Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Contents
Game Changers
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 22, 2012
 
Interview: Silver Dollar uses XBLIG for its mad experiments
 
Last year's Supreme Court case on games cost California $1.8M [2]
 
Facebook starts new European games division
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 22, 2012
 
Spark Unlimited, Inc.
Senior Graphics Engineer
 
Avalanche Studios
Graphics Programmer, New York
 
BioWare Austin
Marketing Analyst
 
Spark Unlimited, Inc.
Lead Gameplay Engineer
 
Penn State Erie, The Behrend College
Interactive Media Game Development Faculty Position
 
Playdom
Server Programmer
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 22, 2012
 
arrow Postmortem: Days of Wonder's Ticket to Ride Pocket [1]
 
arrow Sponsored Feature: Canada - Scoring High as a Game Nation [1]
 
arrow The Vita Interview [18]
 
arrow Gamification Dynamics: Identity and Story [7]
 
arrow What Makes Social Games Social? [3]
 
arrow Will Tablet Game Quality Soon Leapfrog Consoles? [27]
 
arrow Tearing Down Barriers: How to Bring MMO Players Together [10]
 
arrow Withstanding the Collapse of the Middle [4]
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
February 22, 2012
 
Piracy and the four currencies [4]
 
The Secondary Costs of Outsourcing [9]
 
Sixty to Zero [3]
 
The Combinatorial Itch [5]
 
God Games and the Superman Complex [12]
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief/News Director:
Kris Graft
Features Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Frank Cifaldi, Tom Curtis, Mike Rose, Eric Caoili, Kris Graft
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
 
Feature Submissions
 
Comment Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  Game Changers
by Brandon Sheffield [Business, Game Design]
23 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
November 9, 2011 Article Start Page 1 of 4 Next
 

[In this article, originally published in the October 2011 issue of Game Developer magazine, editor in chief Brandon Sheffield selects 20 different things that have changed the course of the game industry -- be they companies, technologies, or anything else.]

We work in a rapidly-changing creative industry, where trends can rise and fall inside of a year, or move on to become new standards that all shall follow. This kind of rapid growth and change doesn't come from nowhere, though.


There are catalysts to every big industry shift. Where would we be without the business and game architecture of Doom? If Facebook hadn't come along, would we be employing thousands of people for MySpace games? What about Unity, or Unreal Engine 3?

We've decided to drill down and look at some of the recent concepts, games, companies, and services that are changing the game industry, for better or for worse. Now let's all get out there and keep changing things for the better!

Mojang (Stockholm, Sweden)

Much has been said about Mojang and its monster hit Minecraft. At over 4 million paid accounts and 16 million users total, the game is a massive financial and critical success. It takes the concept of user-created content to new extremes, making the gameplay and the creation one and the same.

But the reason Mojang makes our list is not just the money. Any company can make money with underhanded tactics -- but Mojang has done so with absolute transparency.

For one thing, it proved the viability of the "pay at alpha" model of self-funding. Companies have tried it before, and others have done it since, but Minecraft wrote the book on the concept. Essentially, let people pay for something they like as early as possible -- but make sure you keep supporting them, fixing bugs, listening to your audience, and being as honest with them as you can.

Minecraft creator Markus Persson makes most of his announcements to Twitter rather than through press releases, and does his best to answer most emails and comments directly (though that's impossible with 10 million users), which puts Mojang at the forefront of not company messaging as well.

On top of that, as the company gets sued by Bethesda for using Scrolls as the title of its upcoming game (Bethesda thinks Mojang's Scrolls sounds too much like its own The Elder Scrolls), Mojang is turning a blind eye to the blatant copies of its game that have cropped up on XBLIG and PC, some of which have made over $1 million.

Mojang should be changing the way companies think about the game business. The Swedish company proves you can be honest, transparent, and responsive to your fans, and still make a massive profit.

Kickstarter (New York, NY)

Kickstarter is likely universally-known by readers of Game Developer and Gamasutra, but on the off chance there's someone among us who's unaware, Kickstarter is a company that takes donations on behalf of a fledgling (or finishing) project, offering incentives for buyers, and general goodwill for the company that needs a boost. Though Kickstarter is certainly not the only game in town, it is the largest, and has funded the most successful game projects to date.

Kickstarter takes a small cut of the donations (5 percent - Amazon takes another 3 to 5 percent for use of its payment service), but this is a small price to pay for a company looking for funding.

Most of these groups wouldn't get anything otherwise, and the crowdfunding model has turned out to be a big deal for the indie game community in particular. Games like Cthulu Saves the World and Blade Symphony got their funding from Kickstarter, and Octodad got a sequel due to its successful campaign on the service.

The great thing about crowdfunding versus getting funds from publishers or angel investors is that Kickstarter owns no part of submitted projects, and (for better or for worse) does not hold them accountable for their successful completion.

