As a follow up to your recent answer about game cancellations, don’t game studios need to present a much more coherent plan than that before production starts? I know things can be added or changed during development, but how come I’ve seen the narrative quite often that the creative leads couldn’t settle on a creative decision or direction and it killed the game? I thought games had a much tighter vision at the start of development than that?

boynextdoornews

I think you're confusing the part where third-party studios pitch a publisher, compared to the way things work internally. The way the process works internally is we start with a vague idea and a skeleton crew, then each green light meeting at each step focuses the core idea more and brings it closer to reality, while adding additional developers to the team in order to build more of that core idea. This means that the earliest steps of a game might be as simple as "Knights of the Old Republic 3", where the initial team's task is figuring out what "KOTOR 3" might actually mean. In a third-party studio, this is part is usually funded and bankrolled by the studio itself before it pitches the publisher.

The long preproduction internal projects that got cancelled were likely still in these fairly early stages, similar to [my own recent experience]. The main issue wasn't that they had strong ideas for what they wanted the game to be, the main issue was that they failed at transitioning from building cool demos and ideas to actually building the game they wanted to make. That transition can be really really hard, because every creative wants to keep being creative and having to roll up your sleeves and actually commit to stop being creative and actually get down to making the thing is immensely uncomfortable.

[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]

Got a burning question you want answered?

Добавить комментарий

Ваш адрес email не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *