Plan for Peter Dwyer
by Peter Dwyer · 03/16/2005 (4:56 pm) · 12 comments
My yearly Rant as brought on by a visit to a Japanese games studio and a 3 year old Niece!
Games programming is different from most forms of programming, in that the end user isn't supposed to see the end product until it is complete. Yet the end product still has to be visually stunning and captivate the intended audiences emotions.
This is why games development is so often equated with film development. The two industries pretty much mirror each other in their processes....or at least they should do.
Films have what are known as test screenings. These are carried out when the filming is complete but, the special effects and some of the scenes are still able to be cut or re-worked. In this stage a film producer may choose to re-shoot the entire film ending, re-shoot the beginning or re-work whole scenes based on audience reactions.
Game Betas are effectively the test screening phrase of game development. It is here that your test audience get to feed back any good or bad points of your design. The developer shouldn't be afraid to re-write whole sections if necessary as (just like movies) this stage of development should have been factored into the plan from the beginning.
So the question I ended up pondering was "Why doesn't this happen in the West?" Why is it that games developers don't factor in re-writes and audience feedback? Why does our industry still rely on blind luck for a hit or a miss, when simply using a beta correctly would pretty much eliminate that possibility.
You may not like your audiences feedback but, at the end of the day you are asking them to buy your product. I equate the current developers attitude towards audience feedback as being like an arthouse film maker i.e. if the audience like the game then they have good taste, if they don't then frack them they wouldn't know a good game if it bit them. The extreme example of this attitude was (a few years ago now) when Romero goofed by explaining that his not yet written or released game was so good that it was going to make all gamers his
Such phrases as "It will be done when it's done" are like knives being twisted into me. Where once it was a sign of quality, now it is worn like a badge of exemption from prosecution. The reality of that phrase is that the developer hasn't made a plan and doesn't think enough of his expected audience or just plain does not know when his product will be available. After all you can't miss a deadline if you haven't set one to begin with right!
The film industry by contrast, will get a script, plan out the production, engage the artists, shoot *take a breath here*, add special effects, cut and edit etc. etc. and still be able to tell you to the month when the movie will air. It really isn't that difficult a task if you plan things in advance.
If you know you have 6 months for the initial development of art, 2 months for the set design, then you plan to use that length of time. Game developers by contrast set out their 2 month set design (level design time) and then ignore it or try to crunch two weeks before the two months are up). You need to allow contingency (I'll be patronising here and say that means you build in time for unexpected slippage and errors).
Having had the honor of visiting a Japanese games studio recently (ah now he gets to it) I saw true production values in a real world senario. This is why Japanese games rarely slip past their intended release dates. The senario I witnessed went like this:-
An artist had a deadline and she produced the specced out art (a ghostly woman). Another designer had missed her deadline and her level was dropped plain and simple. I witnessed a whole level being put aside for a directors cut edition of the game, because it would not be ready in time for the final cut off date (even with the alotted slipage time). The level designer was genuinely appologetic to her team mates but, proud that her other levels had made the cut. Meanwhile on getting the news, the story writers were expertly re-written to deal with the absence of the level. The time saved by culling when the slippage was detected, allowed for some smaller additions to the game to beef up the remaining content.
Daily meetings were held to check progress and things were moved around to ensure that the remaining content was available as needed.
As computers become more powerful, I can see the lack of processes here in the west as being a very shiny nail in the coffin of independents everywhere. The Japanese studio I visited had the release date of their game firmly on the calendar. Even if their publisher had moved the shelf date, their finish date for the software wasn't going anywhere. They had already scheduled their next product to start a month or so after this date (contingency) come what may.
This also didn't impact their creativity in any way. A full hour was set aside to meet and brainstorm every other day (I think it was every other day as I only sat in on two sessions). In these sessions the design, art and programming teams (yes they were very proud of their team dynamics) would all pitch in ideas and concepts. No-one dismissed anything, they would laugh at some ideas as people tended to act out their character ideas or artists would sketch a simple doodle to illustrate their point etc. etc.
You went away feeling that this was how games studios should be run. Very much like film studios, where writers get to write, artists get to create (within a guideline) and programmers got to program (though to a known end goal and deadline). All under the suidance of the games producer. He had the final say in all disputed content, sounds etc etc. He effectively yelled cut on any shoot (in this case any game content).
