>Bed broke >Go to IKEA to buy new bed >Weird fog at bedroom spot >Cutscene triggers >TROMSÖ, KEEPER OF DREAMS Edit: damn that's a lot of likes. Also, spelling.
As much as i hate Steve Jobs, he was right sometimes. That "your audience doesn't know what they want, but know what they like" quote is really true to many things.
I think the issue lies somewhere else in overwatch. My opinion is that the people who beg for something to be changed, are not the same people who bitch when its changed
I love this comment. I feel like the best games/music/movies/art have that feeling to them: "I didn't know I wanted this until I experienced it." I felt this way about Mulholland Drive and Slaughterhouse Five and Bitches Brew.
Businessmen spend all day speaking in lingo not even a third of them understand in order to keep up with the status quo. These days you would be lucky if you could find any company with even 10% of the administration capable of understanding the basis of running a functional company. Let alone invested in the product they sell enough to even know what it is they are selling, or how it's being sold.
This talk reminds me of why I love Sekiro so much. When Sekiro first came out, I scoffed at it for being so much unlike Dark Souls or Bloodborne. I didn't like the platforming, the invisible walls, the contextual executions; they came across as FromSoft trying to appeal to the normies. I hate to admit it, but I just wanted an eastern-themed Dark Souls with samurais, rather than a whole different game. But something stuck with me after I watched the game on Twitch. I keep thinking about those visceral sword fights and the fast moving protagonist with no stamina bar. I eventually received the game for birthday and was blown away after finishing it, with the final boss taking me three days to beat. In hindsight, I would've hated Sekiro if it were just Dark Souls with (more) katanas. FromSoft gave me an experience I didn't even know I wanted, until I trusted them enough to play their new game. In many ways, Sekiro is my favorite game to date, because it accentuates everything I already loved about the Soulsborne series. If Dark Souls is the Ikea of games, then Sekiro is this small cafeteria in Ikea that serves perfect cherry-flavoured cheesecakes.
Let's be honest, the only reason From gave us an extra life in Sekiro was so they had an excuse to make the game even harder. Isshin was certainly one of the hardest bosses I ever fought, and that comes from someone with a platinum trophy of Bloodborne.
@@SunlessSage i think the reason ehy they didnt show us the trus hp is because fromsoft just want us to focus more on the boss and concentrate more to their attack patterns unlike the prodocesscor where it was mix between stats and skill so in my conclusion is that the multiple health bar is there to trick the players mind to be a lot more observant and do split second desicion making while fighting the boss (kinda like fps games but more managable)
@@rayq4235 Exactly, that's one other thing I liked about Sekiro: You can't grind yourself to victory. You have to get good enough, and doing optional bosses and mini bosses rewards you by still somewhat upgrading your character. This sadly also has a negative side, if you are genuinely stuck you'll not get past it for a long time especially without online help. But honestly, while I think Sekiro is objectively the most polished From Soft game to date, Bloodborne is still my favorite. I just love the weapons and atmosphere, and especially the DLC. Sekiro just doesn't have that same 'even the guys that help you are probably insane'-vibe.
Yeah from is one of the few companies lately where it doesnt really matter to me what exactly they make, i trust them to make it an amazing experience for me. Same goes for elden ring, although it seems itll be more like dark souls than sekiro was. Either way though, like I said, I trust them to make it amazing regardless of if it's similar to dark souls or not
That's not what i took from this. From my understanding, the point of this was that AAA games these days suck and are failing because they aren't Dark Souls.
TL:DR Dark souls is successful because it was intentionally designed to serve a niche market within the gaming industry (hardcore/hardcorish gamers) and because of that it's considered a resounding success within that market. Devs should know who they want to target instead of trying to please every kind of gamer.
Developers need to treat games like every other product. Not every car is for every person. Some people simply have different tastes, needs, and price ranges. Lets use a carnival for this next example. The massive rollercoaster is popular, a major selling point for your amusement park. But tearing down the other rides to make more roller coasters is neglectful to the carnival goers that enjoyed that ride you destroyed. That person will talk to the people who liked that ride and once they find out its gone they wont come back, because why would they? And on top of that, now the rollercoaster that was just built has to compete against an already existing rollercoaster. And dont get me started on what would happen if people ended up not liking the new ride or liking the new ride more than the old one. Then you are left with a part of your market thats been burned and isnt coming back and a lump of new or old metal taking up space that people dont want to go on anymore. Then again, im no business major. correct me if im wrong
Ikea doesnt serve a niche market though so im confused. Its aimed to market towards a lot of people with so many designs and price ranges. Im curious whst the comparison is. (dont have the 30 minutes to watch this at the moment lol)
They spend so much time makign somethign everyone will hate. One key different with star wars is than it's both stars wars and disney, they have absolutly nothing more to prove...they're just too big, their name alone ensure they'll get a profit no matter how poor is the product. But they do target one specific audience : the short attention span mindless consumer...it doesn't matter if they tasted a poor quality product, they'll either be way too lenient on the judgment and/or forgot at the next announcment how bad was the previous product.
I think you can apply this logic to exactly what happened with the sequels, The Force Awakens notwithstanding. The Last Jedi was "the IKEA Star Wars movie": where TFA was formulaic, it was deconstructive. It challenged the themes of the "traditional" Star Wars movie (which by then had become the themes of blockbuster event films in general) and raised interesting questions about legacy and heroism that most people wouldn't have expected from a Disney project. It was a movie made for people who loved the original Star Wars' self-aware monomyth narrative and didn't want another generic action movie (at a time when Marvel movies were hitting theaters 3 times a year, without even mentioning competitors). The result was very polarizing in both directions (I love it, as do a lot of people, but there are a lot of people who hate it: if you design for one niche to love it, you have to accept that another niche will hate it). Compare that to The Rise of Skywalker: basically an attempt to rope in people who loved TLJ and people who hated TLJ, the result was soulless, generic sci-fi flick whose only guiding themes were to bring in as large an audience as possible by copying the formula of every Star Wars movie before it, thereby accomplishing none of what TLJ did. IF you think I'm making this up, just compare critic reviews of the two movies.
this was a really good talk. game developers should watch this and take notes. it seems like we are seeing a lot of AAA games these days trying to reach for mass appeal and falling flat on their face because of it.
@@kajmak Dark Souls 3 did exceedingly well in sales and got GOTY, with high scores across the board. Wouldn't say it fell flat on its face in any respect except my own expectations, which was generally an opinion that existed in the minority. I didn't enjoy it as much as DS1, but DS3 was a fantastically crafted game and is still preferred over DS1 by many people.
“Be like George W. Bush… High and to the Right.” Political humor is typically bland but that up there is actually a pretty solid joke and the fact that he doesn’t even get it only makes the whole bit funnier.
@@Sebal007 My guess is that it refers to George W Bush being in the upper right (ie authoritarian right) part of the political spectrum quadrant, and the 'be like him' part means that you want to be in the upper right quadrant of Kawazakis chart
That’s exactly what dark souls does tho. They make their games psuedo-difficult where they’re not actually difficult. They’re designed to be marketed to the largest demographic; the average and because they’re fake difficult that means the average normie can feel like they’re playing a hardcore game for hardcore gamers
yup.. as a general company advice. Small Company where i work has an online app which serves companies transporting cargo in our part of Europe...and thats all we do. We are all friendly within company and talk openly...i asked my boss few times in conversations why dont we expand a bit into air cargo or ship cargo or warehouse operations and all that stuff connected to or alternatives to trucking bussiness we are connected to... There i got my answer.. we wouldnt serve niche market anymore.. we wouldnt be unique anymore... we would have much more costs...and some things would not "fit" anymore like he said in presentation ( web app has a very old ui... but niche market we serve does not mind that as long as they have awesome functionality for exactly the thing they need .. for example )...
2 роки тому+2
Exactly! I love to watch gamedev talks because the people are really willing to share their life experiences!
Just realised that 'know thy enemy and know thyself and in one hundred battles you will never be in peril' is just old school language for 'how to win mobas'
Wankers. Every one of them. Imagine working on a painting and thinking about how much you're going to make from it. That happens, and explains why art has been shit since the industrial revolution.
@@postbroadcast If you want to complain then complain about the fact that people actually need to get paid to survive instead of complaining about a guy making sure they can.
Anthem failed because EA wasn't able to recognize it's true value... they made it look like it's the best game of the genre so far when in reality it's just a worse copy - they could have totally played the "it sucks at first then will get better" and sell it at a way lower price and then when the game would get better and draw people in could have used profitable cash shops and season passes.
