[mr.miyagi]

The Future Evolution of Games: Dominance

Is the games industry headed the way of Hollywood, with only a few major film studios?

As we can see with the overwhelming dominance of Microsoft on the operating system market, it’s the big boys who hold the reins. Similarly, there are several megalomaniacal software giants in the games industry who have considerable authority.
Take EA Games as a case study. EA made their debut approximately a decade ago, and since then have grown inexorably larger with every passing year. Thanks to some successful early titles, EA’s financial supremacy allowed them to obtain numerous official licenses (including: FIFA, UEFA, NASCAR, F1, NHL, PGA, NFL, Madden, NCAA, NBA, MVP and various others), which in turn generated more income. Now EA are buying out and swallowing up smaller companies to facilitate the creation of even more games.
Such formidable powerhouses as EA have considerable influence over the gaming industry, and due to their preponderance of workers and fiscal power can set extremely high standards. The problem is, they can also afford to dogmatically shape titles and games the way they choose, imposing a certain amount of prosaic uniformity upon their work. Marek weighs up the pros and cons.

Dominance by huge companies can easily lead to less originality in games, as creating innovative things can be extremely high risk in the gaming business. But the one-sided orientation of huge corporations to proven concepts supported by strong licenses behind it may still leave some space for independent developers to eventually come up with something totally new that people would really want to play.
Marek conjectures an excellent notion, that EA’s uniformity, rather than standardising games in general, will actually clear an open space for smaller developers to pitch their more inventive wares. Consumers who are bored of conformist commercial offerings will eventually be more inclined to try something different. And despite the financial obstacles faced by independent developers, Antony is confident that creativity will not be snuffed out entirely.

There will always be mavericks and loners working outside the system, no matter how Draconian the system may be. Lack of backing or facilities doesn't stop such people, and as necessity is the mother of invention, such creators are also often the greatest innovators. (Antony Johnston)

It is a cheerful prospect to consider, that there will always be rebels of the system. Bold knights valiantly assaulting the orthodox conventions of the insatiably greedy dragons. People who have the gumption to make games for sheer love of their subject matter, and who have more noble aims at heart than avaricious gluttony. While these heroic crusaders are still at large then all is not lost.
Industrial dominance is certainly beneficial in improving and evolving the quality of titles, which must be given due respect. But the general stubborn reticence to innovate is the unfortunate drawback in this situation. However, so long as the entire industry isn’t eventually controlled by just a few megalithic corporations who each have predisposed digital ideologies, then we can be assured of at least a reasonable degree of variety and creativity in future games.
cry: cuss: mad: hake: