Creative Downturn
The recession could hurt creativity - but if publishers won't take risks, others certainly will.
Published as part of our sister-site GamesIndustry.biz' widely-read weekly newsletter, the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial is a weekly dissection of one of the issues weighing on the minds of the people at the top of the games business. It appears on Eurogamer after it goes out to GI.biz newsletter subscribers.
On the face of it, you wouldn't expect the next couple of years to be very good for innovation and creativity in videogames. Admittedly, widespread fears over the effects of recession are somewhat overblown - right now, there's simply no evidence that economic woes are impacting on videogame sales and 2009 still looks set to be a growth year for the market.
However, the recession - and perhaps more importantly, the slow-down of commercial lending from banks - creates a certain mindset among businesspeople, even those whose sectors are still in rude health. EA's John Riccitiello summed up the mood at the DICE Summit earlier this month, where he told the audience that EA - which has recently cut 1,100 jobs in its worldwide operations - had become "too fat, too reliant on where things were."
Of course, that would have been true even if the recession had never happened - in fact, people including some of EA's own executives have been suggesting that the company is bloated and inefficient for years, a fact underlined by years of rising costs and relatively stagnant revenues.
As Riccitiello admitted, however, to firms in this position (and it's certainly not just EA that finds itself staring at the consequences of uncontrolled cost rises), the recession has been a "blessing in disguise". Suddenly, macro-economic conditions allow them to slash their costs without anyone batting an eyelid, while the same moves twelve months ago would have caused serious concerns about the company's status.
So even for those companies whose products will continue to see sales growth for the next couple of years, the atmosphere is one of frugality. Drought in the credit markets doesn't help, naturally, but for the most part this sense of belt-tightening is more to do with companies taking the opportunity to scale back costs than it is to do with any real financial necessity.
Sadly, when companies scale back costs, they often do so at the expense of throwing out a whole creche full of babies along with the bathwater. If you look at the operations of a big first-party studio, for instance, much of the wasted resource comes from big-name titles, especially those on 12 or 18 month franchise schedules. Money and man-hours are thrown away on bloated, mismanaged teams, the legacy of years of ill-advised "throw more people at the problem" solutions to problematic deadlines.
However, trimming the fat from those teams is hard work. Everyone on the team will fight their corner, claiming their intrinsic worth to the profitable project. Each middle-manager will act like a minor feudal lord, jealously guarding his painstakingly accumulated collection of vassals and subjects. Team sizes, all too often, end up being more to do with office politics and power-grabs than to do with the actual requirements of making a game, and extricating a small, lean, efficient team from this quagmire requires a huge amount of work and some very tough decisions.
Meanwhile, most studios also boast a handful of nascent projects - ideas which are floating around in the pre-production stages, championed by a handful of developers and designers who are working on the concept. On a slightly larger scale are the original game projects, games in production but lacking a big franchise or IP license behind them.
These projects are risky. They're not guaranteed any level of commercial success, and while critics all profess to love original IP, that doesn't mean that original projects are guaranteed a high Metacritic rating either. Compared with the risks associated with trying to trim back costs on high-profile franchise projects, the decision to instead cut back on new ideas and teams working on unproven IP will look extremely tempting to many studios. The same logic, too, will apply at the publishing level, with risky ideas likely to find far less warm receptions at publishers in the coming years.
Both from a creative perspective and from a more long-term business perspective, this is bad news. Creativity has always demanded some risk taking behaviour from publishers - more specifically, a willingness to balance out the risk of some original projects against the guaranteed returns of some blockbuster franchises. The industry's business model, meanwhile, demands that creativity to survive. Without the risk-taking that allows original IP to emerge, the games industry would soon find itself feeding off scraps from the table of the movie, TV and sports licensing industries.
However, not all publishers are quite as willing to clamp down on risk as they used to be. EA is a perfect example; since Riccitiello returned to the company, the firm has been making increasingly encouraging noises and now seems to understand that risk is an essential part of the business of making entertainment, rather than being an unfortunate side-effect which must be controlled and reduced. Some other publishers are slowly but surely getting the message; the platform holders, too, are learning. Whatever else it may have done wrong of late, Sony deserves special praise for its recent willingness to try out new ideas and champion creativity through its first-party releases.
Even these bright spots in the gloom, however, don't change the fact that many publishers are going to become more risk-averse and less friendly to innovative ideas in the coming years. However, there's a further variable to be reckoned with in this equation - the slow but increasingly assured rise of independent games as a commercial force in the market.
We've all been talking about independent games for years, of course. Created outside the studio system by passionate, talented enthusiasts, independent games have been celebrated by the media and even recognised by the industry (thanks to the fantastic Independent Games Festival which runs alongside GDC each year). Rarely, however, have they made any significant impact on the commerce of the industry.
This is changing. It is changing because millions of new consumers who have never played games before are now active in the market, and looking for new experiences which traditional firms simply don't know how to provide. It is changing because the tools which allow the creation of superb games are no longer out of the reach of small teams and even individuals. It is changing because word of mouth has become more powerful than any marketing campaign could ever be. More than anything, it is changing because every major console on the planet now has a digital distribution system allowing consumers to download games at a wide range of price points.