Yes, trying to deliver a totally multiplayer game with the qualities of a totally singleplayer game is something a lot of companies have failed at recently.
@@Agnes135 It was - had 12.5m active subs at one point 8-to-10-yrs ago. I would be surprised if the are 1m at this point. Adding to that Blizz have had to lay off thousands (literally!) of employees in the last six months while also killing off Heroes of the Storm and putting a nail in Diablo's coffin (with their fucking app-store port). Final Fantasy 14 and Elder Scrolls are bigger games at this point.
Yep, the difficulty is not the reason why It's my favourite game of all time. The challenge was welcomed, it made the experience memorable, but it's still not the reason why I love it so much.
For me the atmosphere and story are inseparable from the difficulty. The artistic qualities of the game have a symbiotic relationship with the technical qualities of the game, eg. The cycles of decay and rebirth present in both the game's narrative and mechanics. So many games don't manage this, and I think the Souls series, while not without flaws, should be an example to all developers.
@@abaz9495 Yes, it's kind of implied that the chosen undead is the one who would over come all challenges, and those who fail or give up goes hollow, which makes sense to have the game be difficult. But personally, it's still not the reason why I love the game. Games like ashen, the surge or lords of the fallen are difficult, I liked playing them but the atmosphere didn't capture me. Love Nioh though.
@@SunLevi Mate I'm playing Nioh at the moment and I adore it. It's funny, actually. I first played it on the basis that other people told me it was like DS and quit about 25% in. I came back to it about a week ago and approached it with a fresh mind and appreciated it on the basis of its own merits and now I'm obsessed! I haven't played the others but I'll have a look.
I had this video suggested multiple times before but i didn't watched. Very cool video didn't knew business angle makes you understand so much about games or entertainment.
Well the title did its job. Guy made interesting enough points that I watched the whole thing. Though it's pretty clear if you look up some dirt on Demons' Souls that the reason the Souls games were kept, "Difficult," is because the dev team intentionally left that part out when showcasing it to the board. A lot of its design choices ran head to head with what the marketing team wanted for it, and that's why they shifted into, "Prepare to Die." with Dark Souls. I'd argue though, that the difficulty aspect of the games is not what attracted most people to it. It was curiosity. Wanting to know if it was actually difficult. Wanting to know if there was more under the surface. Their desire to know more within the game was only fueled by the sense of accomplishment for overcoming the challenges in the way of their discoveries. Whatever those discoveries might be. Lore. PVP. Statistical data. Cut content. Boundary breaks. Everything about Souls games creates a sense of wonder. Curiosity leading to awe. All that they ask of the player is that you surmount its challenges in the way you most prefer, and then seeing that there are other options leads to even more things to be curious about.
Dark souls 1 level design was pretty insane. That alone made me want to discover every nook and cranny. You got rewarded with some of the coolest weapons and armour.
Hank Smith Yup, that’s the closest we’ll ever get to a 3D Metroidvania in terms of level design. The only issue I have with the level design that makes the game’s levels not a 10/10. Some of the area’s, namely Lost Izalith, and Demon Ruins to an extent.
@@somaoni8806 i for one really love those places, gives you the feeling it was all build on top off hell. With the almost heavenly city anor londo above it all.
One of the best examples of maximizing value through tradeoffs and limitations is Silent Hill. The team realized they couldn't render anything in the fidelity they wanted while maintaining any long draw distance because of the hardware limitations of the Playstation. Instead of sacrificing the quality of the renders they covered everything in fog so they didn't have to render at range, it ended up being a thematically and mechanically invaluable move. If you play the re-releases without the fog it feels far less oppressive and haunting.
Though a lot of games of that time were absolutely plagued with fog. I think they knew they wanted to make a 3D game, not one with pre-rendered backgrounds so as not to compete with Resident Evil.
I think... Dark Souls just wanted to make an artworhty awesome authentic game. While resident evil was just a money making move. Let's not underplay that
@azazazazazazazazaaa Yes, Devs made a game they wanted to make, and not randomly experiment. Also, if you don't see differences between souls games, you are not entitled to an opinion mister.
@azazazazazazazazaaa Huh? Demon Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, and Sekiro are so damn different from each other that its silly you say its just a copy and paste
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion "mister." That being said, fromsoft did not "just" want to make an "artworthy awesome authentic game," whatever that means, they wanted to do that as well as make it profitable. That wouldn't have been possible without the keen strategy they employed in the creation of the game. What I think is that you've failed to recognize all aspects of the brilliance present within the creation of dark souls. Even the most moving pieces of art need to be created in the first place, and you simply can't do that if you lack the necessary means.
@azazazazazazazazaaa It's called incremental improvements. With each new game they tried to reinforce the strengths of the previous ones while correcting its flaws. Capcom realized probably the biggest flaw of early RE games was their control schemes and so they experimented on that, luckily for FromSoftware they came in later than that with Demon's Souls and didn't have to change as much with their game to get to the perfected form of its recent games, that doesn't mean they wouldn't have if it was needed.
Every indie game developer should see this presentation. I see so many of these points being broken in an attempt to cater to everyone, especially early access games.
This is the second time today I have heard an Ikea to game comparison- the last being a game maker's toolkit's video on hitman's race car level. (edit: my grammar pissed me off)
@@TheAtb85 Ikea is the Dark Souls of stores. It's big, intimidating to new comers, all the lore is hidden in item descriptions, and you can easily get lost through taking the wrong turn in the interconnected map. But, after a few years and many trips, you can blitz through it, use all the shortcuts, and know where all the best items are without even thinking about it.
The fact that this talk is so polarizing rather than just being uninteresting kinda proves his point in a way. Regardless of whether people agreed or disagreed with his points, it got them talking. That the whole point of these talks, so I'd consider it a success. "The opposite of love is not hate. It's indifference."
I was in sales for years and I have seen a lot of presentations based around design, sales, marketing ect..And I was very impressed with this presentation.
It's true that focusing on a smaller audience can be just as good as mass-market appeal, because after Elden Ring they will have made 7 Soulslike games and had 2 remasters. Each one sells great, people know what they like and expect quality, and the development is streamlined which cuts cost. To this day DS is the only brand I've bought a season pass for, because I knew I was buying the DLC and would enjoying it.
His quote about indifference being the opposite of love reminds me of the talk about tcg design form one of the mtg designers. He had a point that it is better for half the players to hate the card and the other half to love it rather than everyone being just ok with it.
This has been one of the most helpful chats this channel has put up so far! Other chats have talked about marketing in similar ways, but this one really hit the nail on the head in terms of explaining the differences, advantages, and consequences of the different methods of focusing your game. Like many other developers, I too was directly inspired by Dark Souls!
This is a pretty brilliant talk, and one that makes me smile. If I ever subject myself to game design again, I'd want to make a product that has folks who are passionate about it not just because it sells, but because i could also know that my art has touched and inspired SOMEBODY out there.
I disagree about Dark Souls' target audience. It's one of my favorite games, but I didn't play it because it's difficult - I don't _play_ difficult games. I'm not a hardcore gamer at all. I played, and loved, it simply because it's a _good_ game. It has a story it doesn't throw at your face - and would be a mediocre story if it was told the traditional way - its level design is phenomenal, and fighting even ordinary mobs is always fun. I haven't played its sequels, so maybe this video does apply to them, but to the first? For some part of the player base, for sure, but not all. Perhaps not even most.
I agree with you. Dark Souls is more than a "hard game". I am also an average player but could beat it with no problem. I read the other commenter that makes Dark Souls known for it's difficulty is the marketing of Bandai Namco. So sad when there is a discourse about Dark Souls, the first thing to be presented is the difficulty.
I think this is really the most pertinent comment made here. Dark Souls didn't succeed because it was difficult, or x, or y, or, z. Rather it found such a passionate audience and positive response because it was a Good game. And that's what all these corporate heads, and focus testers are trying to work out, what does 'good' mean? I think the answer is that 'good' means different things to different people, and as Mr Fischer explains here, trying to make something that is 'good' to everyone - especially to the level that Dark Souls is - is only going to compromise the level of 'good' that it can be for other people. So instead, just ask the one person who you can be sure of what 'good' means; yourself. This is what Dark Souls' creator Hidetaka Miyazaki did. It was a game that he had wanted to make, for himself, and through happenstance he was able to have the resources to do so. As did George Lucas. As did J.K . Rowling. As did Steve Jobs. Companies can try and design a product to appeal to known interests of audiences all they want, but only a person with actual interests in the work, in the medium and the art of creating itself, can make something that people don't even know they want yet.