I know I'm in a minority of one when I say this but, I no longer think it's cool to say "It's done when it's done". As far as I'm concerned (please feel free to totally disagree with me as that's what freedom is all about) that phrase belongs in the dark ages of games programming. It's a cop out, a lame excuse and above all I think it's a sure sign that-
That the man had no plan.
Found it was too late to make a plan.
Tried to flim flam his way out of the jam.
Didn't want anyone to know about it.
The final straw that punched this attitude lapse of our industry (well here in the West anyhoo) home, was when I asked my 3 year old neice when she was going to pick up her toy car and she replied innocently "I'll pick that up yes......" Two hours later I nearly broke my neck on the danged thing.
I was in the midst of formulating a curse when I realised that, like the phrase "It's done when it's done", her saying "I'll pick that up yes......" had no real meaning. She could have meant two minutes or next century for all I knew. It was a totally innocent way of copping out. After all I couldn't say she lied or that she hadn't meant to pick it up ever. I simply didn't have a time frame to reference her actions to. Heck if she picked the car up three days from that moment I would simply have had to acknowledge her good deed.
Our industry needs a serious attitude adjustment but, I guess that will happen when it happens. No need for anyone to actively set a time scale for change and stick to it or implementing their own change timescales or anything like that.
Naw if you wait long enough someone will change for you right...yea bound to happen....Hmm what's that my stomach is rumbling...don't worry stomach some food will be done when it's done....no use grumbling about it stomach....no I can't give you an estimate of when the eggs will be fried....oh you can see that I haven't cracked the shells yet...or turned on the cooker hob.....heh ;o)
Games programming is different from most forms of programming, in that the end user isn't supposed to see the end product until it is complete. Yet the end product still has to be visually stunning and captivate the intended audiences emotions.
This is why games development is so often equated with film development. The two industries pretty much mirror each other in their processes....or at least they should do.
Films have what are known as test screenings. These are carried out when the filming is complete but, the special effects and some of the scenes are still able to be cut or re-worked. In this stage a film producer may choose to re-shoot the entire film ending, re-shoot the beginning or re-work whole scenes based on audience reactions.
Game Betas are effectively the test screening phrase of game development. It is here that your test audience get to feed back any good or bad points of your design. The developer shouldn't be afraid to re-write whole sections if necessary as (just like movies) this stage of development should have been factored into the plan from the beginning.
So the question I ended up pondering was "Why doesn't this happen in the West?" Why is it that games developers don't factor in re-writes and audience feedback? Why does our industry still rely on blind luck for a hit or a miss, when simply using a beta correctly would pretty much eliminate that possibility.
You may not like your audiences feedback but, at the end of the day you are asking them to buy your product. I equate the current developers attitude towards audience feedback as being like an arthouse film maker i.e. if the audience like the game then they have good taste, if they don't then frack them they wouldn't know a good game if it bit them. The extreme example of this attitude was (a few years ago now) when Romero goofed by explaining that his not yet written or released game was so good that it was going to make all gamers his
Such phrases as "It will be done when it's done" are like knives being twisted into me. Where once it was a sign of quality, now it is worn like a badge of exemption from prosecution. The reality of that phrase is that the developer hasn't made a plan and doesn't think enough of his expected audience or just plain does not know when his product will be available. After all you can't miss a deadline if you haven't set one to begin with right!
The film industry by contrast, will get a script, plan out the production, engage the artists, shoot *take a breath here*, add special effects, cut and edit etc. etc. and still be able to tell you to the month when the movie will air. It really isn't that difficult a task if you plan things in advance.
If you know you have 6 months for the initial development of art, 2 months for the set design, then you plan to use that length of time. Game developers by contrast set out their 2 month set design (level design time) and then ignore it or try to crunch two weeks before the two months are up). You need to allow contingency (I'll be patronising here and say that means you build in time for unexpected slippage and errors).
Having had the honor of visiting a Japanese games studio recently (ah now he gets to it) I saw true production values in a real world senario. This is why Japanese games rarely slip past their intended release dates. The senario I witnessed went like this:-
An artist had a deadline and she produced the specced out art (a ghostly woman). Another designer had missed her deadline and her level was dropped plain and simple. I witnessed a whole level being put aside for a directors cut edition of the game, because it would not be ready in time for the final cut off date (even with the alotted slipage time). The level designer was genuinely appologetic to her team mates but, proud that her other levels had made the cut. Meanwhile on getting the news, the story writers were expertly re-written to deal with the absence of the level. The time saved by culling when the slippage was detected, allowed for some smaller additions to the game to beef up the remaining content.
Daily meetings were held to check progress and things were moved around to ensure that the remaining content was available as needed.
As computers become more powerful, I can see the lack of processes here in the west as being a very shiny nail in the coffin of independents everywhere. The Japanese studio I visited had the release date of their game firmly on the calendar. Even if their publisher had moved the shelf date, their finish date for the software wasn't going anywhere. They had already scheduled their next product to start a month or so after this date (contingency) come what may.
This also didn't impact their creativity in any way. A full hour was set aside to meet and brainstorm every other day (I think it was every other day as I only sat in on two sessions). In these sessions the design, art and programming teams (yes they were very proud of their team dynamics) would all pitch in ideas and concepts. No-one dismissed anything, they would laugh at some ideas as people tended to act out their character ideas or artists would sketch a simple doodle to illustrate their point etc. etc.
You went away feeling that this was how games studios should be run. Very much like film studios, where writers get to write, artists get to create (within a guideline) and programmers got to program (though to a known end goal and deadline). All under the suidance of the games producer. He had the final say in all disputed content, sounds etc etc. He effectively yelled cut on any shoot (in this case any game content).
I know I'm in a minority of one when I say this but, I no longer think it's cool to say "It's done when it's done". As far as I'm concerned (please feel free to totally disagree with me as that's what freedom is all about) that phrase belongs in the dark ages of games programming. It's a cop out, a lame excuse and above all I think it's a sure sign that-
That the man had no plan.
Found it was too late to make a plan.
Tried to flim flam his way out of the jam.
Didn't want anyone to know about it.
The final straw that punched this attitude lapse of our industry (well here in the West anyhoo) home, was when I asked my 3 year old neice when she was going to pick up her toy car and she replied innocently "I'll pick that up yes......" Two hours later I nearly broke my neck on the danged thing.
I was in the midst of formulating a curse when I realised that, like the phrase "It's done when it's done", her saying "I'll pick that up yes......" had no real meaning. She could have meant two minutes or next century for all I knew. It was a totally innocent way of copping out. After all I couldn't say she lied or that she hadn't meant to pick it up ever. I simply didn't have a time frame to reference her actions to. Heck if she picked the car up three days from that moment I would simply have had to acknowledge her good deed.
Our industry needs a serious attitude adjustment but, I guess that will happen when it happens. No need for anyone to actively set a time scale for change and stick to it or implementing their own change timescales or anything like that.
Naw if you wait long enough someone will change for you right...yea bound to happen....Hmm what's that my stomach is rumbling...don't worry stomach some food will be done when it's done....no use grumbling about it stomach....no I can't give you an estimate of when the eggs will be fried....oh you can see that I haven't cracked the shells yet...or turned on the cooker hob.....heh ;o)
About the author
Recent Blogs
• Plan for Peter Dwyer• Plan for Peter Dwyer
• Plan for Peter Dwyer
• Plan for Peter Dwyer
• Plan for Peter Dwyer
#2
The games are as good as they ever were ... as exacting, as punctual, and as beautiful. However, they really aren't as good as Halo, Grand Theft Auto, Splinter Cell, Riddick, and many more non Japanese games. They've adapted to a forumula and anytime you follow a formula for game success I think you lose the overall creative edge.
Who cares that the games ship on time ... if they are no better then they were 10 years ago. Has Metal Gear Solid ever surpassed the very first Playstation game? Nope! Has any Mario game since Mario 64 been better? Nope! The current Japanese formula peaked during the PS1 days and hasn't matured since.
Meanwhile since the arrival of the new consoles non-Japanese games (American and UK games perhaps more so than others) have begun to mature. Within 2 more generations of consoles I fully expect America to lead the video game industry as it does the film industry.
The analogy to a toy on the ground ... that just doesn't cut it. Games aren't utilitarian ... they aren't practical per se. They need to be spectacular not just done and out of the way. Time constraits are useful to a degree. However, looking at games that were done when done ... and looking at games that were done on schedule ... I'd take the games that were done when they were done.
One thing I do agree with though is the use of beta testing and even re-writes. If the game's no good then it should be re-written. I actually think most Japanese studios do release games when they are done. The latest Resident Evil for example was re-done 4 times and it turned out great.
In reality I don't think it's the development practices that are separating the games at this point. If Japanese developers plan for re-writes and take their betas seriously enough to complete re-write a game that can't be a bad thing.
It might just come down to cultural differences and what people want to play. Or perhaps the Japanese developers became complacent with their radical success in the previous generation.
I personally have switched. When I was younger I enjoyed Japanese games far more. The older I get the more other games appeal to me.
As for me as a developer ... I really don't believe in strict schedules. I like to strike when the inspiration is hot. If I'm not inspired my work isn't good and I'd rather apply my energy elsewhere if my game energy is low. Personally, I think Independent games will become relatively better and better as larger game development becomes more like an assembly line. The industry has just gone through a period of consolidation. In the next stage the consolidation will lead to lathargic development and boredom amongst gamers. The independent industry will then boom big.
03/16/2005 (7:12 pm)
It's been known for a long time how good Japanese game development is. However ... I've noticed lately that more and more American developers are catching up and in some cases anihilating Japanese games. I think the science behind their development served them well to a point but as of this latest generation of consoles Japanese games have severely fallen off comparatively. The games are as good as they ever were ... as exacting, as punctual, and as beautiful. However, they really aren't as good as Halo, Grand Theft Auto, Splinter Cell, Riddick, and many more non Japanese games. They've adapted to a forumula and anytime you follow a formula for game success I think you lose the overall creative edge.
Who cares that the games ship on time ... if they are no better then they were 10 years ago. Has Metal Gear Solid ever surpassed the very first Playstation game? Nope! Has any Mario game since Mario 64 been better? Nope! The current Japanese formula peaked during the PS1 days and hasn't matured since.
Meanwhile since the arrival of the new consoles non-Japanese games (American and UK games perhaps more so than others) have begun to mature. Within 2 more generations of consoles I fully expect America to lead the video game industry as it does the film industry.
The analogy to a toy on the ground ... that just doesn't cut it. Games aren't utilitarian ... they aren't practical per se. They need to be spectacular not just done and out of the way. Time constraits are useful to a degree. However, looking at games that were done when done ... and looking at games that were done on schedule ... I'd take the games that were done when they were done.
One thing I do agree with though is the use of beta testing and even re-writes. If the game's no good then it should be re-written. I actually think most Japanese studios do release games when they are done. The latest Resident Evil for example was re-done 4 times and it turned out great.
In reality I don't think it's the development practices that are separating the games at this point. If Japanese developers plan for re-writes and take their betas seriously enough to complete re-write a game that can't be a bad thing.
It might just come down to cultural differences and what people want to play. Or perhaps the Japanese developers became complacent with their radical success in the previous generation.
I personally have switched. When I was younger I enjoyed Japanese games far more. The older I get the more other games appeal to me.
As for me as a developer ... I really don't believe in strict schedules. I like to strike when the inspiration is hot. If I'm not inspired my work isn't good and I'd rather apply my energy elsewhere if my game energy is low. Personally, I think Independent games will become relatively better and better as larger game development becomes more like an assembly line. The industry has just gone through a period of consolidation. In the next stage the consolidation will lead to lathargic development and boredom amongst gamers. The independent industry will then boom big.
#3
If I had an "It's done when it's done" attitude, the people I worked for would have flipped. Projects can slip, but it's not something that you should be blas
03/16/2005 (7:23 pm)
Excellent points.If I had an "It's done when it's done" attitude, the people I worked for would have flipped. Projects can slip, but it's not something that you should be blas
#4
I'm currently on contract at an organization of hospitals in the midwest. They have several facilities, total patient flow through all of them is approximately 750 patients per day. They manage all patient information (and that is a LOT of information) through what is called an "interface engine", which is essentially a middleware messaging solution that maps data formats and allows cross-protocol transmission of thousands of messages a day.
We needed to do a yearly reboot of the primary server (AIX Cluster for High Availability), and unfortunately, the reboot did not go as planned--we had a partial failover of the cluster to the backup platform, and wound up with our interface engine distributed across two nodes in the cluster, and basically unusable from either one. During the attempted recovery of the failover, we passed our scheduled end to the downtime, and were required to extend the downtime. When I was asked what the reason for the delay was, the only answer I had was "hardware failure". I was then asked what our ETA was, and the only answer was "unknown". I was told point blank that both the reason and the unknown ETA were unacceptable, and I was required to give a hard and fast deadline for the end of the downtime.
