There is a definite danger of reducing everything down to a formula. When you do that, you get crap. Adding a formula to a creative process can be visualized best as:
creative + formula = crap
It's really unfortunate that success breeds its own sort of creative stagnation. Each new creation has to be better than the previous. There is no end to the cycle and I think the end result is uncreative, recycled crap. Hey, that sounds a lot like Hollywood. Sure, there are some good formula movies out there, but then again what the hell was Van Helsing? Hmmm, you take Hugh Jackman and Kate Beckinsdale and toss them into a CGI blender with no script and you get $160,000,000 eye candy. They could have made the movie for a lot less and had a better story. Current thinking in studios probably took them down the CGI path rather than the creative route. Who needs writers when you have computers?
I'm not a big gamer. I love the games, but I have a business and family, so I don't get to play too much. As a result, I haven't been following the trends in games lately, but I figured this would happen: Video Game Makers Go Hollywood (free subscription required). The gaming industry overall has been excelling Hollywood in revenues for several years now. It only makes sense that they would want to keep their standing. And when it comes to battling Hollywood, it's a crap fight.
The numbers can go much higher for some new games. Atari spent $20 million on its "Enter the Matrix" game last year, an amount that is about one-third the average cost of a feature film.
As a result of the changes, game publishers are less willing to take creative chances, people in the industry say. They make fewer games and rely more on movie tie-ins and what they consider sure-fire sequels. But the smaller number of bets can make publishers walk the kind of financial high-wire that has long been part of the hit-driven movie business. At Activision, 40 percent of publishing revenue last year came from two sets of games, "Tony Hawk's Underground" and "True Crime: Streets of L.A."
In other words, they have a formula that works right now today and they will use it forever. Hollywood still makes money and they still make crap, so why change?
Here is where business executives in the creative industries should remember their roots. Most business are built on risk. Sure it's great to have a formula for making money, but it's also great to take chances and reap the rewards--that's called living. I find it interesting that once people achieve a certain amount of success, they don't want to change the formula (or even update it a little).
It's a tough problem to solve, balancing creativity and profitability. Naturally, the Times thinks this is a tragedy. The gaming industry is not fringe anymore. It's big business, in spite of the fact that their primary market eats, drinks, and breathes cutting-edge. Big business means they have thousands to employ and a market to satisfy. However, there is always room for experimentation and fitting that into the formula may produce more creativity supported by the sure hits. Such a formula may look like:
(risk * creativity) + (formula) = crap + some hits + really cool stuff nobody's seen
Popularity: unranked [?]
Wretched Human Mirror by Bloodbath