|
We're at a point where industry dollars are going to go to more similar, high-budget games, and fewer games in the middle get budgets. And then indie. I think we're seeing a stratification happening.
MS: I think we're seeing a slow suicide. [laughs] I mean, isn't that like attrition? To always put more and more money on a more and more narrow path? Where will this end? At one point, right? Where there's nothing anymore. Death. Suicide. I mean, I'm not an economist, but that seems to be where it's going, no? Or is it just a console/PC thing, and well, after that, it's all going to be Facebook?
AH: Or is there always a strong undercurrent of things that aren't?
Activision is very specifically doubling down on things like Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, and sort of saying, "We don't need anything else, because we can make these things so titanic that they'll dominate." Whereas a company like EA, its closest competitor, is saying, "We're going to send tendrils out into the different market segments."
And I wouldn't say they're necessarily going to send them out to creative avenues. That's not how it's thought about from the corporate side. So, there are definitely different approaches in the commercial games industry, but it's still about market share, or market targeting.
MS: Yeah, well, the companies you mentioned are publishers. I think in any medium, the publisher's concern will be commercial. There are always, like, small record labels and small book publishers; those exist. But the ones you mentioned are not the small ones. [laughs] So, that's normal.
What's more surprising is, actually, there's not more pushing coming from developers to diversify, to work with other themes, to try and reach other audiences, for instance. Which is just getting harder, and harder, and harder, as things remain restricted to these few formulas.
So hard now that, indeed, if you want to reach a broad audience now, you have to make some FarmVille or something. You can't really make this kind of media game that the games industry has been hoping to make for so long, and trying to get very close to, as well. Now you can only make that for a hardcore audience, anymore. I think that's suicide. [laughs]
There are definitely people saying similar things, that we're going to niche-ify. But I think that's the expectation now, in a way -- that the console space will become a niche.
AH: It already is.
MS: But isn't that stupid? They're already connected to the TV. Build them into the TV! I mean, there's so much opportunity there. That's where I agree with Auriea. You know, a lot of publishers and developers say, "This is commercial. We're doing this for commercial reasons." Bullshit. Commercial would be expanding, and trying to reach everybody. They're doing this because they really love shooting shit up. [laughs] They really love that. It's an artistic choice.
AH: That's good that you love what you do, but don't expect that to get you anywhere.
MS: I think they're happy with it becoming a niche, totally happy with that. That's sort of strange, as a commercial company.
AH: The fun of being me is I get to just look at this and not care too much about it. We're just going to make what we make. I insist that I am not in the games industry, even though I come to things like this, sometimes, to my utter folly.
My point being just that more people need to make this stuff for itself, for the love of the medium, perhaps. And not care so much about where the industry is going as a whole. Because that's sort of like, "Oh, they have a big meeting, and they decide that this is how things are going to be," which is how it always felt about genres, to me.
MS: I think this is sort of something that happens because commerce is similar to games. Winning a game is a little bit like selling a million copies. Maybe this kind of mindset of making games, liking games, is similar to being successful?
I find that a lot of developers that I've spoken to over the years, to some greater or lesser extent that I cannot obviously say, but I perceive, have been co-opted by the marketing departments of the companies they work for.
MS: How do they get co-opted?
I think they get enticed by the idea that if they listen to these people, they will make a game that people like better.
AH: Rather than listening to the people themselves, or listening to themselves, listening to their own hearts, their own minds and desires, beyond mechanics. It just seems like, in no other medium is it so focused on this. I mean, yeah, there's really commercial writers, but there are tons! Most writers, it's coming from someplace else for them, and that's what this medium needs more of.
|
Printer-Friendly Version
I just love their perspective and agree with them. I want MORE. It's there... please, let's take it, let's write it, let's make it. Let's make FPS and RPG's and also all those games that we have been wanting for years.
Every time I imagine a new game, I always try to remember what I wanted as a kid and didn't get. And I see our present and all those things that I wanted to play back then haven't been done yet. I still want to see those games...
About the "bad" criticism they receive... I've been thinking a little about Nintendo. I'm a Nintendo fanboy so I'm very partial to them, but still, I feel like they get a lot of hate because they try to make some changes. And I feel like they got even more hate because they got a successful with something thy weren't supposed to (the Wii and the DS). I remember reading year after year "Nintendo is going down this year for sure" with some kind of ingrained resentment. Like they were angry that Nintendo tried something they didn't like and Nintendo proved that they were wrong about it not being possible and that you could actually make a great console without high-end graphics. And now we see all those articles of people thinking that Nintendo will go puff... finally. And that's talking about a huge company that takes some risks but it's still actually very conservative. So, my point is... there is so much hate and conservatism. Let's hope they grow up as well... it would be good it that happened.
I have 2 mentors with polar opposite opinions.
One believes games are money making machines and you shouldn't reinvent the wheel.
The other believes you should be in the games industry to create something amazing and would be crazy to make a game for money.
Thank you for this article which gives insight into both sides from experienced and informed opinions.
But I think the distinction needs to be made between interaction and interface. Interaction relates to how the player emulates the fictional world in their mind and in a sense affects it and how it affects them. Whereas what they were describing has more to do with interfacing. I think the problem with Heavy Rain is that the interface tries to be used as a literal and explicit aesthetic element. It shouldn't be about how the player presses buttons, it should be about how the player interacts with the world. Because the fictional world that the game aesthetically represents are where the ideas are transmitted and where the key concepts are explored, rather than the mechanical parts of the media itself.
Why design the aesthetic aspects of the interaction at the interface level? When it is approached that way, the aesthetics of interaction are consciously analyzed by the player, which simply drags them out of the experience.
Just love her saying that :)
That said, I respect the style of the article, because it really outlines the importance of narrative in video games.
And when you talk about expressing meaning, they often take that a little bit too literal. [laughs] As in language -- I have an idea, and I tell this idea to you. That's not really what happens in a lot of art. It's often a lot more intuitive, and artists play with the aesthetics. They don't know exactly what this message is."
Wow, Michaël Samyn defined myself! I love art, but I can't create it. I can do gameplay, game mechanics, I can design how the game works, how to challenge the player. But I can't portray art, I can't do a game make you feel anything other than "it's too easy, it's boring", "it's hard but I can win" or "this is impossible, I can't win".
About graphics and technical stuff: I see games have fallen into the "technology" trap, since they have "indulged" (for the lack of a better word) with the ideas of "graphics are everything." It takes but a small visit to Youtube to see how many self-proclaimed "hardcore gamers" will argue about games based on which one has the better graphics, or which engine is better, based obviously exclusively on the graphics, since we don't have access to all the game engines out there (I recall an argument some youtubers were having about how the internal use only Frostbite 2 was better than UE3 purely based on the frostbite 2 demo reel DICE showed at E3).
My point here is how developers add too many complications to the technical side of the games (as they said on this interview) but I think this is a part of some sort of vicious circle where you do that because that's what gamers want. You want to pushthe technology, and gamers want tech to be pushed because "that makes games better" (which is completely false). I've experienced that with my just-released indie game SteroidS (developed using UDK), a lot of comments go into "how dated it looks and how it doesn't take advantage of Unreal Engine," this last comment meaning "it doesn't take advantage of the graphic capabilities to make it look as good as Gears of War 3" (little they know I did take advantage of UDK's features, I just happened to take advantage of Unreal Script and Kismet, and that doesn't show in the visuals).
This also relates to how gamers (as well as some developers) make claims on how we desperately need new consoles, while this sometimes can be translated as "we want better graphics." Then come those claims on "how the PC offers a better gaming experience," and the reasoning behind that is basically the latest graphic card can display better graphics than the current generation consoles. In the meantime, there's still a lot that can be tried with devices such as the Kinect to create different kind of experiences. Unfortunately many of those would end up being ignored or would become a part of a "niche" because Modern Warfare 3 looks so much better than *insert fictional very original kinect title here*
About games being able to be a narrative/storytelling medium: We all know the "videogames are art" argument. We can debate whether or not games are an artistic medium or not, what merits do they have (like storytelling). However, how much importance those elements have if games will most of the time be judged based on technical aspects? I for one like the FEAR series a lot (not because they are FPS, as I'm not into FPS, for example I've never played CoD, nor I plan to), but I couldn't help to be very upset when I read this quote on the IGN review: "In terms of aesthetics, F.E.A.R. 3 provides passable graphics that look slightly dated but still get the job done."
You never hear film critics say "In terms of aesthetics, Shutter Island provides passable visuals that look slightly dated but still get the job done." A filmmaker can decide to shoot in black and white and everything is fine because that was an "artistic choice." A game developer decides to use Final Fantasy VII style graphics, gamers and reviewers alike will yell "this looks too obsolete for current standards."
But then the same people start arguing about why games aren't considered art and why Rogert Ebert is wrong when he states videogames are not art.
I for one think developers should start looking into games in a more creative ways and not just focus on make the most photorealistic games possible, and also not just give gamers "the best graphics money can buy" but make them think of games as something different. That's what many indies are doing, but the truth is indies will not change the way the world perceives games.
About the state of the industry in general: I sometimes feel certain gamers (specially the so-called "hardcore gamers") are not into gaming for the love of gamers anymore but because they like top of the line technology, and they can even feel insulted if someone suggests an indie/social/casual game. It turns out that, while "hardcore gamers" should be those that crave for videogames for the love of videogames, they are in reality "big budget games gamers" that want pixel-perfect precision and visual realism (no wonder why CoD 8 sold so many million copies last week, even if it's pretty much the same game as the other 7).
The media doesn't help either, with so much attention given to big budget games because that's what's "hardcore" and smaller games are pretty much ignored. Again, I can talk about this based on my experience with SteroidS, being ignored by many gaming sites because right now MW3 and Skyrim are the only things worth talking about (as well as Minecraft, but for the sole reason that it has a huge user base, as it was completely ignored by the same sites during almost an entire year until it gained momentum... but many brilliant indie games will not get the chance of gaining momentum because they are simply ignored).
I think the clearest example of this could be EpicBattleAxe as they provide "Gaming news and features that cut through the crap..." Visit their site and what you'll see right now is Skyrim, MW3, Uncharted 3... I'd like to know their definition of "crap," maybe low-budget, social, casual, less-known indie games?
I think it's important for people to criticize junk games, junk science, junk food, junk products, junk anything, but I don't think we need to feel frustrated at anything the industry is doing or anything end users are doing. Just keep spreading awareness and eventually there will be a wholesale return to quality and values and honesty. There's growing opportunity to create the equivalent of organic sustainable free range pesticide free high nutrient games and earn a living.
n_Tale_Of_Tales_Dark_Journey.php
I do take issue with some of AH's comments generalizing the industry and what people want to make. It's a huge industry with many people, ma'am. And please, do not judge others for what they want to make either. You're lucky enough to be able to do what you do for a living, so let others do what they do for a living as well. If they want to make COD6 - Post-Modern Warfare, let them. It's less competition for you.