Support NeoGAF

[Pakkidis]

Could this be? An actual person in the industry saying that the game industry is better than ever? According to neogaf that just can't be.

Earnest Adams a prominent designer who writes for gamasutra and has worked with some big companies posts his thoughts on the industry today. I really like him because he provides a fresh perspective on things. You have to sign up to gamasutra so I will just copy and paste it here for your convience.

Cheer Up! Video Games are in Great Shape

So another GDC has come and gone, and with it another round of moaning about how creativity is dead and we're all doomed, or whatever. We had the Game Developers' Rant for the second year in a row, and for the second year in a row I gave it a miss. People complaining might make amusing comedy from time to time, but if it's not constructive, why bother?

Now a lot of the complaining about the game industry is on point, especially the concerns about working conditions raised by the EA_Spouse flap last year. And yeah, it's true that rising development costs and pressure on shelf space is making the industry more conservative than ever—so what's new? We're now Big Entertainment Business. The industry has to follow the money; that's what it's there for. I used to complain about the industry's lack of innovation a lot too, but now I don't care. Why not? Because there's an awful lot more to video games than the game industry, just as there's an awful lot more to music than the record companies. The industry may be as conservative as Pat Buchanan, and it may be going through a rocky transition between consoles right now, but video games are doing very well, thank you very much. So just in case you're depressed about games at the moment, here's a list of things I think we have to feel good about.

The mass market is here. For years developers at the GDC used to debate when we would finally be mass-market, and what it would take to become mass-market, and what games would be like when the mass market arrived. Well, it's here. It snuck up on us while our backs were turned. And the mass market turned out not to be quite what we thought it would be.

At first we were concerned that video games were this kind of kid's and nerd's medium (I'm talking 15 years ago, now) and that console and computer games would have to change really substantially to move beyond that. We were wrong. What happened in the last 15 years is that the kids grew up… and still wanted to go on playing! That never occurred to us back then. So now we're a kid's and nerd's and adult's medium, all simply through the passage of time. And the games didn't have to change really substantially. Oh, the technology and the amount and quality of the content we deliver has changed, of course, but it's still mostly about driving and shooting and playing sports. And while I'd love to see more games about more things, it's comforting to know that the basic mechanics of gameplay that entertained kids in 1991 will also entertain adults in 2006.

We've got a whole lot more ways to make money. That mass market doesn't only consist of kid gamers who grew up into adult gamers, though. It also includes a bunch of new adult gamers who have come to gaming in a way that didn't exist 15 years ago. They're not buying games at retail, they're playing YoHoHo Puzzle Pirates online. And that's great. Puzzle Pirates is delivering a good product at a good price without having to go through the horrendous rigamarole of getting a console license or trying to get a game onto the retail shelves. And so is PopCap. And Pogo. And WorldWinner. And Yahoo! And so on.

Oh yeah, and that mass market isn't all playing little freebie games that earn money through ad revenue either. They're also paying monthly subscriptions to play big games online. We have now managed to sign up a sizable chunk of a nation — a nation! — to play Lineage. If you had said at the GDC 15 years ago that a staggering number of Koreans (Koreans?) would be playing role-playing games (role-playing games, for God's sake?) on-line (what?) in Internet cafés (what??) in 2006, you'd have been laughed out of the hotel.

We've got a whole lot more ways to let people play. Fifteen years ago you had three options: arcade, console, PC. That was it. Now the number of venues for delivering interactive entertainment has exploded, from Tamagotchi on a keychain to multi-million-dollar installations in theme parks. Handhelds, gambling machines, Web-based games, mobile phones, serious games, the list is practically endless. What's so cool about that? They all employ game developers. Yeah, if you insist on making blockbuster console or PC games, maybe times are bit tight right now, but that's a little like saying “I refuse to play football for anybody but the Pittsburgh Steelers.” Do you want to play or not? If so, go where the opportunities are.

Games are getting easier to make thanks to inexpensive tools. Yes, big games are bigger and cost more money to make, but the barriers to entry in making small, homebrew games are significantly lower than they used to be. When was the last time you bought a book and got a word processor to go with it? When you bought a DVD of a movie you liked, did you get a video camera and an edit suite bundled in? But Half-Life 2 ships with game development tools! How radical is that? Once, we would have considered anybody making their own games using our tools to be enriching themselves off our labor, probably stealing our trade secrets. Now we give the tools away with our blessing. Everybody wins. Half-Life 2 continues to sell far, far beyond what its normal market life would be if it had to rely on its gameplay and story alone; wanna-be developers get a nice set of tools to work with at a fraction of the cost of Maya (OK, they're not Maya-quality, but they're not Maya-price, either); and players get more games to play, just for buying Half-Life 2 in the first place. And why is all this so good? Because more people get to do what they love—build video games—and because we'll see more wonderful and wacky games that could never find room on the retail shelves if they had to go through normal channels.


Game development education has arrived. Game programs are springing up by leaps and bounds at universities all over North America, all over Europe, and for all I know, all over the Far East as well. We're starting to actually teach people how to develop games instead of making newbies learn on the job, which is expensive and inefficient. Now, I know there's a certain probability that these programs will turn out more graduates than the industry can employ. But I've always thought that was a bad reason for cutting back on educational opportunities. What if somebody just wants to learn how make video games for their own personal enjoyment? Would we say that there shouldn't be so many piano teachers because there are only so many symphony orchestras in the world? Of course not.

And the great thing about students is that they're not jaded. They don't have any preconceptions about what the market wants. Of course, some of them have played so many cookie-cutter shooter games that it doesn't occur to them to make anything else; but that's what good teachers are for: to show them what's possible. Don't forget that from one generation of film-school students we got Lucas, Spielberg, Scorsese, Coppola, and Polanski. Who knows what might happen after a decade or two of game education?

The academy has finally taken an interest. With the rise of game development education has come a rise in game research. Professors aren't allowed to just teach, they have to publish, too, if they want to get tenure. I know that for a lot of hardcore industrial developers, academic game research sounds esoteric and irrelevant, but they couldn't be more wrong. The academy are the guys with the grant money and the time to find the new techniques that the industry can't afford to work on. Ask a major-league graphics programmer if there's any point in going to hear a bunch of eggheads talk at SIGGRAPH. Ask a serious AI programmer if there's anything to be learned by reading the publications of the AAAI. They'll tell you. We're already starting to see the benefits of collaborating with the academy. Electronic Arts didn't found a game program at USC for the sake of charity.

Serious games are buying us cultural credibility and getting us jobs, too. Five years ago the term didn't exist. Now, thanks in large part to the tireless efforts of one guy, Ben Sawyer, serious games are on the industry's map—and even more importantly, creeping into the awareness of educators and policymakers. What Chris Crawford did for video games in founding the GDC, Ben Sawyer has done for serious games. I remember the first serious games round table, three years ago; it had about fifteen people at it. Now it's an entire conference. Why should we be happy about that? Because a) it's a new way to exploit the wonderful potential of our medium; b) when the public start associating video games with education, healthcare, emergency preparedness training, social policy and so on maybe they won't be quite so quick to pass stupid censorship laws against us; c) because it means more jobs for game developers, even if they're not in the conventional entertainment part of the industry.

Experimental gameplay is now cool. Back when I was helping to produce the GDC, when the lecture rooms filled up we used to keep people out by telling the unhappy latecomers that it was the fire marshal's regulations, and we had to obey them. It was true, but a bit of a bluff; I never actually saw a fire marshal. Well, I saw her this year: a sturdy young woman with a decidedly no-nonsense look on her face. And what session was she keeping people out of? The Experimental Gameplay Workshop, of all things. Again, looking back fifteen years, if you had talked out loud about “experimental gameplay” at GDC, you'd have been met with derision. “Pointless non-commercial navel-gazing waste of time,” would have been among the more polite comments. Now so many people are trying to learn about the latest developments that law enforcement has to be called in to keep order. I think this change of attitude is wonderful. It means we're not stagnating. Financial forces may be putting pressure on us, but the enthusiasm and desire to do—as Masaya Matsuura so eloquently put it—“weird and difficult things” burns bright in the hearts of game developers. Bright enough to be a fire hazard at GDC, anyway.
So cheer up! The song lyrics were right for video games in the mid-80s, and they're right for video games now: “The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.”

 

[Azih]

HERETIC! BURN HIM. REVOLUTION IS OUR ONLY SAVIOUR!

 

[sky]

Good read... you really don't hear this side of the story too much, with most "industry" discussion.

