The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Enabling Young Developers: a community discourse
Polago
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
(Apologies ahead of time if this op starts a little odd at points. I'm relating this train of thought from the source which it was spurned)
Polago presents: a G&T discourse (hopefully
)
In a recent interview on the 1up show at GDC, Goichi Suda "51" delved into details regarding his upcoming Wii title "No More Heroes" and was generally open and insightful in response to the questions asked of him as many developers would like to be. One particular set of state-like comments however raised an interesting point that warrented some expansion.
The debate regarding "sequelitis" in game releases and the veer towards rehashed successful concepts has been raised more than enough times on this forum to satiate most communities, however there has rarely been a discource on "sequelitis" as it pertains to the developers themselves. There has generally been a form of trust in company figureheads and project leads throughout all consumer constituancies, whether it be Miyamoto, Wright, Toriyama or Newell, and a trust in the titles they work on or at the very least support in some form, so much so that those titles without such a namesake backing it can suffer from skepticism or simply not being given a chance to prove itself properly in such a large market. This has been a frequent point of interest in personal endeavours as well as being similar to the broader topics surrounding the issue, so with the subtle suggestion of Suda 51, I quickly compiled a short list (incomplete, please help supply numbers with sources if you know them) of current popular designers in interactive entertainment, or heads of popular titles and projects, and split them into Japanese and North American/European categories.
Japanese
Goichi Suda - 39
Shigeru Miyamoto - 54
Hideo Kojima - 43
Hironobu Sakaguchi - 44
Gunpei Yokoi (deceased) - 66
Satoru Iwata - 47
Nobuo Uematsu - 47 (48 on march 21st)
Akira Toriyama - 51
Yuji Naka - 41
Yu Suzuki - 50
Keiji Inafune - 41
Hideki Kamiya - ?
Atsushi Inaba - ?
Shinji Mikami - 41
Average Japanese "star" age: 47
American
Cliff Blezinski - 32
Will Wright - 47
Gabe Newell - 44
Michael Ancel - ?
Tim Schaeffer - ?
Chris Taylor - ?
Greg Zeschuk - ?
Ray Muzyka - ?
Chris Sawyer - ?
Sid Meier - 52
John Romero - 40
John Carmack - 37
Warren Spector - ?
David Jaffe - ?
Peter Molyneux - 46
Tim Stamper - ?
Chris Stamper - ?
Ken Levine - ?
Average NA/European "star" age: 42.5
Younger
Cliff Blezinski - Lead Designer of Gears of War - 32
Minh Le - co-creator of Counter-Strike - 28
Alex Garden - co-creator of Homeworld, co-founder of Relic, Managing Director of Nexon America - early 30s
Rob Pardo - Lead Designer of Starcraft:Brood Wars, Warcraft 3, and WoW - 35
Jenova Chen - developer of flOw - 26
George Fan - Creator of the ever addictive casual game Insaniquarium - 28
Younger "star" age average: 30
There are a LOT of vacant ages there, so if you can help fill in the voids it would be greatly appreciated. However, in most of those individual cases, it can be assumed an average age of at least 40.
As Suda himself says, it's a slightly disturbing trend if it can be described as such. However, we generally know and realize that there is more than enough young talent out there, whether artist, programmer, designer, or otherwise, concocting brilliant concepts every day (some of which are showcased in the same episode of the 1up show). These independant minds are showcased on plenty of stages, whether it's IDGA events, GDC, commercial services like Garagegames and Xbox live arcade, through communities surrounding XNA and similar platforms, not to mention specific dedicated fan communities (see TheSonicRetard's sonic community of which he is a member) and countless mod communities. So why is it that these individuals, whether through their accolades or exposures, never rise to the forefront in the games industry and earn the spotlight they deserve? Is it because of companies like EA "aquiring" smaller developers and IP while stipping the talent from it's rights and positions? Is it because of companies like Ubisoft who setup idea farms where IP is harvested and the rights are there own? Maybe it's simply because smaller developers have to subject themselves to the whims of their publisher/investor who rake in the majority of the revenue and glory (and risk), and push for higher sales potential (ie. copying what works) instead of allowing creative minds to step up and apart from the status quo. Essentially, as Suda alludes, the industry simply doesn't allow for young independant developers to garner a real limelight or a proper namesake branding. Even then though the paths which could be chosen outside of the industry, whether through angel/stock investment or business/personal bank loans tend to yield dead ends for young endeavours and ages as there is an introductory stigma to young business along with a lack of assets and personal collateral/accountability, while the video game business itself (long term product development and sales) isn't conductive to most small business funding parameters. Small developers have a tougher time with advertising revenue in and out of games because they cannot guarantee to move as much product as is required in many advertising deals like an established brand or large company can, and small groups don't have the resources to set up the services required in many regards (Microsoft with Crackdown and Live is a good example).
