Kotaku
Evan Wilson, a senior research analyst at Pacific Crest Securities, has an interesting take on how game companies should handle their most talented members of their staffs—that's not so different from what we see in professional sports, music or the movie industry.
There are very few people in this world who know how to create hits...multiple hits. Those creative minds should be recognized and remunerated in the video game industry for their contribution as much as other forms of media. From a business perspective, that might be more expensive, but if the reward is better selling games the trade-off is worth it.In other words, Nintendo shouldn't release Super Mario Galaxy but Shigeru Miyamoto's Super Mario Galaxy. It's, of course, an American viewpoint in an industry still very much rooted in Japanese culture.
Analyst: Publishers Would Make More Money By Treating Developers As Stars [MTV]
Comments
Yeah, thats exactly what we need. The star system in video games...
Wow analyst are clueless.
No thanks. Please check celebrity worship at the door. I entirely dig the fact that I love characters more than the people that play them.
Oh you mean like Clive Barker's Jericho? I think we all remember how well that turned out.
@AndrewG009: I take your Clive Barker's Jericho and raise you a John Romero's Daikatana.
They tried doing that with Romero, if I'm not mistaken..
The only games I look at as quality when I see the guy's name on the box are Sid Meier. I guess you could call him a celebrity for the games industry.
@ekkobi:
Touche sir, touche.
You guys really think that's stupid.
So I guess you guys think Hideo Kojima is self-obsessed idiot?
Zone of Enders A Hideo Kojima Game
Zone of Enders 2nd Runner A Hideo Kojima Game
Metal Gear Solid A Hideo Kojima Game
Metal Gear Solid 2 A Hideo Kojima Game
Metal Gear Solid 3 A Hideo Kojima Game
Metal Gear Solid 4 A Hideo Kojima Game
It's on every game case.
Seriously folks, this ain't new.
@AndrewG009: Not even close to relevant. When the hell was Clive Barker ever recognized as a Game Developer?
What is needed is games with good single player experiences with added multiplayer features.
I pretty much would like to have a lot more Co-op Campaign based games. It is fun playing video games, but it is pure enjoyment on a whole other level when you play games with friends.
And of course having a nice network of gamers (XBL) is key in helping that.
@Huckleberry:
And the only two title's I can really think of is Sid Meier with the Civ games (as you said) and Will Wright with Spore, but that's not being presented as Will Wright presents Will Wright's Spore, but for more hilarity about this topic, check out Zero Punctuations review of Jericho, really that hits it case in point.
I'm all for credit where credit's do, but do we really need to make gaming less about games?
Creators already are known, if they prove they deserve credit (or are a female, like Jade). I don't want people's names on my game box, and I don't want to make "game celebrities."
Gaming's focus should remain on the games. Anything that removes or lessens that focus, I am not for.
And they can refer to the gaming industry as Pollywood.
@Moonshadow101:
Not a game developer, but they attempted to cash in on his name.
@dunetiger : the mekuri master: Exactly.
We don't need any Kanye Wests of Gaming to be sure. I'm pretty sure I'd rather see no one go any further than "Cliffy B" has gone in this direction of "Super Stardom." It only makes a developer egotistical. I don't want to think of Cliff when playing Gears 2 for the first time. (If I play it at all, that is)
Didn't Ubisoft just get the rights to put "Tom Clancy's" as a prefix on whatever games they like? Does that apply here?
Either way, the "Tom Clancy" games still hold more merit than most.
it's amazing i'm the only one that has reference Hideo Kojima. That's a great example of a great game, awesome star power attached to it.
The only time a qualifying title like that should be used is to convey to an audience that is a fan of a particular work that they might like another, unrelated work that were created by the same people.
Case in point, you weren't going to get "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" folk to just sit down and watch Firefly on the basis of it having any shared attributes, and seeing as it operates in a different universe, timescale, characters, etc. If you call it by it's full title, though, "Joss Whedon's Firefly", those that were fans of "Buffy/Angel" were automatically obligated to check it out, even if it operated separately from their established bits of enjoyment.
So if Shigeru Miyamoto developed something that didn't have Mario or Zelda's name in it... something obscure, it gets those folk to check it out. To slap his name over a Mario or Zelda title, though, would be redundant.
It's worked for Steven Spielberg for cartoons, it's going to work again for him in the video game industry with Boom Blox.
Seriously, who are these analysts and what are they smoking? Because I want some of it. They are almost as out of touch with gaming as politicians.
Funny thing is EA became big by doing just what he is talking about. This is before they became the monster they are today.
I think this is the case for most hardcore video gamers though. WE know who is developing the game and such, take for instance the CoD series. Gamers know which ones are the good ones but the common consumer doesn't they just know they see a sequel to a good game, then crap is sprung on them. I'm guessing this is why you want see companies adopting the developer or project director PR move anytime soon. It is easier to fool the uneducated consumer.