Most successful projects seem to be nudges to completion rather than actual kick-starts, but a publisher-free funding model is a blessing to any independent game developer, and Kickstarter is currently the leading way to make that happen.

Gameloft (Paris, France)

Gameloft splits its time between making mobile versions of licensed game properties, like Assassin's Creed and Splinter Cell, original titles like Asphalt, and blatantly "similar" titles to popular games like Uncharted and Pokémon.

For better or for worse, Gameloft has pushed the envelope when it comes to making games that draw on the success of other titles. The company makes entirely competent, great-looking games for mobile devices (and occasionally consoles) that leave absolutely no question as to their origin.

N.O.V.A.'s enemy, weapon, and environmental designs look suspiciously like those from Halo. Shadow Guardian borrows themes and gameplay elements from Uncharted. Crystal Monsters uses the themes, gameplay, and even battle perspectives from Pokémon. Eternal Legacy calls to mind Final Fantasy XIII. StarFront: Collision does not hide its StarCraft allusions. You don't have to stretch your brain very much to see the "similarities."


Left, Crystal Monsters. Right, Pokémon Black

Now, this isn't stealing, but it is a case of extreme influence. As battles around IP and gameplay concepts rage, Gameloft's studios have managed to consistently skirt the issue. And it seems to be working for the company, because whenever someone like Naughty Dog or Nintendo doesn't release a game for iOS, Gameloft is there to pick up the slack, and make a decent quality game that scratches a similar itch.

While one certainly wonders what the company's design meetings are like, there's no question that Gameloft is changing the business. This is especially interesting when you get to companies like Nintendo, which says it will never release a game on iOS. Gameloft is forcing companies to think about their mobile strategies a bit earlier, before Gameloft decides to think of it for them.

 
Article Start Page 1 of 4 Next
 
Comments

E McNeill
profile image
Props for describing Gameloft honestly instead of hiding behind "some claim" and other weasel words.


"The fund currently supports four announced projects, Steph Thirion's Faraway, Dan Pinchbeck's Dear Esther, Andy Schatz's Monaco, and Toxic Games' Q.U.B.E."

What happened to Shadow Physics?

scott anderson
profile image
Shadow Physics was dropped from indie fund in July. I might release a little more info on this in the future but that's the gist of it, the game is no longer funded.

E McNeill
profile image
Thanks for responding. I'd be interested in hearing the "more info". I'll keep an eye on the website.

Victor Soliz Kuncar
profile image
Gameloft sounds as a great development to me. "IP" battles are making software companies focus about lawyer stuff instead of making good quality products and thus it is good to have a good precedent such as Gameloft.

Although angry birds is just a physics engine, it does a big deal of cute visual design that is good at attracting new players.

Enrique Montiel
profile image
I don't see what Zbrush and Sculptris changed so much the industry to be called 'game changers'. Those are sculpting software, in the video game scene they are only useful for baking high quality maps and re-topology in some cases. Makes some work easier for modelers but they are not indispensable. Maybe I'm just missing something here. Anyway I haven't read the entire entry, though.

Kelly Kleider
profile image
Zbrush pioneered the ultra-high poly modeling scene. It's used in film, game production and it IS indispensable.

It's kinda strange that you object to the entry without reading it all, no?

Enrique Montiel
profile image
Oh yeah, it improved detailed models in pre-rendered cutscenes and helped in a faster mapping process when used for actual in-game models. Not like cutscenes and normal/bump/etc maps didn't exist before Z-Brush... wait, they did, so: not indispensable. Great tool, awesome tool, it improves and fasten your workflow, just like many other software game developers use, but it is not indispensable (at least not in the game industry, maybe in 3D animation), and in my opinion, not 'game changer' compared to some other examples in this entry.

Kelly Kleider
profile image
It's clear you don't know what you are talking about. Prior to zbrush the primary method for creating normal maps was using the nvidia plugin (or the ati tools). There is no comparison between a character that is traditionally modeled, then textured using the nvidia plugin vs. a normal map generated from a 10 million poly model.

If you want your characters to look like they are wearing glorified bump maps then sure using zbrush is not indispensable, but if you want your art to compete you have no choice but to adopt an ultra-high poly workflow.

Enrique Montiel
profile image
Go read the definition of indispensable. You think without ZBrush or sculpting software in general the video game industry would die? I'm guessing games before Zbrush or games that don't include it in their workflow nowadays are not even worth playing, am I right? Because computer games with no ultra detailed textures and realistic cutscenes cannot even be considered games. Now when it comes to game changer, I don't consider it to be one.

Kelly Kleider
profile image
A game changer doesn't require adoption or death as it's premise, rather it suggests that the subject of the change is fundamentally altered. Zbrush and the subsequent raft of tools that share a similar workflow have changed the industry permanently.
When the 360 appeared on the console scene, a lot of development studios had an incredibly difficult transition from traditional low/medium poly modeling to ultra-high poly counts and normal maps. The workflow if managed poorly was very costly, so in a sense your snarky comment is actually closer to the truth. Why do you think game budgets spiked massively from ps2 to xbox360? Before you fire off another snarky retort, you should consider that I might actually know what I'm talking about, in fact, I might be an artist, I might have been around so long that I worked on a game using rendermorphics before Microsoft bought it and called it directX.

Enrique Montiel
profile image
If anything, the real game changer here is the transition from 2D to 3D, that enabled software like Max or Zbrush to be widely used in the industry, and not only that, that extra axis gave more tools to game designers to design their games, not just eye candy overhauls. I don't take indispensable and game changer as the same thing, despite what my first posts implies. Indispensable = Something absolutely necessary. Game changer, as you said = Something that changes how things are done.

Kudos for being a veteran 'game artist'. I'm sure you know not even 20% of those exorbitant budgets go to the actual developers of the games. Anyway, I'll stay with my opinion. ZBrush/Sculptris: Neither indispensable nor game changers.

Kelly Kleider
profile image
Sorry I didn't reply sooner (ill over the weekend)...

Really? Less than 20%. I think you'll have to produce something that can back up a statement like that, otherwise, I'd be tempted to believe you just pulled that number from your a--.
Here's some budgets to chew on...
http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Most_expensive_video_games

Notice the trend...each generation of platform has a corresponding jump in budgets. The increase in budgets is directly related to the extra effort required to develop for the increased capabilities of a given platform. This is where tools like zbrush really made it possible to produce high quality normal maps in a reasonable time frame. There was nothing else at the time zbrush came out that allowed you to manipulate millions of polys in real-time.
Are we done?

Brian Smith
profile image
Zbrush (& Mudbox, etc) allowed for an unprecedented level of detail to be represented with simple meshes and using relatively unsophisticated hardware. It also allowed for this via an inexpensive and easy pipeline.

Every studio doing content on "current gen" uses these tools. Any tool that gets universally adopted and single-handedly enables a leap in visual fidelity qualifies to be described as a game changer.

Bart Stewart
profile image
As a side note on the patent phenomenon, the problem is not primarily "shady engineers," it is a patent system that intransigently insists on treating software algorithms and concepts exactly like physical inventions.

The concept of encouraging invention by protecting the ability of inventors to profit from their creativity is a good one. But the system through which this concept is implemented is broken. It is failing to achieve its stated goal where software is concerned because it fails to accept that software, while property, is a different form of property with a different range of obviousness and prior art, and a different speed of development and a shorter span of value.

I suggest that blaming the creators who use the current patent system misses the real problem. The patent system itself is what needs to change to reflect the realities of software versus other forms of creative property.

brandon sheffield
profile image
I'd say it's a mix - the system is broken, to be sure, but there are a lot of shysters that are exploiting that system. Creators are not the problem - it's the folks who have never actually created anything, but then file patents on existing techniques just because the patent didn't exist yet that I am decrying.

Titi Naburu
profile image
Well said, brandon. Although there must be creators-shysters too. But some patents are ridiculous, like patenting the thumbs up gesture or a shiny screen.

Bart Stewart
profile image
I understand your point, Brandon. Mine is that the problem is best fixed not by going after the trolls, of whom there will always be plenty to take the place of others, but by fixing the broken system that grants such patents despite obviousness or prior art.

Matt Hackett
profile image
The funding of the Humble Indie Bundle really surprised me. From what I understand, it was started by Wolfire, who wears "indie" like a badge of honor. But surely the investment must mean that they now have to report to investors (at least with regards to their bundles). And why did they even need the money, after the smashing success of the first bundle?

brandon sheffield
profile image
Confusing, indeed! We've asked these questions, and have been unable to get an answer.

Martin Pichlmair
profile image
(Disclaimer: I'm not part of Humble Inc. but I had a game in the third Humble Bundle)

The "smashing success" of the first bundle sure made some money for Wolfire themselves. But the major part of it went to the developers and the charities. Also, Humble Inc. is a separate company from Wolfire Games, though started by the same people. Wolfire is still independently developing games.

Alexander Cooney
profile image
It's incredible to read this and think about how much has changed in so little time.

I'm surprised, though, that Unity didn't get a mention here. Or if not Unity specifically, at least some kind of acknowledgement of the switch from modding to independent game development as a result of a growing stable of viable game frameworks and tools. UDK? Cryengine3?

Jeremy Alessi
profile image
Unity +1

Robert Hewson
profile image
Great read... change is sweeping through the industry, it's going to be a very, very interesting decade.


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.