Today, February 6th, 2013 - David Cage gave a speech at the 2013 Dice Summit. I was not present for the speech. I would also like to preface this response with the fact that I have played none of his games. The article where I received a paraphrasing of Cage's speech can be found at this
link.
There are some points where I believe Cage is correct in his assessment and reasoning. There are other where I believe that he is misguided. That is not to say that his opinions are wrong, or invalid. I probably just done see the issues from the same perspective that Cage does. In his speech, I have been lead to understand that he gave 9 things that he feels that our industry needs to change. I would like to address each one and give my perspective on each.
1. Cage says we should "make games for all audiences:
I can agree with this idea if I am interpreting it the way I believe he means it. If Cage means that we should makes games that adults can enjoy without compromising what we love about the industry. What I hope he does not mean is the over-simplification of games that are meant for specific audiences. To be clear I will give the example of Dragon Age. I choose this game because it is the freshest example in my mind. The reason that I loved Dragon Age: Origins(DAO) was because it was a game filled with things that I needed to learn. The game could be played with a surface understanding of the games combat and battle systems. However, my enjoyment and ultimate love for the game came on my third play-through when I had fully learned all that that game had to offer as far as combat and combat systems were concerned. Dragon Age 2, however, attempted to "streamline" much of the combat and the systems therein. Some people loved it. I hated it. Now that is my opinion. I would elaborate on that point but that is not the purpose of this post. There are many of BioWare's fans who share my sentiment of the second entry in the Dragon Age series. I hope that this is not what Cage meant by making games for all audiences.
2. We must change paradigms:
With this point I can agree as well. As an industry, we need more ideas than a main character with a gun. I disagree with where he places the blame. I do not believe that it is the game designers that are responsible with our gun fetish within the industry. Way back when, there used to be many games and paradigms. Then Doom happened and there were gun games all over the place. Suddenly all those great gaming ideas and paradigms are swept to the side to make shelf space for something that is going to make a company some major cash. I am sure that game designers would take many risks in making different and innovative games, but they also have families and mouths to feed. Since development and the costs of doing business have risen tremendously you need the backing of major companies to even get a product to the market. Digital distribution and indie games are working to change the face of our industry. To Cage I say be patient. Indie may be here to save the day.
3. The importance of meaning:
I completely agree. Rarely do I play a game that has a message, or something of note to say. I believe that this is where games fall short of being called art. Another argument for another time perhaps. That is not to say that games with messages do not exist. A few come to mind, but not enough.
4. Become Accessible:
Yet another good point. No comment.
5. Bring other talents on board:
There are a few examples of games diving into the talent pools of Hollywood Games like The Force Unleashed, Mass Effect, and various Elder Scrolls games come to mind. However, I do not believe that we need Hollywood or Motown (or some other musically renowned city. I could not think of others) to make our games better. The industry already has a wealth of actors and creative people to pull from. The problem is that our industry is not a cauldron of creation. If we allow our creator to create, our industry will soar to new heights.
6. Need to establish new relationships with Hollywood:
I have already said my piece on Hollywood. Although we are working with many talents from the film mediums. And not just the actors. Guillermo Del Toro is currently looking for a new home for a game he is creating, is he not? An academy award winning writer and director wrote the script for Modern Warfare 3. Just saying.
7. Changing our relationship with censorship:
I see the issue that cage has with censorship. On the other hand, another reason that censorship plays a role in what developers would like to create is because they need to sell their product on store shelves. I would not blame all of the censorship issues on 'what you can and cannot do in a game' and also look to the point that you need to maintain a certain level of maturity in your game. AO rated games do not sell as well as M rated games.
8. The role of press:
Press is important. Cage's issues lay with the roles of game critics. I can see either side of this point. Game critics are filters and signalers to consumers. In a research project, I tested this idea. In short, I found that game critics only impact a games sales by about +-5%. That is not a huge impact, but it does show that they have some power. I would like to rerun that hypothesis with some better data(EEDAR, I am talking to you), however, I think the results would be about the same. I am not sure what kind of analysis that Cage expects from critics. Feedback, perhaps? Look to your community for that information if that is what you need.
9. The importance of gamers:
Excellent closing point.
I would love the opportunity to sit with David Cage and get some clarification on some of these points. I think me and David see eye to eye on the state of the industry as a whole. Its just the fine details where we differ. If you would like to read my econometrics research project send me an email at CAR52@uakron.edu and I would be glad to send you the PDF. EEDAR?
Message for David Cage:
Dave,
Can I call you Dave? I will be at PAX East this year and would love to buy you a coffee. (Hint Hint, Wink Wink)
Electronic Arts has been in the news very often lately, and not for any good reasons. Their Stock is declining, they are losing equity, every move they make receives backlash from the community, and the latest being this mishap with SimCity. All of these occurrences have happened with very little comments from the senior management of the company. I cannot say if this is because they cannot get in front of these stories and explain themselves, or it they will not come out and address these issues. All I know is what I see and read. What I have seen lately is a company that is blindly making decisions. Are they doing market research with some of these decisions? I believe Electronic Arts is a company trying to guide itself though this extremely tough industry in this even tougher economy. I am not seeing any leadership or accountability. Does Electronic Arts need a change in leadership? If it were my company, I would say, absolutely!
