Support NeoGAF

[avatar299]

How do you explain the continued existence and success of publishers like Atlus or NIS, who do not have "A-tier" products?

Do i have to. Both operate on incredibly lean costs, to the point that when one finds a success, they can't even capitalize on it. The other isn't profitable, and as a result is branching out.

What he said was a major game designer could not leave a company and head a new major project, and he is wrong. They gave examples, and when they did, he decided to ignore them.

All their examples were terrible. They were all in japan, which again has a very different corporate structure than America, and all of them had established teams.

Well no shit if one dude comes to Activision and says "gimme $40 millions to make a game" they won't do it unless they(they as in publisher or the dude) have a team to do it.

What a silly wasted episode, talking about something so trivial. Reality is that when they come with a proposal, they will have a team, or even more likely, they will join an existing team of the publisher's to make the game.
So stupid, talking about something there is no standard for, it can be different in every situation.

Jaffe with ESP could be an example of what could happen(again there is no set rule): Leaves SSM and most of his team behind. Joins Incognito to make CaC. Then leaves to start ESP to make TMps3 with some people from Incog, some new hires, and maybe some transfers from other Sony studios.

Infinite number of ways something like this could shake down..

Rubin's point was a single individual has little power in this industry, despite there hits so having these type of people come in and innovate at the AAA level probably won't happen. Rubin hit upon, but didn't really explore the fact that you need a little groundswell support from the publisher before they take that risk in a studio.

If you join a big publisher, you just become another cog in the machine.

 

[Draft]

There are people in the industry that could definitely do what Rubin thinks to be impossible. Will Wright, Cid Meier, Miyamoto, Mikami... they could and one or two of them HAVE done it.

I'm think maybe Miyamoto or Wright could swing that, but probably not Meier and definitely not Mikami.

 

[StuBurns]

All their examples were terrible. They were all in japan, which again has a very different corporate structure than America, and all of them had established teams.

This doesn't really make sense, he didn't preface the statement with 'in America'.

EDIT: Miyamoto is a good example, he could do whatever the fuck he wanted.

 

[avatar299]

There are people in the industry that could definitely do what Rubin thinks to be impossible. Will Wright, Cid Meier, Miyamoto, Mikami... they could and one or two of them HAVE done it. And if you took a group of 5 of the top people in a company like Infinity Ward or Naughty Dog and they shopped around they would be snatched up in a heartbeat and they would get a very strong deal.

Do you know the top 5 people at Naughty Dog or Infinity Ward? How many people on the Mass Effect team can leave Bioware, and on name alone create a AAA studio at another publisher? now try that scenario with The Assasins Creed team.

Not everyone is Miyamoto or Wright.

 

[DMeisterJ]

Argh! Stop saying 'Triple A titles'!

:/

 

[avatar299]

This doesn't really make sense, he didn't preface the statement with 'in America'.

EDIT: Miyamoto is a good example, he could do whatever the fuck he wanted.

Yeah but it's an important distinction, because the markets there work very differently and is in transition. Itagaki has so much power becuase he is considered a Japanese talent with WW appeal. Same with Miyamoto. 99% of the rest of designers can't do that, and if I'm Rubin I'm worried more about that 99% than the 1%

 

[gerg]

No one could do that. Because no one's name is money in this industry. Games that receive mega budgets, for the most part, are games in established and very reliable franchises. Publishers aren't going to risk that much money on the possibility that a game could be a hit. But you could probably get a very nice budget for the game. I doubt Jaffe or Jobe, who are at two new start up companies, are working on small budgets.

I think that Rubin's concern is as to what happens when the disparity between big-budget and small-budget games grows even larger, and the B-tier is squeezed out even more so than it is now.

When people say that "no one's name is money in this industry" I don't think that we should be looking at that fact as a good thing. I think that fluidity of ideas and creativity should be valued, and that we should certainly be looking towards a situation whereby someone who has shown themselves to be particularly creative can gain investment on the back of those ideas. The situation as it stands now isn't preferable.

In any case, the discussion is evidently limited by the small number of people who have jumped ship and requested investment on their own.

 

[Penguin]

Okay but maybe I'm missing Rubin's point.

People are listing folks like Will Wright and Miyamoto, which is fine, but when was the last time either had anything close to a bomb?

