Will rising development costs hinder innovation?
by Nick Doerr 
{ Apr 12th 2007 at 4:00PM }
There's an interesting piece over at CVG worth bringing on the PS3 Fanboy front. An analyst actually stopped making console guesstimations and thought about the developers end of the equation for a bit. The man, Ed Barton from Screen Digest, called the "risk reduction strategy" of focusing on franchise sequels and multi-platform titles will choke the innovation out of the gaming industry.But it's not just developers to blame -- consumers widely ignore the innovative titles that are specific to one platform (see Ico) but will eat up a franchise title with minor improvements over the last iteration (see Devil May Cry, EA Sports games, etc).
In a contrasting view, those games that are now franchises did indeed start out innovative -- there was nothing like DMC before it, but now it's a cash cow. Sort of. It's breaking into the franchise market by creating an innovative title that's key, right? That's my aside, but let's continue on Ed Barton's rant.
Barton talks about the PS3 briefly, calling it the one system that will take the longest to exploit the potential of because of the multi-platform attitude of developers. Since each system this generation is so different, he says, the one that stands apart (my words) will take the longest mature. Good stuff. What do you guys think? Will original titles fade out completely, or is making an original title the only way to break into making successful sequels and a franchise out of what was once innovative?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mccomber @ Apr 12th 2007 4:19PM
To me, the system that is hurt the worst by multiplatform releases is the Wii, which is, in the end, the most innovative of the three systems from a pure originality standpoint. ps360 games will of course probably look better on the 360 since the ps3 takes more coaxing to get it to play nice with old code, or so it would seem. What we see first party, and from third parties specifically built for the ps3 will always be the best for this system, and within time will probably outshine what the 360 does, even if it's not as grand a difference graphically as we might like.
Games are entertainment, and we only need to look at television and movies to see how that works. Sequels, remakes and rehash are what end up making the most money most of the time. I'd say the problem is that people simply don't really like big changes or innovations, unless there is enough familiarity to keep them "grounded", so to speak. GTA3 worked because it pulled so many familiar toys and put them into a whole new sandbox. That is where innovation and marketability meet.
KillarClown @ Apr 12th 2007 4:47PM
Old Franchises die off and new ones replace. Just like tv and movies. Just like in fashion. Just like in fads. Just like with vehicles. It's the way of the world. Inovation and change will come.
Killer @ Apr 12th 2007 4:58PM
@ killarclown
You mean like MGS, Mario, Halo, Sonic, more Mario, and Final Fantasy?
Old francises don't die off, they just become and endless cycle of named spin offs or the addition of a number at the end of the title. FF13? HALO 3? MGS4? Mario kart? Paper Mario? They never end!
DarkMage @ Apr 12th 2007 4:59PM
Inovative titles have a tough time standing out and some of the best ones never really catch on in comparison with the long-runing franchises. For example, Valkyrie Profile 2: Silmeria was a great, innovative game with fresh ideas but never really got the appreciation it deserved thanks to competition from well-known titles, in this case competition from Final Fantasy XII.
timvp21 @ Apr 12th 2007 5:16PM
New franchises are born for example....gears of war... all you need is good support from the publisher and a good company like epic to make a new IP.
KillarClown @ Apr 12th 2007 5:28PM
@ killer
Considering you mentioned a handful of the few lasting franchises you expect that I, shamefully, am an e-tard. Well, no, i'm not. I'm an alchy, thanks. Anyway go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_games
From this list of over 1500 games tell me which ones are still a franchise. If it's over half, no, 5% are still productive franchises i'll bow my head.
In time all will come to pass and be like so many other beloved memories of our past (like gen-x and tying plaid shirts around their waist.. i mean WTF was THAT about?)
pete @ Apr 12th 2007 7:14PM
i'member that one, we use to do hooded sweater tied round the waist along with the plaids too.
Chris Putnam @ Apr 12th 2007 7:19PM
This is one big advantage of the tiered platform market we've got right now. The huge, impressive, epic games are going to show up on PS3 and 360, but at the cost of a lot of innovation. Meanwhile, we've got the Wii, sporting a unique control scheme and familiar, generation-old hardware - this thing is built for risk-taking and originality.
What do I think will happen? Developers and publishers will bet the farm on more 100-person team, 2-year+ development blockbuster titles on the high-end systems, while Wii, with its potential for faster and cheaper-to-produce games, will become a sort of testing ground for new concepts. When something flops on Wii, they're not out on the street, while if it succeeds, you can bet that the ideas behind it will find their way (one way or another - not necessarily through the same people) onto the expensive systems.
It's a good time to be a gamer.
Gamble20 @ Apr 12th 2007 8:31PM
nobody heard of god of war, gears of war, Halo, or anything like that before 2000.
Blockbusters are blockbusters for a reason. The reason why Ico and such failed was because they couldnt develop enough hype really.
If you can get people to really get excited for your game, and then have your game be fun and "innovative" then in time it will become a blockbuster.
old franchises to die off, some stay, but most die off (i.e. crash bandicoot etc.)
naggs @ Apr 14th 2007 1:12PM
there is no more or less innovation than there was 10 years ago. we have been hearing this same argument for years. just because there are dozens of FPSs and RTSs and MMOs in developement doesnt mean that there wont be innovation. there is still plenty of room for all those generes to grow and evolve. not every game can or should be a brand spankin new genere completly unlike anything else.
now where is my next gen side scrolling shooter?
John @ Apr 12th 2007 11:49PM
"consumers widely ignore the innovative titles that are specific to one platform"
I find this troubling-- I think it's representative of what a narrow market video games still are. People that would love Shadow of the Collosus for the imagery, depth, atmosphere, would not be also attracted to the difficult fighting system.
We have Loco Roco coming out and I actually think Little Big Planet is going to have a huge range of appeal; the physics alone are compelling and allow multiple attempts through a different range of motions... if 4 crappy players play together, they're still all having fun. Not so true of many games out there.
I think we'll see it, just as we saw movies blossom, but it will take some time... I think after the hump of learning and maxing out these new systems we can expect this stuff around 2009, because it will be able to be made cheaper, and there will be enough broad base of players to justify excursions into newness.
Hopefully when the next-next generation of consoles comes out, there won't be such a struggle. They'll be powerful enough and easy enough to program that we don't have to be wizards juggling so much, and developers can leap on the bandwagon quickly, not having to work so hard for technique, similar to the way that digital video brought out a whole range of possibilities for cinema that did not exist before.
Burnt Meatloaf @ Apr 13th 2007 6:25AM
Innovation is a seriously overused word. It means change, not improvement.
If developers are spending too much money on games, that's their own damn fault. Business isn't about selling as much as possible, it's about maximizing your profit while minimizing your investment. If you lose track of your budget, you're a bad developer. If you've got CEOs, focus groups, and investors telling you what to do in your games, it's time to form a new dev team.