Develop 2010: Attendees bemused by reasons why the popular PSN title fell at early hurdles
Hello Games took to the stage at the Develop Conference today to exact revenge on the publishers that turned down the Joe Danger project.
Sean Murray, a programmer at the studio, revealed that Joe Danger sold 50,000 copies in its first week on the PlayStation Network. Yet Hello Games struggled to convince publishers that the title would work.
Without naming any names, Murray went through a list of reasons why the game was turned down, quoting what he had heard from various publishers in meetings. Attendees at the Develop session broke into laughter.
The list, as quoted by Murray, can be found below:
“Name me one popular game with motorbikes?”
Advertisement
”Collecting giant coins feels unrealistic to me”
”I can see this working as a Facebook app”
”We want games that are less about fun right now”
”We love the theme, but with a different game”
”We believe the iPhone will be largely unsupported”
”Can Joe be a monkey? We like Monkeys”
It's not just publishers. I recently had a job where I was designing a game and wanted a focus on exploration in the game. The programmers on the team were skeptical, and one even said, "Name a successful game based on exploration."
Needless to say, I'm not working there anymore.
It reminds me of a recent employer asking for new ideas, explaining that the concept has to be realistic and no sci fi, as there isn't a market for those games.
Needless to say, I'm not working there anymore as well!
And these are the reasons why businessmen should have nothing to do with playing any role in Game Development, not even on an advisory level! If you need help with finances, see an accountant! Games are meant to be fun, have interesting mechanics, stories, characters, atmospheres, ideas, etc. etc. They don't need to have all of those things to be fun, and you certainly don't need a 50 man team of lawyers, businessmen, and finance specialists to tell you what is fun - because those people don't know what fun is. The only thing of interest in their shallow mindset is MONEY - bottom line. Indie developers already know that you need money to survive, but more importantly, they know that if you do want to be a game developer a game has to have something that gamers and newcomers to games want - and that usually involves something fun, interesting, or exciting (or perhaps a different emotional connection). Businessmen don't know anything about that sort of thing. They are blind to actual creativity and haven't the foggiest about an audience. To them, a Tony Robbins seminar is the epitome of entertainment. We do not need them to participate in the practice of creating OR even selling games. Their is all kinds of free or cheap advise on how to sell games and market games and quite honestly the best way to learn is by wasting a lot of time and gaining the experience first hand - which is far better than dealing with the wrinkled and dried up prunes of the industry - The Publishers and their businessmen!
"Elephants can't dance"
This is a well-known phrase that describes the phenomenon of large organizations losing perspective of the added value in their products/services (in this case, creativity in games), and thereby diminishing their competitive advantage.
Mike Said:
"""Elephants can't dance"""
""This is a well-known phrase that describes the phenomenon of large organizations losing perspective of the added value in their products/services (in this case, creativity in games), and thereby diminishing their competitive advantage.""
I don't really see a phenomenon, I just see larger studios developing crappier games and being forced to follow a formula and flow chart made by the Publishers and their financial aids to cash in on stagnant ideas and clone others work for the quickest possible buck. That's not really a phenomenon, more like an annoying recurrence in the "mainstream" publishing / game developing and the corruption of what was once a creative cycle. For the most part (the majority) Indies still walk with their integrity in tact. These larger publishers and even game developing studios are all guilty of corrupt, adulterated, diluted, and squalid practices of only creating something for the buck rather than being creative and passionate about what it is you actually want to create AND share with those who might be willing to pay for it.
It's a sad state.
And to think people once believed that gaming would never catch up to the film industry.
Hahaha @ PR.
Prejudice, stereotyping & myopia is alive and well on both sides of the table.
"Businessmen don't know anything"
"those people don't know what fun is"
"programmers on the team were skeptical"
"Hahaha @ PR"
"publishers and even game developing studios are all guilty"
No wonder you named yourself dickweed dickweed. LOL
Seriously valid points all around though. I agree with the consensus though. Some of the large publishers really haven't got a clue when it comes to the creative process. I'm not going to drop any names but a couple of the largest (you go ahead and guess) just don't get it. I've worked for two development studios under these publishers and it was abundantly clear to me that they really didn't know there behind from a hole in the ground. The experiences were eye opening and proved to me that they really didn't care about the actual product, just the end result, meaning how much money it brought in and whether or not a sequel could be made from it for yet more profit. Oh and btw, the contracts these guys hand out (and try to hand out) are somewhat ludicrous. I'm glad I was able to start up my own business when I could and was fortunate enough to see what was going on around me. More than half the people I worked with have either moved on or were laid off! It wasn't exactly shocking, but the numbers and turnover simply proved that something behind the scenes was truly wrong. The lay-person doesn't necessarily get to see these things and usually only hears about this type of thing on a third hand basis. Being a part of it was not only stressful and frustrating, it was also counter-intuitive and counter-productive even after the creative freedom was lost.
I think I have to agree that publishers and their lackeys are as people above have described, dickweeds.
For some reason, the 'Collecting giant coins feels unrealistic to me' one amuses me inordinately--after all, we know how much of a flop that game that had the chubby Italian guy in red and his brother dressed in green running around collecting coins was, right?
What does the iPhone have to do with pitching Joe Danger? Maybe these quotes were just "jokes". I can't really tell. I mean, who would say the iPhone is unsupported? Unless that is from 2 years ago.
Kirkpad, I think at this point when they were pitching to publishers, they hadn't decided on a platform, and so they might have gone through all the possibilities. But even so, lol @ the publisher for saying that!
"Name me one successful game with motorbikes"
Mariokart Wii ring a bell?
Even better is MKW had Monkeys ON Motorbikes. Do your blasted research, assface publishers.