Now if there next 5 games come out and bomb, and Nintendo/EA let them go, do you think a company would give them 50 million dollars to recapture the magic?

 

[UraMallas]

I'm think maybe Miyamoto or Wright could swing that, but probably not Meier and definitely not Mikami.

Maybe not alone but I think that if you got the right two or three guys to walk in to another company and say "fund this game we want to make" it would get done by someone looking to plug a hole in Q3 2011, or whatever. He is probably right that top level designers and developers don't have the leverage they would like or that they deserve but I think he goes too far when he says that their value isn't noted. I get what he means but I definitely disagree with his assertion that the best of the best couldn't go and do what they want in the industry.

You might be right about a Mikami, though.

 

[StuBurns]

Yeah but it's an important distinction, because the markets there work very differently and is in transition. Itagaki has so much power becuase he is considered a Japanese talent with WW appeal. Same with Miyamoto. 99% of the rest of designers can't do that, and if I'm Rubin I'm worried more about that 99% than the 1%

It's a very important distinction yeah, one he didn't make.

Are we meant to editorialize and speculate about what he thought and couldn't articulate? I don't think that's fair as he was the one getting irate because the guys disagreed with him. Maybe had he said exactly what he thought, then they wouldn't have disagreed, but that's asking too much of the others.

 

[gerg]

I get what he means but I definitely disagree with his assertion that the best of the best couldn't go and do what they want in the industry.

I think people are correct to say that the "best of the best" could do pretty much what they wanted; it makes sense that, were Miyamoto to leave Nintendo (as if that will happen), he would probably be snatched up as soon as possible. But Miyamoto is a game developer who has been working for the same company for 30-odd years and has created some of the best-selling franchises of all time. I also agree that Will Wright would more often than not secure large investment if he only asked.

I think that Rubin's larger point is that we should be looking beyond a situation where the "best of the best" can secure investment towards one where only the "best" can do so. If we're reduced to looking at 30-year gaming veterans as examples of industry fluidity then I think we're at a loss.

It's a very important distinction yeah, one he didn't make.

Are we meant to editorialize and speculate about what he thought and couldn't articulate? I don't think that's fair as he was the one getting irate because the guys disagreed with him. Maybe had he said exactly what he thought, then they wouldn't have disagreed, but that's asking too much of the others.

If we can confidently derive what we think his argument was then I don't think there's much point in arguing over what he said instead of what he meant.

 

[StuBurns]

If we can confidently derive what we think his argument was then I don't think there's much point in arguing over what he said instead of what he meant.

And who are we to 'derive' anything?

What we know is what he said. He didn't say 'in America', he didn't say 'for the most part', he made a very strict blanket statement. Even when things like Japanese developers were mentioned, he could have commented about the regional nature of his statement, he didn't.

 

[Denzar]

Seems like Rubin is convinced big name game devs are unable to make Triple A titles again/get picked up by the big publishers because he himself has not been approached yet/made a triple a game again.


Wel at least that is what I deduct from his arguments close to the end of the debate.

And I like Satterfield actually. A really down to earth dude.

Great Bonus Round too. Good job GT!

 

[avatar299]

It's a very important distinction yeah, one he didn't make.

Are we meant to editorialize and speculate about what he thought and couldn't articulate? I don't think that's fair as he was the one getting irate because the guys disagreed with him. Maybe had he said exactly what he thought, then they wouldn't have disagreed, but that's asking too much of the others.

He didn't have to make it, it was common sense. You can't tell the difference between Miyamoto and a guy at ND? Rubin was clear as a sunny day.

If you team is dissolved, and that alone should knock out Bayonetta and Itagaki from the discussion, becuase neither team was dissolved, and you moved onto a large publisher like EA, can you, on name alone propose and receive a large budget for a big game. This happens so rarely that i can't believe anyone can make the argument that the current situation is okay or that Rubin is wrong here. You can count the number of people who can do this on one hand, and the number who have in recent memory on one finger.

 

[Bizzyb]

I think COD 4 could be the worst thing that has happened to this industry post 1980s crash.

That game has got too many publishers thinking that they need to continue investing millions upon millions of dollars in these games' budgets. They have dollar signs in their eyes and that's just bad. A game does not have to have millions upon millions spent on it to be fun. It's just sad to see so many studios getting laid off, while so many games are just becoming more and more derivative with less risks being taken. The pressure with job security must be insane, i.e. Make a bad game, lose you job, you house and car, hope your family can recover. What kind of environment is that to work in??

