Easy Allies Podcast #151 - Video

What was that game called?

A recent ResetEra thread was made for a reddit post that seems relevant to your Ask the Comments request: <a href="https://www.resetera.com/threads/quite-a-lot-of-game-developers-insights-on-the-hurdles-and-feeling-knowing-that-the-games-they-worked-on-is-received-negatively.103376/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.resetera.com/threads/quite-a-lot-of-game-developers-insights-on-the-hurdles-and-feeling-knowing-that-the-games-they-worked-on-is-received-negatively.103376/</a> Just thought it might be an interesting read and seems somewhat related to the topic.

Rappy

I'd like to add one factor to the talent discussion: Institutional knowledge. That's how companies can retain skills regardless of individual talent by training and mentoring. Miyamoto's sensibilities have been filtered down through at least four generations of Nintendo designers. Rockstar has had 17 years to learn how to make a Rockstar-style open world game. Sumo Digital had four years to figure out how to develop a Crackdown title. Insomniac did Sunset Overdrive before taking on Spider-Man. Probably the closest thing to Anthem Bioware had experience working on was Star Wars: The Old Republic. There's a weird assumption baked into Kyle's question if Spider-Man's lead animator is better than Crackdown 3's lead animator, and that is that Crackdown got lower scores because of its animations. But that gets into the problem of overrating the importance production values when it comes to the quality of a work of art or entertainment. And that's a whole different topic.

I've been working as a designer in the game industry for over a decade and when it comes to talent I must emphasize the importance of the Creative Director and the top staff. They are largely responsible for the vision of the game. When it comes to regular developers there is a lot of turnover in this industry. Many people move on after 2-3 projects to be replaced my other people. The old teach the new so the traditions and studio-feel of games remains mostly the same but do evolve through new ideas and energy infused by newer employees. Talent on that level is an average of the group. But nearly all the work of the rank and file gets reviewed by the leads and directors and iterated again and again until it's perfect (or money runs out). It's the talent and vision of these people that really drive quality and cohesiveness of the final product. I don't want to demean the work of the actual content producers, being one myself. We are constantly thinking of great ideas, encounters, challenges, mechanics etc to add to the game but it is usually the creative director or similar that is the final gatekeeper. In the end it is a combination of passionate people creating great content curated by a director who can channel it into an exciting product. Bioware has seen a lot of its leaders leave the company in the last decade and those changes have a massive impact on the quality and vision of a game. Also remember that talent is very specific: Being good at making a roleplaying game does not make you good at making a shooter-looter game. There is of course always other factors that can break a game: -Third party middleware underperforming -Underestimation of work needed to match the original concept -Hardware limitations -Publisher meddling in design -Internal promoting to the level of incompetence -...

Mathieu Vanhove

The question about developers and whether or not some are just not as talented as others... the answer seems quite obvious. Yes, some are simply more talented. In every other area, whether it be a hobby or profession we see clear differences in levels of talent. Not all race car drivers are equal, not all artists are equal, not all surgeons are equal... therefore it's safe to assume that not all video game developers are equal. I don't think that makes me (or anyone else) meanies for realizing and acknowledging it ..... we're just simply being real about it.

Mitchell Collier

I'm a software engineer with nearly 15 years experience. I was gonna post a lengthy thing, but, this comment nailed it.

Kif

The Talent Conundrum! As someone who works in the entertainment industry I want to reinforce what others have already said: While raw talent is important it all largely comes down to budget, access to talent, and direction. Budget (AKA time and flexibility) - A project with incredible funding (Spider-man, for example) has the luxury of working at something until it looks and feels just right. Conversely, the developers of Jump Force almost certainly had less time and less people with which to make their game. I’m sure the animators and developers knew their game didn’t control great but unlike Spider-man, they were working towards an immovable deadline and did the best they could with the time given. Access to talent - If a game is being developed at a premier studio like Naughty Dog, there’s a good chance that you will have access to some of the best developers/artists in the biz. On the other hand, a smaller studio that makes only licensed games is just not going to have the same talent pool at their disposal. In the case of Anthem though, it seems like the majority of the game’s issues stem from poor- Direction - This is where experience and taste come into play. The person(s) steering the ship needs to be able to prioritize based on the budget and access to talent available. This is truly the art of deciding what is really important to the quality of your product and varies wildly from game to game. It really feels like for Jump Force specifically, the Director decided the most important part of the experience was rendering cartoon-y characters in photo realism above all else. A critical mistake given that most players would have preferred a game that was just a blast to play, regardless of how many pores were visible on Vegeta’s forehead. Then again this probably wasn’t entirely their fault as I’m sure executives were breathing down their necks. In conclusion although raw talent is definitely important, it’s more about how said talent is utilized that ultimately makes the biggest difference.