From my perspective, it was a true "it'll be done when it's done" scenario--at the time, I had NO idea how long the recovery process would take, and couldn't even make an educated guess that would be reliable to the hospitals that were awaiting uptime information flow. However, from their perspective, they required an answer, because downtime procedures for an extended period of time cause extreme cascading issues, from additional staffing being required, to turning away certain types of patients to other facilities due to lack of being able to process them in a timely manner. That's resources, money, and even patient's lives that were at stake all dependent on an answer to the "when will it be done?" question.
I know that this situation does apply perfectly to the game industry, or even the game tools industry, but I would argue that there actually is more at stake than just quality of the end product. No one ever wants to accept a "less then envisioned" product of any sort, but in commercial operations, counting on third parties to establish and meet schedules is an important thing.
03/16/2005 (7:44 pm)
I just ran into a very real world example of this type of attitude in myself, and I'm honestly not sure if I was right, or "they" were right:I'm currently on contract at an organization of hospitals in the midwest. They have several facilities, total patient flow through all of them is approximately 750 patients per day. They manage all patient information (and that is a LOT of information) through what is called an "interface engine", which is essentially a middleware messaging solution that maps data formats and allows cross-protocol transmission of thousands of messages a day.
We needed to do a yearly reboot of the primary server (AIX Cluster for High Availability), and unfortunately, the reboot did not go as planned--we had a partial failover of the cluster to the backup platform, and wound up with our interface engine distributed across two nodes in the cluster, and basically unusable from either one. During the attempted recovery of the failover, we passed our scheduled end to the downtime, and were required to extend the downtime. When I was asked what the reason for the delay was, the only answer I had was "hardware failure". I was then asked what our ETA was, and the only answer was "unknown". I was told point blank that both the reason and the unknown ETA were unacceptable, and I was required to give a hard and fast deadline for the end of the downtime.
From my perspective, it was a true "it'll be done when it's done" scenario--at the time, I had NO idea how long the recovery process would take, and couldn't even make an educated guess that would be reliable to the hospitals that were awaiting uptime information flow. However, from their perspective, they required an answer, because downtime procedures for an extended period of time cause extreme cascading issues, from additional staffing being required, to turning away certain types of patients to other facilities due to lack of being able to process them in a timely manner. That's resources, money, and even patient's lives that were at stake all dependent on an answer to the "when will it be done?" question.
I know that this situation does apply perfectly to the game industry, or even the game tools industry, but I would argue that there actually is more at stake than just quality of the end product. No one ever wants to accept a "less then envisioned" product of any sort, but in commercial operations, counting on third parties to establish and meet schedules is an important thing.
#5
03/16/2005 (7:56 pm)
Yes it is an important thing looking at it like that. I'd say the larger the operation the more important time management becomes.
#6
Often the only way out, when others have to plan their actions around you is to give a worst case estimate (It'll take x days to replace the cluster and reload from backups) and factor in some time to attempt a fix. If you cant fix within the allotted time, go with plan b.
That way you give the others a plan to work around, and you will cause less problems if its done early than late.
Of course thats not always possible (costs may be prohibitive etc) so a series of checkpoints may be better, allowing others to plan around them, but that adds to the complexity the others have to plan for. So that may not be possible.
You can then run away and join a hippie naturist reserve that allows no technology or contact with the outside world.
03/16/2005 (8:13 pm)
It's a tough situation to be in Stephen, if you dont give a deadline it causes problems, do give one and risk going over and causing problems. The classic rock and hard place scenario.Often the only way out, when others have to plan their actions around you is to give a worst case estimate (It'll take x days to replace the cluster and reload from backups) and factor in some time to attempt a fix. If you cant fix within the allotted time, go with plan b.
That way you give the others a plan to work around, and you will cause less problems if its done early than late.
Of course thats not always possible (costs may be prohibitive etc) so a series of checkpoints may be better, allowing others to plan around them, but that adds to the complexity the others have to plan for. So that may not be possible.
You can then run away and join a hippie naturist reserve that allows no technology or contact with the outside world.
#7
I personally don't subscribe to the 'it is done when it is done, leave us alone while we fiddle' philosophy, but I don't subscribe to the 'plan upfront and set hard deadlines' philosophy either. I am in favor of the more agile methodologies for game development, at least in the stages before the gameplay and interface are totally nailed and all that is left is to churn out content to fill out the game.