No longer are independent games confined to the PC platform. No longer do they have to be given away for free, as they have been in many cases. No longer are they kept away from the marketplace simply by the high walls which surround retail, isolated from consumers by an industry which has traditionally only understood the concept of selling monolithic units of entertainment at a fixed £30 price point.
The explosion of creativity which will be created by this change is only beginning. Certainly, barriers to entry still exist, but they are slowly coming down - and I anticipate that it won't be long before services like PlayStation Store and Xbox Live Arcade start to offer developers the same level of easy access to market that something like Apple's iPhone App Store does.
This revolution will give us a new wave of developers who see games through very different eyes to those of their studio-bound compatriots. Forced to consider the financial bottom line, the technological bleeding edge and the whims of Metacritic at each turn, big studio development is by no means uncreative, but certainly has to follow certain set patterns. With few such concerns, independent game developers can follow their hearts and their instincts to a far greater extent.
The studio system couldn't have created a game like Flower, the utterly beautiful PSN title which came out earlier this month; but more than that, it couldn't have created a persona like Jenova Chen, the mind behind Flower, who happily talks in interviews about evoking emotions, moving past primal feelings and "maturing" the industry in ways that don't involve sex, blood and swearing. He talks about making games that don't empower gamers, but instead make them experience other things, other emotions. It's spine-tingling stuff. It's also commercial suicide - or would be, to a studio working in the traditional development context.
Others like him are emerging, or have emerged, from this scene. Let's not beat around the bush - many of them will build games which will be terrible. Many will try so hard to depart from the way games are traditionally made that they'll fail to notice that some of those things stem from hard-learned lessons, not constrictive rules. Others will make games which are fascinating, or extraordinary, or immensely entertaining, but which simply fail to find a market.
But from among them, there will come a select few who will make games that tick all of the boxes. They will be new, and fresh, and daring - and hugely, vastly commercially successful. Developed for a handful of notes, they will make millions, and they will fuel the careers of new auteurs and the passion of new generations of creators.
The studio blockbuster system won't go away any time soon - and nobody should want it to, any more than any serious movie fan should genuinely wish for the demise of Hollywood. However, the studio system is no longer alone, and its role in creating commercial success will soon no longer be a monopoly. Creativity will face tough times in recession - but no financial downturn will stop it from blooming, even if it's not in the places we might expect.
For more views on the industry and to keep up to date with news relevant to the games business, read GamesIndustry.biz. You can sign up to the newsletter and receive the GamesIndustry.biz Editorial directly each Thursday afternoon.
You may also like...
-
Why Devs Owe You Nothing
-
Digital Foundry: PS3 Skyrim Lag Fixed?
-
Face-Off: The Darkness 2
-
App of the Day: Sir Benfro's Brilliant Balloon
-
Sony admits "dropping the ball" with Demon's Souls
-
Who Killed Rare?
-
Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 Vita Review
-
EA evaluating FIFA Street features for FIFA 13
-
CD Projekt: Witcher 2 intro cinematic "the most expensive asset we ever created"
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning Review
-
One Piece: Unlimited Cruise SP Review
-
Gotham City Impostors Review
-
Grand Slam Tennis 2 Review
-
The Darkness 2 Review
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 performance tip: make a new manual save
-
Skyrim patch 1.4 now live for Xbox 360
-
Mass Effect 3 FemShep trailer debuts
-
Epic's Sweeney on graphics tech: "the limit really is in sight"
-
Valve admits hackers accessed Steam transaction log
-
Double Fine Adventure passes Day of the Tentacle budget
-
Next Xbox has tablet-like touch-screen controller - rumour
-
King Arthur 2 Review
-
Metal Gear Solid: The "Lost" HD Remasters
-
Sony: The Last Guardian is making "slow progress"
-
App of the Day: Superman









Comments (23) Latest comment 3 years ago
Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!
Comment below viewing threshold Show
We discussed this very issue just yesterday. Processes that involve three departments that could easily be managed by one department but whenever you raise this issue everyone involved claims how important they are and that it has always been this way. It's funny how many people complain they have so much work to do yet when you actually want to optimize how things are done then nobody wants to listen.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
...the slow but increasingly assured rise of independent games as a commercial force in the market........the studio system is no longer alone, and its role in creating commercial success will soon no longer be a monopoly....
Best thing to happen to the games industry in a decade. It was becoming pretty stagnant.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
p.s. i didnt read the article just amused you put a halo pic up
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Gaming isn't being hit by recession, the cuts would have come anyway, smaller, more independent title may suffer.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
What about the "Community" games on Xbox Live? How is access to this marketplace from a developer's point of view more difficult than the iPhone?
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Creativity...lol
Comment below viewing threshold Show
That phrase is bandied about by so many. It's the club that's used by the fearful to batter down basic common sense. "Yeah, we always crunch rather than properly plan - its always been this way". "Yeah, we always just hire more producers and throw them at problems, rather than actually figure out what the issues actually are - its always been this way". Etc... I hope things change, but there are a hell of a lot of folks out there with a very vested interest (they think) in things staying the way they've always been.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Couldn't have said it better myself. The Games Industry has the worst production department in any forms of computer development.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Crunch. Study after study shows that it destroys productivity, that more mistakes get made not less, and that the workforce burn out, and that the end product suffers. And who does the 'best' stuff in crunch time? The guys who do the good work during the normal 9 to 5. So, the good guys get burned out and the rest just coast along. Crunch is just evidence of bad project planning and bad personnel management, and yet so many companies seem to shrug their shoulders during half-assed planning meetings and just say "Well, if it all goes wrong, we can just crunch". Or, worse still, they timetable a crunch period. "We can work normal hours for two years then get the team to crunch the last six months." Yeah, coz that always works...
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Don't think this just applies to the game industry; this mentality pretty much applies in any industry you work. Middle management usually are in the worse of jobs as not only are they passing the shit downhill but they are getting more shit and pressure from up top who know even less than them what its truly like at the bottom. Try and put yourselves in their shoes, they have been given a deadline from their boss which is not negotiable, things start going wrong and they have to make decisions. You will never always agree with their decisions but could you make them decisions yourself? Its how they then communicate them decisions to motivate a team that counts and I'm sure like any other industry there truly are some real arseholes about. But all senior management will see is the deadline met not how it was achieved. It sounds like the progammers, artists musicians etc. need to think about joining a union. It wouldn't take too long to do away with Crunch, not with the rates of pay they would negotiate for doing them anyway, the only trouble is you would need a very high percentage to join all at the same time and all be willing to stand side by side. I'm sure the Unions lawyers would love to go head to head over an issue like that and all it would cost the members is the monthly fee, usually around £10 a month!
Anyway.....
At the moment I think were getting quite a good mix with games. We are getting the AAA franshises that everybody knows and enjoys at least one, two or more ie FIFA, COD, Halo, Gears etc. These are then balanced out by the more creative low budgets games which occasionally throws up with some real gems like Flower or Braid. This is definately a good time to be a gamer. Its also good to see the way EA seem more willing to take chances as well with the likes of Deadspace and Mirrors Edge. And to anyone who says all the Xbox has got is grey/brown FPS; play something like Banjo - Kazooie Nuts & Bolts where once you get over the fact you are not racing at 200mph or trying to commit genocide with a variety of big guns you will find a whole lot of fun to be had.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Instead we end up with super large and expensive teams who are so inefficient that communicating, let alone produce a game in a reasonable amount of time is impossible. In real work terms it actually takes no more than about 6 months to a year to create a game from scratch. Somehow this is stretching out to multiple years. From my own experience I have spent weeks in a games office waiting for a producer to make a decision that should have been made during the pre-production phase. I've sat through endless meetings where nothing was decided simply because no-one felt secure enough to make the hard decisions.
I'm moving towards the indie scene and have been for a few years now. The fun has indeed gone out of working for large games companies. A few years ago I went the contractor route and haven't looked back. I work on a lot of AAA titles and simply move on as the project ends. As a result I am able to more openly express my opinions on what I see wrong with a company or where I think they need to change.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
It is bloody depressing when you put it like that isn't it? Well said though. Good to see an article that's well written, and a slew of comments that are intelligent and well thought out. Makes a nice change!
I've been in crunch since last summer. Yes, summer 2008. To say I'm burnt out doesn't even come close. Add to that the fact that management are useless, and one particular person seems to have a grudge against me, and I'm seriously considering leaving.
But where would I go, if the same thing will essentially happen all over again somewhere else?
There is a little hope though. If you have a look at http://www.relentless.co .uk/ you can see they seem to have the right attitude with regard to development. There's also an interesting Finnish study on there on the effects of working long hours.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
gamers have proven time and again that they'll only buy something with lots of shooting and swearing in it.. and having a guy in a space suit wont hurt either.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
I bet you get told how much your efforts are appreciated, and that loyalty will be noticed, etc, etc. Bet you get told what a team player you are. I think there's a book somewhere, called something like "Meaningless Platitudes Vol.2", that those phrases are drawn from.
Best of luck, mate. Hope it all goes well.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Comment below viewing threshold Show
And how many times have the managers said 'No more crunch on the next project!'
I'd hate to think what would happen if we got a 'Games Industry' trade union togther, we could all go on strike in demand for better working conditions.
Sure, 'some' people get paid well, very well in fact, but if you aren't one of them, and you are working in an industry which is geared around university leavers willing to work 60+h weeks (like i did), then when you reach 30+ yrs old, you really don't want to be doing that anymore, you have other important things in your life..ooh, like a family...
At some point someone will realise that the really experienced guys who know how to do it all have left to go and do something more rewarding.
Comment below viewing threshold Show
Amen