The Fall of Japanese Gaming Has Been Greatly Exaggerated

Picture_002
Saturday, January 09, 2010

Ideas for Sale ImageIt's not the first I've heard the sentiment. I've heard many a games journalist in 2009 complain they just weren't into Japanese games anymore. That they were more of same. That every JRPG  and anything else from Japan seemed like the same thing they played last generation. Of course, many of the same critics proclaim their love for shooters or sports games that don't change drastically from what they loved in the previous games. Usually I just leave it alone. People tend to gloss over the flaws in what they love and exaggerate flaws in what they don't. The psychology makes sense; Sigmund Freud asserts people commonly project what they don't like about themselves onto as a defense mechanism. Fans often extend that projection onto musicians, movies, sports teams, and other things in which they fault things in what they aren't fans of while glossing over the same mistakes in what they're invested in. There's a certain point after studying fan culture where I've stopped getting worked up over it, roll my eyes and move on.

Then tonight I caught a rather annoyed tweet from Daniel Feit whom directed me to Armando Filgueiras Jr.'s piece "Is Japan Still Important to Gaming?" I'll admit, on title alone, my initial reaction was to not even bother. Which wasn't fair. Any bold statement or question deserves to be heard out. So, I did give Armando a fair shake to explain the prospect of Japanese games becoming a dying breed and...well...

...really?

I'm dumbfounded how people can't seem to comprehend the idea the growth and expansion of an industry allows for more companies/countries to come in and stake a claim without it somehow simultaneously meaning the downfall of the company/country that has the stranglehold over the industry previously.

The drop in market-share by percentage is very much a valid discussion. Japan has definitely loss ground. But let's not lose perspective here. This isn't like Japan went from having half the market-share in the 8-bit and 16-bit eras and has fallen into obscurity. Western-influence on gaming now has nothing on Japanese in terms of domination at the peak of Japan's hold on the industry. If you want to take words at actual definitions as opposed to using words for dramatic effect, the West isn't even in the neighborhood of domination. 

Much of that had to with the crash in the 80s and that migration to PC in the West. Japan had the console market to itself for a while. PC's, at least in America seemed ruled by Western development. This led to different lineages in game development and audiences that for many didn't even touch what the others were playing. For instance, as influential as Halo was in breaking first-person shooters as a staple in the console space, there was actually nothing new about the FPS to the PC gamer. For people that grew up on console RPGs from Japan that mostly follow the lineage of Dragon Quest, Western RPGs from that follow the lineage of table-top Dungeons & Dragons games seemed deceivingly new and innovative when they came to consoles. Actually, the base gameplay of a disguised die-roll, more directly self-chosen attribute paths, and non-linear storytelling were old hat that predated video games.

This isn't to diminish many of the incredible innovations to come out of the West in recent generations. They have been plenty of industry-changing innovations to come from the West. That's undeniable. But I did want to cite what's a common PC gamer complaint in often innovations in console gaming weren't necessarily new.

Now to upset PC gamers -not that I care- but while PC games were influencing and still influence game development as a whole, if we're using the metric of sales and mainstream acceptance as a gauge, there's a reason most of the top-selling games of all time were developed in Japan for consoles and handhelds. And even looking past Wii Play (i.e. Wii mote with $10 mini-game collection), a great number at the top are Wii and DS games. Just within the VGChartz tracking of the top 50 in worldwide sales for 2009 and even taking out Wii Sports (pack-in) and Wii Play, Japanese games outsold Western games by 34.3 million units. Japanese games penetrate the top of North American and European sales charts far higher than the West does Japan.

Surely, these figures probably don't account for MMO subscriptions, Steam, free indie games, or social networking gaming but that's irrelevant in the context of the debate. With that gap just in sales, it is ludicrous to present the idea the Japanese game industry is becoming irrelevant or that Western development is dominating the industry.

I also find it funny with console makers scrambling to make motion controls, with the DS in its touch screen as well as mobile gaming in the Japan being light years ahead of the West before iPod or iPhone did either, that people proclaim there's a lack of innovation that's coming from Japan. And while I'm as equally excited for the upcoming slate of Western games in 2010 that Armando lists, from what we actually know of them most of that list are arguably not that innovative and may lean more toward the iterative problem for which many Western games decry Japanese games. The one that might truly be innovative in Heavy Rain is still arguably a mix of old tricks (QTE's, context-sensitive controls, non-linear storytelling) with a death mechanic that's may be more interesting in theory than in practice.  I'm as hopeful for the critical darling as anyone, but it's probably leading candidate for 2010 hyped game most likely to actually flop.