I know not every dev is going this way but I have a fear that something is eventually going to give. I feel like the industry is going to implode one day by the over-inflation of game budgets and the decreasing interests from gamers once games become too predictable.

 

[gerg]

And who are we to 'derive' anything?

I'm not sure what the point is with all this nitpicking, however. As avatar299 states, can you not tell the difference between the best developer or designer at Naughty Dog, and Miyamoto? And, if you can, then I'm not sure what the point is in arguing over whether or not he should or shouldn't have explicitly highlighted that distinction when it is clear for us to see regardless.

 

[D4Danger]

So if I understood it

in the 90s studios made deals with publishers
publishers realized they were missing out on a ton of money
publishers bought studios
business goes bad, studios get chopped because they have to pay them regardless
90% of games are now made in-house by the publisher
game developers can't go to publishers for funding unless they are already have a team

about right?

 

[StuBurns]

He didn't have to make it, it was common sense. You can't tell the difference between Miyamoto and a guy at ND? Rubin was clear as a sunny day.

If you team is dissolved, and that alone should knock out Bayonetta and Itagaki from the discussion, becuase neither team was dissolved, and you moved onto a large publisher like EA, can you, on name alone propose and receive a large budget for a big game. This happens so rarely that i can't believe anyone can make the argument that the current situation is okay or that Rubin is wrong here. You can count the number of people who can do this on one hand, and the number who have in recent memory on one finger.

If it was common sense, why did he not correct those replies?

Rubin was anything but clear.

As for the exact criteria your setting, not only can I not name one that managed to do it, I can't name one that has recently been in that situation at all. Can you? A major developer who's team was dissolved?

 

[avatar299]

I think COD 4 could be the worst thing that has happened to this industry post 1980s crash.

That game has got too many publishers thinking that they need to continue investing millions upon millions of dollars in these games' budgets. They have dollar signs in their eyes and that's just bad. A game does not have to have millions upon millions spent on it to be fun. It's just sad to see so many studios getting laid off, while so many games are just becoming more and more derivative with less risks being taken. The pressure with job security must be insane, i.e. Make a bad game, lose you job, you house and car, hope your family can recover. What kind of environment is that to work in??

I know not every dev is going this way but I have a fear that something is eventually going to give. I feel like the industry is going to implode one day by the over-inflation of game budgets and the decreasing interests from gamers once games become too predictable.

Yeah because only COD4 is a successful game that tells publisher to invest in one genre. Those games like Halo, GoWs, GTA's, etc etc were all fly by night moments

 

[MikeE21286]

Best bonus round in months.
Jason Rubin really seems to know what he's talking about. He at least generates some discussion between the panel.

I love Rubin on here....I may not agree with all of what he says on any given episode, but he definitely brings up topics that I have never heard other people in the industry discuss, and he has fully formed opinions on those topics. It breaks up the formulaic approach that the Bonus Round had fallen into...

Geoff: So, we got <insert game> coming out in a couple months and people are excited about it. What do you think about it <insert game critic name>

Game Critic: Well I think it's a really great title for the <insert platform(s)> and I can't wait to play it

Geoff: But how do we think it's gonna sell Pachter?

Pacther: <insert sales prediction> if title = "Wii ___" then <inset sales prediction>+8 million units

 

[SolidSnakex]

I think that Rubin's concern is as to what happens when the disparity between big-budget and small-budget games grows even larger, and the B-tier is squeezed out even more so than it is now.

I think B tier companies just have to step their game up. Platinum would fall into a B tier company as far as development costs go. But their most recent game (Bayonetta) is the quality of a top tier title. So they can survive. Now if you're a B tier company making games below the quality of your budget, then no one should be surprised that a company like that isn't able to survive.

When people say that "no one's name is money in this industry" I don't think that we should be looking at that fact as a good thing. I think that fluidity of ideas and creativity should be valued, and that we should certainly be looking towards a situation whereby someone who has shown themselves to be particularly creative can gain investment on the back of those ideas. The situation as it stands now isn't preferable.

