Slashdot Mirror
Scott Miller On Making Max Payne A Success
Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to 3D Realms founder Scott Miller's weblog entry discussing the reasons why Max Payne "was purposely positioned for success right from the start" . Although Miller, the man overseeing the ever-delayed Duke Nukem Forever, has now sold his share of Max Payne's IP to Take Two/Rockstar, he discusses specifics, including the choice of name ("A perfect name will convey something about the product... have good word-play possibilities for press and news headlines... and have a good short-hand version"), the hook ("The attribute Max owns is 'bullet-time,' like Volvo owns the word 'safety' and McDonalds owns 'fast'") and controversy ("Max Payne had a little, though it didn't get as much press as we thought it might.") He also reveals 3D Realms is "currently working with another developer, with a very similar relationship that we had with Remedy, to create another hit series (or so we hope!)" - an announcement is due in 2004.
Next time tell us how successful your product will be before it goes to market, and then we'll see how good your predictive powers are!
Oh, wait, every company does this with every product.
"3D Realms is "currently working with another developer, with a very similar relationship that we had with Remedy, to create another hit series (or so we hope!)" - an announcement is due in 2004."
that sounds too early for Duke Nukem Forever
I guess Shadow Warrior 2 is out of the question?
The game was originally titled Dark Justice, as this well describes the game's theme.
That's rather funny... Max Payne 2 had an episode of 'Dick Justice' on one of the TV's, where a fugitive cop went after the people who killed his wife. But instead of film noir style, it was like 70's.
"The attribute Max owns is 'bullet-time,' like Volvo owns the word 'safety' and McDonalds owns 'fast'"
Um, well actually I (and quite a few other people I imagine) associate 'bullet-time' with The Matrix. Max Payne just happened to use similar effects in the game, capitalizing on the slo-mo hype following the movie. I'm not 100% sure if my timeline is correct but I remember there being parallels to the movie effect when the game came out. Oh I'll grant that's the big hook of the game. That and metaphors that drag out long enough to make Raymond Chandler develop a nervous tic. But to say MP 'owns' bullet-time is a bit presumptuous.
"Not all who wander are lost" -- JRR Tolkien
This is why Scott Miller is making the big dough. You or I would take a game we made and position it for failure, or mediocrity at best. Scott is that one guy in a million who would position his game for success. And he did it right from the start, too.
Just another feather in the cap of the man who keeps Duke Nukem For(When)ever on task and on budget.
There are 01 kinds of cars in the world. The General Lee, and everything else.
I'm having troubles finding out how the lawsuit ended against the makers of Max Payne (remember the ex-wrestler, who went by the name "Max Payne").
How did that lawsuit end?
YOU'RE WINNER !
Another lame blog
Scott Miller has always been someone I idolized since I was a young child. It started with a game he wrote himself, Kingdom of Kroz, which used ascii characters for graphics but was tons of fun. He later went on to make sequels to this hit game. Also, he used an idea revolutionary to software distribution called shareware. Each of the many games that came from Apogee(what later became 3D Realms) were sent out on disk or put on a BBS completely free with no requirement to purchase the software. However, only the first episode was on these disks. To get the remaining episodes, hint book, and many other fun goodies cost you either 5, 10,or 15 dollars. I bought many of these games because they were so much fun(and piracy wasn't as rampant back then). Games like Commander Keen, Raptor, and Wolfenstien 3D are just a few of the great games Apogee helped develop and distribute. Now, whenever I see Miller's name, it reminds me of the good old days when graphics and sound were a distant consideration compared to how fun the game was.
there really isnt anything world altering that hasnt been said a thousand times before, and by more humble orators.
- in a world of copycats, it helps to be unique
- be smart about your product
- keep it simple
- keep it buzzworthy
- ObPROFIT!
Miller's methodology is all about taking an average product - which at its heart Max Payne most certainly was - tossing in a gimmick to get people interested, then promoting the hell out of the game until it starts selling. Miller has said many, many times that quality is not nearly as important as being First to Market and having a "hook" - which really means ripping off one-liners from a cult movie (Army of Darkness > Duke Nukem) or a visual effect from a popular movie (bullet time from the Matrix > Max Payne).
