"This industry’s in need of a shake-up, but one that should be designed to benefit all developers, males and females alike."
- Rhianna Pratchett, lead writer on Tomb Raider and originator of #1ReasonToBe.
This year's GDC brought a number of standout sessions, including the well-attended #1ReasonToBe panel, now available in the GDC Vault. But one influential voice not present at the panel was the hashtag's originator, Tomb Raider and Mirror's Edge writer Rhianna Pratchett.
Now in a new interview with Rock, Paper, Shotgun, Pratchett - who was unavailable to attend the panel at GDC because of a schedule conflict - shares her own coda to the talk, which discussed not only industry sexism but the empowerment working in games can offer.
The problems highlighted by #1reasonwhy were shocking, saddening and predictable in equal measure. It doesn’t matter how ‘special’ your industry is, there’s no excuse for some of the sheer asshattery which that hashtag revealed. However, maintaining a sense of perspective is vital. Yes, it’s important to talk about the fight, but it’s just as important to remember what we’re fighting for.
The main reason why I started #1reasontobe is because I believe that raising awareness of what a great industry this can be, and what opportunities there are for men and women alike, is fundamental in tackling these problems.
Pratchett doesn't deny that sexism is an issue within games development. "Sexism exists in the industry, because sexism exists in the world," she says. "When you have any industry that’s skewed in one gender direction or another, then sexism is an unfortunate by-product. Men don’t always get an easy ride in the field of nursing, for example."
Overall, however, Pratchett doesn't look upon workplace sexism as some final battlefield but one of many the industry needs to address collectively.
My gut feeling is that, by and large, it isn’t necessarily male attitudes which [are] keeping women out of games development or cause them to burnout. Instead, it’s a combination of a poor work-life balancing conditions, a lack of awareness of the opportunities out there and dwindling creative diversity. And these are problems that have a huge impact on the industry as a whole.
[...] We need to place stronger emphasis on improving working conditions, burnout rate and industry awareness. Ultimately, that’s what will improve the quality of the games and the lives of those who create them.
The interview also delves into Pratchett's goals with Lara Croft's reboot in the new Tomb Raider and the shift in critical perception of the title after she was announced as story lead. You can read the entire interview here.
Rhianna is right about it needing a shakeup, but it has nothing to do with sexism. What it needs is to get away from games like Tomb Raider, games which strive to be shallow empty-headed blockbuster movies, and get back to focusing on gameplay. The same cover based shooter and linear corridor gameplay is getting really old. Why don't we do something that would actually benefit gaming and shake that up.
"Cause people keep buying those types of games? If they didn't sell absurdly well we wouldn't be making them. "
But these games aren't selling enough units, the industry is crashing as we speak and Tomb Raider is one of the 3 games, that is repsonsible for the loss Square Enix reported last month (the other 2 titles were the latest Hitman and Sleeping Dogs, games aimed at the same 14-25 year old, blood thirsty, male player that Tomb Raider was aimed at).
Obviously we've all heard the reports that the industry is in a downswing. Personally I think we're lying to ourselves if we don't admit that the homogeneity isn't at least partly to blame.
But, even if that weren't true, even if games were making more money than ever, someone still needs to speak up for originality and trying new things. My point was that this article is really barking up the wrong tree. Sure sexism is a problem, but if we can all forget about gender for a second and take a look at the games coming out, I think we have to admit that the REAL problem is with the games.
The industry needs shaking up indeed, Pratchett. And yet, Tomb Raider played things incredibly safe. How unfortunate.
@Luis Guimaraes Then she has little to really offer, other then programmers and designers (least of all the managers) most have little to offer in terms of suggestions to improve the games industry.
@Kujel -- as a Game Designer, I can tell you that is totally not true, and there is room for all sorts of perspectives. Development often benefits from having diverse views, and writers and questions about how to tell better stories are absolutely worth asking and certainly do contribute to making the industry better.
Also just because we need to diversify the sort of games we make doesn't mean the general problems she talks about here are not things. They most certainly are -- and in fact getting more diverse voices is part of the solution to the problem Brion is talking about.
If a broader variety of people were making games wouldn't we expect to see less homogeneity in what they make? Maybe a games industry in which more women played prominent roles would produce different kinds of games.
