Slashdot Mirror
The Path to AAA Games
Gamasutra has up a feature discussing an E3 discussion session haunted by some illustrious names in game design. The topic of the panel was The Path to Creating AAA Games. Hosted by Carly Staehlin, the panel featured Matt Firor, Todd Howard, Tetsuya Mizuguchi, Tim Willits, and Will Wright. From the article: "'My biggest failure was Quake 3,' Willits said. 'The game offered perfect multiplayer for hardcore players. In fact, they're still playing it. But the more casual gamers, and other people who actually have money, found playing next to impossible.'"
Quake 3 still stands out in my mind as the ultimate example of why it's a bad idea to develop any game (except possibly a MMORPG) with the hard-core in mind. I remember the consultation phase ID went through while developing it, where they talked to a lot of the "top" hardcore players from Quake and Quake 2 to get their input into game mechanics and map design. I also remember how most of these people then turned around and savaged the game after its release.
There's simply no gain to be had in pitching your product at this market.
First, Compared to the "casual" market (which includes a lot of people who definitely count as gamers, but don't focus on one title or genre exclusively), the number of potential buyers is tiny. They're also extremely vocal, on forums, message boards, IRC and at industry events. This can give the impression that they're a larger group than they are.
Second, this group knows no gratitude. I've never seen a developer go as far as ID did during the Quake 3 development process and I've never seen a developer take such (unwarrented) flak after release for dumbing-down, selling-out, or whatever the term of the day at the time was. Everything about the game was slated; the physics, the maps, even the fact that it had pretty graphics.
Third, this group is insanely conservative in terms of its gaming habits. I was part of the "hardcore" fps gaming scene for a while and one of the most disgusting thing about it was the palpable fear with which the people at the top of the game would approach anything that proposed even mild changes to the game as they knew it. This was extremely noticable every time Counter-Strike approached a new version release. With new iterations of the Quake and Unreal Tournament series, it was even worse. The top players were petrified that any changes to the game might diminish the little tricks they were using to stay on top and force them to adapt or even, god forbid, lose their place and the reputation that went with it. When Quake 3 came out, I remember how terrified a lot of the top Quake/Quake 2 players were of the prospect that they might have to fight to regain their prestige. The result was a lot of trash-talk about the game and a very slow adoption rate.
Finally, this group of players is the most insular and cliquey around. I've lost count of the number of times that I've seen newbies in hardcore games (both MMORPGs and fpses) subjected to a barrage of obscenities within moments of connecting. With a primarily online game, a developer is investing a lot of their reputation in the behaviour of their players. What I saw in Quake 3 was a long way from being impressive.