15:15 It's intentional, but not based on your MBA-philosophy. Japanese artisans do extreme focus all the time. They know how to focus their effort on what fills the niche and cut out other things. There are tons of super-niche games in Japan. From Soft is one of many.
Imagine paying 50k to go to grad school and the teacher tells you "make products people want to buy" you look around and everyone is furiously taking notes.
Amazing presentation by Justin! Lots of very useful and immediately useful information; not only for game dev, but for analyzing games and the business of games.
I feel like Eve Online is another good example. In a world where every MMO was trying to be WoW and failing, EVE was something completely different, that only a minority of people could actually enjoy. But the people who love EVE, they basically have no where else to go. EVE is the only place that really caters to them. So it slowly and continually grew while the WoW clones died.
Amazing presentation, not just about game design, but about business and decision-making in general. Really enjoyed watching this and will definitely re-watch. Genius idea, genius execution. Thank you. :)
exactly! this talk pissed me off so much and it shows why we can't have nice things in games -- market makes decisions while completely missing the point of what makes a game great or memorable or loved
@@shinluis you completely missed the point. That is EXACTLY what this talk was about. When he mentions Steve Jobs and how people know what they like, but don't know what they want....is what Nova Sky says. and From Software did. Same with playing to your own strenghts and catering to a certain audience. For example Bioware and EA: EA wants games that cater to the largest audience possible. Rather than use their different studios expertise and their different niche audience to attain an accumulative "large audience", they want every studio to develop games for everyone. Bioware was famous for Storytelling and RPG, but they lost their way by not improving at their field of expertise, while other studios around the world actually caught up and even left them in the dust in those areas. Naughty Dog for example is considered the best storytelling studio for the last 10 years and are still improving on this aspect. The comparison of Resident Evil and Dead Space or other Horror games is really great. Your goal should be to claim a niche/ focus on your strenghts and try to become the best in that niche and then always try to stay ahead (which sounds way easier than it is). This talk is really amazing and showing both sides: Economic trade-off and design expertise. Dark Souls focuses on a Niche audience with a simple gamedesign, so development costs are kept at a minimum (fewer systems, average graphics) and do not need to sell too many copies to reach profit. A successful example for a game that reaches a HUGE audience would be rockstar games. GTA or RDR cost 10x more money than any other AAAgame, but their level of polish, amount of systems and possibilties (freedom of play) far outweight their competitors and makes it profitable, because they are the best at what they do and use their HUGE amount of ressources in the best way possible.
Thomas to be honest its been a while since I’ve watched this video and i dont remember exactly what this guy said, but I do agree with just about everything you just said! My point, I suppose, was that FROM is doing things the way they do because that’s what the only way they can/know how to do it, not because there was a market research on a viable niche they found out they could profit upon. Miyazaki said in an interview that they didnt do a lot of tutorials because they were bad at it; all the cool things in FROM games came up organically and candidly, rather than “because that will hit THIS niche market best.” They, very much not on purpose, ended up creating their own market organically, rather than trying to plan one according to the market at the time, which is what this talk suggests.. I think?
I know that this is 2 years old by now, but something about the question at 27:23 reminded me of how Doom Eternal and Animal Crossing: Horizons synergize during the buildup to their releases back in 2020. Both games operate on what seems like fundamentally opposing ideologies, but that ideological polarity actually helped with marketing the games. Doom covered gamers who wanted shooters, action, and displays of spectacle, while Animal Crossing was more on social, team based relaxing gameplay. Both niches the games were aiming for were covered, and between these otherwise very different games it felt like there was something for everyone. Regardless of how hardcore a player was, people could feel like these games were built for them.
Seeing this video in 2023, he really is only more and more correct as the gaming scene and market has shown in the past two-to-three years. Indie studios are essentially filling up the niches and overturning the gaming market by outcompeting AAA studios that have either gotten too cocky or forgot they're making games for an audience and not their investors as they have become too all-rounded and less specialized for any audience, thereby losing their original target audience and not being a specialized game for no-one. Most AAA games that have come out are forgettable and most people are indifferent to them or play them but forget about them immediately, whereas indie games are the ones becoming cult classics and having dedicated and passionate fanbases that interact with them and provide feedback. I would say what kickstarters and other such group-funding sites do is allow your targeted audience to directly fund a game and in turn have more involvement with something they are passionate enough to "buy" before its even made. Metroidvanias of all varieties are cropping up from these indie or otherwise single-person devs who ARE the target audience themselves and majority of the time are already involved with the communities they are developing a game FOR. One point he brought up during the Q&A about "living in your own shadow" as a game dev as being either good or bad is even more relevant given how FromSoft released another ArmoredCore game and reaching further back branched out with Sekiro, as still being the same game they always make but revitalized and just different enough to actually warrant renewed interest and not just be a clone of something they already made but with a sequel sticker slapped on.
that talk was very interesting, and is aplicable to many things, not just game design or product design in general. it is also a lesson on what you maybe should consider when you plan on building your future
What's so great about Dark Souls is that it HAS a difficulty slider. It's all in-game mechanics though. If you want easy, you play magic. If you want medium, you play buff based (faith) melee If you want hard, just melee and no spells If you want insane, Soul level 1 run
That's not really the same as a difficulty slider, it's just an understanding of game mechanics. Magic isn't an easy mode, it's just generally stronger for PvE.
I never quite understood this, yeah magic made certain boss fights easier, but it took far longer and unless you had a co-OP partner or npc the bosses generally didn't give you the space needed to use it properly. It was always easier and faster to melee, exceptions being ds2 pre-patch. Even the best magic builds simply go the route of, buff weapon then use melee.
In other industries, the solution to being beholden to your legacy is rebranding or creating separate brand identities. I can't picture how it maps onto games though.
It’s like Ubisoft just watching this and said: “let’s do exactly the opposite of what he said with our games, specifically with Ghost Recon franchise.”
Cut out all of the things your game doesn't need, and invest the effort on the most valuable parts. If your game involves traveling back and forth to a hub world, collecting loot, and modifying your loadout to tweak your character build with that loot; it's ok to cut some environmental quality to have good load times and spend some of the extra artistic effort to make that loot look interesting. *cough* not talking about any particular recent game *cough*. (Oh, and if all the environments end up looking the same anyway, maybe make them more modular so you can reuse the assets and create more varied encounters, since you spend 90% of the game grinding encounters)
A good talk and it's interesting to approach games from the viewpoint of marketing while comparing them to other product, but I'd argue that Dark Souls wasn't a good example. See, DS is indeed a perfectly fit tiltle for "hadcore gamers" and that's what the marketing around the game focused on, but it had success beyond that sphere. The thing is, DS wasn't successful because it targeted the right crowd. It was successful because it's one of the best designed games ever made. I'm not the first to say it, but DS isn't exactly "difficult", at least, not in the same sense as games like Touhou, Super Meat Boy or Starcraft at high level can be. Unlike most hard games, DS (the first one at least) doesn't require for you to have great reflexes and precision. It helps, but there is a strategic layer to the game that makes it possible to beat it without that. Can't beat that boss ? There is probably an easy way to cheese it, or you could find an alternate route and come back later when you've gotten a lot stronger and pulverize him. DS doesn't require you to be very good at playing DS, that's why people have managed to beat it with a Guitar Hero drumkit, with one finger, blinfolded and many other ridiculous challenges. In that sense, the target audience for DS is a lot more open than just "hardcore gamers", it is "whoever wants a challenging experience that requires a lot of time investment but feels rewarding". And sure, you might say that's the exact definition of "hardcore", but I'd say, although most, if not all of the "hardcore" guys fit into that definition, they also have the element of experience and mastery. A "hardcore" fighting game player isn't someone who is just good at this kind of game, it's someone who mostly plays them, who played a lot of them previously and who wants to be better at them. Remove these elements and you find yourself with a much larger audience. Even most "casual" players might appreciate an experience like DS since its only requirement to enjoy it that you put in alot of time. This, in my opinion is why DS was successful. I'm quite sure that it was envisioned from the start as something targeting a very niche and hardcore audience, but it was so well-designed that it ended up attracting a lot more than that. In fact, I'd say DS's marketing was its weakest point as it turned away a lot of people who might have otherwise enjoyed the game.