Adam: "If a broader variety of people were making games wouldn't we expect to see less homogeneity in what they make? Maybe a games industry in which more women played prominent roles would produce different kinds of games."
The problem isn't with the genders of the people making games. The problem is that business people are running the industry and making safe choices. The problem is that every big budget game is thoroughly focus tested and watered down until every individualistic idea is weeded out and replaced by something homogenous in the name of "accessibility."
What the industry needs is a different approach to making games. It needs a shake-up. It needs people with good ideas, regardless of whether those people are men or women.
Stop gambling on $60 games. Make $20 games with a lower budget that are have less content, less scope or less assets (voice acting, artwork), but equally good gameplay.
Pretty sure that would make everyone happy. Less risk for investors, less crunch time on devs, more varied games for gamers. Sure, we'd miss our block busters like Bioshock Infinite, but in terms of total play time those games make up maybe 2 or 3 days worth of play time and only come along a few times a year, so they don't exactly make up a massive part of our gaming diet anyway.
Brion, you honestly don't think that if more games were made by and targetted at people other than adolescent males we'd see a wider variety of thematic content? Of course it goes without saying that having good people making things will likely result in better things being made, but you're changing the topic. No one claims that the *only* thing the video game industry needs is more women and suddenly everything would be amazing for everyone; the point is that among the issues that the industry faces, representation of women is one of them. And even if that isn't an issue for you specifically that doesn't mean it isn't an issue at all.
"you honestly don't think that if more games were made by and targetted at people other than adolescent males we'd see a wider variety of thematic content?"
Why should a game made by people other then adolescent males grant a wider variety of thematic content? The story of Tomb Raider was written by a woman, I don't see this making any difference.
Just because Kathryn Bigelow is a woman, it doesn't mean Zero Dark Thirty is targetting a different audience then the same film would have targeted, if it would have been shot by a male director.
Well, I have only played a few hours of Tomb Raider, but so far the gameplay does seem to be pretty far from a "linear corridor". Skyrim it isn't, but it's fairly open and vertical as far as these things go.
Also, Brion, why don't you walk your walk, and let Rhianna walk hers? Sexism is as much a problem as your perceived "homogeneity". To take it out on her for addressing the problem she's concerned about is like saying that nobody should try to cure cancer until world hunger has disappeared.
"Well, I have only played a few hours of Tomb Raider, but so far the gameplay does seem to be pretty far from a "linear corridor". Skyrim it isn't, but it's fairly open and vertical as far as these things go."
Maybe the problem people are having with the TR reboot is not if it's levels are corridor or not, but more the extreme violence- and torture-porn level of the game.
Besides, the new TR is a shooter, outside of the hardcore gamer community nobody cares if the levels are "corridor" or not, most people just see, that the core game mechanics in almost every (western) developed game today are the same.
"To take it out on her for addressing the problem she's concerned about is like saying that nobody should try to cure cancer until world hunger has disappeared. "
The whole sexism debate was pushed by people in the industry after last years e3 where journalists and game developers cheered and applauded at every headshot and mutilation shown on the big screens of the press conferences. The whole sexism debate is used as a distraction from the violence debate, that the industry doesn't want to have.
This is the reason, why some people in the industry even put fuel in the fire after the Newtown shooting - the danger of a debate about video game violence and the glorification of gun violence in games (also big in TR) seemed so big, that they made up a debate about female objectification in video games by simply copying and pasting feminist movie theories from the 1960s, which can't be applied to video games at all.
Wow, congratulations you guys. I really wondered how long it would be before the first post trying to pretend sexism isn't an issue and this uppity woman should shut up, followed by trying to divert the subject to a "real" issue.
You did it in ONE POST.
@Christian:
"The whole sexism debate is used as a distraction from the violence debate, that the industry doesn't want to have."
No, the sexism "debate" is something that people like you constantly try to distract *from.*
The sexism debate is a distraction, because it's a ghost debate when it comes to games. 99% of all games don't show women in a sexist way, because they don't show women at all and the few exceptions show them in the same way as the show male protagonists, as mercyless killers, that the player either controls or the he has to shoot.