I don't think it'd be too different in other industries. If your studio is shut down then that's likely because your games have reached a mediocre (or worse) quality with sales to match. If that's the case then it would suggest that the famous designer there has lost their touch. So of course no one is going to want to sink a lot of money into them on the seemingly small possibility that they might get it right again.

 

[HK-47]

Yeah, for Nintendo.

Are you arguing third parties are hurting on DS?

 

[dsister44]

im inined to think that this would happen, if the op guys from infnity ward went to EA and aked for a team and funding im inclined to think they would get it.


so what do we think will be in the final episode? if wii and DS are not mentoed in some form im realy gunna have to question whoever ecided what topics to discuss

 

[avatar299]

If it was common sense, why did he not correct those replies?

Rubin was anything but clear.

As for the exact criteria your setting, not only can I not name one that managed to do it, I can't name one that has recently been in that situation at all. Can you? A major developer who's team was dissolved?

because he isn't used to sitting on show in front of a camera? maybe because he was thinking of a different counterpoint? Who knows. Either way those arguments are just flat out wrong.

If the question was proposed via email, or some format where you couldn't get an immediate response back, would naming any game be a valid refutation? You don't win a debate by just throwing up some random rebuttal.

 

[StuBurns]

because he isn't used to sitting on show in front of a camera? maybe because he was thinking of a different counterpoint? Who knows. Either way those arguments are just flat out wrong.

If the question was proposed via email, or some format where you couldn't get an immediate response back, would naming any game be a valid refutation? You don't win a debate by just throwing up some random rebuttal.

If I thought he meant what you claim he meant, I'd agree with him. I think he's either wrong, or an inarticulate irritating presence.

Rubin, if you're reading, feel free to let me know which.

 

[wizword]

Jaffe, and Jobe aren't moving publishers though. They are getting finance from the same people who were giving it to them before.

 

[EarsOfASnake]

im inined to think that this would happen, if the op guys from infnity ward went to EA and aked for a team and funding im inclined to think they would get it.

I think Rubin was completely right on this point, there is no way that a group of lead position people from a top flight developer could walk in and get a deal at the drop of a hat. It wouldn't be because they didn't have a team and it wouldn't be that their previous experience wasn't good enough. It would solely come down to the fact that they do not have a product to sell at that point.

 

[dsister44]

Are you arguing third parties are hurting on DS?

to be fair,when was the last time a wetern 3rd party announceda big gamfor the DS?chinatown wars?

 

[StuBurns]

I think Rubin was completely right on this point, there is no way that a group of lead position people from a top flight developer could walk in and get a deal at the drop of a hat. It wouldn't be because they didn't have a team and it wouldn't be that their previous experience wasn't good enough. It would solely come down to the fact that they do not have a product to sell at that point.

If he literally meant that though, it'd be true of everyone, not just people who've been fired, not just people moving to new publishers, everyone. No game document/pitch is going to get a triple A game with a new IP green lit.

 

[MikeE21286]

I wonder if Kojima left Konami and came to a different publisher and said he wanted to make a Metal Gear game for them if they would hire him.

I'd like to think so, and if not, well that's said.

 

[StuBurns]

I wonder if Kojima left Konami and came to a different publisher and said he wanted to make a Metal Gear game for them if they would hire him.

I'd like to think so, and if not, well that's said.

He couldn't, Konami own the Metal Gear IP.

 

[gerg]

As for the exact criteria your setting, not only can I not name one that managed to do it, I can't name one that has recently been in that situation at all. Can you? A major developer who's team was dissolved?

Evidently, we have defined "major" in such a way that it is restrictive to all but a few developers. It is no surprise, then, that there is a great dearth of empirical data to support Rubin's overall argument. Rubin's point, however, might be that this is only symptomatic of the problem at hand: significant fluidity, as it is in the marketplace, only exists for very few people. A better situation would be when this applies to a much wider group of developers.

I think B tier companies just have to step their game up. Platinum would fall into a B tier company as far as development costs go. But their most recent game (Bayonetta) is the quality of a top tier title. So they can survive. Now if you're a B tier company making games below the quality of your budget, then no one should be surprised that a company like that isn't able to survive.

I disagree entirely.

I'm not saying that producing bad games doesn't play its part in studios closing down; if you produce bad game after bad game in constant succession, it should be no surprise if you lose investment. My general point, however, would be that the current industry climate doesn't allow for much deviance from excellence at all: I feel that a strong industry should allow for at least one hiccup on the path to success.