On the part about games getting easier to make. That's definately true to an extent, but it depends on whether you are talking about contruction or content. If you take the route of mods, simple free engines, or small games (flash etc), it's unquestionably easier, and there are so many tools available for free. That is really great.

But content-wise... if you are trying to compete head to head with the "big boys", then the expectations in terms of what you can delivery story, gameplay, cut-scene, sound wise are much higher than even a few years ago. To do those things well requires increasingly higher levels of skill. And the consumers just expect those things to be great... not easy :lol. But overall I know that is a debatable and less-important point. In the greater scheme of things, yes, the options are plentiful and things are definately heading in a much better direction then you typically hear about from GDC rant sessions.

 

[monchi-kun]

people complain because they lack the means to do something about the issue at hand....plain and simple.

 

[border]

Totally uncompelling. All the guy's argument boils down to is that "OMG games are mainstream now! Awesome!" I love how he flippantly disregards both EA employee abuse and licensing abuse by saying "Well we gotta go where the money is". If that doesn't convince you that the writer is a douchebag, then the corny reference to Timbuk 3 at the end almost certainly will.

Wow, there's all these schools opening up to teach people how to make games! Everybody can be on the fast track to spending 80-hour weeks making Tom Clancy's Madden Free Roaming Glitchfest.

t's comforting to know that the basic mechanics of gameplay that entertained kids in 1991 will also entertain adults in 2006.

Besides FPS games, this is almost completely untrue (outside of handheld markets).

 

[sky]

Everybody can be on the fast track to spending 80-hour weeks making Tom Clancy's Madden Free Roaming Glitchfest.

The point he is making is that there are a lot more options out there now. You don't need to follow that old "evil EA" route -- and it's up to those teachers or industry mentors to make sure those new to the industry foster that kind of creative thinking.

 

[Ranger X]

From a develloper stand point i completely agree with him. BUSINESS isn't doomed at all.
But it doesn't mean it's cool for the gamer like me.

I care more for console and PC games (call that the hollywood of games) than any other form of videogames. I don't give a shit about all those small games here and there. They are cool and fine and all BUT i need my "hollywood games".
Big games are the ones in difficulty, it's the home consoles and PC gaming that is having worries, all the rest is super fine.

It's the same for movies and music too. I don't give about all those opporturnities musiciens are having. Anybody can make a living with music. But the day there's wouldn't be bands selling their high quality stuff at HMV, life is going to be fucking boring. The same will be the day we would have to make our own b-movies because block buster millions dollars budget movie industry would be dead.

So yeah the industry as an industry is healthy and that's what he is talking about. But the "hollywood games" may face serious difficulties in the near futur (and already some right now) and that's the part of this industry i truly care about as a gamer.

 

[border]

I hadn't heard about Serious Games before this article, so I looked them up. Interesting stuff, though their goals seem kind of nebulous.

You don't need to follow that old "evil EA" route

You never really did, though. But as you already said, making anything that is remotely competitive with commercial games has gotten far MORE difficult and resource intensive than it ever was. Cost of entry into the field has gone up, not down. All this talk about gaming programs at universities rather than "on the job" kind of underscores the fact that the price of getting educated has been shifted onto the workers themselves....

 

[Y2Kev]

....save us Nintendo?

 

[R0nn]

From a develloper stand point i completely agree with him. BUSINESS isn't doomed at all.
But it doesn't mean it's cool for the gamer like me.

I care more for console and PC games (call that the hollywood of games) than any other form of videogames. I don't give a shit about all those small games here and there. They are cool and fine and all BUT i need my "hollywood games".
Big games are the ones in difficulty, it's the home consoles and PC gaming that is having worries, all the rest is super fine.

It's the same for movies and music too. I don't give about all those opporturnities musiciens are having. Anybody can make a living with music. But the day there's wouldn't be bands selling their high quality stuff at HMV, life is going to be fucking boring. The same will be the day we would have to make our own b-movies because block buster millions dollars budget movie industry would be dead.

So yeah the industry as an industry is healthy and that's what he is talking about. But the "hollywood games" may face serious difficulties in the near futur (and already some right now) and that's the part of this industry i truly care about as a gamer.

