Japan’s once-great arcades have shrunk to the periphery of the current videogame scene, and a stagnating home console market troubles the largest of its developers. Yet amid these adverse conditions, some Japanese studios exist on a handful of staff, stubbornly working towards the dream arcade shooters that first inspired them to enter the industry.
What keeps these companies driven when the supposedly low-end arcade boards are overpriced, the Japanese gaming market is in crisis, and the worldwide industry is pushing towards ever-larger costs and ever-fewer innovations? We visited three small developers – G.rev, Milestone and Triangle Service – and interviewed them to find out…
G.Rev
The company behind Border Down and Senko No Ronde was founded in May 2000. It now has eight full-time staffers: three newcomers and five ex-Taito employees previously from the
G Darius and Ray Storm/Ray Force teams. We spoke to president Hiroyuki Maruyama.
Why did you leave Taito?
The company decided to leave the arcade market, apart from big cabinet systems such as driving games. We understood the reasoning behind the decision, but we had joined Taito to create arcade videogames and we assumed the company would come back to the arcade videogame market a couple of years later. After more than a year working on games for the PlayStation we started to realise Taito’s return to the arcade videogame scene would never happen. So our conception and will to create videogames clearly differed from Taito’s direction.
Was it a big risk to form a small developer in a shrinking market?
You know, we didn’t feel that risk, although making the company was a painful learning process. It took three years to deliver our first shooter, Border Down, in 2003. It wasn’t our first arcade title: we made a puzzle game for just ¥3m (£15,100). But Border Down was truly our first step in the arena. We saved money by getting jobs from Sega and Treasure [G.rev developed the 3D engine for Ikaruga] and when we had enough, we did Border Down. That’s our approach. When we spoke about our game to Sega, it provided the technical support and boards at a low price so we could start work, but we financed it with our own money. It took around nine months to develop the game. We are known for learning and developing quickly: our latest game, Senko No Ronde, took just a year.
Do you think the introduction of the low-end arcade boards such as Type X and Atomiswave will have a positive effect on the arcades?
Low-end boards alone cannot achieve that. As the number of arcades in Japan decreases, the cost per board produced increases, lowering the prospective profits. The result is that arcade games aren’t selling. With this in mind, we decided to release our latest title at a very low price – we love the arcade and want it to survive, so we wanted Senko to sell at ¥110,000 (£554) like Border Down. But Senko is a very original title that’s seen as a risk by operators, who are consequently reluctant to order it. We had to increase the price to ¥150,000 (£755), to cover our costs. If original games could be sold at ¥110,000, I think we’d have a viable and dynamic arcade market.
The Type X is really too expensive – about ¥300,000 (£1,510) – and there are too many versions of it. As an interchangeable PC, it lacks the standardisation of boards like the Naomi. On the other hand, the Atomiswave is very cheap and its performance is not that far from the Naomi. It should have been a great option for developers, but in reality it’s had a hard time sticking to its promises and Sammy hasn’t delivered a strategy. The Naomi is still the best option, although Sega isn’t pushing it. But, since there’s a large base installed in the country, there’s still a lot of room for third parties like us.
How much of an issue is money?
Of course it’s an issue, but if you are patient you can avoid it becoming a big issue. If you want to do everything quickly, you have to find a way to get as much money as possible in the shortest time. This means taking terrible risks, possibly getting into bad deals that would endanger the company in the future. I prefer to take my time and save enough money to make my original games. Even if I have to wait ten years, that would be OK, because I’d still get to make my game. If you think in the long term, the financial issue disappears: imagine a three-year cycle in which one would be used to develop your game and the other two to save for the next title.
The GDC keynotes this year were very different: J Allard’s vision of larger teams for Xbox 360 titles and Satoru Iwata’s commitment to small teams with ingenious ideas. What’s your take on it?
Both visions are right. It’s natural that big companies will go to bigger projects, and Nintendo’s vision corresponds very much to the way it has seen videogames for years. Both have their audiences, and if you consider Nintendo and Microsoft’s visions as the minimum and the maximum, then we will have to find our way in the middle of this. It’s not about a choice; there are many graduations in between.
Microsoft is really trying to appeal to many in Japan, and we have been told it would do its best to give us the best environment possible. But to be honest, since the PlayStation2 is already testing our limits, imagining the world beyond is unrealistic. It’s more than just a technical issue; it’s a financial barrier. The next generation of consoles will provoke an even bigger shrink in the number of developers, and I think Nintendo is focused on this particular aspect with its next machine. Sony’s vision is not yet clear, but Microsoft is already thinking post-PlayStation era with its new Xbox.
If these three manufacturers offer three different choices, it’s easier for us to choose our next step. If they all offered the same, we would be in big trouble, as would the whole industry!
The fun of a videogame is not based on the size of the developer, or the amount of money invested in the project. I really believe we still can provide a lot of fun even with lower-cost games. But I never trust what manufacturers tell developers when they launch a new console. As a company, we will wait and see.
Many of the larger Japanese publishers feel the need to ‘westernise’ their games to sell outside the Japanese market. Does this affect smaller developers like G.rev?
In the past, we never considered our development as ‘for Japan’ or ‘for overseas’. We just had the simple idea of making something fun. This hasn’t disappeared, but it has been replaced by the concept of ‘business’. I don’t think creators in Japan are motivated to make games for the US because it’s the biggest market. It doesn’t work like that. People in big companies make games the company feels are needed to support its growth and because overseas markets offer the best prospects, they move toward these markets.
If someone in these major companies feels the need to make his or her own game – well, they quit. Why are videogames not selling as well as they did before? People are just bored. The boom is over. There are still many who enjoy playing videogames, but it’s not the only form of entertainment. Companies who had spectacular growth during the boom now find themselves oversized in today’s market.
Have you considered developing for the DS or PSP?
Many present the DS as the platform of ideas, of concepts, but the use of specific features like the touch panel actually limits your freedom to create. Of course, if a game makes natural and fun use of these features, I see a lot of potential; but if you don’t use the pen and the double screens, your game is meaningless on the DS. Forcing you to use these features confines you in a very narrow environment, so I’m a little afraid about the machine’s future.
The PSP is just a PlayStation with a beautiful screen. I don’t see any merit in that. Of course there are a few interesting titles like this use of cards in Metal Gear Acid, but so what? Why should I develop or play on the PSP? For its wireless features? If the wireless network becomes global and easily accessible, then I see the potential for very interesting developments, but currently the PSP is less of a console and more of a business move from Sony – for itself, and against Nintendo. As a game console, I don’t see its merit.
How do you see the future for your own company?
I think a lot about the future, probably because at G.rev we have this habit of planning our projects in longer cycles than others. But in the future, I expect that our offices will be cleaner – that will be the only difference. I don’t see bigger changes, expect maybe the size of my staff going up to a total of around 20 people. We will continue to make the games we want to do.
I don’t see the arcade itself changing very much, except in physical size as cabinets get smaller.
I think games will be broadcast in realtime via satellite to specially equipped cabinets, based on PCs. In the meantime, the business model will evolve accordingly, and I will try to anticipate these changes.