Matt B

I made it!!! I finally made it! After having 2 months of not watching EZA content (due to vacation and a lot of gameplay sessions) I did got the time to dig my favourite shows. I'm so glad you guys are now in your new studio. Now I might be helping on providing some questions here and there. Also, keep doing those games Kyle!!!

Leo S. Luna

Question to Comments: In my opinion true magic occurs when a team knows each other, has passion for their project and loves what they do. Anytime work is done merely for the paycheck the investment is minimal and the effort mundane regardless of the talent. Case in point: The Grudge Match, a film starring Sylvester Stalone, Robert De Niro, Kim Basinger, Kevin Hart, Jon Bernthal and Alan Arkin. It should be an incredible movie which is lackluster at best but it’s evident the “talent” wasn’t fully vested into the film. However, an independent film like Napoleon Dynamite swept the nation because everyone in the film fully believed in and loved the project. Spider-Man was a passion project and it’s evident in every aspect of the game. Insomniac showed what they could do with Sunset Overdrive which was the proving ground for Spider-Man. Even though Sunset Overdrive may not have the highest accolades Sony was smart enough to invest in what the team “could do” which I think stemmed from the enthusiasm of the team. We have tons of examples for both great games and poorly developed games and it’s easy to spot some of the differences in a game made for a paycheck. To conclude I think it comes down to the leaders of the teams and their ability to inspire and push their talent to reach their best. An orchestra in my hands would sound like screeching cats regardless of the talent performing but put that same talent in John Williams hands and you have a masterpiece.

Christopher McClung

THQ absolutely disgusts me and as they refuse to properly address this situation with firings and a real disowning of their actions I will not be giving them a single cent. What a garbage company. I'll be extremely disappointed in any Allies who decide to support THQ going forward if this isn't resolved. Child Porn is a hard line that every single person should have universally and none of this is okay.

Really disappointing from the Allies on how they handled the Devotion and THQ's topics, what a shame...

Thnk about Insomniac before Sunsent Overdrive, it was a 3rd person plataform studio and no one knew they could do open world with fun traversing. They did it for whatever reason and rock it. In Anthem BioWare is trying a new thing, maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t. Anthem in my opinion has really fun combat, excellent traversing and excellent level design and none of those were Bioware strong suit.

I think you should play Anthem because it does have excellent world building, storytelling (although not in the main quest) and player choice (albeit limited compared to previous games). It took me 45h to experience every story in the game, and now I’m playing a second time to see how things change if you choose a different patch (changes are minor, like a shop opens or not, or there is something different in the fort, but it does change).

In response to the question posed to the comments: Using Anthem as an example, it feels like a game that was given to the wrong people. EA was looking for a loot shooter, and they used Bioware. When I think Bioware, I still think of the Mass Effect series, which in my opinion, truly shined as narrative based games where your choices mattered and had effects on the story. Fast forward to Anthem. Leaving out the many technical problems Iʻve faced, the problems with the game for me donʻt come from movement, or gunplay, or fun abilities, or world design. My problems with the game all stem from the fact that I think Biowareʻs talents do not mesh particularly well with a loot shooter. For example, the game will outright tell you you should play with a full party of four, encouraging multiplayer communication. However, the game also has lengthy dialogue conversations that require you to tell your friends to be quiet while you listen to an NPC. Thatʻs not to say that Bioware couldnʻt have made a good game here. As an example, the game identifies two groups of people that go on missions - Sentinels, a more organized, military-like group of people that keep watch over the strongholds, and the Freelancers, a less tightly run, bounty-hunter-like group that go on dangerous missions. Imagine if the game made you choose a faction at the beginning. You could add more individuality to each player by having the players choose a side, which changes how some NPCs react to you, and so on. Stuff like this plays into Biowareʻs main talents, that of making you, the player, feel like an individual and not just another face. I think the discussion of talent should also play into what a developerʻs talents are. Rockstarʻs talents lie in making open-world games with ultra detail. Insomniac killed Spider-Man and we knew they could do motion because of Sunset Overdrive. Naughty Dog does cinematic experiences and character study games the best, probably tied with Santa Monica. That doesnʻt mean that a developer cannot branch out, but that they are known for certain things.