The problem is not that Tomb Raider is showing Lara Crofts cleavage like Brandon Sheffield claimed on this very site, it's the fact, that the writer of the game is making statements like this:
"It’s very difficult to keep that good affable character when they’re having to slaughter loads of people. But what we tried to do with Lara was at least have the first death count."
"Certainly with the first kill having a lot of impact. She went quite a long time without having a weapon. Then there was the bow, and then quite a long time without a gun. There is lots of kills after that. But you can’t play the same card over and over again. Every kill cannot be like the first kill."
She is saying in a game, where the player has to kill hundreds of people in order to see the credits, they tried hard to "have the first death count"? Just to summarize the scene:
- Lara is hiding from the evil bandits
- russian speaking bandits boss finds her and starts touching her all over her body threatening her with a gun.
- Lara bites him manages to grab the gun and shoots him in the face, drops the gun, stumbles away moaning, crying
- after a few seconds, she stops sobbing, picks up the gun again and takes her bow
- camera is suddenly behind Lara and a text box informs the player "Semi-Auto Pistol new gear acquired"
This is not having "a death count", it's turning the player on with adolescent revenge fantasies. If this is the shake up she is talking about, I am not interested.
It is just the same adolescent male fantasy of violence I can find in any other shooter on the market. The fact, that Lara is a woman doesn't change anything.
Rebecca: I wasn't trying to divert anything, rather I think that Pratchett is the one diverting. Sexism is always wrong, but I think you're lying to yourself if you think it's the major issue that the games industry is facing now. Homogeneity and a lack of creativity is a PLAGUE in the games industry right now, and every major AAA game suffers from this plague. IMO it's slowly destroying the industry. Tomb Raider is a HUGE example of those things, with it's incredibly safe design, watered down concepts, and Hollywood envy.
We all agree Sexism is bad. But Tomb Raider is a prime example of the failures of the game industry, and that MUST be addressed.
The shake up is coming. If the PS4 and Xbox Infinity are $500 a piece you will see epic financial loss. They are banking too much on the American, Japanese markets(both in economic decline). They should lower the prices drastically and aim for the world stage like Valve.
Valve is PC only and PC games tend to require high end specs if they're not indie games. Yes valve offers some but the majority of their offerings are AAA PC games.
Came here expecting more of the usual drama, was pleasantly surprised. It's so refreshing to hear thoughts on the subject from a reasonable human being that understands what the issue is.
We definitely need more women in our industry. Also I'm interested to see statistics as to the proportion of women in indie development compared with AAA development.
That would be interesting to see but I imagine if there is a difference it's not much. It's not just assholes who keep women out of our industry but also culture and to some degree biology (females just aren't as interested in the technical fields).
@Scott My statement is based on years of observation, females just show lest interest in tech, math, science, etc. They are just as capable as us males but they don't tend to take as much interest in these subjects.
@Rebecca I've tried talking to many women about tech and nearly always they have no interest, I was also talking to my wife about this observation and she concered, so no I didn't make it up. Females do (probably do to biology) have less interest in tech! I'll wager it has something to do with the difference in the amount of grey matter in the male brain compared to the female brain. With all that said that does not mean females are less compitent in tech feilds nor does it mean I think that either, just that they generally have less interest!
"I've tried talking to many women about tech and nearly always they have no interest"
For the record, many men have no interest either. I question the veracity of your "observations." Have you ever heard of a "self selected sample"?
"Females do (probably do to biology) have less interest in tech!"
DUE to biology, you mean.
And when you say something like "probably due to biology," that's exactly the same as saying "this is complete speculation." You've just admitted it has no basis in research or facts. In other words, Rebecca is on the mark when she's saying you're making it up.
we need more interesting people in the industry. Hiring kids straight of school (usually not a very liberal arts minded one) with no interesting life experiences and putting them into nonstop crunch does not generate very interesting games.
I don't believe that would matter, because that is not the root of the problem. More interesting low level workers does not change the fact that the only console games with financial viability are very large risk-averse sequels with mass appeal brands and content.
As a kid who was hired straight out of school I actually would agree if people in my position had an affect on the creative direction of most or even some of the games I have workedo n . the fact of the matter at least in my experience is that starting at the bottom means just that . though we perform endless crunches they are usually for older more experienced people who maintain creative decisions and control if it's a lack of creativity or interesting experiences it's not the fault of the kid so to speak.
