Gamers - You Have Horrible Taste!
The last time that we covered Matt Sakey's regular 'Culture Clash' IGDA column, we got a little perturbed at the level of invective in there, and his latest April 2006 IGDA column, on 'establishing an industry identity', again falls on the combative side.
Sakey's central theory seems to be that, well, gamers are dumb: "Everything that is wrong with the games industry can be summed up in one word: Psychonauts. The fact that this wonderful game moved only a handful of units in the United States is an offense. The publisher didn't advertise aggressively, and I do hold Majesco partially responsible. But mostly I blame gamers for failing to buy a title with practically universal appeal." Um... one would think that the definition of 'universal appeal' is that everyone would buy it?
The conclusion? "There's certainly profit and probably long-term stability in continuing the status quo: franchises, sports licenses, movie tie-ins. But following that path exclusively means that gaming will never aspire to anything greater. If that's okay with you, then so be it; accept that this medium will forever remain a bastard stepchild, the lower spawn of higher arts."
This Au-like argument seems, to me, to be fallacious - you iterate reliable, fun, profitable titles (yes, aesthetes, Madden is enjoyable to play!) so you get the opportunity to take greater risk on other titles, or you just use digital distribution and lower development costs to take those risks. It's not a fire and brimstone moment. But I guess it's more fun if we pretend it is. Gamers, you suck!
Comments
i'm afraid that the video games industry is largely driven by "me too" thinking. GTA is defined cool, so everyone buys it. Everyone is told that Madden is the be-all and end-all of sports gaming, so everyone buys it.
There is nothing wrong with this per se -- Madden and GTA are great games in their own right.
But what is certain is that it is only the minority of gamers that are interested in thinking for themselves -- who will actually ask "is Madden all is can be?" or who will ask "is there anything after crime in GTA?"
This site may make fun of guys like Au and Sakey, but without them and gamers like them this site has no point in existing.
Posted by: Ultra SMRT | April 6, 2006 10:05 PM
The industry isn't as sequel-driven as one may think. You have the franchises, yes, but there is still plenty of new blood in the market. FEAR, Fahrenheit or Katamari, for instance. The latter is now being whored out for all it's worth, true, but it was a fairly recent introduction. One mustn't dismiss all franchises as direct clones, either. Oblivion is the fourth in the Elder Scrolls series, yet bears little more than a passing resemblance to the previous titles. Each Zelda game that comes out is very different from the last. San Andreas is an immense improvement over GTA3. They share a common root of their name, but that doesn't mean the game is the same.
Games have always been a 'me-too' environment. Driven right from the very start by arcades wanting exclusives. Companies would clone their competitor's games almost identically. Same happens in every market, and the silent majority that makes up most of the spending power behind game sales is fine with it. Anyone who cares about original games doesn't matter enough to most developers.
Posted by: Matt | April 7, 2006 2:31 AM
"But what is certain is that it is only the minority of gamers that are interested in thinking for themselves"
It seems to me that "thinking for yourselves" actually means "agreeing with me". Just because there's this (in your opinion) great game that flies under the radar doesn't mean that all gamers are mindless sheep who do what the TV says. Isn't it possible to both think for myself and enjoy a popular game?
Also, if these under-the-radar games were suddenly popular, would the people buying them continue to be mindless sheep who follow the crowd?
It just seems to me you have the attitude of indy rock listeners and indy film watchers: if it's not popular then it's better.
Posted by: boohiss | April 7, 2006 6:13 AM
Did you read the article? He's blaming the industry, not gamers. He only holds gamers partially responsible. I disagree with some of his statements (casual games are a leech on creativity?? Sure, there are lots of clones, but also lots of unique games...), but the overall complaint about the marketing of some games is a valid one.
Posted by: bubicus | April 7, 2006 10:58 AM
The marketing of the game blew it for me. I was very excited and about to buy it a release when I found the console price $10 higher than the PC price. That annoyed me enough to not buy. Still, having a new and inventive title that you believe in means you really should be the biggest promoter of the game. I didn't see that.
Posted by: Jason | April 7, 2006 11:06 PM
Speaking from a UK perspective, it appears there are a catalogue of industry errors. Released in April in the US, the game wasn't released in the UK until Feb 2006. It appears to have been published by THQ in the UK/Europe so where was the announcement that it had changed hands, similar to the announcement when Majesco picked it up from Microsoft? The last recorded screenshots and press release to be found was in May 2005. Clearly, like a defected spy, the game was left out in the cold.
Could the developer shoulder any responsibility for this? Would the fact that the game being in development since 2001/02 onward bear any relevance? The first screenshots were released in 2002 and showed a complete product against what was released. Could it be that the cost of developing this game and the shift between publishers, again, probably a cost issue directly related to development, meant that there was very little marketing money to apply to such a title? With the title changing hands it would also be difficult for marketing to fit the game into what is normally a 9 month lead strategy. So, what happened to Psychonauts throughout its 'wilderness years'?
Posted by: scratchinghead | April 8, 2006 2:56 AM
I would have been happy to buy Psychonauts had it been released on NGC or Mac. I don't have a PC, refuse to buy an XBOX, and didn't want to take the graphical hit on the PS2 version. This game screams gamecube and mac, and it's beyond me why they didn't release it on those platforms.
Posted by: Erik | April 10, 2006 12:03 PM