Keanu La'a

“Just ask the comments” I think when it comes down to the discussion of talent, it’s not so much that one person on a team is more talented than another at animation, art, or programming. In the AAA industry, these teams are often made up of many people working on one aspect of a game’s design and the effort is collaborative in a way that can make up for or diminish individual talent. I think the more important focus, then, should be placed on the “talent” of the studio overall. In other words, what is a particular studio known for? What have they been historically good at? For a game to succeed the studio must place their “talents” at the pillars of design and really let them shine. For example, Bungie developed a reputation for their talent as being able to develop some of the best first-person shooting mechanics on a console with Halo. They essentially revolutionized the industry and allowed for console gamers to enjoy FPS in a way that before may have been thought impossible. So natrually, Bungie chose to make Destiny; a looter shooter with tight controls and an infinitely replayable gameplay loop. Conversely, let’s bring this point back to Anthem (which is the game that Kyle had brought up). Bioware has always made pretty janky, buggy games whose core gameplay loops aren’t necessarily the thing people are playing their games for. However, their prior games are essentially unrivaled in terms of storytelling, world-building, and player choice. Those are Bioware’s talents as a studio. And those elements should have been the core pillars of design behind their newest game. Unfortunately, someone within Bioware or EA, ostensibly made a financial decision to create a looter shooter game designed around the “games as a service” model that ignores the studio’s collective talents perfected by years of practice. The result is a game that feels half baked which will struggle to find its own identity, and people can sense this. Bioware made the wrong game. They didn’t focus on their “talent” as a studio. Ultimately, it doesn't come down to the individual talent of one person on a team, in my opinion. It’s about making the right decision for your studio based on its collective talent. That, which over time, becomes your identity.

LOL! @Ian, I was so thinking "Poke the BEAR" and then you said it...and then had to repeat it!! =)

JessieBlu

Canada says "You're welcome." L&amp;R

Corrigall

I think regardless of where you stand on the political issues, your comments make it very clear that this is more than just a single joke insult that someone snuck into the game... this sounds like a blatantly political game intent on getting a controversial message across. I am very much against censorship, but as I'm not familiar enough with the situation (and the game seems to offended a lot of people) taking it down was probably a smart decision. Thanks for sharing, it is very informative to hear the opinion of someone who actually lives in China!

Nimbus

I would imagine that talent/skill is more important when the teams are small. Working at massive studios, I think it'd come down to management more than anything else. Though we do hear stories like when Iwata comes in and saves Pokemon Gold/Silver. So perhaps it does happen at bigger studios on a developmental level to some degree as well.

Andrew Chalmers

I agree with this 100% as someone who works and has close ties with friends and family in the game industry.

Kyle: I'm sure developers themselves would tell you there are differences in talent between teams. They could probably tell you some teams they consider more talented, and some they consider less. Think of the miracles that a Bluepoint or Panic Button can pull off versus other studios. That's just technical talent, but it's one angle.

iconmaster

I'm a developer with 20 years of experience altough my main focus is not in games I've worked in AAA games as a contractor in the past. From my perspective talent (or skill) in the development side is not the problem, for the most part when a project fails to achieve its goal is a management fault. Maybe the project was ill conceived, the direction was not clear, or the integration was messy. In my experience is impossible to make any AAA game without truly smart people behid it. A really talented person in a key area could help to aliviate some burden but I'll take a talented director or producer vs the most impresive developer, artist or designer any day. Managing a huge diverse team with diverse goals and expertise is really really hard. So to answer Kyle's question, yes, talent does matter... in management. The team working on any game knows most of the issues the game has before releasing it. Some are impossible to find unless you have hundred of thousands of players playing, but the things that everyone notice that appear in every review they know for sure, and they choose to work it out after release (or they just don't care anymore, which is extremely rare). AAA games are hard to make, and like with any creative endevour the people behind it is putting more than just technical knowledge in their area, they are leaving their passion with it, caring for every aspect of their work and when the end product does not reflect that it's really hard for everyone. To my knowledge the money aspect is not usually the problem, any good producer or director will make everyone clear to don't expect a 90% metacritic or millions in sales if the budget is not there for what the goal is. Maybe this helps to give you all a different perspective. Thank you, L&amp;R Leo.