I feel strongly about this because innovation rarely involves doing something new and creative with absolute success on the first occasion - not all creativity will be enjoyed by all people from the get-go. Innovation is about making "mistakes", and if the industry, as a whole, starts to punish this to the point where innovation suffers, then I would be concerned about that industry's creative and financial health. Whereas before an innovative, but bad (and bad-selling) game could make enough a money to turn a profit, this no longer seems to be the case.

I don't think it'd be too different in other industries. If your studio is shut down then that's likely because your games have reached a mediocre (or worse) quality with sales to match.

Unless I am misunderstanding you, you seem to be equivocating sales with quality, which is never the case. Or, alternatively, you seem to believe that studios will be kept alive because they produce good, but poor-selling, titles, which I don't think is the case either. If your studio is shut down, it can certainly be because you produced an excellent title (or a series of excellent titles) which simply did not sell well.

If that's the case then it would suggest that the famous designer there has lost their touch. So of course no one is going to want to sink a lot of money into them on the seemingly small possibility that they might get it right again.

This is my point: we shouldn't only be funding those who have been successful 99% of the time.

 

[EarsOfASnake]

If he literally meant that though, it'd be true of everyone, not just people who've been fired, not just people moving to new publishers, everyone. No game document/pitch is going to get a triple A game with a new IP green lit.

That was his exact point though, if risks won't be taken by publishers on new IP from people who are at the top of their field then where do the next original 'triple A' titles come from.

 

[UraMallas]

From what I can tell, it happens more so in Japan than here. That much is true. But it does happen. Itagaki, although not close to one of my favorite developers and I even feel he is a bit overrated, can pull a group of 5 or 6 of his top developers along with him to shop themselves around and sign a deal with SEGA. This happened without any game in development --just ideas and past accomplishments to show. Mikami and the two or three other top dogs at Studio 4/Clover left Capcom and shopped themselves around on past accomplishments in the way of titles like Resident Evil, Viewtiful Joe and Okami. Sakaguchi took his Final Fantasy name to Microsoft and said I want to make a new game but I want another studio to develop it and I want you to pay for it, I'll just round up guys that helped on past Final Fantasy games. They got funded and that is an example of getting funded on almost nothing but sheer talent in past games. They didn't have a team, they didn't have money, they didn't have a console, they didn't have a game but Sakaguchi could put together some of the Final Fantasy guys to make a new game and the value of that landed his company a multi-game deal.

Its true that not everybody can do it but he refused to admit that someone like Will Wright could land a deal for a $50 million budget. Hell, if Itagaki landed a $20 million dollar game budget I'd consider that a success and I would assume he did. Same with any that I've mentioned. I guess you could argue that none of the games from developers I've mentioned have become "triple-A" but I don't think that Mikami and co. were limited at all when they put together Bayonetta. I could be wrong but it seems to me that they were given free reign over their new IP. They were funded and told to basically do what they do best.

 

[MikeE21286]

He couldn't, Konami own the Metal Gear IP.

yeah, true, but I guess another game in general then.....not called Metal Gear

 

[StuBurns]

Evidently, we have defined "major" in such a way that it is restrictive to all but a few developers. It is no surprise, then, that there is a great dearth of empirical data to support Rubin's overall argument. Rubin's point, however, might be that this is only symptomatic of the problem at hand: significant fluidity, as it is in the marketplace, only exists for very few people.

I would agree, but he didn't say only 'very few people', I don't believe he gave any room for this happening as a one off or anything. He just said it couldn't happen.

He is not Miyamoto, if he means he couldn't do it, fair enough, but to say it can't happen is a very different statement.

yeah, true, but I guess another game in general then.....not called Metal Gear

Ummm I'd like to think he could, obviously he wouldn't get anything like the budget he got for MGS4, but as much as an experienced game designer who's trying to start a new IP would get. I'd see that as quite similar to Sakaguchi's activities this generation.

 

[Kittonwy]

This doesn't really make sense, he didn't preface the statement with 'in America'.

EDIT: Miyamoto is a good example, he could do whatever the fuck he wanted.

