John Kirk – Head of Business Partnership and Knowledge Transfer, Birmingham City University (Chair)
Pete O’ Donell - Director, Acquisitions and Developer Relations, Codemasters
Pip Piper - Chair, Producers Forum
Jamie Sefton - Sector Manager, Game Republic
Alice Taylor - Commissioning Editor, Education, Channel 4
Alex Chapman - Sheridans Solicitors
JK: What does the changing digital landscape mean for content producers? Should it be the platform or the idea itself that influences creative choices?
JS: Creative people will always come up with ideas but it’s also the case that new technology inspires creative people. The iPhone is just one example of how content can be distributed. Today, there are so many distribution methods that you really have to know your market and choose the most appropriate platform depending on the audience of game players. The fact that there are so many choices is a good thing, though; everyone from individuals to massive companies are using digital distribution. Local companies self-distributing is a good thing, as it means they maintain the IP and keep the wealth in the region.
AC: The first game I worked on was a 7-a-side football game, as the technology only allowed for 7 players. I then moved on to an 11-a-side football game for the same reason, and so on. Platform advancements allow developers to go on to make more advanced games. The Wii is a revolutionary new platform, which has led to Microsoft and Sony embracing motion control, and now something like a quarter to a half of games produced will be motion control: that is platform dictating content. Ideas come when the creative people bring the ideas that maximise the technology of the platform. Games on the market today are working to the restrictions of the technology and making the best games possible out of it. Games that only require 32K of memory, which is not substantial at all, can still go on to become seminal games and that’s thanks to the creativity. Pete's biggest job is to find these creative people, and that's what the game industry needs to work on. As Lord Putnam says, when more and more films are increasingly being made, the desire is for something smaller – that theory can be translated to the medium of game, where smaller but still creatively rich games find an audience.
PO’D: I think it boils down to choice. You can make a download only game, an iPhone game, there are limitless styles and types of game that producers can make today. One possible problem is that the current setup is that there are distinct types of producers who only focus on one type of game or platform. This means there’s very little communication and producers being set in their ways can limit collaboration. Digital platforms create the choice and opportunities that allow people to work together. It will be interesting to see what impact social networks have on gaming: could Facebook be the new Xbox 360?
AT: I agree, there’s a bigger spectrum now. How, if you have an idea and you don't have a platform speciality, can you make cross-media content? A lot of our projects have been smaller enterprises, with one game made by a specialist in small Flash games. I think you have to look at the content of the game and what suits. For example, we have a game coming out that looks at self-esteem and eating disorders, and this is web-based because it’s aimed at teenagers.
JK – What are the success factors for those working in cross-media?
AC: Opportunities are key. I recently worked with developers coming to the end of a big budget game, on which the company owned the IP, and they got chatting to a TV company to find the two could work together. The production company wanted to pitch something to the BBC, and this game allowed them a new platform to pitch. It was a war game and so hit the male demographic they were chasing, and so that was a great opportunity fulfilled.
AT: Yes, getting chatting is the key!
JS: Talking to each other and working on projects is very important. It’s the language which is different across mediums, not the ideas themselves and the potential of those ideas. Creating partnerships and collaborating is a very valid thing to do.
JK: Is that something you think is working in the West Midlands?
PP: I think it is working and has the potential to work even more so. I work with so many different creative people. It's always about the story first, but then questioning what the opportunities are and how can I expand a project via different platforms, that entrepreneurial side. Then again, I will make critical choices with colleagues to make films that might not make money, but on other days I'll get out of bed and make the conscious decision to make films that will. The key is getting people together and letting the ideas evolve, so you can find that balance.
PO’D: I’ve seen the benefits of collaboration around the world, and I’m really keen on getting a games network going within the West Midlands. With the amount of creative people and the potential for partnerships, it’s a shame there is no games network already in existence.
JK: How easy is it for someone in one medium to move to another?
PP: You have to open up networks and decide the best models for future projects.
AT: Don’t get tied up – experiment. People who are successful know their medium but then there are so many opportunities and ways to do business outside that one medium. The Internet is global so any sense of territory and geography go straight out the window and immediately opens up the audience. Obscurity is what you should fear.
Audience member: Do you see a market/commercial model for educational games being used outside of entertainment, or a time when games companies might see a profit in educational games?
AC: It's already there. Civilisation 2, for example, is a very addictive and very educational game. Sim City is another. Educational games are already here but they’re just not known as educational games, and these are games bought for kids which do make money.