You've forgotten the major point. It was one of the best-designed games in your opinion, means that you're the target audience. But a lot of people are not ready to play the game because it is too hard or too depressing and harsh.
@@ievgeniiromenskyi3375 imho, I never found it too hard, too harsh or too depressing... The thing is that design of DS (be it level design or graphics etc.) is stellar. But the games were overhyped as this incredibly difficult masochistic experience, mainly because DS 1 came out at a time when AAA titles became too "hand holdy" and this caused it to be somehow seen as incredibly difficult even thought It could be considered comparable in difficulty to some earlier 3rd person action titles.
Late to the party, obviously, but this applies to basically any company, anywhere. Whether you're into games or not, what a great presentation! Actually sent this to my girlfriend who gives presentations all the time about her business.
Based on the general reaction in these comments, I feel like the speaker could have done a better job emphasizing how to practically apply these lessons. If From made a game that they wanted to make, then their target audience was themselves, and all the lessons about where to make your cuts applies just as much. This talk is not saying that you should decide your target audience before you start designing your game. Games will always appeal to certain types of people in general, whether the designer intends them to or not. that doesn't somehow make them soulless, but being able to understand what that audience wants when you're making a game will help you make decisions about what content to prioritize. Developers only have so many dollars and so much time to make the magic happen, and this talk is not about game design but about resource allocation. He tried to make that clear with the initial quote about rpg stat investments, but then chose to use an rpg where all stats can eventually hit their cap as his primary example, where instead he could have used a game with a hard level cap in order to reinforce that message better.
There are so many helpful and important points brought up in this presentation, and then the comment section is littered with people that came for a meme or a 30 minute gush on Dark Souls. This is about game design philosophy from a business perspective, finding and satisfying a target audience with a video game. It's not about Ikea or Dark Souls, they're just used as examples for the broader concepts of the talk.
I didn't pickup the smugness but I'm dense :D My only thought was he reminded me of folks that comment on youtube videos but don't watch the video, and I'm like "holy shit this happens IRL too"
I was just looking for interesting ds related content since I got an off day from being sick but I ended up coming across this video that made me think more regarding how to assess the problems we hv in my sister's f&b business that im helping out at XD This is some pretty cool stuff, props to the presenter!
I'm not going to argue about the legitimacy of his comparisons; that's all semantics. The overall lesson is what matters, and that lesson is pretty indicative of the AAA industry's current failings. I'd love to hear this guy's opinion on recurrent monetization vs. consumer tolerance, mass production of specific IPs vs. consumer fatigue, and the overall sustainability/practicality of producing and maintaining live service models. I would include labeling and challenging your audience through the media, but I think most intelligent human beings view that as a bad business practice, and this guy seems pretty intelligent.
Reading the title, my mind instantly went to compare the level design of the local Ikea store to Dark Souls :) Free roaming, labyrinthine design. Shortcuts. It all makes sense now. It's the other way around: Ikea is the Dark Souls of furniture stores :)
>Bed broke
>Go to IKEA to buy new bed
>Weird fog at bedroom spot
>Cutscene triggers
>TROMSÖ, KEEPER OF DREAMS
Edit: damn that's a lot of likes. Also, spelling.
Ikea but instead of paying for furniture it's animated and you have to beat it into submission
Mem arrows are AMAZING
This is perfect haha.
you forgot to add ">epic music"
@@genocidehero9687
>meme arrows
Ok Redditor
Ikea is the Dark Souls of furniture stores
I came here to comment that, shouldn't be surprised someone already did it
Yes yes yes
Tedious and somewhat obfuscating with a high chance of throwing your back out upon completion?
@Grym you know you need to be humm first, and your cried fall om deaf ears, because another customer just entered the store
came here to post this
Bed Of Chaos has a new meaning.
Kaosbädd
i see what you did here
Dark Souls is a game I didn't realize I wanted till I played it.
This! It's just not the kind of game your average Joe comes up with.
As much as i hate Steve Jobs, he was right sometimes. That "your audience doesn't know what they want, but know what they like" quote is really true to many things.
@@nemtudom5074 this is clearly shown in overwatch, blizzard listen too much, and the players constantly shit on things that they asked for months ago
I think the issue lies somewhere else in overwatch. My opinion is that the people who beg for something to be changed, are not the same people who bitch when its changed
I love this comment. I feel like the best games/music/movies/art have that feeling to them: "I didn't know I wanted this until I experienced it." I felt this way about Mulholland Drive and Slaughterhouse Five and Bitches Brew.
“Passionate fans make viable brands” It’s amazing that this even needs to be said these days.
Businessmen spend all day speaking in lingo not even a third of them understand in order to keep up with the status quo. These days you would be lucky if you could find any company with even 10% of the administration capable of understanding the basis of running a functional company.
Let alone invested in the product they sell enough to even know what it is they are selling, or how it's being sold.
This talk reminds me of why I love Sekiro so much. When Sekiro first came out, I scoffed at it for being so much unlike Dark Souls or Bloodborne. I didn't like the platforming, the invisible walls, the contextual executions; they came across as FromSoft trying to appeal to the normies. I hate to admit it, but I just wanted an eastern-themed Dark Souls with samurais, rather than a whole different game. But something stuck with me after I watched the game on Twitch. I keep thinking about those visceral sword fights and the fast moving protagonist with no stamina bar. I eventually received the game for birthday and was blown away after finishing it, with the final boss taking me three days to beat. In hindsight, I would've hated Sekiro if it were just Dark Souls with (more) katanas. FromSoft gave me an experience I didn't even know I wanted, until I trusted them enough to play their new game. In many ways, Sekiro is my favorite game to date, because it accentuates everything I already loved about the Soulsborne series.
If Dark Souls is the Ikea of games, then Sekiro is this small cafeteria in Ikea that serves perfect cherry-flavoured cheesecakes.
Let's be honest, the only reason From gave us an extra life in Sekiro was so they had an excuse to make the game even harder.
Isshin was certainly one of the hardest bosses I ever fought, and that comes from someone with a platinum trophy of Bloodborne.
@@SunlessSage Yeah I couldn't imagine fighting Owl- Father and Isshin with 1 life
@@SunlessSage i think the reason ehy they didnt show us the trus hp is because fromsoft just want us to focus more on the boss and concentrate more to their attack patterns unlike the prodocesscor where it was mix between stats and skill so in my conclusion is that the multiple health bar is there to trick the players mind to be a lot more observant and do split second desicion making while fighting the boss (kinda like fps games but more managable)
@@rayq4235 Exactly, that's one other thing I liked about Sekiro: You can't grind yourself to victory. You have to get good enough, and doing optional bosses and mini bosses rewards you by still somewhat upgrading your character. This sadly also has a negative side, if you are genuinely stuck you'll not get past it for a long time especially without online help.
But honestly, while I think Sekiro is objectively the most polished From Soft game to date, Bloodborne is still my favorite. I just love the weapons and atmosphere, and especially the DLC. Sekiro just doesn't have that same 'even the guys that help you are probably insane'-vibe.
Yeah from is one of the few companies lately where it doesnt really matter to me what exactly they make, i trust them to make it an amazing experience for me. Same goes for elden ring, although it seems itll be more like dark souls than sekiro was. Either way though, like I said, I trust them to make it amazing regardless of if it's similar to dark souls or not
Yes but thats the problem with AAA these days isn't it, they do not want a 'target audience' they want everyone.
And thus they please no one.
Yep, we get jack of all trades master of none games.
@@asiamatron
In truth, AAA developers can pull it off based on today's tech, BUT!!!... Greed is a Sin.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 True indeed.
That's not what i took from this. From my understanding, the point of this was that AAA games these days suck and are failing because they aren't Dark Souls.
That's what he said in the video...
TL:DR Dark souls is successful because it was intentionally designed to serve a niche market within the gaming industry (hardcore/hardcorish gamers) and because of that it's considered a resounding success within that market. Devs should know who they want to target instead of trying to please every kind of gamer.
Well said.
Or create something you enjoy, like UA-camrs, otherwise people will see through the bullshit. Projects fall from this effect.
Developers need to treat games like every other product. Not every car is for every person. Some people simply have different tastes, needs, and price ranges.