Miyamoto doesn't have a magic wand that can make a Zelda-level game without a team of 100+ quality people, it takes an incredible amount of money to build up the studio and time to hire all the right people, and another $30-50 million just to make the game, and maybe $5-10 million to market it, if you're already working at a quality employee at a high profile developer already making a high quality, commercially successful game, why would you leave just to start from scratch? Knowing that, why would a third-party publisher take the risk of funding such a venture when that money can be spent on a couple of high budget games by your already existing internal studios?

 

[MikeE21286]

I'd see that as quite similar to Sakaguchi's activities this generation.

yeah, when Rubin was talking that was all I could think of was Sakaguchi.

 

[[Nintex]]

The problem is that most designers start to work in other fields instead of game design because the industry is fucked and they can easily use their creative or management skills elsewhere.

Also examples of game designers who could just walk up to publishers to get their games made:

Masahiro Sakurai(in fact Nintendo insisted that he came back and after Brawl was made, with countless delays to boot, Nintendo offered him his own development studio)

Martin Hollis(left Rare, was hired by Nintendo for GameCube development, started Zoonami, got more funding from Nintendo but game Zero was never released)

Mark Pacini(left Acclaim to work at Retro Studios, could walk up to Nintendo and get Metroid Prime 1/3 made, left Nintendo and was picked up by EA to head some sort of 'idea factory' called Armature)

Mark Cerny(the guy produced Sonic 2 for SEGA, walked up to Naughty Dog to get Crash Bandicoot made, know your history Jason!)

Fumito Ueda(was once the animator for a Saturn game called Enemy Zero and moved on to form the ICO studio at Sony)

Lets not forget Infinity Ward, it was once EA's Medal of Honor team or Artoon(Blinx, from the creator of Sonic!), Mistwalker(Lost Oddysey, from the creator of Final Fantasy!) and countless others who had no problem to get funding for their games over the years.

 

[Kai Dracon]

While I can't stand it when people equate sales with quality in the absolute sense - "if a game sells millions its superior by definition!" - the flipside is that *generally speaking* sales indicate /trends/ in quality over time. There are however flukes. Sometimes, a studio just gets shafted by timing and circumstances. Other times an individual game may be good, and even have the potential for widespread popularity, but doesn't get noticed fast enough to achieve critical mass and generate word of mouth.

It is these cases that piss fans off, and cause people to say that sales !=quality. However, these cases are still the exception that proves the rule. Most of the time, a studio's sales go down because their games start to either suck, or become pitched at a niche audience.

(This is another thing fans of various games cannot accept, sometimes. That quality does not equal mass market appeal. If more people like chocolate compared to strawberries, this does not mean chocolate is higher "quality" than strawberries.)

 

[gerg]

I would agree, but he didn't say only 'very few people', I don't believe he gave any room for this happening as a one off or anything. He just said it couldn't happen.

He is not Miyamoto, if he means he couldn't do it, fair enough, but to say it can't happen is a very different statement.

Here we are getting into the semantics of "can't happen", which I feel is a useless tangent when we all know what he pretty much meant anyway.

Yes, for Miyamoto and Will Wright, what we are describing can happen. In this sense, "can't happen" is not literally true. But 99% of game developers aren't Miyamoto or Will Wright - mentioning these two people, for them, is insignificant: for them, it may as well be the case that it can't happen. In reality, it doesn't happen often enough, justifying the statement that it "can't happen".

To the counter-argument of bringing up Miyamoto and Will Wright I say, "So what?" In any case, if you wanted to point out that what Rubin said is not literally true, then you have been successful in doing so.

Mark Cerny(the guy produced Sonic 2 for SEGA, walked up to Naughty Dog to get Crash Bandicoot made, know your history Jason!)

Fumito Ueda(was once the animator for a Saturn game called Enemy Zero and moved on to form the ICO studio at Sony)

With these examples, at least, such events happened during past generations. In fact, Jason Rubin touched upon this, saying that something similar with Rare was "ancient history". I think that that's a justified rebuttal, because the rising costs that exist now and make it so difficult to secure funding weren't a problem then.

 

[Bizzyb]

Yeah because only COD4 is a successful game that tells publisher to invest in one genre. Those games like Halo, GoWs, GTA's, etc etc were all fly by night moments

CoD took it to the next level though. GTA has been a moderate success this Generation, though nothing like last gen, and even then the budgets were much more reasonable last generation.

God of War has yet to come out so we don't know exactly how it will perform. And Halo has always been a system seller as it is MS flagship title so it really doesn't count.

