The Big Minds Behind LittleBigPlanet

Gamasutra is reporting on a panel put on by the folks at Media Molecule, just hours after Phil Harrison's keynote yesterday. There, they talked about the formation of their ambitious company. They began with just a lot of hopes, and knew hard work was in store for them. Just the same, using techniques they'd picked up in the mod community, they drew up a very successful game concept and got someone else to pay for it. "[Essentially], the company's sole mission at the start was to do the most ambitious game it could produce, asking 'how hard can we make it for ourselves.' 'If we were jumping into the abyss,' said Evans, 'we were going to do it with rockets on our back.'"

Comments

XP

[DavidHOzAu]

FTA

Next in the mega plan was to be "totally open and honest with the publisher." Working with SCEE, Healey and Evans said that they made the decision early on to treat the relationship like a partnership. "We're 10 people, they're 10 trillion," so during early visits, Media Molecule told Sony "absolutely everything."

"We didn't want to have a them-and-us attitude," said Healey, adding, "that way if it goes wrong we can blame them."

Healey, too, said that the company would go through quite painful arguments, ridiculous in that after two days of "arguing about some silly little thing," they would realize they were talking about the same thing anyway, but with different words. Here, too, the two stressed that visual concepts and communication were key.

It sounds like they were successfully applying XP on the client side, but the quality of internal team communication dropped significantly as soon as the team grew in size. Their method of approaching development is also interesting: jump in, boots and all. This should be in a textbook.

Not sure about LBP

[slim]

Maybe I've missed something important, but I'm not sure I see how Little Big Planet is going to succeed.

Sure, all those high-def textures are very pretty. And the physics stuff is very clever. But watching the gameplay video, it's just a 2.5D platformer, and I'm not sure how the super-duper physics simulation is any more fun than the more basic mechanisms used in the previous generation of platformers. ... which leaves us with the community aspect -- which I understand to mean that you can design your own levels and upload them so that other people can play them. It sounds appealing at first, but I started to think about how it would actually play out.

Sonic 2 is an excellent platformer. Let's hypothesise that someone hacked up a level design tool that outputs playable Sonic levels, and set up a web site so you could share the levels you designed. How soon am I going to get bored of playing new Sonic levels, most of which were designed by people who are /not/ expert level designers? I reckon, very soon.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[minginqunt]

Um, have you missed the single most important aspect of the game?

That is, people can collaboratively build levels, publish them online, play each other's levels co-operatively online, rate them, comment them, copy and change them...

Sony's idea is for this to become a Youtube-for-games sandbox.

And I think that's pretty cool.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[slim]

Um, have you missed the single most important aspect of the game?

That is, people can collaboratively build levels, publish them online, play each other's levels co-operatively online, rate them, comment them, copy and change them...

Sony's idea is for this to become a Youtube-for-games sandbox.

And I think that's pretty cool. I think it's pretty cool in concept.

But YouTube videos can be endlessly different. Whereas a platformer level is just variations on a theme of moving from point A to point B by running and jumping.

I wish them the best of luck, and will watch with interest... we'll see.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[LKM]

Yes, that is very cool. However, it is extremely likely that 99% of these levels will suck. Level design is one of the most important parts of designing a good game. If you look at most 2D jump-n-run games, almost all of them have the tech correct. You can move the character, make him jump, attack enemies, no issues there. The difference between the good games and the bad games is level design. Sonic the Hedgehog and Super Mario World were great games because the level design is awesome. The crappy games are crappy because the level design is boring or unfair or annoying.

I think it's great to let users design levels, and good things have come out of this, but for sidescrollers, good level design requires a lot of skill and experience, and most people don't have that.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[7Prime]

That makes me even more suspicious. I was involved in a number of Ambrosia Software communities way back when I was in middle school: Avara and Escape Velocity, specifically. We were doing exactly that, creating, sharing, and critiquing levels. As fun as it was, though, I remember two things: the only people who were interested in it were pretty hard core, not your mainstream gamers, more realistically, your future game designer types (if they were any good). Secondly, it got old, and the turnover rate was pretty high.

Folks, this is NOT a new concept, and I fail to see it being able to take off and stay aloft for very long. It's been tried countless times, by various developers, and the best that can ever be achieved is an occult group who share their creations while passing in the dark. Heck, Quake 2 had a mod scene, yet only a small percentage of people who bought the game took part in it.

All I'm trying to say is that you can't expect "custom level designing" to ever be one of your mass market selling points. It should be one of the last bullet points on your list of marketable features, because it's a feature that will only appeal to a hardcore audience, of which will probably buy the game anyway. I'm just skeptical that project sounds like its being done by a group of game developers who have gotten caught up in the trap of imprinting their own interests onto their audience. The reality is that MOST people really have little interest in being creative enough to design their own game environments.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[MBraynard]

Historical reference.

Starcraft's battle.net had a place where you could play player moded games. There were some HUGELY fun modifications made. Once you downloaded someone's mod, you could mod it, too. So you would often see an original work marked 1.0 and then someone else would do a 1.1 or whatever and they would keep getting better, bug fixes, etc.

If the tools are there and it's a fun environment, I think you could find enough people making a few cool maps that would make it worthwhile. Not ALL will be great, but many may be good.

Re:Not sure about LBP

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I've missed something important, but I'm not sure I see how Little Big Planet is going to succeed... ...and I'm not sure how the super-duper physics simulation is any more fun than the more basic mechanisms used in the previous generation of platformers.

You can say the same thing for the new Mario game just released for the DS, yet it's succeeding quite admirably. All you really need for success is the following:

1.Make it look like fun
2.Make it actually be fun to play
3.Build buzz based on #1 and #2
4.Profit

They got #1 in spades. It looks like a hoot and a holler. We won't know about #2 for quite a while. But if they do have both #1 and #2, and the game is well marketed and well covered in the press, it doesn't really matter if every little thing they do is brand new, does it? They'll succeed big-time.

LittleBigPlanet

[EveryNickIsTaken]

This game appears designed to draw in the kiddie/parent crowd, and the casual gamer. However, Sony needs to recognize that "casual gamers" are not going to spend $600-700 on a console, regardless of how cute the characters on the screen look. Sure, the graphics appear amazing on this, and the physics puzzle play is fresh and original, but you have to wonder... Who are they marketing this to?

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[CronoCloud]

I've been saying this for ages, but the PS3 is not just a console, it's an all-in-one entertainment box.

Games: PS3/PS2/PS1, downloadable demos, the ability to purchase PS1 games for PSP use.

Video: on disc (DVD and BD) and on the HD and mass storage devices

Audio: CD's, SACD's, DVD-Audio. It can rip CD's itself.

Built in web browser.

Built in ability to stream to the PSP

Photos.

Linux, not only does it do all of the above, but it's also a PC. Firefox, OpenOffice, Thunderbird, Gimp, Gaim

And now the Playstation Home and Little Big Planet.

Sure the thing costs $600, but it's like buying a PS2 with a LInux kit. It can replace the "second PC" in a lot of homes and that may be Sony's intent. Hurt Microsoft's bottom line by reducing sales of "second PC's" to home users. People might realize that they can do PC stuff without Windows.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[Anonymous Coward]

Me, for one. I haven't seen anything that has looked this fun since Katamari. 4 players looks like an incredible romp. I'm 20, and yet will hold nothing back in forcing both my mates and my partner to play. If the responses of my friends who are the same age as me are anything to go by, I think they've found that market.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[Malestyr]

I don't think astroturfers are a very difficult market to reach.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[fotbr]

The problem is other than geeks, nerds, and linux & sony fanboys, most people don't care about having one box that does everything.

Most people ALREADY HAVE a DVD player, a CD player, and a PC to do everything else you mentioned. Most people are not racing to jump on the BluRay/HDDVD wagon. And the PSP isn't exactly the most popular handheld either, especially for casual gamers, so thats not an advantage. The casual gamer is not going to shell out $600 for a device that duplicates functionality they've already got with other devices.

Geeks, nerds, and the linux & sony fanboys are a different story, of course, and your reasoning might work for them. But for the casual gamer -- my parents, for example -- its a $600 box that plays a few games, since they already have stuff to do the others.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[drinkypoo]

Sony's idea is apparently that the casual gamer crowd is also the HD video crowd. It's not a totally misguided idea; there are certainly people in that segment that would play video games if they were the right type. However, it is a mostly misguided idea in that the uptake of HD is not very inspiring. It might work in Japan where product lifecycles are apparently much shorter, but the market outside of Japan is much larger, and Sony is going to have to come to that realization eventually. Everyone else has already.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[Anonymous Coward]

Denouncing any enthusiasm as astroturfing is a little silly. While I don't own a PS3, I've used one and had a good time. The price is steep, but someone's good feeling about the platform and its features might really be totally genuine. You seem to reveal your insecurities by denouncing that automatically.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[Cadallin]

So? The 360 can do most of the non-linux stuff. And I'm not buying a game console to be workstation anyway. Playstation Home seems to me like a huge scam to get people to buy advertising.

Little Big Planet does look awesome, but its going to take a lot more than that to get me to buy a PS3.

Re:LittleBigPlanet

[KDR_11k]

That's nice and all but people don't want package deals that cost so much. Most will buy it for the games and there's no 300€ gamesd only version, you HAVE to pay 600€ to get that game functionality and you'll get the rest whether you want it or not. Sure, if you'll ask the average consumer he'll say yes, he'd like those features but when you tell him the price he won't like it. The consumer wants a Ferrari for the price of a Honda but given the choice he'd rather buy a Honda for the price of a Honda than a Ferrari for the price of a Ferrari.

DOOM

[HalAtWork]

Sonic 2 is an excellent platformer. Let's hypothesise that someone hacked up a level design tool that outputs playable Sonic levels, and set up a web site so you could share the levels you designed. How soon am I going to get bored of playing new Sonic levels, most of which were designed by people who are /not/ expert level designers? I reckon, very soon.

Just for the sake of argument... wasn't that the same thing with DOOM? Player-made mods and levels everywhere from everyone, yet the best managed to rise to the top. The most organized groups put out the best level packages. There were competitions, and id even included some of the best player-designed levels with Final Doom didn't they? I'm sure there will be some commercial releases to get things going as well. All that said, I'm a gamer and it doesn't sound very exciting to me either. Give me a good single player game I can lose myself in any day... if I want something less serious to play with a bunch of people, there's plenty of fun games on the Wii.

Re:DOOM

[powerlord]

. if I want something less serious to play with a bunch of people, there's plenty of fun games on the Wii.

Um ... why shouldn't Sony try to offer a fun "party" title?

Its actually nice to see them trying to cater to a ( player > 2 ) crowd which has been almost exclusively been Nintendos domain (with the N64,GameCube and Wii).

Yes, the PS2's gametap let four players play at once, but how many people sprung for it, versus, "hey bring your controller(s) over and we'll party"?

Re:DOOM

[LKM]

I think FPS are actually somewhat more forgiving than sidescrollers. With sidescrollers, level design is 99% of the gameplay experience. With shooters, especially multiplayer shooters, it's more like 50%, so even mediocre levels can be fun.

Re:DOOM

[HalAtWork]

Um ... why shouldn't Sony try to offer a fun "party" title?

Um ... they shouldn't? I was merely pointing out how well Nintendo's already done it for cheap. This, on the other hand, is supposed to be generating hype that in turn convinces people to buy the PS3. It's kind of a wimpy system-seller if you ask me, especially if you don't even want to go online!

Not for kids

[fistfullast33l]

I love how the same people that relish Nintendo's creative bent and defend it's games as not being made for kids bash Sony for the exact same reasons.

As for the charge that this is a kid's game, it isn't. Yes, it has pretty graphics and cute music. However, it also has dynamic content and world creation, something that the average 8-12 year old isn't capable of handling or caring about. This game isn't going to appeal to kids, just like Psychonauts didn't appeal to kids otherwise it would have sold more. It appeals to industry insiders, developers, and anyone with a creative bent and a copy of photoshop.

Will kids like it upon seeing it? Definitely. Will the community content be built by these kids? Definitely not. This is a graphics artist funhouse waiting to happen.

Most people won't need to be good

[fistfullast33l]

good level design requires a lot of skill and experience, and most people don't have that.

Most people won't need it though. As the GP states, only a handful will rise to the top as the best levels. If the developers are really smart, they'll allow multiple people to work together to build a level and play it. That's really where the fun stuff comes in. If you have multiple people creating obstacles and whole levels, then it really becomes a group challenge and then you have a few mediocre people making a level that they themselves find fun. If they're having fun, then the game has served it's purpose. Even if you just share your levels between friends and they suck, the game is still a success because it's engaged those people to be creative.

Looks like fun.

[MaWeiTao]

Actually, that game seems to me like it's going to be a lot of fun. I think good 2D platform games have been neglected as a genre for far too long. Not every game needs to be full 3D. The graphics are a nice bonus.

Actually, I'm a bit surprised by the tepid response. The guys are doing something a little different that at first glance seems to be fun. I guess it's because it's a PS3 game. If the same game were intended for the Wii I can only imagine that people would be lauded it as yet another example of how Nintendo cares about gameplay.

Re:Looks like fun.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I guess it's because it's a PS3 game. If the same game were intended for the Wii I can only imagine that people would be lauded it as yet another example of how Nintendo cares about gameplay."

This is correct. The game looks like a really fun time and the user-generated content implimentation looks like it might work really well. Yes, it's just a little game, but it has the potential to be a huge hit. If the same game were to come out for the Wii, there would be a huge wave of support for it (thought the MS fans would likely still boo). It seems like a lot of people are so invested in their console of choice (or blinded by their ill-will toward Sony) that they either miss or are unwilling to acknowledge the possibility of positive news/moves for Sony.

Re:Looks like fun.

[earthbound kid]

I think it sounds interesting, and I applaud Sony for giving it a shot, but I wonder if this kind of game where you have to move things around on screen and customize them wouldn't be better if you could use a mouse or the Wii remote to do it. Moving stuff around with the sixaxis seems like it would be a bit more tedious. Also, the video of it I saw made it seem like there are a bewildering number of options available -- which would turn off non-hardcore players.

So, I want it to do well, I'm just skeptical that you can make this work on the PS3.

Um, mods on crack?

[earthbound kid]

Seriously, can someone explain why I was modded troll? I don't expect everyone to agree with me--maybe you think LittleBigPlanet will work fine on the sixaxis--but I don't see why I was modded troll. I even said I hope I'm wrong and that it does well since it sounds like an interesting idea.

Bizarre modding.

Little Big Adventure

[cibyr]

Why can't it be another Little Big Adventure game... Now I'm all disappointed.