But sales aren't everything. History shows sales figures are as much a result of access, audience and promotion as anything else. It's no small wonder that once Microsoft released a successful console in the Xbox (and then the Xbox 360) that, like one the PC, the top selling games for it would be Western games. People tend to buy things produced with their sensibilities in mind. Those things are often created locally as often someone native to a city, region or country understands the cultural nuances better than someone from outside.

So while it's easy to point to Square Enix president Yoichi Wada's "prejudice" in the Japanese market line, an American would have to be in complete denial to make a claim Americans don't do the same thing with many products. "Buy American" is a popular economic slogan and there are plenty of people in this country that won't try a food, watch a movie, buy a car, read a book, and yes even buy a game if they perceive it too "foreign." Heck, we can often be tribal with products between different regions within the country. So that's not remotely a mindset problem unique to Japan and aren't keeping games from being sold there

I don't believe one region, barring another industry disaster will probably ever be truly dominate again because of that. Japan the rest of the Asia, North America, and Europe all have their own markets with several things that stay within each and that cross-over into other markets. And all have developers within those regions that understand their regions and will often cater well to them well remain strong in their own foothold.

But rest assured, the rumors of Japanese game development's downfall have been greatly exaggerated.


Gerren LaQuint Fisher, like Japanese gaming and hip-hop, has been presumed dead. When he shows signs of life he contributes to The Game Reviews, tweets @gerrenlaquint, and runs a humble little blog called The Underscore

