Where music has been, games are going.

by noodles on Friday, October 16th, 2009 at 15:59 - Comments: 0

We've all heard the words "They were better before". It usually refers to a band that's been around the general circulation of records for a few years. The theory being that when the band or artist gained the attention of a broader audience the record-company put more production and promotion into the development of further songs from that artist. This usually goes hand-in-hand with the term "sold out", accusing the musicians of chasing the all-might-dollar over "keepin' it real". The latter usually involves scraping by on a day-to-day basis not knowing where the next paycheck is coming from and playing where you're offered, making the artists go to the people, instead of the more popular version of the people going to the audience. To clarify, I'm talking about fans having to pick between not seeing the performance and, not only, coughing up an arm and a leg for tickets, but also to get to the venue, and perhaps even find accommodations near the event. Whereas the other version, known as the "band on a budget"-approach, involves - sometimes metaphorically, sometimes literally - a band living out of their van, going from gig to gig to earn enough money to put gas in the tank and food in their bellies.
OK, those are somewhat extreme sides of the same spectrum, but you get the point.
When they reach a more wide-spread fame they adjust and "evolve" to make their music fit a broader audience. Why? Because they wish to reach more people and their label requires it to throw more money their way. This too is a hand-in-hand thing. If the band pleases a broad range of fans then the label has more reason to swing their economics in that bands direction.
A great example of how this works is usually found in the rock and/or metal genre. Partially because a pop-, electro- or hip-hop-artist generally don't stray too far from their genre. But listening to a recent, say, KoRn-album and compare it one of their earliest releases, it's like it's not the same band. I'm not saying that one is better than the other, I'm just saying that their "sound" has "evolved". KoRn, along with icons like Metallica, are probably the ones most often being accused of "selling out", making more profitable and/or marketable songs. I believe a phrase used is "producing singles".

So what's with all the theorizing about music? Well, here's the thing:
This is happening in video and computer games today as well. I believe the best example would have to be the Resident Evil-series. That's "Biohazard" for you original-title-freaks. What started out as genre-creating exclusive for the Playstation is today an action game on several platforms. How did we go from Resident Evil to Resident Evil 5? Originally being release in a shifty time-period, where hard games are crossing over from being something that lasts, and give you something to do, to just being too difficult and not worth the effort. The effect of this was that the general difficulty of games have been toned down to a not-so-frustrating level. Why has this happened? It boils down to "accessibility". If a game is easier it means it won't scare away potential customers that would otherwise dismiss it as an experience not worth undergoing. And if more people buy a game, that means that the publishers and developers/producers make more money. In comparison to the music industry, in this case the "record label" would be the publisher and the "artist" would be the developers/producers.

Let's play with the thought.
A game, let's call it Zombies Ate My Mexicano, is produced by Zombie Studios and pitched in such a way that the publisher Wide Spread Inc. picks it up for distribution. The game sells fairly. Out of an estimated market of 1 million people, gamers in the distribution-region that potentially would by a zombie-game, 20% pick it up. No matter if the game got good reviews or not, let's pretend the title made a profit. Now the "label" is thinking "We could sell more of this stuff, but we need to tweak it so that 10% more of the market picks it up". The "artist", celebrating that they made a profit from their title, is already planning the next installment, since the first one sold acceptably well. They get a ring from the publisher.
"Hey Craig, congratulations on your game selling."
"Thanks Corey, we're already working on the sequel: 'Zombies Ate My Mexicano 2: Hell Is A Daily Destination'"
"Yeah, about that: We need you to include pink little bunnies."
"Pink little bunnies?"
"Yeah, our research show that this would widen the receptive audience by about 40%."
Now Zombie Studios have to make a choice. Find another publisher that doesn't require pink bunnies, or make the change and keep the already established relationship with a publisher.
The title is made and the cycle repeats. Soon enough, the game has gone from being about zombies eating Mexicans to vampire-Eskimos clubbing baby seals*.

I'm not saying this is how it actually happens, but as a thought-experiment and a metaphor it serves its purpose. The reason why higher integers in a series don't resemble the lower ones is evolution. The developer doesn't want to make the same game again, they want to make it better, with more content.
OK, there are those that just want to cash in by creating small, crappy, low-quality titles at a very high pace that, for some reason, sells. Just look at the generic musical artists out there, same thing. A certain type of music is selling abnormally well at a certain time, you can bet that there are new artist going up on stage, coming straight out of the artist-factory. The ones that do care about their products however, need to go through this process, of further developing, tweaking and adjusting. Some choose to do entirely their own thing, making enough money on just that to secure future investments, but others need to give the market what the market wants. Or they just choose to do so because that's were the money is.

I do believe I can squeeze a World of Warcraft-reference in here: WoW has undergone a multitude of changes since it's launched. And being involved in gaming, how can you not have heard of someone quitting because of a change made in an update or the similar? Yet, the subscribers continue to grow, meaning that more new people are signing up than people putting it down. Why? Because their goal is to make it accessible to anyone, anytime, anywhere. This is not done by "keepin' it real", this is done by "sellin' out". KoRn may not sound exactly like they did on their first album, but they're still making music and they're, allegedly, trying to keep their "core-fans". Blizzard, the people behind WoW, is still serving Warcraft, and they're making new content based on the lore that they created. Even if the game doesn't feel or act like it did when the servers first opened, they too claim that they try and look after their "core-fans". But both KoRn and Blizzard are asking the same question at the marketing-meeting: How do we reach more people and make them buy out stuff?


The video game industry are doing exactly what the music industry has been doing for years: Finding out what sells and then producing it. Artists and developers have to pick between falling in line and be accused of "sellin' out", or trying to make it on their own and "keep it real".

Me? I'd play the worlds smallest violin for you and laugh my ass off all the way to the bank.

* On an entirely different note: Check out the game The Seal Hunter.

tags: resident evil music industry zombie korn video games