AT: We readily commission games that have an element of social or historical comment. Over ½ million users of our game about genetics and DNA were UK teenagers.
JS: We’re holding an event that looks at fitness and health
games. By using Wii Fit as a model, seeing how huge that has become, you can tighten the scope into something educational.
PO’D: My personal opinion is that if you keep it fun, kids will learn more. Games like Medal of Honour are an example of learning by stealth. There’s one level that is so extreme that it hopefully opens peoples eyes up and motivates them to learn more about the history. WWII games might open the door to something like 5 or 10% of an audience who will go on to learn and read about these topics, so there’s certainly potential for more.
JS: Then you think would there be an audience for a game centred on the Holocaust? Would this cheapen history or could it be an educational opportunity?
AT: It’s the theory of fun – when you're having fun, you're learning. Games offer brain rewards for learning. 'Game' as a definition can be frowned upon in a subject matter like that, but something like 'The Holocaust Puzzle' might engage people and open up the audience.
Audience member: I’m currently developing a game aimed at young girls. What are your thoughts on the profitability and potential for female game audiences? Do Channel 4 support games development targeted at under 16s?
AT: Channel 4 content is targeted at 16 plus, with education going down to 14+ but there are currently discussions about going younger. As for women and girls in games, there’s a big audience of 6-11 year olds and teenagers. You have to pick your platform or console carefully, depending on the content and genre of the game. The audience for shooters is only 12% girls, whereas music is more like 80%. Game companies generally target boys but, with multiple platforms and multiple genres, there is great potential.
JK: Is money one of the key challenges for the game industry?
JS: There are talks of further tax breaks for the game industry, which means the industry is maybe – and finally - being looked at in same way as the film industry. Game companies in other countries, such as Canada, have bigger tax breaks and, therefore, better wages. Funding and finance is a major issue, especially for those companies that self-publish – there’s the issue of where is the money coming from? The other main issue is talent potential and holding on to the best people. It could help if there were better links between universities. This is a UK-wide problem and not regional specific.
AC: Two months ago I wrote an open letter regarding tax breaks, supported by Screen WM, that was published. To summarise: around 1/3 of staff costs in Canada are subsidised, meaning the cost of making games is substantially less. Despite that, the UK is still strong – there is the risk of it becoming weaker but we genuinely have the greatest level of talent in this country.
AT: Remember, Grand Theft Auto is British…
AC: The complaint the UK industry has is there are companies in the USA on the doorstep of publishers, which ultimately helps them. Game production is traditionally funded by publishers. Lord Putnam discussed three sections in creating a final successful product: finance, distribution, talent. Finance is still the problem and always has been – there is no private equity to invest in games. That's where we need to put a lot of work, into educating financiers – that's the main lesson we can learn from the film industry. The talent is there, and distribution is opened up now.
AT: The industry was disc-based only five years ago, and that’s changed massively.
AC: The average UK film costs £750,000 to £2million to produce, without distribution. Games cost significantly less, especially DS games, and yet the turnover is huge.
JS: People still want big blockbusters but the game industry has a thriving indie scene now. There are games being made by a handful of people; it’s almost like a regression into the bedroom programming era, but instead of creating tapes it's digital distribution. Seeing innovation coming from this indie sector is a fantastic thing.
PO’D: Back 15 years ago when Sonic came out, it would have cost £250,000 to make and ended up selling huge amount of units costing £35 each. Today, games are costing way more with shorter turnaround.
JS: This is why the iPhone represents such a major shift, with developers getting a cheque every month for games featured and downloaded. This can only encourage involvement in games.
PO’D: On the day BBC iPlayer launcher, the demand was so great that the site nearly crashed. This immediate success shows there’s a demand for greater access. The shift will continue, with games on demand coming soon – some of which will be 25GB of info sent to the user. Download times need to be smaller for games of this size to reach their audience. The digital revolution is happening; we just need to move faster and encourage people to move faster to keep up with the technology.
PP: In 20 years time, it’s predicted there will be a group of people emerging who are deliberately choosing not to connect with technology.
AC: There is a danger of disenfranchisement by the evolution and creation of new technology. If content is only available to certain people, with certain technology or certain amount of memory, marginalisation will occur. The great thing about the Internet is that there’s money to be made out of smaller games and widgets or Flash games. The games industry is interested in investing in these, and so there’s still that need for simplicity.
P'OD: There was a recent survey that deduced the majority of over-60s would not be interested in receiving free internet. Now that’s what I call ‘anti-social networking’.