There are ways to create games that do not rely on a linear implementation, and there are ways to effectively track progress, assess risks, and control features using systems that are more fluid.
That being said, any particular project may require a different approach or different methodology to have it developed successfully (success regarding budget and time constraints). One size does not fit all.
And altough I personally don't like the 'it's done when it's done, get off our backs' attitude, it should be noted that some of the really big sellers from Blizzard, Valve, and Id, use the 'it's done when it is done' development model to produce some really superlative products.
03/16/2005 (8:19 pm)
Great .plan. I personally don't subscribe to the 'it is done when it is done, leave us alone while we fiddle' philosophy, but I don't subscribe to the 'plan upfront and set hard deadlines' philosophy either. I am in favor of the more agile methodologies for game development, at least in the stages before the gameplay and interface are totally nailed and all that is left is to churn out content to fill out the game.
There are ways to create games that do not rely on a linear implementation, and there are ways to effectively track progress, assess risks, and control features using systems that are more fluid.
That being said, any particular project may require a different approach or different methodology to have it developed successfully (success regarding budget and time constraints). One size does not fit all.
And altough I personally don't like the 'it's done when it's done, get off our backs' attitude, it should be noted that some of the really big sellers from Blizzard, Valve, and Id, use the 'it's done when it is done' development model to produce some really superlative products.
#8
Good project management can often be a series of compromises or adaptations that does not loose sight of the overall goal.
03/16/2005 (8:44 pm)
True, one size does not fit all. But there are generally some immutable constraints on any project, like time, money, manpower etc.Good project management can often be a series of compromises or adaptations that does not loose sight of the overall goal.
#9
Most times game developers headed by developers may have more of a Let
03/17/2005 (1:51 am)
There is some other parameter to consider...Most times game developers headed by developers may have more of a Let
#10
However, there is a hole in your argument regarding japanese developers. You mention that japanese developers plan and work to plan, ok, but then you mention that the resident evil guys re-started the game 4 times and that they are prepared for re-writes.
You cant have "work to plan" and "be prepared to rewrite everything". They are opposing forces. Either you ARE working to plan, in which case, you make whats on the plan OR you are working to create a product and accept that the plan will have to expand to fit new content or re-writes. If the latter, than the plan isnt as rigid as you were purporting to be a good thing.
My experience from Japanese developers (admittedly not first hand, but second hand from a reliable source) is that japanese development has its problems too, but has managed to find a more stable funding model that allows some experimentation and reworking.
We in europe and america are just catching on to the whole "pre production mitigating risk" concept, with this actually being PAID FOR. I recently herd for the first time ever a contract which the publisher agreed to pay for a period of pre-production which helps mitigate the risks inherent to full production.
The whole analogy between film and games is flawed in many ways, speaking to guys from the film industry, so I dont think we can try and hold the film industry up as a beacon either. Quite simply I object to that analogy because the media's involved are fundamentally different in nature. One is infinitely more malleable than the other.
As for your point about usability testing not happening in the games industry, I'm part of a group doing some research in this area right now and whilst it does happen (have a look at microsoft games usability labs GDC presentations), it doesnt happen nearly as often as it should and often isnt as well organised.
Indies can also benefit from usability analysis and product testing at an early stage, which is something our group is going to look at going forward from our current research.
I think your points are well made and on the most part accurate for sections of the industry, but its simply not the case for the whole industry. I think you'd find that if you were in contact with many of the bigger developers and the higher-end of the market, you'd find many of the practices you are espousing actually happening.
The japanese have a culturally different approach, which might be thier historical advantage, but believe me, they are NOT considerably better process wise than most developers in the west.
03/17/2005 (5:55 am)
Its an interesting and well argue'd plan, I tend to agree with Joe about the one size fits all methodology not being viable.However, there is a hole in your argument regarding japanese developers. You mention that japanese developers plan and work to plan, ok, but then you mention that the resident evil guys re-started the game 4 times and that they are prepared for re-writes.
You cant have "work to plan" and "be prepared to rewrite everything". They are opposing forces. Either you ARE working to plan, in which case, you make whats on the plan OR you are working to create a product and accept that the plan will have to expand to fit new content or re-writes. If the latter, than the plan isnt as rigid as you were purporting to be a good thing.