As we can all see, there are more barriers than there are oppertunities to start and stay independant in games, especially if you happen to be "cursed" by youth as well. This thread though isn't being made and bottom paged to discuss what's wrong so much as what we, the dedicated gaming community, can do about this if only in some small way. What can be done by the smaller developers to stay independant and propagate their concepts, projects, and more importantly in this context, their names? How can the communities surrounding these developers and games (including G&T) help out? Community based funding for promising designers/artists/companies? A collaborative pool of contacts and expertise? Mass exposure through freely offered advertisement on community property/webspace and splinter/user branched spaces?
What ideas would G&T propose? What avenues can be explored and expanded? What tools can be used or furthered to promote these avenues? What are the beacons currently in place? We know the talent is there, so how do we truely allow it to flourish without sacrificing it's own name and brand as it does now?
tl;dr: How can gaming communities help keep independant talent independant and allow them develop their own names and recognition (business or individual) instead of being amalgamated or stifled as the current industry/business standard dictates?
Polago presents: a G&T discourse (hopefully
)In a recent interview on the 1up show at GDC, Goichi Suda "51" delved into details regarding his upcoming Wii title "No More Heroes" and was generally open and insightful in response to the questions asked of him as many developers would like to be. One particular set of state-like comments however raised an interesting point that warrented some expansion.
1up question:
"The Halo, the medal of honor, and stuff like that. If games like that are popular, then what do you see as the problem with that?"
Suda 51 responds:
"I think the games you mentioned are the hollywood blockbusters of the industry and I believe they are an important part of the market. But the problem arises when all you've got coming out are Hollywood-style games. The industry needs independant games with small budgets. The industry needs to foster an environment where indy developers can make games that cost less without threatening the developer's very existence. I'm thirty-nine years old now. Now in Japan, there are no young twenty-something year-old stars in our industry. That worries me. So you've only got older game creators. If we don't do something to bring young guns into the fold our industry will fail. We need...sorry this is getting long! [laughter]"
The debate regarding "sequelitis" in game releases and the veer towards rehashed successful concepts has been raised more than enough times on this forum to satiate most communities, however there has rarely been a discource on "sequelitis" as it pertains to the developers themselves. There has generally been a form of trust in company figureheads and project leads throughout all consumer constituancies, whether it be Miyamoto, Wright, Toriyama or Newell, and a trust in the titles they work on or at the very least support in some form, so much so that those titles without such a namesake backing it can suffer from skepticism or simply not being given a chance to prove itself properly in such a large market. This has been a frequent point of interest in personal endeavours as well as being similar to the broader topics surrounding the issue, so with the subtle suggestion of Suda 51, I quickly compiled a short list (incomplete, please help supply numbers with sources if you know them) of current popular designers in interactive entertainment, or heads of popular titles and projects, and split them into Japanese and North American/European categories.
Japanese
Goichi Suda - 39
Shigeru Miyamoto - 54
Hideo Kojima - 43
Hironobu Sakaguchi - 44
Gunpei Yokoi (deceased) - 66
Satoru Iwata - 47
Nobuo Uematsu - 47 (48 on march 21st)
Akira Toriyama - 51
Yuji Naka - 41
Yu Suzuki - 50
Keiji Inafune - 41
Hideki Kamiya - ?
Atsushi Inaba - ?
Shinji Mikami - 41
Average Japanese "star" age: 47
American
Cliff Blezinski - 32
Will Wright - 47
Gabe Newell - 44
Michael Ancel - ?
Tim Schaeffer - ?
Chris Taylor - ?
Greg Zeschuk - ?
Ray Muzyka - ?
Chris Sawyer - ?
Sid Meier - 52
John Romero - 40
John Carmack - 37
Warren Spector - ?
David Jaffe - ?
Peter Molyneux - 46
Tim Stamper - ?
Chris Stamper - ?
Ken Levine - ?
Average NA/European "star" age: 42.5
Younger
Cliff Blezinski - Lead Designer of Gears of War - 32
Minh Le - co-creator of Counter-Strike - 28
Alex Garden - co-creator of Homeworld, co-founder of Relic, Managing Director of Nexon America - early 30s
Rob Pardo - Lead Designer of Starcraft:Brood Wars, Warcraft 3, and WoW - 35
Jenova Chen - developer of flOw - 26
George Fan - Creator of the ever addictive casual game Insaniquarium - 28
Younger "star" age average: 30
There are a LOT of vacant ages there, so if you can help fill in the voids it would be greatly appreciated. However, in most of those individual cases, it can be assumed an average age of at least 40.
As Suda himself says, it's a slightly disturbing trend if it can be described as such. However, we generally know and realize that there is more than enough young talent out there, whether artist, programmer, designer, or otherwise, concocting brilliant concepts every day (some of which are showcased in the same episode of the 1up show). These independant minds are showcased on plenty of stages, whether it's IDGA events, GDC, commercial services like Garagegames and Xbox live arcade, through communities surrounding XNA and similar platforms, not to mention specific dedicated fan communities (see TheSonicRetard's sonic community of which he is a member) and countless mod communities. So why is it that these individuals, whether through their accolades or exposures, never rise to the forefront in the games industry and earn the spotlight they deserve? Is it because of companies like EA "aquiring" smaller developers and IP while stipping the talent from it's rights and positions? Is it because of companies like Ubisoft who setup idea farms where IP is harvested and the rights are there own? Maybe it's simply because smaller developers have to subject themselves to the whims of their publisher/investor who rake in the majority of the revenue and glory (and risk), and push for higher sales potential (ie. copying what works) instead of allowing creative minds to step up and apart from the status quo. Essentially, as Suda alludes, the industry simply doesn't allow for young independant developers to garner a real limelight or a proper namesake branding. Even then though the paths which could be chosen outside of the industry, whether through angel/stock investment or business/personal bank loans tend to yield dead ends for young endeavours and ages as there is an introductory stigma to young business along with a lack of assets and personal collateral/accountability, while the video game business itself (long term product development and sales) isn't conductive to most small business funding parameters. Small developers have a tougher time with advertising revenue in and out of games because they cannot guarantee to move as much product as is required in many advertising deals like an established brand or large company can, and small groups don't have the resources to set up the services required in many regards (Microsoft with Crackdown and Live is a good example).
As we can all see, there are more barriers than there are oppertunities to start and stay independant in games, especially if you happen to be "cursed" by youth as well. This thread though isn't being made and bottom paged to discuss what's wrong so much as what we, the dedicated gaming community, can do about this if only in some small way. What can be done by the smaller developers to stay independant and propagate their concepts, projects, and more importantly in this context, their names? How can the communities surrounding these developers and games (including G&T) help out? Community based funding for promising designers/artists/companies? A collaborative pool of contacts and expertise? Mass exposure through freely offered advertisement on community property/webspace and splinter/user branched spaces?
What ideas would G&T propose? What avenues can be explored and expanded? What tools can be used or furthered to promote these avenues? What are the beacons currently in place? We know the talent is there, so how do we truely allow it to flourish without sacrificing it's own name and brand as it does now?
tl;dr: How can gaming communities help keep independant talent independant and allow them develop their own names and recognition (business or individual) instead of being amalgamated or stifled as the current industry/business standard dictates?
Polago on
0
Posts
2) Titties
It might just work!
Big companies are just too much to compete with now, and they farm all the talent, and shove it into a very small box.
This small box is often times referred to as a 'cubicle'.
I think the giants are going to always be the giants now - and nobody is going to be added.
most of all, most of all
someone said true love was dead
but i'm bound to fall
bound to fall for you
oh what can i do
Companies that embrace mod communities have a great wealth of talent for potential hiring.
