Miyamoto Quote on Cultural Difference

September 9th, 2009

This year, research has become an increasingly more integral part of my writing procedure. Just today actually I researched my way out of purchasing Prince of Persia (2008). Good on me. I’ve also integrated my research habit into the posts themselves under the ‘Additional Readings’ heading. Backlogging too has become another significant part of my reading/writing habbit as of late. I’ve backlogged on Metal Gear comics and Retronauts posts. Now I’m doing a bit of both with Iwata Asks.

Iwata Asks is simply that, Mr Satoru Iwata, CEO of Nintendo, asking questions to developers within NCL’s Japanese offices. Such insight into the development of products such as Punch Out!!, Wii Sports Resort, Nintendo DSi and Super Mario Galaxy are valuable as they are obtuse to Nintendo’s prior stringency to divulging such insider information, rare exceptions omitted. These interviews are therefore akin to golden tickets into Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory.

I recommend that you take a read through sometime. The background stories are always interesting, of course, but the interviews too are very light-hearted, constant streams of laughter. For now though, I’ve plucked a quote from the Link’s Crossbow Training interview with Mr Miyamoto, creator of Mario, Zelda, Pikmin etc.

“If there is something simple which someone can find enjoyable, the same joy can be experienced by anyone on earth, I believe. That’s what I always have in mind when I am creating games. For example, when we were working on Wii Sports, Americans kept telling me that there was no way that games this simple would sell in the States. When Wii Sports finally went on sale though, the games included appeared to have even stronger appeal in the US than they did in Japan. When you see a phenomenon like that occur right in front of you, you start to see that there really isn’t any difference in what Asians or what Westerners find enjoyable.”

Global Markets as The Next Casual Gaming-sized Phenomena

September 7th, 2009

(This is another canned GameSetWatch column, I hope you enjoy.)

If 10 year product life cycles are anything to go by, then we’re perhaps a third of the way through this most recent generation of consoles. Over the past several years we’ve seen an unprecedented turning point for the industry in the form of audience expansion through the advent of casual gaming. While casual gaming will no doubt continue to embed itself as a norm of this industry, enjoying the many fruits of its labours, we can already see the swell forming for the next phenomena to succeed casual gaming and that is expansion to global audiences.

The Global Medium

Video games are hardly a global medium. Japan, America and “Europe” (includes Australia and New Zealand); the three regions where video games are most prominent in terms of shared distribution, only account for roughly 20% of the global population. Even between these divisions there remains a large disparity in available software. As an Australian player I cannot legitimately purchase PSone classics such as Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil or Spyro the Dragon through the Playstation Network. As an American player, perhaps you don’t know very much about the classic Enix RPG Terrinigma? Nay we dare discuss Japan.

The other collective 70-80% of global population have their own individual market situations. Often the means to acquire games in such regions are more complex (although not necessarily illegal, as one might assume), shifting the market in multiple, intertwining ways. Despite the natural complications, games are often no less prominent and successful in such countries, even though software distribution is rather limited, particularly of the home consoles.

So then; the Difference

What separates a China, Korea or India from becoming a Japan, America or Europe in many cases is systems of trade and systems of localization which are much narrower. Although there is a degree of generalization (comes with the territory) the 70-80% figure can be divided into two groups which I have suitably dubbed “enclosed markets” and “one-way street markets”.

sim-city-world

China and Korea (both separate and as a joint unity) represent the former (“enclosed markets”) very well. Both countries enjoy rich game industries which can be segregated in several components; the burgeoning development industry from the mainland, rampid piracy and importation of mostly western or Japanese product from neighbouring areas (ie. Hong Kong, Taiwan) and legal consoles and software (ie. iQue, DS Lite, Wii(Korea only)). The legal, mostly online-based industry lives off the pay-per-play/pay-for-necessity model and is a thriving market. With all of the illegal stuff being detached from the mainland (ie. most of what is pirated isn’t legally available anyways) and everything legal predominately existing only in China or Korea, the Chinese and Korean games markets are in this case self-sustaining.

Unlike the enclosed markets, many of the countries that would fall into the “one-way street market” category have little or no industry of their own. Whatever industry is present usually develops for the web. Common sense given development kits are tough to come by. Jamaica embodies these characteristics. As such, there is no recognised games industry in Jamaica and local distribution is either weak or non-existent. Never ones to let down though, keen Jamaican gamers import their games and consoles either from local import vendors or through the internet. Further, enthusiastic players and community leaders in the capital Kingston will pool together their resources to form community “arcades”. In these “arcades” players can pay to play the latest games, only a couple of months (or less) after the North American street dates. So, in contrast, one-way street markets have relatively small industries of their own and rely wholly on distribution from the outside.