My experience from Japanese developers (admittedly not first hand, but second hand from a reliable source) is that japanese development has its problems too, but has managed to find a more stable funding model that allows some experimentation and reworking.
We in europe and america are just catching on to the whole "pre production mitigating risk" concept, with this actually being PAID FOR. I recently herd for the first time ever a contract which the publisher agreed to pay for a period of pre-production which helps mitigate the risks inherent to full production.
The whole analogy between film and games is flawed in many ways, speaking to guys from the film industry, so I dont think we can try and hold the film industry up as a beacon either. Quite simply I object to that analogy because the media's involved are fundamentally different in nature. One is infinitely more malleable than the other.
As for your point about usability testing not happening in the games industry, I'm part of a group doing some research in this area right now and whilst it does happen (have a look at microsoft games usability labs GDC presentations), it doesnt happen nearly as often as it should and often isnt as well organised.
Indies can also benefit from usability analysis and product testing at an early stage, which is something our group is going to look at going forward from our current research.
I think your points are well made and on the most part accurate for sections of the industry, but its simply not the case for the whole industry. I think you'd find that if you were in contact with many of the bigger developers and the higher-end of the market, you'd find many of the practices you are espousing actually happening.
The japanese have a culturally different approach, which might be thier historical advantage, but believe me, they are NOT considerably better process wise than most developers in the west.
#11
To me, it's about Task Orientation and Time/Resource Management.
I am professionally in showbusiness, where productions of all types[motion pictures, general sessions, parties, etc] are setup, operated, and torn down on a project to project basis. Tickets are sold in advance with performances scheduled in advance, everyone knows the timeline. Here is a quote, uttered by me across this planet, in different venues, many times over; "...rumor has it, the show's tonight!".
While it may be argued that these industries are totally different and the product is diametriclly opposed; to me, the fact remains: a product for consumtion is being offered, regardless of it's artistic developement or intention. If you intend to sell it,[that is one endgoal here, isn't it?], you do actually have to do it at some point, instead of endlessly discussing it's features/virutes.
It seems that this industry may be more afraid of disappointing a claim of, "This will put XXXX to shame", than showing true 'artistic' developement. Not all 'art' is appreciated or consumed. Art as perfection might be a better example. Seems like computer programming is attempting to create the 'perfect' art, and it just is not possible[no matter how many monkeys pounding away on how many typewriters for how many years...;)]. You just simply do the 'best' you can and let the rest to chance.
On the stage it's my daily job, to decide what can be accomplished and can't in the timeSlot allotted; balancing the artistic direction intended against the resources and time available. More than once, I've had to suggest something wasn't going to make final cut and to redirect energy to something that would. Time/resource management...
03/17/2005 (7:59 am)
Quote:What ever happend to planning and sticking to a plan?...
To me, it's about Task Orientation and Time/Resource Management.
I am professionally in showbusiness, where productions of all types[motion pictures, general sessions, parties, etc] are setup, operated, and torn down on a project to project basis. Tickets are sold in advance with performances scheduled in advance, everyone knows the timeline. Here is a quote, uttered by me across this planet, in different venues, many times over; "...rumor has it, the show's tonight!".
While it may be argued that these industries are totally different and the product is diametriclly opposed; to me, the fact remains: a product for consumtion is being offered, regardless of it's artistic developement or intention. If you intend to sell it,[that is one endgoal here, isn't it?], you do actually have to do it at some point, instead of endlessly discussing it's features/virutes.
It seems that this industry may be more afraid of disappointing a claim of, "This will put XXXX to shame", than showing true 'artistic' developement. Not all 'art' is appreciated or consumed. Art as perfection might be a better example. Seems like computer programming is attempting to create the 'perfect' art, and it just is not possible[no matter how many monkeys pounding away on how many typewriters for how many years...;)]. You just simply do the 'best' you can and let the rest to chance.
On the stage it's my daily job, to decide what can be accomplished and can't in the timeSlot allotted; balancing the artistic direction intended against the resources and time available. More than once, I've had to suggest something wasn't going to make final cut and to redirect energy to something that would. Time/resource management...
#12
-Rob
03/19/2005 (4:26 am)
I agree with Peter and disagree with a lot of other opinions here. Even as indie's you need to have a proper business model with deadlines.-Rob
Torque 3D Owner Pat Wilson