Why is there ANYTHING wrong with saying bad things about a COMMUNIST PRESIDENT?! If anything, it should be open season on his ass.

aguynamedjosh

Just Ask the Comments: Hey Allies! I’m an animator in the movie industry who dipped her toes into games briefly in the past. I just wanted to share my thoughts a bit on how much raw talent influences the quality of the final product. It’s a bit of a mess, since so many things are different from one production to the next. First, I’ve worked in a game startup founded by a past big EA executive back in the big Facebook games craze. Every week, we would have meetings where we would look at the trends, who was making the most money in that space etc. Farmville is popular right now? Change the game to look like Farmville! Little Big Planet just came out and is doing well? Add a level editor! We released one game and then the company closed down. All the employees were extremely talented people who went on to do great things after. What I’m getting at is that it’s way more often due to higher ups not having a clear vision, following trends instead of creating new ones and just handcuffing their talents. In the case of Crackdown vs Spiderman, it’s hard to know what happened and who is better than who. With Crackdown being delayed for so long, I can relate to the situation that the animators were probably in. I’ve worked on project that get changed over and over again, redoing the same shots for months and months and at some points, you just don’t care anymore. I don’t know if this is what happened, but it’s a possibility. Then there is the issue of big studios having “too many cooks in the kitchen”. Some places get so big that you get so many levels of approval that your work has to go through that it loses any flavor or anything that made it special. So many times I’ve had work go through 5+ different approvals from different people, coming back at every step with notes, only for it to come back at the end because one random person who happened to be in the room during reviews said “but what if someone gets maybe confused by this tiny thing?”. And that’s how something eventually gets drained of all creativity and just becomes this boring thing we’ve seen a thousand times in favor of mass appeal but ends up appealing to no one. This is getting too long, but I just want to say that the final product should never be used to judge the talent behind it. I’ve worked with shitty people from Pixar and extremely talented people in shitty tv shows. And finally, keep in mind that the same people who worked on the Emoji movie worked on Spiderman Into the Spiderverse. Love &amp; Respect! (sorry for any english mistakes)

Re: the THQ 8 Chan situation, I don’t think this is just a ‘wash over’ type of thing. It was not as innocuous as you made it seem and THQ Nordic seemed fairly aware of the type of conversation they were having throughout. They crossed some pretty dubious lines with the questions they chose to respond to as well as some of their answers. Also these decisions came from the top as it was not only their PR head but also a member of their board involved in the AMA. A really bad look, and I think there will be additional fallout in the days to come. WaPo just reported on this recently...

Hey allies, normally I'd prefer not to be involved in a political discussion, but regarding Devotion, I think I should provide some information from a Chinese citizen's point of view. From what I learned, the whole thing around Devotion isn't just about insulting the leader of out country, it is why it's been banned, probably, but it's not what piss the player in China the most, at least in my opinion. There are something in this game that is not pointed towards PRC government, but toward the people. The main villain in this game is a cult under a disguised name "陆心社", the characters "陆心" can be translated to "Heart of Mainland", of course, that can be interpreted differently, and then, the name of the leader of the cult, is "陆恭铭", which is very close to be pronounced "陆公民", which means "Mainland Citizen", this, too, can be interpreted differently, and his age is 49, of course, the year PRC is born, yeah, also can be interpreted differently. And then, the cult's ritual, is to soak people in a container with alcohol, starting from Oct.1st, lasting a week, which, you may not know, is the week we celebrate our National Day of PRC, this, too, can be interpreted differently. But then, with so many "Coincident", I'm curious about what you guys think this is, from an American's point of view, for me, this is undoubtedly a deliberate insult towards PRC Citizen, The unfortunate thing about this incident is, a lot of PRC player actually praised this game before the details are clicked with them, they voluntarily advertise this game and it's developer, a lot of people on the social media bought the game despite the are terrified to play it themselves, a lot of people bought the game and watched Let's Plays of the game, a lot of PRC player praise it as the pride of Chinese Game, I don't agree with them, it's still a game made in Taiwan, it's sad to say, but Mainland game industry is still, dare I say, trash, but I'm still happy that a good game is made by people who are so close to us. EDIT: Also, if this game is not officially released in PRC, I think my opinion might be slightly changed, but it is indeed officially released in PRC, so, there's that. I hope these things can make a better picture out of this incident, so yeah, in my opinion, the review bomb by PRC players is well deserved, THEY CALLED FOR IT, after all, I'd imagine that nobody will praise a game that deliberately insults him/herself, that's all, sorry for this long rant, Love &amp; Respect.