I don't agree at all. I suspect there are plenty of interesting people in the industry, in fact I know a few of them. The problem is that any ideas they have are dilluted and destroyed by the system. The real problem is that the publishers have too much control... too many cooks in the kitchen throwing in half baked ideas, while trying to keep the product as "safe" and accessible as possible to appeal to the widest audience; they look at what's popular and copy that.
The problem isn't the people in the industry; the problem is the SYSTEM.
"We need to place stronger emphasis on improving working conditions, burnout rate and industry awareness. Ultimately, that’s what will improve the quality of the games and the lives of those who create them."
Are they a new company that's going to blow the world's socks off?
...
Oh. Looks like they've been around for a while.
They sound a lot like [insert company name here].
And they haven't blown anyone's socks off since 2004.
The shake-up is most likely not going to be a huge earthquake that changes the landscape overnight.
It's going to be a series of small tremors that alter things in little ways, over time raising hills and creating valleys where there were once flat plains.
Interactive electronic entertainment (computer and video games) have been in a state of constant and inevitable change since inception. Obviously.
Question: when you were young, what kinds of games did you want to make?
Super Mario Bros.?
Doom?
The Sims?
Call of Duty? (Maybe that's TOO young...)
The young people, both male and female, inducted into the industry of games have those things in mind. They want to replicate the experiences they enjoyed when they were introduced to games, and share the emotions they felt back then.
At the same time, the are indoctrinated to the concept of market forces dictating the products they create; if Space Rifleman Deathmatch is popular at the time, there's a good chance that many will be involved in a Space Rifleman Deathmatch clone sooner or later. If variants of Space Rifleman Deathmatch are at the end of their novelty, the opportunity to create oddball products that haven't been done before appears. And then is subdued when a new platform or technology plateau is reached.
With new home console platforms becoming available to consumers in the coming months, and a reset of the technology/complexity curve that comes with it, many titles will be expected to be simple experiences to showcase the technological (read: graphical fidelity) of the new platforms.
New Space Rifleman Deathmatch clones.
Looking into the cases for the "shake-up":
"1.) a combination of a poor work-life balancing conditions,
2.) a lack of awareness of the opportunities out there and
3.) dwindling creative diversity.
4.) We need to place stronger emphasis on improving working conditions,
5.) burnout rate and
6.) industry awareness."
1.) Improving poor work-life balance conditions depends on either employees either demand better working conditions from their employers, or refusing to work for employers who promote poor working conditions. Possibly outdated metaphor: if you don't like working at Foxconn, stop working at Foxconn.
2.) The variety of opportunities are right outside the window, constantly in the enthusiast media, and an e-mail or two away. Awareness isn't the issue, it's lack of pursuit of those options.
3.) Creative diversity will not exist in an environment where Product X sells incredibly well and everyone else has to have a variant of Product X to keep the cubicle farm lights on and everybody fed. New, untested ideas are not welcome in environments banking on sure-things and home runs.
4.) To draw a path to improvement, the facets that require improvement need to be identified. Can project planning and pacing be improved? Can schedules be improved? Do managers and leads need to be less or more involved in steering? Do publishers need to be educated on more reasonable milestone timelines? Is the latest project-development-framework-of-the-week not working, or is it being executed incorrectly, and in what ways can it be improved?
Is there a diversity issue? Does the team need more men, women, people with red hair, people with blue hair, short people, or tall people? Is the lack of people born and raised in Kansas causing the project to run late and require a big crunch at the end?
5.) Study burnout and career change rates. How many game development staff have abandoned the trade to pursue other careers, and in what fields? How many of those were straight out of school, and how many were aged veterans? Was there an exit interview, and what reasons were given for pursuing other opportunities? Was the desire to start a family or spend more time with their kids and significant other stated? Was it "a**hole attitudes" (it's in the source article), and did the gender of the a**hole matter?
6.) With industry awareness, there is also audience awareness. The assertion is that: "The industry is used to targeting the male demographic, at least when it comes to triple-A, non-casual titles." That would explain why so few females play triple-A games and males do not play casual titles... wait, that isn't right. Doesn't that kind of reinforce stereotypes like
"Only girls play The Sims" and
"Only boys play Quake"
which are not true in the least.
