3 ms·

> It seems pretty clear to me that in the video games industry (and pretty much any 'art' industry for that matter) great results are driven by singular, great

> It seems pretty clear to me that in the video games industry (and pretty much any 'art' industry for that matter) great results are driven by singular, great people. I can assure you from working inside said industry that this is not often the case, if ever. Edit to add: great results are driven by great teams.

fnordpiglet 4y ago
I agree. Producers and designers that frontline a successful project get the visibility but they have to be backed by highly effective teams of equally gifted folks that collaborate effectively. I don’t think this is different for any complex human endeavor. Often times the front liner isn’t the one who built the team - there’s often an anchor person more in the middle of the project that attracts talent and creates the atmosphere of collegial collaboration. Smart front liners bring those folks along to the next projects. From the article it sounds like that was Starfield, not 76, which is probably why it was so miserable.
- swivelmaster 4y ago
  As soon as a project is known internally as the one the B team was assigned to because all the “favorite” people went to the “better” project, it’s basically doomed. This has happened so many times, the game industry has enough people who should know better, and yet…
uejfiweun 4y ago
That's a totally fair point, and I completely agree. I should have clarified this in my original post. If you're passionate about games, but nobody wants to work with you, then that passion won't permeate throughout the development team. All these gaming visionaries tend to have the gift of extreme charisma and strong passion for games - you need both IMO to make a great result. You may have a great idea, but you need to get people fired up about it too and articulate it in a way that can be understood.
- meheleventyone 4y ago
  Even still this isn’t correct, even building a great team isn’t the work of one person and plenty of great games are built by teams lead by people who don’t get press as visionaries. You’re falling for marketing, both personal (where extreme charisma does help) and company lead where wheeling out a famous name sells units. Which isn’t to say famous people are all rubbish but that the hype and the reality are very different to one another.
OrderlyTiamat 4y ago
This sounds just like the great man theory in history [1]. I think we should be wary when a lot is attributed to a single person whatever the context may be: there are always people "behind the stage" as it were, without whom the show doesn't start. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory

fnordpiglet 4y ago

I agree. Producers and designers that frontline a successful project get the visibility but they have to be backed by highly effective teams of equally gifted folks that collaborate effectively. I don’t think this is different for any complex human endeavor. Often times the front liner isn’t the one who built the team - there’s often an anchor person more in the middle of the project that attracts talent and creates the atmosphere of collegial collaboration. Smart front liners bring those folks along to the next projects. From the article it sounds like that was Starfield, not 76, which is probably why it was so miserable.

swivelmaster 4y ago
As soon as a project is known internally as the one the B team was assigned to because all the “favorite” people went to the “better” project, it’s basically doomed. This has happened so many times, the game industry has enough people who should know better, and yet…

uejfiweun 4y ago

That's a totally fair point, and I completely agree. I should have clarified this in my original post. If you're passionate about games, but nobody wants to work with you, then that passion won't permeate throughout the development team. All these gaming visionaries tend to have the gift of extreme charisma and strong passion for games - you need both IMO to make a great result. You may have a great idea, but you need to get people fired up about it too and articulate it in a way that can be understood.

meheleventyone 4y ago
Even still this isn’t correct, even building a great team isn’t the work of one person and plenty of great games are built by teams lead by people who don’t get press as visionaries. You’re falling for marketing, both personal (where extreme charisma does help) and company lead where wheeling out a famous name sells units. Which isn’t to say famous people are all rubbish but that the hype and the reality are very different to one another.

OrderlyTiamat 4y ago

This sounds just like the great man theory in history [1]. I think we should be wary when a lot is attributed to a single person whatever the context may be: there are always people "behind the stage" as it were, without whom the show doesn't start. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_man_theory