This isn't to say that there aren't incredibly talented young developers out there working their craft and gaining experience to eventually fill in the gap (in independent, casual, mobile, and even big name development studios like EA Canada). Generally, a lot of "star" developers get several unknown projects under their belt before getting that one mega hit that propels them to "star" status. If these unknown projects include a lot of big-studio games, then that might mean up to 2 years spent working on a single idea (although several designers these days work on multiple projects simultaneously).
I've had the pleasure to meet some extremely talented, driven, and young developers out there with enough motivation and growing influence, that I'm not too worried about the future of this industry. I do agree that the industry has to better facilitate the avenues in which we can recognize the next generation of top designers. However, as in the case with most of the top creative talent I've met, their main motivation is the overwhelming desire to create something worthwhile, with mainstream recognition coming as a far secondary goal.
I'd also like to contribute some developers to the list who I feel made significant contributions to the shaping of the industry within the last 6 years and are relatively young.
Minh Le - co-creator of Counter-Strike - 28
Alex Garden - co-creator of Homeworld, co-founder of Relic, Managing Director of Nexon America - early 30s
Rob Pardo - Lead Designer of Starcraft:Brood Wars, Warcraft 3, and WoW - 35
Jenova Chen - developer of flOw - 26
George Fan - Creator of the ever addictive casual game Insaniquarium - 28
Looking for a Hardcore Fantasy Extraction Shooter? - Dark and Darker
That's about what I wanted to say.
This is a fantastic post krapst, and is exactly what I was hoping for when I made this thread. Thoughful and provoking. Everything stated is your post is straightup fact, from the massive amounts of work and time needed, to the overwhelming desire to create something amazing. I wasn't really thinking about the young stars making hollywood style games specifically (or any type/grade of game) so much as the recognition or ability to be a face in/of the industry or at least some part of it, but it is still a great point to touch nonetheless given the state of things right now with releases and business structure.
It's also interesting to note that even though Rob Pardo has done such big name projects with blizzard, he's not a quickly recognizable name like warren spector and the like. Odd considering his accolades, and considering I recognized the name Jenova Chen before Pardo's. I'll put those developers seperate in a 3rd list in the op so that they are kept nice and tidy. If anyone can think of any other major young developers/industry workers, then be sure to mention them so I can revise the lists.
Anyways krapst, along with all of those positives you agreed that the industry isn't facilitating the paths indy/young developers can take to have a face in the industry, despite their desire and sacrifice to make their dreams come true. In theme with the main question being asked in the op, what do you think can be done within the context of the industry/business to help young developers stay independant, or do you think it's needed at all given the success that some people still see? Perhaps when the time is right they'll take the reigns, but for now maybe it's too early to worry? I definitely don't think it should be the GOAL of the developer to be famous/popular, but it would be a fantastic reward of recognition for the contributions and efforts to games on the whole, especially if brought about sooner in their careers.
Followup questions: Is it better for interactive entertainment to have "star" developers at all, or would games/relations be better without these people to fall back on?
So far they make great role models and set bars to be broken. We study how they do it and break it down and use it as a guide to making our games. One of my co-developers, Paul Eres, did a writeup on the Miyamoto framework. Without the stars and the pioneers, we would have a hard time knowing what to do, or how to outdo/compete with them.
The only thing I've really noticed is that companies tend to only have one star. You rarely if ever have "all star" companies or games, like movies.
I don't think the industry is so much geared around stars as Hollywood is, particularly in case of producers. There are occasions when we see games with the producer's name on the box i.e. Civilization. But it's not Hollywood where that's being used as a big selling point to the majority of gamers out there. Honestly, when it comes to films I don't care who Jerry Bruckheimer is, so why would I care who Cliffy B is either? This isn't to say either of them haven't produced some fine work, but the only reason I know who Bruckheimer is , is because I have his name thrown at me in 10 different trailers. With Cliffy B, I had no idea until Gears of War came out and his name was being tossed around with it.
So in a sense, the game industry is moving the direction of Hollywood, by using names to help suppliment games, particularly when there isn't a previous fanbase or IP to gear the advertisements around. In terms of what this does for the market, I would say it appears to be nothing more than a marketing ploy.
Now in terms of Indy gaming, again I've played numerous games from there, ie Counter-Strike, and other mods for the HL engine, or the Q3 engine. And again, as a casual gamer I don't know who created what. Partly because I'm not overly interested, but the same goes for "industry" games, and partly because the information isn't always readily available.