Hey Allies, I wanted to weigh in on the “ask the comments” segment. I have worked professionally on several mobile games, which had varying degrees of success. Before that, I worked on multiple student game projects while earning my master’s degree. Kyle posed the question “is the lead animator of Spiderman more talented than the lead animator of Crackdown 3?” Here are several potential reasons, from my personal development experience, why a game’s art might fall flat. - The artists aren't very good. - Not enough budget to execute the vision: the scope of the content is too high for the number of artists on the team, so none of the assets get the amount of attention they require in order to really shine. - Management can't decide between two different art styles, so they basically request that the artists make two versions of everything for the first half of development, before a decision is finally made. - Bad tools make it cumbersome to finish assets at a high level of quality. (The first game I ever worked on professionally, whenever new art was added to the game, it would take about a half hour to rebuild the game and see how it looks in-engine. Imagine trying to polish and refine a set of animations when you have to wait 30 minutes to see how your changes look every time you tweak something.) These same kinds of issues apply to design, sound, and programming. It’s practically impossible to diagnose why a game has a certain issue without knowing the story of development. I’ve worked on some really bad games with some very talented people. When I was working on a racing game for a young audience, a designer and I had to completely redesign and reprogram the racing controls from the ground up FIVE different times over the course of 18 months, because an executive’s 4 year old son could never understand how to play. Every time he tested the game, he would crash, lose the race, and cry. The track design, racing AI, character progression, and other gameplay features all relied on some basic assumptions about how the game was played, and we kept having to change how to play the game. So there was a cascading effect that negatively impacted the entire project. The fourth time I had to rewrite the controls, I told my wife that if they asked me again, I would find a new job. The studio was shut down less than a year after I quit. Love and Respect, Winston

Ian, Kyle, we need another easy update video on the fantasy league!

Nick Geurtsen

Brad is 100% going to make some Bowser jokes

Andrew Burton

I wish Kyle wouldn't use the word "talent" in places where the word "skill" is such a better fit. Saying "talent" can be seen as demeaning in the sense that it can mean something someone was innately born with and didn't earn through hard work, as that is sometimes used to accuse people who worked very hard to achieve what they're good at as simply just being lucky enough to be naturally good at it, thus dismissing all the effort they poured into becoming good at it. Yes I'm aware sometimes they're exchanged as synonyms of one another, but they hold pretty different connotations in spite of that.

MBUN

Glinnys Cauldron 10/10. Kyle should pretend to throw a bit of paper into the cauldron that's in front of the desk and just off screen and a puff of smoke from the bottom of the screen is edited in.

Cash

loosey juicy

D-Up Gaming

Continuing the conversation with the game, the game's actually pretty interesting (and scary). Shame that China is stomping down on Taiwan, although perhaps they should have known better than rope in Winnie the Pooh. It's a shame that their government/citizens can take down a piece of work hosted and shared outside their borders

Kevin

I think you guys may be underestimating how upset people get by the Winnie the Pooh thing in China. I’m not deeply educated on the situation, but from what I’ve gathered from my significant other who spent 3 months living in a Chinese monastery, the Pooh-bear comparison in China really riles people up. The country has completely banned Winnie the Pooh, if I remember correctly, and last year banned a Pooh film from releasing. I think from our perspective in the US, and generally outside of China, it seems silly but I think it’s considered pretty controversial to make any comparison to President Xi Jinping and Winnie the Pooh especially so when you factor in Taiwan, as mentioned in the podcast. I can respect and comprehend the spirit of protest from the artist responsible for the asset, but just wanted to give a bit of context to why this would rile people up. Great episode!

Cannonball_Jones

Thanks, we added that within the last three weeks or so

Easy Allies

Is that credit section at the beginning new? If so it looks baller. If not it looks baller.

Matt Izaguirre

Soundcloud takes some extra processing time--I'll add it to this post!

Easy Allies

I second that!

Alex Sierra

Today is such a good day!

Yui

Love me some early podcast!

Dennis M.

SoundCloud? L&amp;R!

wuggles