| Discussion
Developers Roundtable:
The Future of Simulations - Part 1
After the 2005 E3Expo we ran a series
of discussions (linked on our homepage) on The
Future of Simulations where we asked the SimHQ Staff
for their thoughts on the state of the simulations industry.
We'll now follow-up those discussions from the developers
point of view. As a reference, you should also read this SimHQ
2000 two-part interview series available in .pdf here
and here
to see the PC simulation industry's leaders point-of-view
from five years ago.
Our Panel of Participants
SimHQ: We would like to
thank all of you for your participation in this round table
discussion. For those of you that are not familiar with the
format let me explain. Over the next few days we will ask
you a series of questions concerning the future of simulations.
Please answer these as candidly as you can. Don’t feel
compelled to answer all of the questions; some may not apply
to your particular field or you may be compelled not to answer
due to contractual agreements. We understand that and are
happy with any answers that you can provide. This discussion
will center upon several topics to include nontraditional
gaming platforms (read consoles), alternate methods of receiving
a product and the overall potential of simulations to remain
viable in the ever competitive (and contracting) world of
PC gaming.
Our first set of questions will
concern product development and marketing. Typically we hear
about scalability within the same product. Will that trend
continue or do you foresee a time when we'll have multiple
categories for the same product? For example, a high-fidelity
sim and a casual gamer sim.
Product Development and Marketing
David
(Matrix Games): According to marketing doctrine the inevitable
life cycle of a product is to break it into more fragments.
This will eventually hold true for flight sims. More importantly
it is already going on, there are plenty of first person shooters
or first person simulations that are laughable in scale compared
to the more complex flight sims, such as IL-2. These titles
typically are low budget at this stage, since they are less
complex. It is important to note, however, that this process
of fragmentation is being slowed by the fact that massive
flight sims are so much work that creating scalability is
a relatively minor addition. I believe to some degree scalability
will be a part of any successful complex flight sim, else
the genre would be prohibiting new players. So, yes, multiple
categories are inevitable but “massive” flight sims
will always have some degree of scalability.
Chris
(Lead Pursuit): There shouldn’t really be a reason
for any difference. The ideal product should engage as many
enthusiasts as it can, at whatever skill level. Of course,
this is difficult to achieve because of resources and time.
In fact, the greatest and most difficult challenge for developers
is making the simulation as accessible as possible. Clear
understanding — the necessity for appealing to the casual
gamer — is vital. Achieving that is difficult.
Martin
(Battlefront): A high-fidelity sim is more than the sum
of a few tweaked realism settings. A good casual sim and a
good high-fidelity sim should normally mean that different
design concepts are applied from the ground up. Notice that
I said “good”.
But of
course when you ask if the trend will continue, then the answer
is “probably yes”. The reason being economics...
the sim market is small enough already without breaking it
further apart into segments, and especially mainstream publishers
need to make a sim appealing to as wide an audience as possible
to keep even a glimpse of hope of making a profit of it. Notice
that I said “mainstream publishers”. Battlefront
isn’t one...
Rick
(XSI): I really believe it all depends on what your markets
desires are, as many of these flight simulations are aimed
at a wide variety of interests. It’s a brave new world
out there, and the gaming markets are constantly adjusting
to meet the predictable requirements of flight sim consumers.
I do believe though that flight sim developers will always
need to continuously embrace and support their products scalability
options, hardcore or not…whether that includes the accessibility
of a pop-up manual during flight, or a co-pilot who takes
you through the various training missions and exercises…other
available options that are usually standard in most sims would
continue to include scalable flight models, the use of unlimited
fuel, ammo and weapons if needed, and the addition of an all-inclusive
expanding tutorial with the modular sims. We should also look
into introducing various teaching programs that may help to
entice the newer recruits in this market, and bridge the gap
between the learning curve. One noteworthy item that new simmers
need to also recognize is, if your planning to purchase a
high fidelity flight sim for the PC, you should definitely
make the effort to prime yourself with the necessary time
needed to get the very most out of your flight sim experience.
 Julian
(XSI): I don’t think the high-fidelity market is
big enough to cater to exclusively. Unfortunately this in
many cases has led to developers/publishers ignoring them
completely and concentrating on the casual market completely.
With Fighter Ops our main goal is the high fidelity market,
but we do realize that for us to be successful we need to
have scalability. In that regard I guess we are approaching
this from the opposite end to many other developers, we are
aiming to please the most demanding market first, then add
in the scalability for the casual gamer. One of the things
that has annoyed me the most in the past, and I guess one
of the big reasons we started the Fighter Ops project, is
the comment that the hardcore crowd, or the people who fly
in online squadrons or people who build home cockpits are
not big enough to worry about. Sure I agree that you will
make more money by selling to the casual gamer who purchases
a simulator off the shelf, plays with it for a few months
and moves on to the next thing, however really if you are
in the flight simulation business solely to make money, you’d
have to seriously consider your choice of genre and platform.
The heart and soul of the flight sim community, IMHO, is the
guy who flies online every week with an established squadron,
he’s built his own cockpit, yeah they are the minority
(although I think there are many more of these people than
some companies believe), but they are the guys who purchase
every flight sim that ever gets released, they are the guys
who stick with us year after year. Catering for the casual
market is the easiest part, and I think too often developers
(albeit often forced by publishers) take the easy route and
use the excuse that the market isn’t big enough to worry
about.
Nils
(eSim Games): If a simulation game's prime development
goal is entertainment, then scalability is sufficient to address
the different expectations of different consumer groups.
What
is needed in our case, Steel Beasts, is what marketing theory
calls "product variation." It is not always possible
to meet both the demands for some serious training value and
great entertainment in good compromise. This means however
that a developer actually CAN cater to different markets.
For a battle simulation that deals with contemporary armored
vehicles this is possible. Within limits, that seems to be
the case for some flight simulations as well. But not every
simulation title is suited or even targeted for a training/educational
purpose.
Go
To Page 2
Click
here to go to top of this page.
Copyright 2008, SimHQ.com. All Rights Reserved. Contact the webmaster. |