So why is that? Aren't the majority of mods out there for FPS's? Sure you get the occasional game like The Elder Scrolls ie Morrowind and Oblivion, which allow for modding, and the using of their engines for things other than FPS games. But how many times does that really happen? Honestly, I want to know because, I'll say it again I'm just a casual gamer, and I'm not into the whole community to a large degree if any.
But this brings to mind something I was wondering about because of this topic. What is it taking to do these mods and indy games? A lot of mods are based around using previous textures, etc. Or even in some cases there is no new artwork, so that means it's really coming down to just programing. Which means that writers, and artists to some degree aren't getting the same exposure. Or if they are it's because that's not their primary job, coding may be.
This is all speculation on my part, but wouldn't more indy games of a variety that's not a FPS allow for the rise of more "stars"? Because you would have people with other backgrounds being known. But again, there's the problem of the whole teamwork process that is necessary in the gaming industry. Same goes for the film, but in Film a number of people are showcased prominently because of their necessity to the film. The same isn't true with games.
Producers in terms of gamers and films deal with the money, and handling the affairs and keeping the team going, while holding aloft the image the game is going for.
Directors are only in movies for the most part, and a lot of their job in terms of games is taken over by the producer or lead designer.
Writers, well with a film, it can all start with them. With a game, they may never be needed. Examples include Counter-Strike, Shadowrun (the new one from Fasa), pick a sports game, basically any form of multiplayer game because when it comes to multiplayer stories go out the window. Example, C&C doesn't need a story it just needs balance for MP so that two guys can have a good time trying to kill one another.
Artists, the same really goes for both film and games, artists are secondary to the designers ideas.
And unless these people which are taking secondary roles are also filling primary roles such as being a designer, then you won't have stars rising from their ranks. You will have appreciation of their work by their peers and others, those that see what they've done, but not by the standard consumer.
So I think for a person to be a star they have to be someone that is marketable and sociable and in a position of greater prominence. This includes indy gamers, and coming up with new concept/games is hard when the majority, again from my understanding, of engines out there to work with are for FPS.
I realize at the end of this that I am probably crossing the whole indy game and modding community too much, but as previously stated a lot of people start there and get positions because of their work. But how many writers have done that? I ask cause I like to write, and so in terms of gaming that's of the greatest interest to me.
Here's an article Captain K brought to my attention a while back:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/8/3
Essentially what it states is that the publishing mechanism in place is causing the market to suffer because most of the titles that are to be released do not earn money. That's why you see so many sequels. What this does basically is snuff out any kind of independent market.
This is also the reason that the key players at the moment are so old. After the dust from the big bang of video games settles, we were left with that universe and that universe alone.
With the advent of delivery methods such as steam, this might change. I mean I'm not 100% as to how one releases a game on steam and what the profit margins are. But with the publishers being so fucking greedy, that would be the only way that I could see any new talent filtering into the current scheme. At most I'd see them squeeze out a few titles and vanish into oblivion though.
I personally believe we're in the last viable generation of modding. Long-gone are the heady days of working on HL1 and hammering out a release in a year or so. The engines have changed and the art pipelines have grown more complicated and more demanding, but the demographics of likely modders have shrunk.
What used to take a dozen people in high school or college to make a HL1 mod now takes the same amount of people who are now in professional careers, both in game design and in completely unrelated fields. Young newcomers are faced with cynical vets and ridiculously high expectations. In a field where the community is entirely cultivated online, somehow everyone expects you to look AS GOOD as a multi-million dollar game but PLAY BETTER simply because you are a mod, and therefor, you'll find bohemian success.
I've been in modding for about 6 or 7 years now. I first cut my teeth on Firearms for HL1 and now work on World at War and Firearms: Source for HL2. Those who are still willing to put up with the B.S. of an over-complicated, utterly antiquated pipeline (I'm looking at you, Valve. DOS compilers? Are you kidding me?) have to be something special, truly talented people. And what happens to truly talented people in an environment that, by its very definition, is unprofessional? All too often they become arrogant and unsufferable. I want to slit my wrists every time I think about managing a team of modders, one faction of whom are smart, dedicated, talented, and utter dicks, versus those who are smart, good guys, talented, and lazy. In an overtly critical environment where acting and looking professional is Holy Writ.