Lets use a carnival for this next example. The massive rollercoaster is popular, a major selling point for your amusement park. But tearing down the other rides to make more roller coasters is neglectful to the carnival goers that enjoyed that ride you destroyed. That person will talk to the people who liked that ride and once they find out its gone they wont come back, because why would they? And on top of that, now the rollercoaster that was just built has to compete against an already existing rollercoaster. And dont get me started on what would happen if people ended up not liking the new ride or liking the new ride more than the old one. Then you are left with a part of your market thats been burned and isnt coming back and a lump of new or old metal taking up space that people dont want to go on anymore. Then again, im no business major. correct me if im wrong
Ikea doesnt serve a niche market though so im confused. Its aimed to market towards a lot of people with so many designs and price ranges. Im curious whst the comparison is. (dont have the 30 minutes to watch this at the moment lol)
Boom! Well put
Ikea Souls: Prepare to Buy Edition
So many different “builds”. Lol
the camera operator was not prepared for this guy
He is the Dark Souls of GDC speakers
Gdc really is a "on site" event first. It shows that UA-cam is anexo afterthought, but they'll prpbably learn with time.
Likely it was automated and programmed to just keep him in view.
@@andrewdalecramer Fat doubt. It just has preset angles instead of a smooth free rotation base
They're not "angles". The camera is fixed, the PiP is just being scanned (moved digitally) within the frame.
"if you wanna be like star wars, don't spend so much time making something everyone will buy"
this statement did not age well at all
They spend so much time makign somethign everyone will hate.
One key different with star wars is than it's both stars wars and disney, they have absolutly nothing more to prove...they're just too big, their name alone ensure they'll get a profit no matter how poor is the product.
But they do target one specific audience : the short attention span mindless consumer...it doesn't matter if they tasted a poor quality product, they'll either be way too lenient on the judgment and/or forgot at the next announcment how bad was the previous product.
@@ballom29 not everyone lol
people who aren't much invested in SW and marvel fans loved the new trilogy
@@eduardood yes, even though the new movies were absolute garbage
I think you can apply this logic to exactly what happened with the sequels, The Force Awakens notwithstanding. The Last Jedi was "the IKEA Star Wars movie": where TFA was formulaic, it was deconstructive. It challenged the themes of the "traditional" Star Wars movie (which by then had become the themes of blockbuster event films in general) and raised interesting questions about legacy and heroism that most people wouldn't have expected from a Disney project. It was a movie made for people who loved the original Star Wars' self-aware monomyth narrative and didn't want another generic action movie (at a time when Marvel movies were hitting theaters 3 times a year, without even mentioning competitors). The result was very polarizing in both directions (I love it, as do a lot of people, but there are a lot of people who hate it: if you design for one niche to love it, you have to accept that another niche will hate it). Compare that to The Rise of Skywalker: basically an attempt to rope in people who loved TLJ and people who hated TLJ, the result was soulless, generic sci-fi flick whose only guiding themes were to bring in as large an audience as possible by copying the formula of every Star Wars movie before it, thereby accomplishing none of what TLJ did. IF you think I'm making this up, just compare critic reviews of the two movies.
He was talking about the original Star Wars, not Disney Wars.
This camera work was the dark souls of presentations.
“Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia.” -Kurt Vonnegut.
Damn he should have said aids
@@Ghesh_Vargiet He lived until 2006...
@@Ghesh_Vargiet must've been straight lol
Joke, obviously
thats amazing
"Toilet paper. Very valuable, not unique." Those words have never been more true now.
this was a really good talk. game developers should watch this and take notes. it seems like we are seeing a lot of AAA games these days trying to reach for mass appeal and falling flat on their face because of it.
At the same time... Never assume the demographic of your game. You can build your game to a demographic, but you can also fail in that.
see: dark souls 3
@@kajmak Dark Souls 3 did exceedingly well in sales and got GOTY, with high scores across the board. Wouldn't say it fell flat on its face in any respect except my own expectations, which was generally an opinion that existed in the minority. I didn't enjoy it as much as DS1, but DS3 was a fantastically crafted game and is still preferred over DS1 by many people.
@@kajmak Bad example. Dark souls 3 retained its soul.
@@kajmak wdym? Ds3 got goty and sold 10 million units.
“Be like George W. Bush… High and to the Right.”
Political humor is typically bland but that up there is actually a pretty solid joke and the fact that he doesn’t even get it only makes the whole bit funnier.
He definately does get it, saying "I don't get it" is short hand for "don't send me angry diatribes".
@@TonkarzOfSolSystem That’s a sound theory and a smart tactic, if true.
Would you explain it a bit or give me a nudge to the right direction to get it?
@@Sebal007 My guess is that it refers to George W Bush being in the upper right (ie authoritarian right) part of the political spectrum quadrant, and the 'be like him' part means that you want to be in the upper right quadrant of Kawazakis chart
@@cruzerion thanks for the plausible explanation :)
"the more people you are trying to target, the less specific you can get to their needs"
best line about game development i have ever heard.
It applies to all product development, to be honest
That’s exactly what dark souls does tho. They make their games psuedo-difficult where they’re not actually difficult. They’re designed to be marketed to the largest demographic; the average and because they’re fake difficult that means the average normie can feel like they’re playing a hardcore game for hardcore gamers
@@zzodysseuszz i 100% believe u have never completed a souls game in your life. because you have quite the skewed perspective on the franchise.
This is un-ironically one of the greatest talks I've ever heard, as life advice.
yup.. as a general company advice. Small Company where i work has an online app which serves companies transporting cargo in our part of Europe...and thats all we do. We are all friendly within company and talk openly...i asked my boss few times in conversations why dont we expand a bit into air cargo or ship cargo or warehouse operations and all that stuff connected to or alternatives to trucking bussiness we are connected to...
There i got my answer.. we wouldnt serve niche market anymore.. we wouldnt be unique anymore... we would have much more costs...and some things would not "fit" anymore like he said in presentation ( web app has a very old ui... but niche market we serve does not mind that as long as they have awesome functionality for exactly the thing they need .. for example )...
Exactly! I love to watch gamedev talks because the people are really willing to share their life experiences!
Yes, these ideas transfer very well outside of business too, like writing music or painting.
how could it have been ironic
Just realised that 'know thy enemy and know thyself and in one hundred battles you will never be in peril' is just old school language for 'how to win mobas'
That book is over 2.000 years old and it works in a lot of different situations as advice still. You should read it, "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu
@@jeronimo486 actually funny story I study game design and we had to read parts of it so yea xD
wasn't expecting to learn so much about business from this talk but damn am I loving every second
It's so nice how he asks people if he has answered their question
This is a great video to counter the “If From made their games with easy mode they would sell more games to more people” argument.
Technically it does.
It's called the late game because you have to EARN your status as the god of death.
@Yogurt cuss sounds more like a problem on your end
@Yogurt cuss did you legit delete your previous comment and act oblivious once you got replied to?
@@blank8737 what did his other comment say?
@@6xXx_Jack_xXx9 no clue, I just know that he deleted it 'cause otherwise zarucarsha wouldn't have been able to tag 'em
IKEA SOULS: PREPARE TO DRIVE EDITION
@Tom Myers demon souls is kil
The joy when you find those shortcuts in IKEA stores you can then use for speed-runs!
Good to hear a business guy from the game dev community.
Wankers. Every one of them. Imagine working on a painting and thinking about how much you're going to make from it. That happens, and explains why art has been shit since the industrial revolution.
@@postbroadcast that stupid, game isn't exclusively art
@@postbroadcast in addition to what aidil said, it's foolish to think that art can't be analyzed for how it appeals to its audience.
@@postbroadcast If you want to complain then complain about the fact that people actually need to get paid to survive instead of complaining about a guy making sure they can.
Brilliant talk, and thanks for calling Steve Jobs an asshole.
Ok it can't just be me who thought this would be about the level design of Dark Souls
yes!!
This is exactly why Anthem and many other "AAA" garbage has failed
Anthem failed because EA wasn't able to recognize it's true value... they made it look like it's the best game of the genre so far when in reality it's just a worse copy - they could have totally played the "it sucks at first then will get better" and sell it at a way lower price and then when the game would get better and draw people in could have used profitable cash shops and season passes.
Yes, trying to deliver a totally multiplayer game with the qualities of a totally singleplayer game is something a lot of companies have failed at recently.
RIP World of WarCraft :(
@@Relbl WoW is the most successful online game of all time is it not?
@@Agnes135 It was - had 12.5m active subs at one point 8-to-10-yrs ago. I would be surprised if the are 1m at this point. Adding to that Blizz have had to lay off thousands (literally!) of employees in the last six months while also killing off Heroes of the Storm and putting a nail in Diablo's coffin (with their fucking app-store port).
