4 ms·

Keita Takahashi famously never even wanted to make another Katamari game after the first ones. Namco had so little faith in the project they dumped it out as a

Keita Takahashi famously never even wanted to make another Katamari game after the first ones. Namco had so little faith in the project they dumped it out as a budget release at the time, thinking it would get swept up in the PS2's shovelware oceans I cannot imagine how crushing that must've been as a creator, though thankfully his game did achieve quite the cult following (and even an eventual Unity re-release on Steam and other platforms) Namco at the time was so surprised by the success of it they immediately requested more Katamari to which he largely declined. Though the later games are still pretty enjoyable

jojobas 3y ago
This is the gist of it - at this point he could have requested royalties and probably would have gotten them. Otherwise he was a salaried designer for a title whose success was improbable. I guess everyone could ask for a "if an idea of mine hits $10M of sales get 0.5%" clause in their contracts with a low risk to the employer, but then it's virtually guaranteed that he was one of dozens whose ideas went into this, 20x0.5% is a lot.
- bombcar 3y ago
  It’s not really low risk to the employer - with all the employees and projects it’s guaranteed to hit and the company has to pay out. Of course, recognizing unexpected success just is what profit sharing is designed to do.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    Well, an individual project doing well doesn't mean the company made a profit.
- Gigachad 3y ago
  As usual, huge profits are made by taking on risk. These publishers are ok to lose money on a bunch of things because it will be paid back on the random unpredictable wins. If everyone requested some term of "if it's successful, I want the profits", then your risk free salary would be reduced.
  - feedsmgmt 3y ago
    When there's extremely abundant capital available the opportunity for the business owners to take that kind of risk is valuable and the creative artist responsible for fulfilling that opportunity deserves a fair equitable share of the revenue that results.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Gigachad 3y ago
      And they are completely free to add whatever terms they want to their employment contract, or to go solo and take all of the risk and all of the profit. What more would you want?
    - jgamedev 3y ago
      Namco didn't have abundant capital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namco#Financial_decline_and_restructuring_(1998%E2%80%932005) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namco#Financial_decline_and_re...
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      When there's abundant capital available then there's still a price for that capital. But that's just "there's money; I should have some", which is understandable, but doesn't have a good enough grounding in reality. More fundamentally: there is a market for talent. If no other artists are willing to work without this benefit then one of two things will happen. Either this benefit will be added to artists' contracts, or the projects won't happen in the first place because they will never make enough money to be worth the investment.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
rendaw 3y ago
What was his basis for rejection? I'd like to imagine he considered the work complete at that point and was rejecting milking the life out of the characters and world. In the unending wash of remakes and unnecessary decade+-later sequels today I sometimes wonder if original creators were facing some monetary hardship and gave in.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  Or they just don't own the IP and the company gets other people to make them?
lynguist 3y ago
Really, was it really seen as shovelware by the publisher? It was heavily promoted on PS2 booths here in Switzerland back when it came out. Katamari and EyeToy were promoted alongside each other as quirky 2000s era aesthetic titles. Somehow I feel like the aesthetics of Satoshi Kon were of the same time and same sensibility. I would also add Studio 4°C to it. Masaaki Yuasa’s Mind Game. Genius Party. In my mind all these Japan things from that era blend together. Kingdom Hearts was also of the same era, and also promoted the same way, but I never played that.
- tetris11 3y ago
  Doesn't Japan tend to get releases from Japanese publishers before the West gets it?
- nemetroid 3y ago
  From what I recall and can find online, the original game was only released in Japan and North America.
  - rwmj 3y ago
    I'm pretty sure this is true. Here in the UK I had to import the US version (should have imported the Japanese version) and region hack the console to play it using one of those slide devices that let you open the CD tray after the game had started.
- Nursie 3y ago
  In Europe we didn't get access to Katamari until the second game, so yes, by then it was comparatively big news and "We Love Katamari" was promoted because Katamari Damacy had done so well in other markets.
  - lynguist 3y ago
    Ah, thanks for the information! You are right.
Tiktaalik 3y ago
> they dumped it out as a budget release at the time I remember buying Katamari Damacy and Gradius V on the same launch day for C$20 each. Incredible value for two insanely great games. Just wild in retrospect.