Audience quadrants were mentioned: male, female, age25; and the need for products to appeal to all four quadrants simultaneously. However, accuracy when targeting specific demographics isn't exactly hitscan. Players aged 30+ who have played games since 1985 and previous may enjoy games aimed at players younger than them. How can a game be rated "M for Mature/Manly" (ages 17 and up) when the vast majority of players are under the age of 16 (or sound and act as if they are not yet old enough to drive or shave)? Female players may enjoy games that male players enjoy. On the opposite side of that coin, male players might not enjoy a game specifically targeting females under the age of 12 in a pink box with ponies and sparkles all over it...
... unless the My Little Pony franchise is involved in which case no logic can be used to explain that ...
... other than these males somehow appreciate something that is innocent, colorful, and funny...
... for some reason.
[ [HINT HINT THIS IS A CLUE ] ]
Someone please explain this Brony concept. Either media demographics are horribly organized and clumsily verified, or we are approaching the End of Days.
Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Hm think the Brony concept is rather simple , it not too different than the K-ON Phenomenal in Japan . Got a generations of guys who've grown up with Japanese related fantasy materials , and due to Japan lack of a christian background and other reasons like manga- cartoon fantasy/lack of nihilistic realism in Japanese entertainment .They have made colorful (personality cute and sexy female characters ) and will tell a complete story with drama or action regardless of how silly the concept looks to an outsider. So here comes along an America artist Lauren Faust who takes female archetypes and make them into likeable funny characters with a full range of personality without making them generically political correct and integrates pop-cultural references that only adults would get . So the audience who now culturally use to seeing woman as main characters has no problem watching My little pony . But this is probably different from the douche who plays call of duty and is offended by the existence of a female solider on the battlefield due to it lack of realism .
And I would argue yeah.. the research into demographics is probably awfully done and more used to reinforce either the beliefs of Conservative publisher or very Political activist groups view points and chants, and is not in anyway scientifically based. Not just even gender based, you would have to factor in country /culture differences in play styles and buying habits.
But these games aren't selling enough units, the industry is crashing as we speak and Tomb Raider is one of the 3 games, that is repsonsible for the loss Square Enix reported last month (the other 2 titles were the latest Hitman and Sleeping Dogs, games aimed at the same 14-25 year old, blood thirsty, male player that Tomb Raider was aimed at).
But, even if that weren't true, even if games were making more money than ever, someone still needs to speak up for originality and trying new things. My point was that this article is really barking up the wrong tree. Sure sexism is a problem, but if we can all forget about gender for a second and take a look at the games coming out, I think we have to admit that the REAL problem is with the games.
The industry needs shaking up indeed, Pratchett. And yet, Tomb Raider played things incredibly safe. How unfortunate.
Also just because we need to diversify the sort of games we make doesn't mean the general problems she talks about here are not things. They most certainly are -- and in fact getting more diverse voices is part of the solution to the problem Brion is talking about.
The problem isn't with the genders of the people making games. The problem is that business people are running the industry and making safe choices. The problem is that every big budget game is thoroughly focus tested and watered down until every individualistic idea is weeded out and replaced by something homogenous in the name of "accessibility."
What the industry needs is a different approach to making games. It needs a shake-up. It needs people with good ideas, regardless of whether those people are men or women.
Pretty sure that would make everyone happy. Less risk for investors, less crunch time on devs, more varied games for gamers. Sure, we'd miss our block busters like Bioshock Infinite, but in terms of total play time those games make up maybe 2 or 3 days worth of play time and only come along a few times a year, so they don't exactly make up a massive part of our gaming diet anyway.
Why should a game made by people other then adolescent males grant a wider variety of thematic content? The story of Tomb Raider was written by a woman, I don't see this making any difference.
Just because Kathryn Bigelow is a woman, it doesn't mean Zero Dark Thirty is targetting a different audience then the same film would have targeted, if it would have been shot by a male director.
Also, Brion, why don't you walk your walk, and let Rhianna walk hers? Sexism is as much a problem as your perceived "homogeneity". To take it out on her for addressing the problem she's concerned about is like saying that nobody should try to cure cancer until world hunger has disappeared.
Maybe the problem people are having with the TR reboot is not if it's levels are corridor or not, but more the extreme violence- and torture-porn level of the game.
Besides, the new TR is a shooter, outside of the hardcore gamer community nobody cares if the levels are "corridor" or not, most people just see, that the core game mechanics in almost every (western) developed game today are the same.
"To take it out on her for addressing the problem she's concerned about is like saying that nobody should try to cure cancer until world hunger has disappeared. "
The whole sexism debate was pushed by people in the industry after last years e3 where journalists and game developers cheered and applauded at every headshot and mutilation shown on the big screens of the press conferences. The whole sexism debate is used as a distraction from the violence debate, that the industry doesn't want to have.
This is the reason, why some people in the industry even put fuel in the fire after the Newtown shooting - the danger of a debate about video game violence and the glorification of gun violence in games (also big in TR) seemed so big, that they made up a debate about female objectification in video games by simply copying and pasting feminist movie theories from the 1960s, which can't be applied to video games at all.
You did it in ONE POST.
@Christian:
"The whole sexism debate is used as a distraction from the violence debate, that the industry doesn't want to have."
No, the sexism "debate" is something that people like you constantly try to distract *from.*
The sexism debate is a distraction, because it's a ghost debate when it comes to games. 99% of all games don't show women in a sexist way, because they don't show women at all and the few exceptions show them in the same way as the show male protagonists, as mercyless killers, that the player either controls or the he has to shoot.
The problem is not that Tomb Raider is showing Lara Crofts cleavage like Brandon Sheffield claimed on this very site, it's the fact, that the writer of the game is making statements like this:
"It’s very difficult to keep that good affable character when they’re having to slaughter loads of people. But what we tried to do with Lara was at least have the first death count."
"Certainly with the first kill having a lot of impact. She went quite a long time without having a weapon. Then there was the bow, and then quite a long time without a gun. There is lots of kills after that. But you can’t play the same card over and over again. Every kill cannot be like the first kill."
She is saying in a game, where the player has to kill hundreds of people in order to see the credits, they tried hard to "have the first death count"? Just to summarize the scene:
- Lara is hiding from the evil bandits
- russian speaking bandits boss finds her and starts touching her all over her body threatening her with a gun.
- Lara bites him manages to grab the gun and shoots him in the face, drops the gun, stumbles away moaning, crying
- after a few seconds, she stops sobbing, picks up the gun again and takes her bow
- camera is suddenly behind Lara and a text box informs the player "Semi-Auto Pistol new gear acquired"
This is not having "a death count", it's turning the player on with adolescent revenge fantasies. If this is the shake up she is talking about, I am not interested.
It is just the same adolescent male fantasy of violence I can find in any other shooter on the market. The fact, that Lara is a woman doesn't change anything.
Sources:
http://gamasutra.com/view/news/173227/Opinion_Video_games_and_Male _Gaze__are_we_
men_or_boys.php
http://killscreendaily.com/articles/interviews/tomb-raider-writer- rhianna-pratch
ett-creating-men-boobs-and-writing-vulnerable-lara-croft/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlwpAEEEXP8
We all agree Sexism is bad. But Tomb Raider is a prime example of the failures of the game industry, and that MUST be addressed.
i.e. you just made it up.
For the record, many men have no interest either. I question the veracity of your "observations." Have you ever heard of a "self selected sample"?
"Females do (probably do to biology) have less interest in tech!"
DUE to biology, you mean.
And when you say something like "probably due to biology," that's exactly the same as saying "this is complete speculation." You've just admitted it has no basis in research or facts. In other words, Rebecca is on the mark when she's saying you're making it up.
The problem isn't the people in the industry; the problem is the SYSTEM.
This.
Heck, yeah! Let's shake this industry up!
Google and read their employee handbook.
...
Oh. Looks like they've been around for a while.
They sound a lot like [insert company name here].
And they haven't blown anyone's socks off since 2004.
It's going to be a series of small tremors that alter things in little ways, over time raising hills and creating valleys where there were once flat plains.
Interactive electronic entertainment (computer and video games) have been in a state of constant and inevitable change since inception. Obviously.
