
Budgets are rising on games. That's obvious. You have to sell more copies
of a game to be profitable. Does that worry you about package software,
$60 packaged software for next generation consoles? Do you think we're
going to reach a saturation point, where that might be a problem?
DJ: Just the cost of making games,
you mean?
Yeah, I guess so. The cost of making
games, basically.
DJ: You know, I don't know. I think
it's definitely nerve wracking. I think we're starting to see less games.
I think we're starting to -- well, here's the part that scares me the
most. The part that scares me the most is that I look at these break-even
spreadsheets, when we're working with Sony on our games. You know --
this is how many units you have to sell to break even, and this is what
your current budget is.
Let's put it this way: it's really, you're at
a whole new level, and it's not scary in the sense that I want to get
out of it, and walk away from the problem, but it really is amazing
to look back at, say, Twisted Metal 1, and go, "OK, we were
selling that for 49 bucks, and that cost about $800,000 to make."
And we sold 1,000,000 copies, and we were just like, "Hell, this
is great!" And now you look at selling a million copies of a title
that's going to cost 10, 15, 20 million [to develop], and you're like, "Man,
I hope the low end is a million copies!" Because if it ain't, you're
screwed!
It's really scary. Especially when
you're publishing on a single platform, versus spreading your title
out amongst all kinds of places. So, you know, it's definitely on our
minds, we definitely worry about it. But we don't necessarily know how
it's all going to pan out. I don't know if it's going to mean less games,
or -- the knee-jerk is to say that it'll mean less artistic choices,
but I think if you look at the amazing games that came out toward the
end of 2007, that does not seem to be happening.
We are getting some
amazing titles out there -- thematically, and technically, and gameplay
wise -- like Call of Duty, and Orange Box, and BioShock,
and Rock Band. So, you know, you'd think that would be a problem,
but it doesn't seem to be.
Do you think it helps drive the
ball into Nintendo's court, to an extent? Because the DS and the Wii
have much lower barrier of entry to some of the smaller, and even not-so-small
developers that can't afford the budgets, or afford the marketing dollars?
DJ: You know, maybe. It's hard to say.
I don't have enough data -- which is not that it's not out there, I
just haven't looked at it in a while -- about selling on the Wii. I
mean, you know the first party stuff is selling really well. I saw recently
that Carnival Games, which is a third party title, was doing
pretty well. And so it's the same way when you asked me what I thought
about PS2. I love the fact that there is an option out there for developers
and gamers who are like, "Look, you know, we don't care about the
bleeding edge so much. We just want to have a good time." So I
think it's nice that that has opened up.
And I was going to use the word "niche,"
but I think considering the success of the Wii -- at least so far --
that would be a disrespectful word to use when describing it, considering
how stunningly successful it's been. So what it may really be saying
is that the vast majority who want to play video games could really
care less if they're playing the leading-edge graphics. They just want
to have a good time and get on with their lives. So, you may be right,
that may be actually opening up a whole new world for developers. But
I think it's too early to say if anybody other than the first party
developers on Nintendo's platforms, like in the past, are going to be
able to reap those rewards and benefits. Or if you're only talking about
Zelda and Pokémon.
No, you're right. And I think that,
just like we were talking about with casual versus hardcore, and PS2
transitioning into PS3, all of this stuff, I just feel like right now
we are at a crossroads where we can't really see what's happening. All
these things seem to be up in the air. Do you feel that way?
DJ: Yeah, absolutely. And then when
you roll in the whole digital distribution model, in terms of what is
going to happen to the brick and mortar stores, and is this stuff going
to be downloaded through your television, or are you playing on your
cell phone? There are so many options now, and that's the great news;
the bad news is that nobody knows where this is going to end up. And
so it's scary but exciting.
That's why, to me, I love the downloadable
model. I saw something, it might have been on your site the other day,
that the game industry estimates that they lose a billion dollars a
year to used game sales. I love the digital download model for both
casual games and free games. I love the fact that game makers are being
able to play with, and experiment with a lot of these different ways
to get games to consumers.
In some cases it's cutting out the middleman
altogether, and going right to the consumer, right to the game player.
So it's a real exciting time. I'm grateful to be in the business at
this point in its life.
|
This sentence makes no sense, americans needs to learn that "could care less" and "couldn't care less" means completely different things.
It's good that Jaffe is admitting to not knowing what the future holds because that is a real concern. Developers just need to do what they know with the data they have, strong and steady, and the crystal ball will become *less* murky in the next 6 months, I think.
My prediction - games based on advertising revenue cannot sustain themselves. Maybe for the foreseeable future (in that murky crystal ball) but relying on advertising as a financial model and expecting it to support your games for years into the future is a mistake. A few different models need to be used in a combination in order to create a reliable revenue stream.
This interview also got me thinking about the remakes on different platforms - isn't it funny how people go crazy over different levels of graphical achievement? A DS game could look 'gorgeous' while a PS3 game could also look 'gorgeous', only because they are capable of different things.
Well, I found it hilarious.
My prediction? Sony will draw it's own crowd and standing with the casual gamer when the price cintinues it's accelerated drops. These are usually the most pliable bunch who often confuse marketing with true consumer information. It will however fall to second place in both the casual (to the Wii) and hardcore (X360) gaming markets, although it will be technically a success. Sony will trumpet on about another solid product made, while secretly trying to find out what the next generation's competitors will be doing, knowing they've barely escaped a massive failure with the PS3.
Jaffe will continue in the tradition of making GoW titles for Sony, further continuing the now stale stable of flagships that are churned out as the next big thing for the series. I'm sorry this is not Sony bashing, I was a fan of the PS2, but Metal Gear Solid 4? another Final Fantasy?
Also, I want to point out for Mr JAffe that Sony has no loyalties if it can impact Microsoft sales. Look at what happened with UT3.
1. Look, I think I was like, you know, like -- the thing is, and I mean like, you know, like definitely those people -- and it's happening.
2. For a creator, it's "exciting" to be able to put ads inbetween levels of his games.
Also, "couldn't care less" is sarcastic without saying it the wrong way (that would be by leaving out the "not"). "Could care less, but not likely" doesn't make any sense whatsoever.