COD4's success is something that has not yet been seen in this generation thus far, only comparable to a Nintendo game...and that's the ultimate goal is it not? to have a game sell on "Nintendo's level", yet what they forgot is that Nintendo does not need to pump out millions upon millions on just one title and does not fear taking risks and being merely derivative (The Next Zelda and Metroid game should be further examples of that fact)

btw, I wasn't speaking of COD4s success only influencing one genre. Though the FPS genre is nearing complete fatigue

 

[NeoUltima]

Rubin's point was a single individual has little power in this industry, despite there hits so having these type of people come in and innovate at the AAA level probably won't happen. Rubin hit upon, but didn't really explore the fact that you need a little groundswell support from the publisher before they take that risk in a studio. (did he?)

If you join a big publisher, you just become another cog in the machine.

That's nice... Is this suppose to be a rebuttal to my post? Doesn't change anything I said. Anyway...regarding single individuals having no power, that is bs. Does James Cameron have no power in the movie business? All his movies are successes and almost anything he proposes will be greenlit. Obviously that is an extreme example, but publishers do value what these proven devs have to say, but the responses from the publishers will all be different and depend on a lot of things. Does the publisher have a team that the proven dev could take over? Does the proven dev have some sort of team with him? Will they find it worth it to create a new team? Is the proposal really fucking good? Regarding a studio dissolving, if that is the case, chances are when someone from said studio makes a proposal, they will have people from their old studio behind/with them. Too many situations, to many possibilities. Rubin was focusing on just one extreme situation, and yeah, in that extreme situation he is probably right.

Again, this is just a silly thing to argue about. There is no point or merit in this discussion, too many ways such a thing could shake down. At least last week there was something worth discussing.

 

[StuBurns]

Here we are getting into the semantics of "can't happen", which I feel is a useless tangent when we all know what he pretty much meant anyway.

What he 'meant' might not be obnoxious and infuriating to hear, but what he said was.

Maybe if I knew the exact thing he meant I'd fully agree with him, but what I heard was a grown man acting like an irritated child when his friends disagreed with his grandiose statements.

I disagree with what he said, maybe I disagree what he meant, but I don't know exactly what that was, and neither do you.

 

[UraMallas]

Also examples of game designers who could just walk up to publishers to get their games made:

Masahiro Sakurai(in fact Nintendo insisted that he came back and after Brawl was made, with countless delays to boot, Nintendo offered him his own development studio)

You made a good list but this one is especially apt. Nintendo all but built a studio around this guy so that he would come back and develop for them.

 

[Bizzyb]

You made a good list but this one is especially apt. Nintendo all but built a studio around this guy so that he would come back and develop for them.

Speaking of which, what exactly does he do at Nintendo when he isn't making Smash Bros games?? It's kind of like hw Konami uses Kojima up to make MGS games, even giving him his own studio, but asides from making MGS he does little else (I feel sorry for Kojima. he is forever shackled to that series)

 

[gerg]

What he 'meant' might not be obnoxious and infuriating to hear, but what he said was.

Maybe if I knew the exact thing he meant I'd fully agree with him, but what I heard was a grown man acting like an irritated child when his friends disagreed with his grandiose statements.

I disagree with what he said, maybe I disagree what he meant, but I don't know exactly what that was, and neither do you.

I'm prepared to stop the discussion here, because I do actually agree that Rubin was less than clear with what he said. Nevertheless, I think you're taking his statement too literally, and that, for all intents and purposes, what he is suggesting doesn't happen.

 

[jett]

With every episode Rubin becomes more of a know-it-all douche. It's getting annoying.

 

[Nirolak]

Those were different situations and neither proved him wrong. Many members of Team Ninja left with Itagaki, and PG is largely made up of old clover studios staffers. The only examples of singular individuals being given teams and huge budgets just off name value is the guy behind SSB:B with Project Sora and Sakaguichi.

Also notice all the counter examples are from japan, which has a very different corporate structure than American teams.

You missed a very large one in the form of Armature: http://kotaku.com/5049329/metroid-prime-devs-eye-360-ps3-for-future-games

 

[NeoUltima]

With every episode Rubin becomes more of a know-it-all douche. It's getting annoying.

Pretty much. Not sure I even want to watch Part 4(but I know I will anyway lol)