jojobas 3y ago

This is the gist of it - at this point he could have requested royalties and probably would have gotten them. Otherwise he was a salaried designer for a title whose success was improbable. I guess everyone could ask for a "if an idea of mine hits $10M of sales get 0.5%" clause in their contracts with a low risk to the employer, but then it's virtually guaranteed that he was one of dozens whose ideas went into this, 20x0.5% is a lot.

bombcar 3y ago
It’s not really low risk to the employer - with all the employees and projects it’s guaranteed to hit and the company has to pay out. Of course, recognizing unexpected success just is what profit sharing is designed to do.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  Well, an individual project doing well doesn't mean the company made a profit.
Gigachad 3y ago
As usual, huge profits are made by taking on risk. These publishers are ok to lose money on a bunch of things because it will be paid back on the random unpredictable wins. If everyone requested some term of "if it's successful, I want the profits", then your risk free salary would be reduced.
- feedsmgmt 3y ago
  When there's extremely abundant capital available the opportunity for the business owners to take that kind of risk is valuable and the creative artist responsible for fulfilling that opportunity deserves a fair equitable share of the revenue that results.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Gigachad 3y ago
    And they are completely free to add whatever terms they want to their employment contract, or to go solo and take all of the risk and all of the profit. What more would you want?
  - jgamedev 3y ago
    Namco didn't have abundant capital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namco#Financial_decline_and_restructuring_(1998%E2%80%932005) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namco#Financial_decline_and_re...
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    When there's abundant capital available then there's still a price for that capital. But that's just "there's money; I should have some", which is understandable, but doesn't have a good enough grounding in reality. More fundamentally: there is a market for talent. If no other artists are willing to work without this benefit then one of two things will happen. Either this benefit will be added to artists' contracts, or the projects won't happen in the first place because they will never make enough money to be worth the investment.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

rendaw 3y ago

What was his basis for rejection? I'd like to imagine he considered the work complete at that point and was rejecting milking the life out of the characters and world. In the unending wash of remakes and unnecessary decade+-later sequels today I sometimes wonder if original creators were facing some monetary hardship and gave in.

robertlagrant 3y ago
Or they just don't own the IP and the company gets other people to make them?

lynguist 3y ago

Really, was it really seen as shovelware by the publisher? It was heavily promoted on PS2 booths here in Switzerland back when it came out. Katamari and EyeToy were promoted alongside each other as quirky 2000s era aesthetic titles. Somehow I feel like the aesthetics of Satoshi Kon were of the same time and same sensibility. I would also add Studio 4°C to it. Masaaki Yuasa’s Mind Game. Genius Party. In my mind all these Japan things from that era blend together. Kingdom Hearts was also of the same era, and also promoted the same way, but I never played that.

tetris11 3y ago
Doesn't Japan tend to get releases from Japanese publishers before the West gets it?
nemetroid 3y ago
From what I recall and can find online, the original game was only released in Japan and North America.
- rwmj 3y ago
  I'm pretty sure this is true. Here in the UK I had to import the US version (should have imported the Japanese version) and region hack the console to play it using one of those slide devices that let you open the CD tray after the game had started.
Nursie 3y ago
In Europe we didn't get access to Katamari until the second game, so yes, by then it was comparatively big news and "We Love Katamari" was promoted because Katamari Damacy had done so well in other markets.
- lynguist 3y ago
  Ah, thanks for the information! You are right.

Tiktaalik 3y ago

> they dumped it out as a budget release at the time I remember buying Katamari Damacy and Gradius V on the same launch day for C$20 each. Incredible value for two insanely great games. Just wild in retrospect.