Tom clancy's ubisoft catalog!
So like John Carmack's Doom?
hrm nah.
I think the fans pretty much know who makes the games and already look out for the next games by said devs.
I mean, I'll buy anything made by Blizzard, Infinity Ward or um...anything NIS publishes here in the States.
I think a fair amount of this activity already goes on. Let's see here, who doesn't know John Romero, Cliffy B, Jade Raymond, Hideo Kojima, John Carmack, etc?
@byrc:
I don't play MGS for Kojima. I play it 'cause I love Snake. In all honesty, I think some of the gameplay in the MGS series is kind of assbackwards, but Snake keeps me coming back.
Cliffy B's Gears of War... Nah. I'm straight on that Idea. let's just keep it Gears of War.
Kanyeezy. Uh. No. We need good games as much as we need good music. Let's just keep the ego out of it.
American McGee's Alice?
@byrc: gosh you ARE amazing!
As a side note, Miyamoto is one of the very few celebrities that I would actually like to meet and thank.
Tom Clancy presents: Steven Speilbergs Hideo Kojima Game
Kojima does rock though ;)
Oh, and I will gladly hunt someone down if I see "Tomonobu Itagaki's Ninja Gaiden 2".
Really, I'm surprised he hasn't tried to pull that shit. How egotistical that guy gets sometimes.
@byrc:
I agree, and that's the whole point though, name recognition does have a bit of power behind it. I made the Jericho reference because I remember standing in a Gamestop and hearing someone state loudly, and I quote, "Oh my God, Clive Barker, I have to own this game!" at which point I cringed quietly. But, attaching a name to it drives a bit of power home. Yes, a Hideo Kojima game will catch a gamer's eye because his name is well known in the industry. Converesely, it is the same way Tom Clancy has the pseudo-strategic, tactical, political, military genre cornered with his books and thereby games with his name attached, so to speak. John Romero, Peter Molyneux, and Shigeru Miyamoto, just to name a few all have a well-known name in the game industry and that's the point that is trying to be driven home and while it could garner some marketability, I personally think its a bad idea.
@liquid_kore: Haha, I want to see a game with that as a prefix. Hopefully the games name would be somewhere along the lines of "Overblown" or "Excessiveness". Come on, "Tom Clancy Presents: Steven Spielberg's Hideo Kojima Film/Game/Intermediate Medium of Video Entertainment: EXCESSIVENESS."
Coming soon on everything except the Commadore 64. For now...
How about no. I don't think any single person can take the credit for the success of a game. Mario Galaxy wouldn't have been so hot if you didn't have the talented people who are able to implement all the game play mechanics. It's not just about the person with the ideas, you also need people to execute those ideas.
Maybe is a good things for the dev's, because a guy that is a sucessfull chess games maker, can move to RTS, to RPG, to sport games. Imagine some dev's stuck making a FPS after another...
More importantly, what about the programmers working 3am Sunday nights to make their milestones on these Super Star games?
Isn't that why Sid Meier and American McGee self-title their own games? :P
Also, didn't Miyamoto have very little to do with Mario Galaxy? I mean, he supervised it, but I think lately he has had a more "creative suggestion" type approach than an actual design one.
Yu Suzuki
@byrc:
not to forget...
metal gear (hideo kojima)
metal gear 2: solid snake (hideo kojima)
metal gear solid: vr missions (hideo kojima)
metal gear solid portable ops/ MGSPO plus (hideo kojima)
metal gear acid/ acid2 (hideo kojima)
metal gear: ghost bable (hideo kojima)
snatcher (hideo kojima)
policenauts (hideo kojima)
lunarnights(hideo kojima)
there are many, many more...
@byrc: Thats a little diffrent. @byrc: Your reference average at best, Kojima didnt try to become popular with his games. He made great games and as a result, he has gained recognition.
If the trend of gaming stars becomes popular then every developer is going to have their "Big shot" developer.
It will dilute the glory of actually being a good game dev. when every company is trying to have star game creator.
Stars do not make good games. Good games make stars.
@karasu is my homeboy: It's like your speaking from my own heart homes!
Games are unique in that there is rarely just one guy (or gal) responsible for both the idea and the execution. Many games are cooked up by a full kitchen of awesome developers. A round table, as it were. So rather than putting a persons name, I would rather they keep up with putting the studio's name. Maybe just feature these logos a bit more predominantly. If you just put one guys name on the box, it totally detracts earned recognition from the heroes in the studio.
Take CoD for example: We all know which one to buy, because it has Infinity Ward on the box. It also works the other way, like with Valve, 3D Realms, or the now defunct Clover. It's an automatic must buy just because of the studio involved.
Or am I just crazy here?
@byrc:
Idiot? No. Self-obsessed? Most definitely.
I love how everyone is complaining about how a mere name on a title would ruin gaming, when there are already plenty of games that already do this and even so among the gaming community people recognize games by their creators.
Lets be honest, how many of you bought a game mostly (if not solely) because of who was the director/producer?
@CitizenInsane27: So how do you feel about Tom Clancy presents: A Steven Speilberg production: Hideo Kojima's Ninja Gaiden 2 featuring Tomonobu Itagaki.
Peter Jackson's King Kong: The official game of the movie.
Oh...he means like 'Steven Spielburg's Boom Blox'...yawn.
@Mikazukinoyaiba: The point is that, nine times out of ten, if the game *needs* the name for people to care about it, there's usually a very good reason.
@Rebochan:
Shigeru Miyamoto
Nintendo already gives him the celeb treatment and tries their best to protect his public image.
We see alot of this already.
Tom Clancy's (war game)
Sim Meier's (sim game)
American McGee's (Piece of Crap game)
Honestly, in all entertain fields, we do need big names, but let the names show naturally. This isn't music or movies where a handful of people (actor's or directors or singers) are the major contributing force. With games, we have teams. We have dozens, sometimes hundreds of people working on a single game. Gaming has become such a big production that to isolate one person as the face of a game is simply unreasonable.
When we do see it, it usually comes through excellence. Ken Levine, Carmack, Warren Spector are a few who are outstanding in there fields and have earned there title as being game industry 'stars'
Add a name to a title just (often to sell more copies) doesn't work. Just ask Romeo about Daikatana
I wish i could play some Mark Wilson's War
@Buddy_DoQ: You're absolutely right. Infinity Ward is a great example, as are Blizzard, Harmonix, and probably several others I'm forgetting right now.
Not only does giving one designer superstar status downplay the involvement of the rest of the team, it creates the false impression that the team is interchangeable, and that the one superstar designer could create the same game with any team. That's a little hard to swallow.
I was kinda shocked when I readed the tittle.. I thought your gonna talk about how we need more Starts(like movie stars) in our games... Im glad that was wrong ^^and thats a nice idea.. except the "Some persons name": Game Tittle thing... :|
You know what, I don't really care WHO develops the game as long as it's good. And it's not ONE single person who turns a game into greatness. If you're going to put someone's name in lights, you need to do the same thing for every person who worked on the title. This is not pro sports. We don't need showboating and idol-worship. If anything, I want more focus to be on the characters in the actual game.
And on the last note, if a game from SEGA every has the word "Sonic" in the title, I want to see a blue hedgehog, not a bunch of crappy wannabes. Thank you.
I'm glad that most of this industry is lacking the 'star power'. It means I can judge a game's worth entirely on the content, without any preconceived ideas of what I think of the writer/actor/director getting in the way. Why would you take away the ability to look at something on its own merits? Oh yeah, to make more money...
@
@J. Kyle:
Bungie.
I think iconic characters is the key. Mario, Master Chief, Solid Snake, Cloud, etc. Its the characters and the story that make the game enjoyable, and I could really care less who made it. Some developers are better than others, like you said, but even a tiny/obscure developer could make an awesome game.
YES! Let's take what ruined filmmaking, and apply it to videogames! Genius!
stupid.
nobody plays MGS cause of kojima, they play it cause of snake... it's not HIDEO KOJIMA presents: METAL GEAR... it's METAL GEAR: SOLID (solid as in SNAKE).
@daklog:
i play it because of Hideo Kojima :/
analyst this analyst that. Anyone forget you can't spell analyst without anal?
Analyst Says Games That Feature Cheese Sandwiches Sell Better.
@ekkobi: I liked both of these games for what they were although jericho had entirely horrible dialogue with out any sense of irony... but then so did Undying. Daikatana had a very frustrating opening section which set a bad tone for the rest of the experience for most players, but I would argue so did system shock 1 at the time.
The art work and story in Jericho are pretty decent and the gameplay is fun. Characters/voice acting look saturday morning cartoonish and didn't seem to fit at all. (I only paid 20 bucks fr it though)
I recognize why this analyst wants this, and why it would make publishers more money. It also simplifies the connection/branding as a marketing tool.
I am actually pretty turned off by any thing that's introduced as "so and so's something" because it really takes an army of creative talent these days to put anything together successfully, and it's not just the lead designer or the writer, or the director or the artists. This is not to say that there aren't people that can unite others into a common vision and make that work, or that there aren't amazing people tat stand out in all these fields. I am just don't want the games industry to turn into western hollyood world of marketed entertainment where only the director and sometimes the writer get all the credit or a lead designer.
That being said I do have my faves in the industry, so I'm sort of being elitist maybe.