Reality Panic

Carnegie Mellon’s Entertainment Technology Center recently announced their Game Innovation Database (GIDb) with the goal to “classify and document every innovation in the entire history of videogames”. Quite an ambitious goal, if even to determine what qualifies as innovation!

Thankfully, they have outlined a comprehensive taxonomy to help in classifying innovations. Here’s a gem submitted by Professor Schell:

Rampage –> Play as a Villain
Rampage was one of the first games where the players controlled a villain, rather than the standard “good guy”.

Ah, the good old days of gaming when being bad was so good…

When I recently spoke to Nicole Wong, who broke the story that EA_Spouse = Erin Hoffman, she asked me if it mattered who EA_Spouse was and what impact her outing would have. Coincidentally, I had just watched V for Vendetta…

I responded that it really didn’t matter who EA_Spouse is, as EA_Spouse is more of an idea, or symbol. That EA_Spouse is no one and everyone at the same time. That the importance of EA_Spouse was in the message not the messenger.

I’ve known Erin for a while now, even before she took on the now famous EA_Spouse persona. And, I knew it was her shortly after the fanfare of the initial blog post, etc. I’m happy for Erin as I am guessing she’s feeling a certain sense of liberation in letting go of the persona.

(In the movie, however, the indentity of V was never revealed. Of course, when chatting with Nicole I didn’t really go into the whole “overthrowing of an opressive regime” story arch of the movie ;)

Just finished playing Wideload’s first game, Stubbs the Zombie in Rebel Without a Pulse. As the GameRankings scoring suggests, not necessarily an earth shattering game, but an enjoyable quick play nonetheless.

Admittedly, I was less interested in the game itself and more so curious to experience the end result of Alex Seropian’s use of the “core” team structure (arguably the closest to the per project film production model). There’s actually been quite some coverage on it, and unfortunately I missed his production lecture at GDC. The IGDA’s Chicago chapter also has a nice summary of a postmortem (LOL, a doubly appropriate term) Seropian presented back in November.

As identified by Seropian as one of his main problems in producing Stubbs, a big challenge in moving toward a core+contractors/outsourcers model is the general lack of an experienced and easily accessible/engageable pool of contractors/outsourcers. For the most part, such a large chunk of industry talent is “tied up” with full-time employment contracts. It is a chicken/egg problem that is further exacerbated by the lack of geographic proximity (like in Hollywood) and ever evolving tech/tool platforms.

A funny aside, I still can’t believe that Stubbs was being blamed for promoting cannibalism. The anti-game crusaders are really getting imaginative!

Producer about town Jamie Fristrom posted a great comment/reaction to my recent Escapist article, and put it up at his own blog as an “open letter” to me. Thanks!

Of course, being critical does open the door to resentment, etc. I realize that the more I say “production sucks”, the more producers are really not going to like me. Goodness, I’m guessing many already don’t ;) But, anyway…

I can rationalize by saying that in general, the overall level of production and project management in the game industry is not great. In so doing, I am not suggesting that it is the fault of any given producer, or that Jamie, for example, didn’t do the best job he possibly could. As I’ve noted many times, poor production process and bad quality of life are often symptoms of larger root issues outside the control of producers. As Jamie suggests, even the best of producers can get bogged down and mired in the challenges of creating something fun and/or dealing with the internal politics and business constraints of their studio/publisher.

In that vein, the levers for major change/improvement are often outside the purview of producers. Sure, producers can apply various best practices and make tweaks here and there. But, approving a move to train all staff on PSP/TSP and achieving CMM Level 3 is a major executive level decision - just as one example. In part, that was the point Steve McConnell was trying to make: We can all help make minor process improvements on a personal level, but the big decisions have to be made at the top.

Another point McConnell made was that “first principles” can only take us so far. In that light, the vast majority of producers and project managers in games don’t have a management degree, formal extended education or relevant work experience in people/project management. Some do, most don’t. Now, I’m not suggesting there is any textbook or class that will serve as that elusive silver bullet, but it is always nice to supplement hands-on in the trenches work experience with a more formal approach to learning. (Hmm, maybe the IGDA should create some kind of Game Producer Certification training program ;)

Anyway. As an experiment, I think we have to ask ourselves, What would ideal production be like? If we were able to toss out all the old/current ways of doing things, what would we do?

My sense, in talking with countless producers, is that they are working to evolve their current processes. Even if they’d like a revolution, it is seemingly too painful and risky for this war… I suppose my article was about exposing some of the the risks of not pushing for a revoluton.

If nothing else, my recent article in The Escapist was a call to invest in our people as a way to make more money. That’s the bottom line. Forget all the feel good crap. Wanna make more money? Invest in your people and processes.

Overall, feedback has been very positive for the piece, with the link making the rounds on various private industry lists, Slashdot clocking almost 350 comments and pick ups at GameDaily BIZ and the blogosphere in general.

But of course, not everyone agrees. Among the points of contention is the notion that games aren’t just software so software engineering processes can’t really help. Right and wrong. First a mature PRODUCTION process should encompass all aspects of development, not just code. And second, the code is still a massive component of the production, so efforts to optimize the software specific stuff will still hit a lot of fat.

A related issue is the fact that games are a creative endeavor, and art cannot be formalized. Bah! Chaos is just chaos. Structure and formalization on the part of the producers/managers establishes the platform from which the artists can be creative.

Then again, from Tim Moss’ God of War postmortem at GDC:

“Basically we didn’t do very much. We kept an up to date task list and I could tell anyone what we would be doing for the next few weeks. But I didn’t keep a schedule as such. I relied on my judgement and the senior-only team. They didn’t let me down.”

Anyway, it is amazing the extent by which folks cling to their broken ways and find any way to rationalize away the potential good that could come from change. Also, rampant xenophobia just doesn’t help…

I didn’t stick it in the article, but I really like something that gameLab honcho Eric Zimmerman always says “we want our people to have a healthy and active life outside of work because this makes them better game creators when they are at work.”

Nice.

Ironic Note #1: EA’s director of technology, Mark Dochtermann, was rated as the man that has the best job in America by Money magazine.

Ironic Note #2: EA’s ex head of HR (during the whole ea_spouse situation), Rusty Rueff, has co-authored a book titled Talent Force: A New Manifesto for the Human Side of Business.

Despite all the never ending negative attention given to games, there is so much potential for good (and I mean good good, not just good fun)… Two recent stories caught my attention.

First, the news that a specially designed video game can benefit kids with cancer. We already knew that games were being used to distract patients from pain in general, but now HopeLab’s Re-Mission is a game specifically created to help cancer patients. The results are quite promising.

As an aside, I remember meeting one of HopeLab’s execs, Pamela Kato, at GDC about 5 years ago (and pretty much at every one since). It was refreshing to see a bunch of non-game folks really want to take the game side seriously (ie, get the game-ness of the game right). They knew how to do the science, but not the art of game design. Kudos to them for creating something with such a positive impact. (Sadly, other than a few reports, I’ve not seen much in the way of widespread media coverage :(

The second story is Microsoft’s partnership with Best Buy to sell rubber “cause” bracelets. Sure, they promote Xbox 360, but the money is being donated to the Boys & Girls Club of America’s “Club Tech”, which helps to educate children about using technology safely. Additionally, each bracelet is packaged with a pamphlet on the ESRB (and how to use the “v-chip” style feature on consoles). Nice move, MS. This will likely do more to help (build awareness with) parents than all of the anti-game legislation combined!