And sure, there are the lucky teams that can produce good content through experience, talent, and sheer force of will. And I highly expect them to be strip-mined into the professional gaming industry within a month or two of releasing anything, which, more often than not, is the unstated goal of being a modder. I say "strip-mining" instead of "cultivated" because you will never see anything original from them every again. Ever. Ask Minh Le how much he'll enjoy working on Counter-Strike over the past 8 years and into the NEXT 8 years.
TL;DR... So, no, I don't think modding is still viable as an environment for young developers. Or if it is, it won't be much longer.
But even here we just see endless mods of North American PC games. For the aspiring console developer, what can you do? I'm sure if I enjoyed FPS's I might find modding fun, but I don't particularly care for the genre.
I think that has little to do with actual facts and almost everything to do with the media that cover games and game developers.
If you listen to the Half-Life 2: Episode 1 developer commentary, it quickly becomes clear that there are at least a dozen key creative players at Valve--anyone who's important enough to a design process to be the person to talk about something significant that made it into a game is clearly a vital creative influence at that dev studio. And I personally get the impression that there's several dozen developers at Valve that have a lot of creative influence, and probably that it's a place where everyone's input is taken into consideration based on its merit, rather than based on that developer's "standing" at the company.
Gamespot does periodic features on games that go gold, offering behind-the-scenes looks at dev studios, and I've been surprised at how many studios involve every single employee in the creative process to some degree. Bungie seems like a good example--regardless of any individual employee's specific job description, it really sounds like everyone who works there has at least some hand in directing the creative process.
But we don't hear about Joe Average the level designer and his offerings to the game--we hear about Cliffy B and Rob Pardo and Chris Roberts and Chris Taylor, because from a media POV it's easier to write compelling journalism about singular developers than about entire studios. I don't think it's a flaw in the industry as much as it's a flaw in the information media.
Of course, there's certainly companies and projects out there where there's no question that the lead designer's input is far more important than anyone else's--nobody's going to argue down a fine point of a Metal Gear Solid's design, for example. If Kojima wants something in particular, he's going to get it. And maybe I'm wrong with my belief that a lot of studios use group effort for their creative processes (any developers reading this thread can correct me on that).
I think that's mainly because the big names in the film industry--directors, producers, actors, cinematographers--tend to get their work on a contract-by-contract basis. You can assemble an "ensemble cast" for a movie because actors aren't full-time employees of individual film companies, and you can hire a hotshot director for the same film because directors aren't full-time employees of individual film companies either.
It doesn't work the same way in the game industry. Cliffy B works for Epic, and John Carmack works for iD. Unless one of them quits his job and goes to work for the other company, you won't ever see the two guys working on one project.
But to be honest, the idea of making the jump to eventually release the game, and compete with what is out there, is a completely frightening prospect. You look at the indies that made it happen (the Savage guys, the Alien Hominid people, etc) and obviously it is possible, but you need to have more than just a good idea with a decent enough implementation to pull that off. I'm hoping we're at least going to have that when all is said and done, but it is very daunting to try and do this. And in the end I think this is a big problem because people that might have so much potential and creativity might just drop everything and turn back, because they are discouraged from going forward.
Back when I was job hunting, I had people calling me asking if I had 6-10 years of experience in a mosaic of obscure technologies when my resume clearly stated that I was just getting out of college. If these are the expectations of entry level developers for business applications I can't even imagine what they must be like for game development.
So, I thought, maybe I could just make a game for fun on my own. But I like coding 3D graphics, so I'd want to do it in 3D. I also like drawing character art, so I'd like to have characters. But to make any game that uses my talents I need to:
* learn to model a human/humanoid
* learn to map texture coordinates
* learn to animate 3D models using bones and quaternions
* learn how to export all this data and store it in a way I can use it
After that, for someone like me, using the data in-game is actually relatively simple. It's just that those first 4 steps that I need to go through just to get started are a huge deterrent.
Not to mention learning to compose music and create sound effects.
