Business of pLAy: Does Lowering Quality Raise Your Company Profile?

The Binary (11/11/11) Edition:

Many studios pay the bills by taking on non-Triple-A license projects. Some studios focus exclusively on these types of projects; others use these to fund internal "pet" (original IP) projects. Unfortuantely, some of these are projects these companies are less-than-thrilled to take on. This makes companies less willing to commit time & resources to complete these projects. That, in turn, leads to a sharp decline in quality. This begs the question: should a company always spend the time and energy required to make top-quality products or is it ok for a company to have a portfolio filled with quickly made, mediocre games?

Some devs think that when it comes to these types of license titles, our industry model naturally skews toward creating mediocre releases.

First of all, each new project is another chance to make money. It seems logical that moving on to new projects as quickly as possible would optimize profitability. (You can’t make anything if you have to lay everyone off or close your doors.) Moreover, some believe having a successful "hit" title is more of a numbers game than anything else.

Second, being forced to slog through creating a game no one on the team cares about can feel like a whole new level of hell. Thus a project's momentum naturally drops off as motivation and morale take a dive.

To top it all off, potential investors and non-gaming decision-makers may be more impressed by a studio with a longer list of titles. These people may lack the ability to judge the difference between mediocre and quality releases. (You can offset this by listing reviewer scores, awards, and reviews next to each title - but they still may not know which of these is more prominent or impressive.)

Knowing all that, why would any studio bother to strive for quality in these projects?

1 - Quality games generate buzz.
I remember reading an article about how the team working on the original Tony Hawk game had unexpectedly turned what could have been another run-of-the-mill license game into a fantastic experience and a successful franchise. I've read similar stories about a handful of surprisingly great movie license games. Creating a high-quality game, especially when it is unexpected, seems to generate a lot of good press.

2 - Quality grows an audience.
I’m enough of an insider that I’ll pass-up any game that sports the moniker of certain lackluster studios. Most people don’t do that – yet. But with games becoming increasingly mainstream, I wouldn’t put it past the public to eventually develop this level of “brand awareness”. After all, Blizzard has been known for taking a really long time to release a game; yet fans knew every game would be high quality, so they forgave the wait and bought the games. Just like companies, players balance where they invest their time & money. The internet has significantly lowered the entry bar for a lot of truly engaging entertainment – most of which is available for free. Players will return to the places, companies, and brands they trust.

3 - Quality attracts quality.
Making great games is why most of us joined this industry. Most devs want to work at a company that makes great games. A company that turns out high-quality games will likely attract a larger pool of higher-quality talent. Mediocrity factories have a higher turnover rate and the talent that stays lose all sense of passion for their work.

Now, I'm not suggesting that a game made to sell cereal bars should be given the same treatment as Call of Duty or Farmville. Fortunately, there are ways to achieve quality and keep the team motivated without breaking the bank or significantly slowing time to release. I’ll cover specific techniques in next week’s edition of "Business of pLAy".