Final Fantasy 14 and Elder Scrolls are bigger games at this point.
The title of this video was probably the most refreshing use of an overused expression.
sometimes I feel im the only one who didnt play dark souls for it being "soo hardcooore", but because I liked the atmosphere and story of it
Yep, the difficulty is not the reason why It's my favourite game of all time. The challenge was welcomed, it made the experience memorable, but it's still not the reason why I love it so much.
For me the atmosphere and story are inseparable from the difficulty. The artistic qualities of the game have a symbiotic relationship with the technical qualities of the game, eg. The cycles of decay and rebirth present in both the game's narrative and mechanics. So many games don't manage this, and I think the Souls series, while not without flaws, should be an example to all developers.
@@abaz9495 Yes, it's kind of implied that the chosen undead is the one who would over come all challenges, and those who fail or give up goes hollow, which makes sense to have the game be difficult. But personally, it's still not the reason why I love the game. Games like ashen, the surge or lords of the fallen are difficult, I liked playing them but the atmosphere didn't capture me. Love Nioh though.
@@SunLevi Mate I'm playing Nioh at the moment and I adore it. It's funny, actually. I first played it on the basis that other people told me it was like DS and quit about 25% in. I came back to it about a week ago and approached it with a fresh mind and appreciated it on the basis of its own merits and now I'm obsessed! I haven't played the others but I'll have a look.
Most people play it for the lore. You make yourself sound dumb considering the lore videos have more views than any other videos about the games
This video is so true that I can’t believe I didn’t find this until now.
Did UA-cam algorithm suggest GDC videos to you too? I wonder if GDC is pushing stuff around now since it's back this year.
I had this video suggested multiple times before but i didn't watched. Very cool video didn't knew business angle makes you understand so much about games or entertainment.
@@WealthyHomeless been watching a lot of dark souls content while I'm waiting for Elden ring, but all in all its pretty entertaining.
@@jadenmurray1325 me too but soon our wait will be over
@@WealthyHomeless humanity restored.
This is just good business advice, generally.
And also art
In my eyes, this presentation alone completely tanks all arguments about an „easy mode“ in Soulslikes.
To be fair souls games already have a feature that allows for a less unforgiving experiance. Summoning phantoms
@@raak4070 and leveling strength
@@mayonnaise2396 of course
Heavy great mace buffed with lighting blade and perseverance weapon art is my competitive advantage.
*Laughs in bandit knife weapon art*
I salute you in fully naked, two-handed spear hit and run manner, Sir!
@@ishitrealbad3039 why bother if you can so easily react role every move
@@jaydeejay4166 yeah, quickstep is really only needed for curved swords and daggers
Well the title did its job. Guy made interesting enough points that I watched the whole thing. Though it's pretty clear if you look up some dirt on Demons' Souls that the reason the Souls games were kept, "Difficult," is because the dev team intentionally left that part out when showcasing it to the board. A lot of its design choices ran head to head with what the marketing team wanted for it, and that's why they shifted into, "Prepare to Die." with Dark Souls.
I'd argue though, that the difficulty aspect of the games is not what attracted most people to it. It was curiosity. Wanting to know if it was actually difficult. Wanting to know if there was more under the surface. Their desire to know more within the game was only fueled by the sense of accomplishment for overcoming the challenges in the way of their discoveries. Whatever those discoveries might be.
Lore.
PVP.
Statistical data.
Cut content.
Boundary breaks.
Everything about Souls games creates a sense of wonder. Curiosity leading to awe. All that they ask of the player is that you surmount its challenges in the way you most prefer, and then seeing that there are other options leads to even more things to be curious about.
Dark souls 1 level design was pretty insane. That alone made me want to discover every nook and cranny. You got rewarded with some of the coolest weapons and armour.
Hank Smith Yup, that’s the closest we’ll ever get to a 3D Metroidvania in terms of level design. The only issue I have with the level design that makes the game’s levels not a 10/10. Some of the area’s, namely Lost Izalith, and Demon Ruins to an extent.
@@somaoni8806 i for one really love those places, gives you the feeling it was all build on top off hell. With the almost heavenly city anor londo above it all.
Hank Smith I’m saying those area’s because they were rushed to meet a deadline, not specifically because they’re bad.
One of the best examples of maximizing value through tradeoffs and limitations is Silent Hill. The team realized they couldn't render anything in the fidelity they wanted while maintaining any long draw distance because of the hardware limitations of the Playstation. Instead of sacrificing the quality of the renders they covered everything in fog so they didn't have to render at range, it ended up being a thematically and mechanically invaluable move. If you play the re-releases without the fog it feels far less oppressive and haunting.
Though a lot of games of that time were absolutely plagued with fog. I think they knew they wanted to make a 3D game, not one with pre-rendered backgrounds so as not to compete with Resident Evil.
I think... Dark Souls just wanted to make an artworhty awesome authentic game. While resident evil was just a money making move. Let's not underplay that
@azazazazazazazazaaa Yes, Devs made a game they wanted to make, and not randomly experiment. Also, if you don't see differences between souls games, you are not entitled to an opinion mister.
@azazazazazazazazaaa Huh? Demon Souls, Dark Souls, Bloodborne, and Sekiro are so damn different from each other that its silly you say its just a copy and paste
At least one person gets it!
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion "mister." That being said, fromsoft did not "just" want to make an "artworthy awesome authentic game," whatever that means, they wanted to do that as well as make it profitable. That wouldn't have been possible without the keen strategy they employed in the creation of the game. What I think is that you've failed to recognize all aspects of the brilliance present within the creation of dark souls. Even the most moving pieces of art need to be created in the first place, and you simply can't do that if you lack the necessary means.
@azazazazazazazazaaa It's called incremental improvements. With each new game they tried to reinforce the strengths of the previous ones while correcting its flaws. Capcom realized probably the biggest flaw of early RE games was their control schemes and so they experimented on that, luckily for FromSoftware they came in later than that with Demon's Souls and didn't have to change as much with their game to get to the perfected form of its recent games, that doesn't mean they wouldn't have if it was needed.
This guys pacing on the presentation is like the first half of Dark Souls 1. Absolutely brilliant and engaging.
Came for the Dark Souls, stayed to learn about business efficacy.
I have a strategic marketing exam today and I'm watching this instead of studying. This guy still managed to talk about goddamn porter Jesus Christ
Watching this after the trainwreck of "Anthem" really pulls their (lack of) strategy into perspective
Every indie game developer should see this presentation. I see so many of these points being broken in an attempt to cater to everyone, especially early access games.
-Fog Gate near furniture
-Björg'nsklaargen, Architect Master
This is the second time today I have heard an Ikea to game comparison- the last being a game maker's toolkit's video on hitman's race car level.
(edit: my grammar pissed me off)
Ikea is the Dark Souls of game analogies.
Watched that video too yesterday btw, it was weird indeed to see this pop up twice in a row.
@@TheAtb85 Ikea is the Dark Souls of stores. It's big, intimidating to new comers, all the lore is hidden in item descriptions, and you can easily get lost through taking the wrong turn in the interconnected map. But, after a few years and many trips, you can blitz through it, use all the shortcuts, and know where all the best items are without even thinking about it.
Dark souls is the Ikea of Dark souls comparisons. Infinite stock.
Same.
Future_Mo same
The fact that this talk is so polarizing rather than just being uninteresting kinda proves his point in a way. Regardless of whether people agreed or disagreed with his points, it got them talking. That the whole point of these talks, so I'd consider it a success.
"The opposite of love is not hate. It's indifference."
Money... Funny when Earth never needed it until Humanity was created. lol
I was in sales for years and I have seen a lot of presentations based around design, sales, marketing ect..And I was very impressed with this presentation.
It's true that focusing on a smaller audience can be just as good as mass-market appeal, because after Elden Ring they will have made 7 Soulslike games and had 2 remasters. Each one sells great, people know what they like and expect quality, and the development is streamlined which cuts cost. To this day DS is the only brand I've bought a season pass for, because I knew I was buying the DLC and would enjoying it.
His quote about indifference being the opposite of love reminds me of the talk about tcg design form one of the mtg designers. He had a point that it is better for half the players to hate the card and the other half to love it rather than everyone being just ok with it.
This has been one of the most helpful chats this channel has put up so far! Other chats have talked about marketing in similar ways, but this one really hit the nail on the head in terms of explaining the differences, advantages, and consequences of the different methods of focusing your game. Like many other developers, I too was directly inspired by Dark Souls!