This raises an interesting question actually. With the advents of XNA and other development tools which simplify the process allowing concepts and designs to be prototyped and finished quicker and with less time/money investment, will such options replace the current mod community as we see it today and in days past? Given the ease of adding controller fuctionality to XNA titles and instant porting to 360 (lack of porting needed rather) and low cost, could this become the mod community of sorts for consoles, as far as indy development goes and allow younger faces to be known on a console stage?
a) sequels
b) ports from bigger platforms (as in: console->handheld or console->cell phone)
c) use a popular license, for example a movie or TV series
It was made clear to me that I would be unlikely to get a chance to develop any of my own game ideas (for some examples, check out my blog, URL is in my sig.)
I don't mind it right now, because I haven't designed any hit games, so they have no reason to think that my ideas could lead to hit games (never mind just plain successful: this industry thrives on major hits only... moderate sellers rarely get a sequel or port) but it seems to me that this is depressing to many game designers. Look at all the "best games of all time" lists, and you'll find games that wouldn't get past the decision-makers at most current developers/publishers. They still think that games such as Katamari Damacy, Tetris or The Sims were flukes, and that ambitious, original ideas are unlikely to be profitable.
The biggest hope for the industry, right now, is the fact that indies can develop smaller, simpler, but often more compelling games which sell for less, but can continue to move the industry forwards. The big enabling factor for this is services such as XBox Live Arcade, Nintendo's Virtual Console (I can't wait to see indie games come out that use the Wiimote!), and Sony's own download service.
I know some of you would be content to get more games like Halo, Gears of War, or GTA, but the industry can't move forward without new ideas.
Check out my new blog: http://50wordstories.ca
Also check out my old game design blog: http://stealmygamedesigns.blogspot.com
That's the same for every industry where there is a fair amount of money riding on it. The only difference is music, where you can be incredibly talented very quickly; if you know how to play a guitar, then you know how to play it.
I don't see why anyone is surprised by this.
Although the standard brick and mortar retailer + publisher/distributor model is still the most powerful (most lucrative) means of delivery, downloadable content delivery systems are finally becoming a viable competitor. We've seen some fairly successful independent games reach their intended market through such systems, such as Dystopia, Defcon, Rag Doll KungFu through Steam and Sam & Max through Gametap. The market I work in (Korean MMOG market), the downloadable delivery system is actually the most popular means of distribution.
There are also tons of great independent self-published games out there that do well in targeting a niche market. Galactic Civilization 2 (US), Pox Nora, and Puzzle Pirates are all recent examples of fairly successful self-published games that did well by using good marketing and offering fresh products. A lot of these games were basically done by people who were sick and tired of the current system and sought out ways to bypass the traditional methods of game publishing. I think these products serve as great inspiration for young developers and teams who still have a dream of making a commercially practical game idea.
I think the main thing these guys got right is that they know their audience and set realistic expectations. I see it analogous to creating a kick-ass TV show instead of a Hollywood film. They aren't out there trying to create the next blockbuster mega-hit, but instead work on a more reasonable scale and try to create a top notch product at a profit. When you're forced to create a product who's sales is based entirely on it's gameplay value instead of the glitz of a million dollar marketing campaign, you're going to absolutely ensure your game is fun.
The changes in tools available to new developers is also a huge reason why I'm so optimistic about the future of independent game developers. Garage Games and their community has done some nice things with the Torque engine, and even the upcoming Penny Arcade Game will utilize it. Popcap Games and Three Rings both offer free game engine frameworks that allows designers to create new games. Microsofts XNA Game Studio is an awesome framework that may finally give independent developers exposure to the massive console market. I've been working as a professional game producer for the past 6 years, recently working with one of the big 4 publishers, and even I'm excited as hell about working on XNA to create hobby games and side projects with friends.
A comment on the mod community, and the "strip-mining" of talent by the big developers; I just want to say, if you have the talent and know how to present yourself, there will always be a demand for competent developers. You just have to set your expectation realistically. You can't expect to make the big bucks and have full creative freedom on a large budget project without putting in an enormous amount of work to prove yourself. When a publisher is risking $2-5million on a single project, they like to go with a proven formula. However, that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of smaller budgeted innovative projects and studios that can work out. One of my friend's said it best to me when recruiting me to his studio by asking "Would you rather be a tail of a dragon, or would you rather be the head of snake, that has the potential to become a dragon?".
Looking for a Hardcore Fantasy Extraction Shooter? - Dark and Darker