Question: when you were young, what kinds of games did you want to make?
Super Mario Bros.?
Doom?
The Sims?
Call of Duty? (Maybe that's TOO young...)
The young people, both male and female, inducted into the industry of games have those things in mind. They want to replicate the experiences they enjoyed when they were introduced to games, and share the emotions they felt back then.
At the same time, the are indoctrinated to the concept of market forces dictating the products they create; if Space Rifleman Deathmatch is popular at the time, there's a good chance that many will be involved in a Space Rifleman Deathmatch clone sooner or later. If variants of Space Rifleman Deathmatch are at the end of their novelty, the opportunity to create oddball products that haven't been done before appears. And then is subdued when a new platform or technology plateau is reached.
With new home console platforms becoming available to consumers in the coming months, and a reset of the technology/complexity curve that comes with it, many titles will be expected to be simple experiences to showcase the technological (read: graphical fidelity) of the new platforms.
New Space Rifleman Deathmatch clones.
Looking into the cases for the "shake-up":
"1.) a combination of a poor work-life balancing conditions,
2.) a lack of awareness of the opportunities out there and
3.) dwindling creative diversity.
4.) We need to place stronger emphasis on improving working conditions,
5.) burnout rate and
6.) industry awareness."
1.) Improving poor work-life balance conditions depends on either employees either demand better working conditions from their employers, or refusing to work for employers who promote poor working conditions. Possibly outdated metaphor: if you don't like working at Foxconn, stop working at Foxconn.
2.) The variety of opportunities are right outside the window, constantly in the enthusiast media, and an e-mail or two away. Awareness isn't the issue, it's lack of pursuit of those options.
3.) Creative diversity will not exist in an environment where Product X sells incredibly well and everyone else has to have a variant of Product X to keep the cubicle farm lights on and everybody fed. New, untested ideas are not welcome in environments banking on sure-things and home runs.
4.) To draw a path to improvement, the facets that require improvement need to be identified. Can project planning and pacing be improved? Can schedules be improved? Do managers and leads need to be less or more involved in steering? Do publishers need to be educated on more reasonable milestone timelines? Is the latest project-development-framework-of-the-week not working, or is it being executed incorrectly, and in what ways can it be improved?
Is there a diversity issue? Does the team need more men, women, people with red hair, people with blue hair, short people, or tall people? Is the lack of people born and raised in Kansas causing the project to run late and require a big crunch at the end?
5.) Study burnout and career change rates. How many game development staff have abandoned the trade to pursue other careers, and in what fields? How many of those were straight out of school, and how many were aged veterans? Was there an exit interview, and what reasons were given for pursuing other opportunities? Was the desire to start a family or spend more time with their kids and significant other stated? Was it "a**hole attitudes" (it's in the source article), and did the gender of the a**hole matter?
6.) With industry awareness, there is also audience awareness. The assertion is that: "The industry is used to targeting the male demographic, at least when it comes to triple-A, non-casual titles." That would explain why so few females play triple-A games and males do not play casual titles... wait, that isn't right. Doesn't that kind of reinforce stereotypes like
"Only girls play The Sims" and
"Only boys play Quake"
which are not true in the least.
Audience quadrants were mentioned: male, female, age25; and the need for products to appeal to all four quadrants simultaneously. However, accuracy when targeting specific demographics isn't exactly hitscan. Players aged 30+ who have played games since 1985 and previous may enjoy games aimed at players younger than them. How can a game be rated "M for Mature/Manly" (ages 17 and up) when the vast majority of players are under the age of 16 (or sound and act as if they are not yet old enough to drive or shave)? Female players may enjoy games that male players enjoy. On the opposite side of that coin, male players might not enjoy a game specifically targeting females under the age of 12 in a pink box with ponies and sparkles all over it...
... unless the My Little Pony franchise is involved in which case no logic can be used to explain that ...
... other than these males somehow appreciate something that is innocent, colorful, and funny...
... for some reason.
[ [HINT HINT THIS IS A CLUE ] ]
Someone please explain this Brony concept. Either media demographics are horribly organized and clumsily verified, or we are approaching the End of Days.
Starring Arnold Schwarzenegger.