Well, imagine if a big developer will go out and put some time and effort into games that are totally different from the traditional mold. Say, educational games or games for healthcare issues. It wont cost much to develop those games, but it could bring in big revenue which in turn could be used to finance those big blockbuster games we hardcore gamers have come to expect. At least that's how I'm looking at this. I sadly can't help but bring up Nintendo in this regard, which churns out stuff like Nintendogs and Brain Training (Brain Training in particular) to make them big bucks (low dev costs, big sales) with which they can finance more traditional games (Zelda, Mario, Metroid, third-party efforts). They are actually only scratching the surface of what could be done in exploiting non-traditional markets. There's a lot of potential here which I will certainly support as long as traditional hardcore games wont suffer for it.

So in short: utilize these so called 'serious games' for an extra big revenue stream and put that revenue into development of more traditional games.

 

[Ranger X]

Well, imagine if a big developer will go out and put some time and effort into games that are totally different from the traditional mold. Say, educational games or games for healthcare issues. It wont cost much to develop those games, but it could bring in big revenue which in turn could be used to finance those big blockbuster games we hardcore gamers have come to expect. At least that's how I'm looking at this. I sadly can't help but bring up Nintendo in this regard, which churns out stuff like Nintendogs and Brain Training (Brain Training in particular) to make them big bucks (low dev costs, big sales) with which they can finance more traditional games (Zelda, Mario, Metroid, third-party efforts). They are actually only scratching the surface of what could be done in exploiting non-traditional markets. There's a lot of potential here which I will certainly support as long as traditional hardcore games wont suffer for it.

So in short: utilize these so called 'serious games' for an extra big revenue stream and put that revenue into development of more traditional games.

I think this works to a certain extent. But if you go and make alot of money in serious games, why not invest my revenues into MORE serious games so i can make MORE money? It's just business after all. They need to make money before making us gamer blockbuster games. And when i read a guy like in this article, i see that what i just said can happen EASILY.

I hope for your scenario though

 

[MrSardonic]

At first we were concerned that video games were this kind of kid's and nerd's medium

really? what about all those adults that played the first computer games and then stopped once things got complicated and aimed at hardcore nerds? i thought the article was a bit bullshitty

 

[Joe]

3D controls are the bane of the industry.

which is why in my perfect game world, the revolution is successful and microsoft and nintendo join forces.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

really? what about all those adults that played the first computer games and then stopped once things got complicated and aimed at hardcore nerds? i thought the article was a bit bullshitty

I'm sure their all going to come back and play simple Mushroom games on the Revolution. It's nothing cultural.

 

[tanasten]

Revolution is only expanding the game industry, like Nintendo DS is doing.

What the article says, it's we are in a era of open debate about gaming, with a lot of oportunities going everywhere, with people readying themselves for the future of this industry, and we're it's becoming a lot more easy to do games than never before.

Those are real statements. Who does not make a game nowadays it's because they really don't care to.

 

[Oblivion]

Now if only we could have an article that says Nintendo isn't doomed. Sigh.

 

[Archie]

Now if only we could have an article that says Nintendo isn't doomed. Sigh.

Why would someone want to lie like that?

 

[MrSardonic]

I'm sure their all going to come back and play simple Mushroom games on the Revolution.

It's spelt "they're" not "their". And what do you know about who will buy Revolution?

It's nothing cultural.

huh?

 

[Barry Lightning]

anyone actually working on games knows there's no impending doom, sorry yall.

 

[AdmiralViscen]

Comparing video games to Hollywood and the music industry doesn't exactly give me high hopes for innovation. The music and movie industries are disgusting right now. Growing to be more like them is NOT an accomplishment.

Also funny that he uses cell phone and Shockwave games to talk about how healthy the industry is, when those games aren't really part of the industry people are so concerned about. Also kind of implies that non-games are a great thing, which most "but the industry is healthy!" people disagree with.

 

[soul creator]

Comparing video games to Hollywood and the music industry doesn't exactly give me high hopes for innovation. The music and movie industries are disgusting right now. Growing to be more like them is NOT an accomplishment.

I think what he's trying to imply is that there *is* still innovation in all these industries...but the majority of it will always be found under the radar. In essence, innovation almost by definition won't ever be "mass market", except in relatively rare cases.

Music on the radio is usually crappy, but there's still lots of great music out there...you just gotta find other sources. Your average movie released in a bunch of theaters worldwide won't be crazily innovative, but innovative movies are still plentiful. You just gotta search them out in other places.

It would be nice if "innovation and quality" was always what sells millions, but the cynical side of me always thinks this would be an exception, not the rule. It's the price of "success". Or something.