Fixing This “Problem”

Everything I’ve just explained shouldn’t be treated as a “problem” or “issue”, because the reality is that there will never be such a thing as a “total” global market, and nor should we believe otherwise. Games are simply product after all, and product regulation varies per country, per culture. Games are also very subjective things and as people who live in culture which shapes our sensibilities, not every game is suitable for every market or every person. The success of Madden in the UK and Australia is indicative enough of that!

Instead, it’s all about access and distribution. There’s nothing that says players in Russia pirate video games simply because they’re Russian. Rather, there is no distribution model in place which satisfies the perception of value for Russian players. Further, illegal means can give access to certain content, but not all of it. If you provide people with a reasonable deal, there’s no reason for them to turn it down. The reasonable deal obviously must adhere to the cultural norms of the respective societies which is what will shape the consideration sets of the publishers of today and the future.

Old News

Reading this far you might be forgiven into thinking this is all rather current, which is to say that it isn’t! Global expansion is old news and has been quietly developing since the start of the industry. The same countries listed as examples were acquiring games, just as they do now, 15-20 years ago through similar, if not the same means. With this said though the industry is now the largest of all forms of entertainment and distribution continues to lose physicality, ensuring that major strides are all but imminent. The following initiatives are good examples of this;

In April Sony announced that it would be releasing six to seven new titles developed specially for an Indian market in partnership with local developers. On May 25th, Brazil released their own home console Zeebo, created for developing counties and soon to be exported elsewhere. Back in 2006 Nintendo opened a new Korean subsidiary with the DS Lite and Wii releasing in the respective years that followed – both consoles have seen significant success since.

Wishful Thinking?

There are two key factors that are and will continue to affect the global expansion of the video game industry in forthcoming decades. Those being the newfound modernization of countries such as China and India and the continual success and pervasiveness of the video game industry.

As suggested, the internet is a major contributor to the latter. Physical distribution, shipping and additional expenditure that comes with it can be completely avoided through distribution platforms which run over the internet. Every country that is able, already acquires games through the internet, so for publishers it’s only a matter of value proposition. The same can be said for development; the internet creates a viable market place for developers such as the few in Jamaica.

The tools are therefore already in place, with further advancements (such as streaming gameplay) on their way. The key problem then is having someone set up a system of access which provides attractive content at a good price point through a viable means. It’s not particularly easy to do in an industry with multiple consoles, established distribution streams and individual markets, but it’s worth considering. At least, that’s my prediction of where global distribution is heading.

Posted in Culture | Comments (0)
Tags: buying games, casual gaming

Super Mario Galaxy Observations #3 – Representation of Boss Battles

September 5th, 2009

mario-galaxy-bowser

Initially I disliked the boss battles with Bowser in Super Mario Galaxy. To be honest, I didn’t really understand them, but after completing the game with 121 at the helm – and many a Bowser toppled – I think I finally get it.

Nintendo designs the levels of their primary franchises (Mario, Metroid, Zelda) in the same formulaic fashion. A dungeon, sector or stage is a training ground for a newly acquired ability. In Metroid and Zelda it’s often a little more elaborate with frequent folded game design – but overall the structure is the same amongst all three franchises. The boss battles therefore are the exams. They test all facets of your skills just learnt. For example, a boss battle centered around the hookshot would focus on both the hookshot’s ability to draw items closer as well as its ability to cling Link to certain meshes.

Mario doesn’t gain permanent abilities or devices throughout his adventures hence the battles in the Mario games focus on elements of the central game mechanics, typically jump. In Super Mario Bros. the primary means for defeating King Koopa (as he was known back then) was to jump over him; jump was the game’s most prominent feature, the base of the series, one could say. In Super Mario World Mario had to grab and throw Mecha-Koopas at Bower’s Clown Car; grabbing and throwing was a significant new mechanic to the game. In Super Mario 64 Mario twirled Bowser around by his tail; this accentuated the new analogue stick control.

In Mario Galaxy, Bowser runs about a spherical planet from one side to the other. As with all the other examples listed, this demonstrates the new spherical planet gameplay. The repetition of these boss battles, with the exception of Super Mario World, further emphasizes the core mechanics of the game whilst making minor alterations and additions along the way.

I know it’s common sense, but these kinds of observations live in the subconscious part of my brain, so sometimes it makes me feel smart digging it out from there.

Additional Readings

Iwata Asks – Mario Galaxy

Posted in Game Discussion | Comments (3)
Tags: super mario galaxy

« Older Entries

Newer Entries »