This is a pretty brilliant talk, and one that makes me smile.
If I ever subject myself to game design again, I'd want to make a product that has folks who are passionate about it not just because it sells, but because i could also know that my art has touched and inspired SOMEBODY out there.
I am a simple man. I see Dark Souls, I click
hahaha I know, right. Every. Time.
@Chips Handon Wrong. You don't care.
@Chips Handon
Thanks to your comment, I care immensely now.
Bob Dylan is the Dark Souls of garden equipment
George foreman is the dark souls of grills
I disagree about Dark Souls' target audience. It's one of my favorite games, but I didn't play it because it's difficult - I don't _play_ difficult games. I'm not a hardcore gamer at all.
I played, and loved, it simply because it's a _good_ game. It has a story it doesn't throw at your face - and would be a mediocre story if it was told the traditional way - its level design is phenomenal, and fighting even ordinary mobs is always fun.
I haven't played its sequels, so maybe this video does apply to them, but to the first? For some part of the player base, for sure, but not all. Perhaps not even most.
I agree with you. Dark Souls is more than a "hard game". I am also an average player but could beat it with no problem.
I read the other commenter that makes Dark Souls known for it's difficulty is the marketing of Bandai Namco. So sad when there is a discourse about Dark Souls, the first thing to be presented is the difficulty.
I think this is really the most pertinent comment made here. Dark Souls didn't succeed because it was difficult, or x, or y, or, z. Rather it found such a passionate audience and positive response because it was a Good game. And that's what all these corporate heads, and focus testers are trying to work out, what does 'good' mean? I think the answer is that 'good' means different things to different people, and as Mr Fischer explains here, trying to make something that is 'good' to everyone - especially to the level that Dark Souls is - is only going to compromise the level of 'good' that it can be for other people. So instead, just ask the one person who you can be sure of what 'good' means; yourself. This is what Dark Souls' creator Hidetaka Miyazaki did. It was a game that he had wanted to make, for himself, and through happenstance he was able to have the resources to do so. As did George Lucas. As did J.K . Rowling. As did Steve Jobs.
Companies can try and design a product to appeal to known interests of audiences all they want, but only a person with actual interests in the work, in the medium and the art of creating itself, can make something that people don't even know they want yet.
"Well, what is it ?"
Companies need to remember “The opposite of Love is not Hate, it is indifference”
15:15 It's intentional, but not based on your MBA-philosophy. Japanese artisans do extreme focus all the time. They know how to focus their effort on what fills the niche and cut out other things. There are tons of super-niche games in Japan. From Soft is one of many.
Imagine paying 50k to go to grad school and the teacher tells you "make products people want to buy" you look around and everyone is furiously taking notes.
Someone at ea needs to watch this presentation
Amazing presentation by Justin! Lots of very useful and immediately useful information; not only for game dev, but for analyzing games and the business of games.
I feel like Eve Online is another good example. In a world where every MMO was trying to be WoW and failing, EVE was something completely different, that only a minority of people could actually enjoy. But the people who love EVE, they basically have no where else to go. EVE is the only place that really caters to them. So it slowly and continually grew while the WoW clones died.
Amazing presentation, not just about game design, but about business and decision-making in general. Really enjoyed watching this and will definitely re-watch. Genius idea, genius execution. Thank you. :)
The lesson of darksouls is everyone wanted to play demon's souls just nobody knew what that was.
exactly!
this talk pissed me off so much and it shows why we can't have nice things in games -- market makes decisions while completely missing the point of what makes a game great or memorable or loved
@@shinluis you completely missed the point. That is EXACTLY what this talk was about. When he mentions Steve Jobs and how people know what they like, but don't know what they want....is what Nova Sky says. and From Software did. Same with playing to your own strenghts and catering to a certain audience. For example Bioware and EA: EA wants games that cater to the largest audience possible. Rather than use their different studios expertise and their different niche audience to attain an accumulative "large audience", they want every studio to develop games for everyone. Bioware was famous for Storytelling and RPG, but they lost their way by not improving at their field of expertise, while other studios around the world actually caught up and even left them in the dust in those areas. Naughty Dog for example is considered the best storytelling studio for the last 10 years and are still improving on this aspect. The comparison of Resident Evil and Dead Space or other Horror games is really great.
Your goal should be to claim a niche/ focus on your strenghts and try to become the best in that niche and then always try to stay ahead (which sounds way easier than it is).
This talk is really amazing and showing both sides: Economic trade-off and design expertise.
Dark Souls focuses on a Niche audience with a simple gamedesign, so development costs are kept at a minimum (fewer systems, average graphics) and do not need to sell too many copies to reach profit.
A successful example for a game that reaches a HUGE audience would be rockstar games. GTA or RDR cost 10x more money than any other AAAgame, but their level of polish, amount of systems and possibilties (freedom of play) far outweight their competitors and makes it profitable, because they are the best at what they do and use their HUGE amount of ressources in the best way possible.
Thomas to be honest its been a while since I’ve watched this video and i dont remember exactly what this guy said, but I do agree with just about everything you just said!
My point, I suppose, was that FROM is doing things the way they do because that’s what the only way they can/know how to do it, not because there was a market research on a viable niche they found out they could profit upon. Miyazaki said in an interview that they didnt do a lot of tutorials because they were bad at it; all the cool things in FROM games came up organically and candidly, rather than “because that will hit THIS niche market best.” They, very much not on purpose, ended up creating their own market organically, rather than trying to plan one according to the market at the time, which is what this talk suggests.. I think?
I know that this is 2 years old by now, but something about the question at 27:23 reminded me of how Doom Eternal and Animal Crossing: Horizons synergize during the buildup to their releases back in 2020. Both games operate on what seems like fundamentally opposing ideologies, but that ideological polarity actually helped with marketing the games. Doom covered gamers who wanted shooters, action, and displays of spectacle, while Animal Crossing was more on social, team based relaxing gameplay. Both niches the games were aiming for were covered, and between these otherwise very different games it felt like there was something for everyone. Regardless of how hardcore a player was, people could feel like these games were built for them.
Seeing this video in 2023, he really is only more and more correct as the gaming scene and market has shown in the past two-to-three years. Indie studios are essentially filling up the niches and overturning the gaming market by outcompeting AAA studios that have either gotten too cocky or forgot they're making games for an audience and not their investors as they have become too all-rounded and less specialized for any audience, thereby losing their original target audience and not being a specialized game for no-one. Most AAA games that have come out are forgettable and most people are indifferent to them or play them but forget about them immediately, whereas indie games are the ones becoming cult classics and having dedicated and passionate fanbases that interact with them and provide feedback.
I would say what kickstarters and other such group-funding sites do is allow your targeted audience to directly fund a game and in turn have more involvement with something they are passionate enough to "buy" before its even made. Metroidvanias of all varieties are cropping up from these indie or otherwise single-person devs who ARE the target audience themselves and majority of the time are already involved with the communities they are developing a game FOR.
One point he brought up during the Q&A about "living in your own shadow" as a game dev as being either good or bad is even more relevant given how FromSoft released another ArmoredCore game and reaching further back branched out with Sekiro, as still being the same game they always make but revitalized and just different enough to actually warrant renewed interest and not just be a clone of something they already made but with a sequel sticker slapped on.
that talk was very interesting, and is aplicable to many things, not just game design or product design in general.
it is also a lesson on what you maybe should consider when you plan on building your future
Interesting point at 26:00 I believe that is exactly what from software did with ENB and Dark Souls 2
This was a fantastic talk thanks Justin. Should have way more views tbh
The first Nier game has the most loved and unspoiled ending through word of mouth in gaming history. You couldn't pay a person to explain the ending.
This is the Lords of the Fallen of GDC talks.
Big oof
Lords of the fallen was actually a succes, despite it being a bad DS rip off.
@@ishitrealbad3039 its getting a sequel lol.
this is probably the best GDC talk I've ever watched
Amazing talk, I thought I might get bored halfway through but it had me the whole time
I wish they'd release a remastered or rebuilt Kings Field.
What's so great about Dark Souls is that it HAS a difficulty slider. It's all in-game mechanics though.
If you want easy, you play magic.
If you want medium, you play buff based (faith) melee
If you want hard, just melee and no spells
If you want insane, Soul level 1 run
That's not really the same as a difficulty slider, it's just an understanding of game mechanics. Magic isn't an easy mode, it's just generally stronger for PvE.
I never quite understood this, yeah magic made certain boss fights easier, but it took far longer and unless you had a co-OP partner or npc the bosses generally didn't give you the space needed to use it properly. It was always easier and faster to melee, exceptions being ds2 pre-patch. Even the best magic builds simply go the route of, buff weapon then use melee.
It took me 7 years, at Least 60 new games, and a lot of strategy guide reference, but dammit I beat Dark Souls. Badge of honor
Praise the sun, fellow nameless accursed undead! \[T]/
that was a really good talk, one of the best featured at GDC, and that's saying a lot
Great talk like holy shit! get morer from this guy
In other industries, the solution to being beholden to your legacy is rebranding or creating separate brand identities. I can't picture how it maps onto games though.
It’s like Ubisoft just watching this and said: “let’s do exactly the opposite of what he said with our games, specifically with Ghost Recon franchise.”
Not only did I buy the strategy guide but, I put those colored marker tabs on each section for quick access.
Beat Saber is a good example of this concept
This is just an absolutely phenomenal talk. Really practical too.
22:57 "Nine Inch Nails"
See, I had a feeling I liked this guy.
A business take that focuses on the product and what it can offer to players. What a concept!
Cut out all of the things your game doesn't need, and invest the effort on the most valuable parts. If your game involves traveling back and forth to a hub world, collecting loot, and modifying your loadout to tweak your character build with that loot; it's ok to cut some environmental quality to have good load times and spend some of the extra artistic effort to make that loot look interesting. *cough* not talking about any particular recent game *cough*. (Oh, and if all the environments end up looking the same anyway, maybe make them more modular so you can reuse the assets and create more varied encounters, since you spend 90% of the game grinding encounters)
And also give Bioware a engine more for their strengths and what they want to do, EA forcing every developer to work on the one engine is dumb.
The funny thing is... AAA Developers/Publishers have the ability to be better in everything, but greed is a Sin.
Excellent talk, really interesting to see the business strategy side of things!
A good talk and it's interesting to approach games from the viewpoint of marketing while comparing them to other product, but I'd argue that Dark Souls wasn't a good example. See, DS is indeed a perfectly fit tiltle for "hadcore gamers" and that's what the marketing around the game focused on, but it had success beyond that sphere.
The thing is, DS wasn't successful because it targeted the right crowd. It was successful because it's one of the best designed games ever made.
I'm not the first to say it, but DS isn't exactly "difficult", at least, not in the same sense as games like Touhou, Super Meat Boy or Starcraft at high level can be. Unlike most hard games, DS (the first one at least) doesn't require for you to have great reflexes and precision. It helps, but there is a strategic layer to the game that makes it possible to beat it without that. Can't beat that boss ? There is probably an easy way to cheese it, or you could find an alternate route and come back later when you've gotten a lot stronger and pulverize him. DS doesn't require you to be very good at playing DS, that's why people have managed to beat it with a Guitar Hero drumkit, with one finger, blinfolded and many other ridiculous challenges.
In that sense, the target audience for DS is a lot more open than just "hardcore gamers", it is "whoever wants a challenging experience that requires a lot of time investment but feels rewarding". And sure, you might say that's the exact definition of "hardcore", but I'd say, although most, if not all of the "hardcore" guys fit into that definition, they also have the element of experience and mastery. A "hardcore" fighting game player isn't someone who is just good at this kind of game, it's someone who mostly plays them, who played a lot of them previously and who wants to be better at them. Remove these elements and you find yourself with a much larger audience. Even most "casual" players might appreciate an experience like DS since its only requirement to enjoy it that you put in alot of time.
This, in my opinion is why DS was successful. I'm quite sure that it was envisioned from the start as something targeting a very niche and hardcore audience, but it was so well-designed that it ended up attracting a lot more than that. In fact, I'd say DS's marketing was its weakest point as it turned away a lot of people who might have otherwise enjoyed the game.
shut up
@@ratcasket Is this an attempt to harsh my mellow? Totally bogus dude.
@@ratcasket That felt kinda undeserved. :/
You've forgotten the major point. It was one of the best-designed games in your opinion, means that you're the target audience. But a lot of people are not ready to play the game because it is too hard or too depressing and harsh.
@@ievgeniiromenskyi3375 imho, I never found it too hard, too harsh or too depressing... The thing is that design of DS (be it level design or graphics etc.) is stellar. But the games were overhyped as this incredibly difficult masochistic experience, mainly because DS 1 came out at a time when AAA titles became too "hand holdy" and this caused it to be somehow seen as incredibly difficult even thought It could be considered comparable in difficulty to some earlier 3rd person action titles.
Late to the party, obviously, but this applies to basically any company, anywhere. Whether you're into games or not, what a great presentation! Actually sent this to my girlfriend who gives presentations all the time about her business.
Based on the general reaction in these comments, I feel like the speaker could have done a better job emphasizing how to practically apply these lessons. If From made a game that they wanted to make, then their target audience was themselves, and all the lessons about where to make your cuts applies just as much.
This talk is not saying that you should decide your target audience before you start designing your game. Games will always appeal to certain types of people in general, whether the designer intends them to or not. that doesn't somehow make them soulless, but being able to understand what that audience wants when you're making a game will help you make decisions about what content to prioritize. Developers only have so many dollars and so much time to make the magic happen, and this talk is not about game design but about resource allocation. He tried to make that clear with the initial quote about rpg stat investments, but then chose to use an rpg where all stats can eventually hit their cap as his primary example, where instead he could have used a game with a hard level cap in order to reinforce that message better.
"Passionate fans build strong brands"
Meanwhile 343:
Broader audience broader audience broader audience
I beat the crap out of Dark Souls after it failed to provide me with swedish meatballs
There are so many helpful and important points brought up in this presentation, and then the comment section is littered with people that came for a meme or a 30 minute gush on Dark Souls. This is about game design philosophy from a business perspective, finding and satisfying a target audience with a video game. It's not about Ikea or Dark Souls, they're just used as examples for the broader concepts of the talk.
The creature in the thumbnail is not Dark Souls though.
It's from bloodborne
@@jonathanperez4034 moon presence 😉
Is it from Ikea?
Bloodborne is canon fight me
The image now is from the DS 3. heh
I don't know jack squat about this business, but it's such a delight to listen to someone who knows what they're talking about. What a sharp dude.
That guy around the 30:00 mark talking about fast follow and that seemed like he totally missed the point of the speech but was weirdly smug about it
I didn't pickup the smugness but I'm dense :D My only thought was he reminded me of folks that comment on youtube videos but don't watch the video, and I'm like "holy shit this happens IRL too"
I was just looking for interesting ds related content since I got an off day from being sick but I ended up coming across this video that made me think more regarding how to assess the problems we hv in my sister's f&b business that im helping out at XD This is some pretty cool stuff, props to the presenter!
In addition, Dark Souls has way less voice acting than most other rpgs. In other words, they focused on gameplay, graphics, and atmospheric sounds.
Dont forget there is only music in the Firelink Shrine and Bosses
@azazazazazazazazaaa How is the gameplay clunky? I think it's boring, but not clunky.
@azazazazazazazazaaa How is the gameplay clunky ?
They focused on level and combat design, aswell as narrative ofcourse.
The thumbnail looks like the Soul of Cinder has been stuck in Ikea looking for something that he just can't find.
I'm not going to argue about the legitimacy of his comparisons; that's all semantics. The overall lesson is what matters, and that lesson is pretty indicative of the AAA industry's current failings. I'd love to hear this guy's opinion on recurrent monetization vs. consumer tolerance, mass production of specific IPs vs. consumer fatigue, and the overall sustainability/practicality of producing and maintaining live service models.
I would include labeling and challenging your audience through the media, but I think most intelligent human beings view that as a bad business practice, and this guy seems pretty intelligent.
Great advice for developing any brand, be it a musical band, a novel, tech, service, restaurant, ...
Escape from Tarkov is the darksouls of competitive online shooters and it actually has an Ikea on their maps
@@wonkaytry yes, but it has the same equipment porn as darksouls
More important, it have Goshan.
Unfinished
Expensive
Convoluted
Basically toolset for a future game
Tarkov is great
Tarkov is not a competitive game.
@@ishitrealbad3039 not in the classical sense, but you need a lot of skill (not aiming but situational awareness).
Reading the title, my mind instantly went to compare the level design of the local Ikea store to Dark Souls :) Free roaming, labyrinthine design. Shortcuts. It all makes sense now. It's the other way around: Ikea is the Dark Souls of furniture stores :)
Best comment 👌 lol