People shouldn't begrudge 3DR their financial success and obvious knowledge of marketing, but it's galling to see them continually try to pass off what they are doing as "innovation", when clearly their focus is on superior marketing of mediocre products with occasional lip service paid to "quality" and "innovation". They honestly do not know how to design a truly great game, but they're able to garner the sales of a truly great game (or so they say, the real figures are hard to come by) through the magic of "positioning".
Is he really saying that the name "Max Payne" would make or break this game? Please! The second I first heard this name I thought "Cliche!". Only in video games can you get away with such CHEESE names for characters. (Oh sorry, video games and Wrestling.)
To think Miller 'set up' Max Payne to succeed because of these marketing hallmarks, without giving credit to the solid story, voice acting, graphics, and well honed gameplay... that's just silly.
All Miller seems to be doing is hyping up marketing's importance in making video games sell better. Yes, those are all great focus points for making a game -easy-to-market-. They don't however have anything to do with the game's actual success, or whether it 'leads' or 'follows'.
It's certainly more difficult to come up with a marketing campaign for a game without a definitive and well designed central character ala Max Payne, Duke Nukem or Lara Croft. Similarly, its simpler to define the gameplay of Max Payne than that of The Sims, or even Grand Theft Auto.
But it's worth noting that -most- of the best selling games of their respective genres have -not- featured any stylized 'main' characters, and -few- can have 90% of their gameplay reduced to a single 'verb'. Most didn't even -have- a marketing campaign. (keep in mind that Miller is the one who is predicating 'success' based on sales)
Sim City, The Sims, Age of Empires, Rollercoaster Tycoon, Warcraft/Starcraft, Doom, Quake, Myst, Deer Hunter, GTA 1-3, Final Fantasy, Everquest, Baldur's Gate, SW:KotOR, Diablo, etc. None of these games fit his outline very well. And the one's that -do- fit his model well for central characters have succeeded in the past because of -gameplay- innovation from the state of the genre. For every Mario, Megaman, Metroid, and Sonic, there are countless drones that follow these bulletpoints perfectly, have great marketing campaigns, and fail (Bonk, Battletoads, Kid Icarus, etc).
In fact there does not seems to even be a -correlation- between marketability ease and success in Video games.
Yes, miller did a good job marketing, and positioning this game. No, its actual -success- did not have anything to do with that. Perhaps its -degree- of success (as defined by sales), but it isn't a good game because of his marketing tactics.
He got the game in front of as many people as possible the right way. He had a hand in making it easy to convey, and to define. If it were called 'dark justice', and had an less strikingly named central character, it would still be as good of a game.
The -game- made itself a success. if the -game- had sucked, then we wouldn't even be talking about it. (eg. Daikatana, which meets nearly all his criteria)
However, contrary to what he states about 'leading' and 'following' -- His marketing angle deliberately turned Max Payne into a derivative. It -is- an action movie. A straightforward, well done, well written action movie. But that's -it-. It may -lead- in sales, but its marketing angle is entirely that of -following- the established genre.
-games- that truly -lead- are those that define and create genres. Doom, GTA, the sims, sim city, populous, warcraft, civilization. subsequent games can be more fiscally successful, but if they are following in the mold exactly as established, then they aren't 'leading' anything.
Again, i'm not trying to marginalize miller's work. I'm just saying that a bit of perspective is needed. Doubtlessly, if Max Payne were not as well marketed, it would not have sold as well.
Miller is in the business of -selling- games, whether they're -good- or not. And he is unquestionably very good at his job. Consider how well DNF has been 'sold'. Despite that it's been in dev for nearly a decade, it's still on the lips of every gamer.
But to the game -player-, most of his points are bunk. They don't make games fun, they don't make games 'better'. they're not even necessarily desireable qualities.
That these qualities are well known to marketers, that they exist in list form, is -why- most games on shelves are derivative. The same reason that most movies are derivative because of well known formulas and 'x meets y' story summaries.
Marketing students: learn from Scott Miller and 3d realms.
Gamers and Game Developers: ignore them.
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
"Do you expect me to talk?" "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!"
I was on the 3D Realms site in... '96? I was trying to find a patch for something. I saw on the 'soon to be released' list Max Payne (when it's done), a title they didn't give the name of (Balls of Steel) and Duke Nukem 4 (when it's done)
503 Sig Unavailable
The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator