GAME JOBS
Contents
The Trouble with Typecasting: Starbreeze, Syndicate, and the Future
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Telltale Games
Lead Environment Artist
 
Trendy Entertainment
Technical Producer
 
Sledgehammer Games / Activision
Level Designer (Temporary)
 
High Moon / Activision
Senior Environment Artist
 
LeapFrog
Associate Producer
 
EA - Austin
Producer
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Tenets of Videodreams, Part 3: Musicality
 
Post Mortem: Minecraft Oakland
 
Free to Play: A Call for Games Lacking Challenge [1]
 
Cracking the Touchscreen Code [3]
 
10 Business Law and Tax Law Steps to Improve the Chance of Crowdfunding Success
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief:
Kris Graft
Blog Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Mike Rose, Kris Ligman
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
Education:
Gillian Crowley
 
Contact Gamasutra
 
Report a Problem
 
Submit News
 
Comment Guidelines
 
Blogging Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  The Trouble with Typecasting: Starbreeze, Syndicate, and the Future
by Christian Nutt [Business/Marketing, Interview]
3 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
January 20, 2012 Article Start Previous Page 2 of 3 Next
 

How big is the studio now?

MN: We are 93 people.



And how many projects do you have running at the same time?

MN: Right now, we have two.

Including Syndicate?

MN: Including Syndicate.

I guess your role is managing overall.

MN: Definitely. I'm not involved on the production level. I oversee the production; I get reports, of course, and am in close contact with the game directors and the producers on the projects, but we are also a listed company. So I have to deal with that, as well.

Independent developers have seen a lot of closures, so managing the burn rate on a studio of that size and making sure projects are lined up has got to be one of your biggest challenges.

MN: That is one of my biggest challenges and one of my biggest priorities, yes.

Is it difficult, in this climate, to sign projects for your studio?

MN: It's always difficult. As you know, triple-A projects today are getting bigger and more expensive with more production value into it. Having someone spend that kind of money... It is hard. It is difficult, as you say. That's one of my top priorities: to have the right products lined up for the next project.

There's been a lot of discussion of having teams prototyping so that you can have something to show; how do you manage that process?

MN: (laughs) That's a hard process. What we try to do is that we have one game, and then we can do two projects, staggered, so we have people in between that can work on our new stuff we want to make.

Riddick, Syndicate, and The Darkness, these are IPs that you brought a lot of life to as a studio, but they are not original IP. Is that something you are seeking out?

MN: We want to make our own IP; no doubt. That's something the studio wants to do. Everyone in the studio can ask me what it is; we have probably 93 different views on that. We definitely want to do it.

But it's also about balancing the financials as well. It takes money to build your own IP, but we definitely want to do that; no doubt. We have been fortunate to work with great IPs like Syndicate, The Darkness, and Riddick, and the talented people that worked with those games and made them really good games.

Is the focus of your studio going to continue to be on big triple-A games, or are you going to mix it up?

MN: We're going to mix it up. From several standpoints, I think. We're working on the big triple-A, but we're also looking to do a few smaller things that we can potentially try our own IP on, as well. More games in production at the same time, but smaller. Everything from managing the financial and commercial risks to letting the people at the studio work on their game they want to work on and giving them some creative freedom, if you like.

Do you envision going direct to consumers on download platforms with smaller games? Does that appeal to you as a studio?

MN: It always appeals to you. When I look at any project, I look at it from a commercial standpoint, I look from a creative standpoint, and a production standpoint. So it depends on what kind of game we're doing. We're not doing that right now, but we're actually self-funding one original IP right now. If we're going to take it to market ourself -- I haven't decided yet. It's always about how you maximize what you can do.

How do you make those decisions? Is it based on the opportunities you're being presented with by publishing partners saying, "This is a better idea, right now, for our studio," or is it about just the quality of the IP as it develops?

MN: First we have a long-term business plan foundation; we know what we want to make and where we want to be in three years' time. If we get presented opportunities that fit within that, then we do it; otherwise, we don't.

You have a long business plan, but some of these decisions must come together suddenly.

MN: Oh, yes; that's why I said that the business plan is the foundation, but you also have to look at it opportunistically sometimes as well. You work both ways, in that sense -- if I make any sense! (laughs)

Absolutely, it does. Do you feel a strong desire to remain as an independent studio?

MN: Yes.

Why?

MN: To control your fate, in some ways.

Do you think studios that have not stayed independent have suffered because they can't control their own fate?

MN: No, I don't think so. I think we've been lucky. We're also publicly traded, which makes it a bit more stable. We have our loyal shareholders who help us through the growth of the company. I think you have to be extremely lucky to succeed in any business, and I think we have. I think the big studios that have gone under have been unlucky. It's a hard world out there. I can't speak for them, of course, in any way, but I think it's a lot about opportunity, and being in the right place at the right time.

I'm sure there was a certain point where you get the jobs because of the quality you produce, but you also get the jobs because things came together at EA, which is completely external to anything that you could control.

MN: Yeah. Exactly. Definitely. Since that's a big unknown, trying to create your own IP and work on your own products like we do right now, makes the creative freedom that we can move in that direction as well. We're not going to leave this space! (laughs)

 
Article Start Previous Page 2 of 3 Next
 
Top Stories

image
Gearbox's Randy Pitchford on games and gun violence
image
How Kinect's brute force strategy could make Xbox One a success
image
Microsoft's official stance on used games for Xbox One
image
Keeping the simulation dream alive
Comments

Ernest Adams
profile image
It looks like a fine game in its own right, but I do wish EA had more respect for the fans of its original IP -- and perhaps more confidence in their own ability to bring new IP to market. Why call this "Syndicate"? It's clearly not Syndicate. Presumably they did it because they felt it had some name recognition; but the fans of the original Syndicate are getting old and may not be that interested in FPSs any more, and the name won't mean anything to the youngsters. I'll bet than 90% of the old fans are more irritated than pleased.



I anxiously await the My Little Dungeon bile demon virtual pet game; The Sims On Crack GTA ripoff; Theme Madden NFL stadium builder; and Bill Budge's AK-47 Construction Set.

Aleksander Adamkiewicz
profile image
Don't forget the Billy Mays Point and Click RPG. I'm really surprised nobody did that yet.

Bisse Mayrakoira
profile image
Cookie-cutter FPS is not interesting to seasoned gamers who have seen it all before (and probably done better), but I don't see a general mismatch between "old player" and "FPS". Especially with a single player game like Syndicate where you don't compete with the other players' twitch reflexes.



If the levels were open-ended with a heavy strategic and improvisation focus, there were destructible environments and car bombings, persuading/brainwashing masses of civilians, the player could jump between controlling different syndicate agents and give orders to the remaining agents, individual agents were considered disposable assets and there was no moralistic plot... the old fans would definitely acknowledge the game as a real Syndicate game, and most of them would tolerate or even appreciate the change of perspective.


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Tech