This is a substantial rewrite of an
earlier post that was much more colorful. This version has about as
much content, but it is also much shorter and less likely to annoy
people.
The subject of this post is in the
nature of a response to various friends of mine who wonder why I do
not work in the glamourous and rewarding field of computer-based
entertainment, e.g. the game industry. These are friends of mine who
wish me well, and have seen others from so-called highend computer
animation go work successfully in that industry. But I don't think
my friends actually understand the game industry very well and maybe
are not aware of some of my goals going forward that inform the
choice of industry to work in, so this post is an effort to thank
them for their suggestion but supply some reasons why it is perhaps
more difficult than they realize or has other issues that argue
against such a move.
First, I think the future of
computer-based entertainment (CBE) is huge, just huge, in terms of
its cultural importance as well as the technical challenges and
opportunities that it presents. And I have no doubt that various
groups are making a vast amount of money in that industry, and will
no doubt make much more in the future. Some of them will.
Second, here are four possible scenarios where I could work in the game industry and be very happy and rewarded. Unfortunately I don't think that any of these are very likely. (a) EA could hire me to be a senior creative vice president at a
modest salary of $500,000 US plus a production R&D budget, (b) I
could be independently wealthy and have my own personal laboratory
and production company working on topics that interest me, (c) I
could be Will Wright, founder of Maxis and creator of SimCity. Mr
Wright gets to do pretty much whatever he wants to do in the game
industry, and I am sure it would be very entertaining and rewarding
to be in his shoes, or (d) I could be a Ken Perlin-like person, who
does not actually have to make any money from the game industry, but
can instead work on ideas that he thinks are important and
interesting and from time-to-time publish these ideas. But Ken is a tenured full professor of computer science at NYU and I am not.
Third, although there has been some
cross-fertilization between so-called high-end computer animation and
the computer based entertainment industries, it is not in general
easy to move between those two. There was a very specific period
when someone from ILM or another perceived to be glamourous sector of
computer animation could talk their way into the game industry. This
was a number of years ago though and that time has mostly passed.
And even when it was going on, it did not work out for a lot of
people, or if it did work out, it no longer does. There are also
some cases of people coming from the game industry and moving into
high-end computer animation (so called, again, I think these terms
are misleading) but again it is not a general rule that such things
are likely to happen.
Fourth, the grass is always greener,
and there are good reasons for this. When you are not in an
industry, it is likely that you do not know what the problems are in
that industry. But every industry has problems and here are a few
that afflict the game industry. (a) The industry is very
competitive, many titles are produced each year but only a few of
them become profitable, similar in many ways to the music industry.
(b) Also similar to the music industry, the money is made in
distribution and production companies only see a major upside if they
have had a hit, (c) The games are financed by advances from the
distribution companies (e.g. an Electronic Arts) which pays for the
production of the game. If the game does not become a hit then the
production company has no money to live on, and must either lay
everyone off, make a deal to do another game again at low or no
profit, or go out of business. Production companies of successful
and interesting games go out of business all the time, every day of
the week. (d) Because of the vast risk associated with doing a game
and the need to sell an idea to a distribution company or otherwise
get financing to create the game, and because game production is both
expensive and difficult, people work hard to reduce risk which
usually means not taking chances. Thus, very few new ideas are
explored in the computer based entertainment industry on a day-to-day
basis by the people working in that side of the industry. There are
people who get to explore these new ideas, but they are special
people and this does not represent something that the great majority
of people who work in that industry get to do. (e) Like all for-profit companies, the computer-based entertainment industry is highly influenced by who it is that traditionally buy their products and their likes and dislikes as those people (or their parents) are, after all, the customer. And the game industry is therefore highly targeted towards boys of certain age groups and the themes that appeal to them. There are some exceptions to this, and there is a lot of discussion about games for girls, games for adults, games for frogs, etc, and this area will evolve, but for the most part we are talking about games for boys here and what it is that boys like to do.
Fifth, it takes time and effort to
establish onesself in any industry, and the computer-based
entertainment industry is no exception. Therefore, if one is going
to put in that effort, it makes sense to be sure that certain
qualities of that industry, sometimes described with phrases such as
"lifestyle" are right for the individual in question. For
example, some industries are located primarily in certain cities, and
therefore an industry may or may not be appropriate based on where
you want to live. And since I am coming from a long-history of
having helped to invent high end computer animation and visual
effects, it makes sense to see if the game industry is any better,
worse or different in some of these areas. Here are just a few of
these so-called lifestyle issues for your consideration: (a) in terms
of stability in comparison to computer animation and visual effects,
if anything the game industry is less stable, (b) in terms of being
able to work on new technologies and explore new ideas, it is not
clear that one industry is any better than another, but possibly the
game industry has a slight edge here, (c) in terms of respect for
experience and issues of ageism, the game industry is if anything
worse than the motion picture industry, (d) in terms of the
intellectual level or sense of humor of the industry and the people
in it, it all depends on where you work and what you are doing, but
the game industry per se is probably not that much better, (e) In
terms of whether I would be able to work on ideas that interest me,
again it depends entirely on the project, your position on that
project, etc.
So, in conclusion, I want to thank my
friends for their suggestions, but I don't think that working in the
computer based entertainment sector would work for me unless I could
somehow engineer a project, job, role or whatever that allowed me to
work on ideas and content of interest to me in a suitable
environment. Otherwise it would just be a waste of my time and I
would be better off trying to establish myself in an industry that
has more stability, works on a higher intellectual level, and which
tries to help the world. The defense industries and the nuclear
weapon industries both come to mind in that regard.
If someone from EA is reading this and
wants me to come on board as a senior creative vice president, I hope
you will not hesitate to pick up the phone and give me a call.
No comments:
Post a Comment