 
Problem? Report this post
GERREN LAQUINT FISHER'S SPONSOR
Comments (13)
Default_picture
January 09, 2010
@Gerren: Excellent article! I agree with practically everything you said. I think the issue regarding creativity in Japanese games and the market decline as a whole as been blown way out of proportion. The market is shrinking somewhat, but I think part of it has to do with the economic recession and high prices of Japanese games in an increasingly global market. I think more and more Japanese gamers are catching on to how outrageous the prices are they're being charged for certain DS titles. I have no data to back this up, so I can't prove that, but I'd suspect that it might be one of the causes behind decreased sales. That, and the splintering of the market this console generation. So many new things have been thrown at gamers that they're still adapting.
Default_picture
January 09, 2010
After reading the comment to my article and reading yours I'm getting the feeling I'm being misunderstood. Since I first wrote my article it has been edited and things have been removed but I pointed out that I am ignorant when it comes to Japan, But as a gamer in modern day I can't help but to notice to change in game development as a whole. I agree with a lot of what you have to say and if I said anything to under mind the stranglehold Japan has had on gaming for the past 2 decades, that comes from my amateur writing. I understand that gaming belonged to Japan for a good while and I am in no way underestimating the role Sony and Nintendo play in the gaming world. My focus is on the development side of things. The list of games I noted where mostly sequels and yes are very similar to their predecessor but I see the same when it comes to Japanese games, for example Bayonetta is very similar to Devil May Cry and Final Fantasy XIII is kind of self explanatory. I was just expressing my views on the subject, and did not mean it to be discriminatory or anti-Japan. I wish the U.S. was as accepting as Japan is of the gaming culture, but when it comes to development Japan's influence is all but gone. You don't really American companies trying to make a Monster Hunter clones but later this year on March 31st we will see Quantum Theory a very clear Gears of War clone. I wish the best for Japanese development and hope to see great new exciting content from them but as of right now they have become stale.
Picture_002
January 09, 2010
@Armando I understand what you're trying saying on the development side. I just believe you're turning a very generous blind eye to those same thing in the West. Part of addressing that list was to break down this myth the West is any less guilty of putting out iterative sequels or games that aren't that different from anything else we've seen. The West hasn't exactly done anything so far and away ground-breaking and game-changing in terms of hardware or software to warrant the claim of being far ahead of Japan as many in the West would like to believe. As with any industry, very few things come through any given year that are truly ground-breaking. Most things you see are variations on what we've seen before. We just so happen to see more of the interesting things that do happen here because many of the interesting things that go on in Japan never see the light of day in America. There's a drastic difference between Japan opening itself up to more Western influence and Japan no longer influencing things. I've watched our sports sims take RPG-progression elements that are as Western as Eastern. I've seen Rachet gameplay footage that seemed clearly influenced by elements of Mario Galaxy. Both regions learn from and incorporate ideas from each other. And frankly development communities on both sides would be foolish not to. But the reason you don't see Japan releasing a load of Monster Hunter clones here is the same reason you the see American companies releasing a load of Gears of War or Halo clones in Japan. The market arguably really doesn't support the originals enough to warrant THEIR releases in the first place. That has a lot less to do with development influence than it does to not send a product out to die in an audience that's proven it doesn't care for it.
Default_picture
January 09, 2010
Your last paragraph forgives any of the small grievances I have for the rest of your article. I think the thing to focus on is that gamers feel disdain for Japanese companies because most of the big companies are taking cost-cutting measures and Nintendo is trading some of their innovations in the past for ridiculous marketability in the present. Instead of saying something like that, it's way too convenient for someone to say, "Well, Japan must just suck." I think a bigger problem in the culture around games is massive hyperbolizing due to laziness.
Picture_002
January 09, 2010
@Jon I agree definitely to the point of how we as a community often uses hyperbole for so much. Armando's article sparked this one, but I'm not trying to pick up him. I am attempting to the address the an overarching attitude some people have that's overstating things on many ends. Where I'll jump from you is also where I'm seeing a bit of another problem within the culture. One person's "ridiculous marketability" is another person's step forward to something new. I think from review styles on site to genres of games to even this idea of country of origin fans have an extremely bad habit of equating things that don't cater to them directly as being things that "suck," are "gimmicky", and are wastes of time. Nintendo gets that bad rap now for the technology in the Wii. They particularly get that from gamers that wanted Nintendo to be more like Sony or Microsoft and really only see innovation as pushing graphics, frame-rate and the amount of stuff that can be done online. For those people that value does thing most, that's their right. But it's a very limited view of innovating and somewhat self-important to think anyone pushing things that adds value to people that don't have their values or play the games they play. The "hardcore" can complain all they want; 3+ years is an awfully long time for a gimmick to remain as successful as the Wii has been prior to the drop-off toward the end of 2009. I may not like the Wii, buy a Wii, nor think Nintendo has supported as well as they could have. But I'd have to a total hater to think Nintendo didn't do something right. Obviously Nintendo's competitors think so or else they wouldn't be investing in taking the motion-controls further.
Default_picture
January 09, 2010
I don't think you'd have to be a total hater for you to recognize that there's a sizable "hardcore" audience that gets nothing out of the most "innovative" aspects of Nintendo's console. Like it or not, I'll personally always be more compelled to play Modern Warfare 2 over Wii Fit, despite the good titles that fully use motion controls like Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. I think the central problem with the Wii is that sales and success are often conflated, because under some definitions of success, sales are certainly a prime determinant. However, success is also a subjective term, so it's equally valid to say that Nintendo's strategy hasn't been successful for a perfectly valid segment of the market.
Default_picture
January 10, 2010
Good Post.
Picture_002
January 10, 2010
Sure, Jon But that's more to personal tastes. I'm not going to rail on PC as a platform because most of what I've seen does nothing for me as a gamer that I don't feel better served on another platform. It does plenty of great things for it's audience and I have the ability to step outside myself and appreciate it doing that for PC gamers. I don't own a Wii. I never intend to. I'd much rather play my NCAA online dynasty, Assassin's Creed, and a main series Final Fantasy over most Wii games. I'm not their audience and I was well aware of that before it launched. Sure, Nintendo's strategy hasn't been successful in pleasing a perfectly valid segment of the market. A segment that it's pretty obviously overvalues itself in relation to what Nintendo has shown itself to please. I do particularly like it, no. Do I think it's a valid complaint, absolutely. But I think we as gamers and/or writers are normally so wrapped up in subjective ratings of games and such that we forget what Nintendo is and what ultimately actually matters in determining success in their world is pretty objective. At the end of the day, what you or I would rather play than a Wii game has absolutely nothing to do with whether the console has been a success. Nintendo is a for-profit business; an entity that ultimately is deemed a success by it's bottom line being a turned profit. That's bottom line isn't written by a jilted segment of the market united by an underlying gripe is the consumer equivalent to "You don't call me like you used to." They've made the jump from last to first in sales. They're the only console maker whose product, if I'm not mistaken, is profitable. They pushed for (you can argue if it's forward or not) a change in both interacting with their games and opening the market to new consumers. Their bottom line has more than grown on the strength of millions of people that embraced that. If the definition of a for-profit business in being an entity that sells a product or service with goal of turning a profit, Nintendo has been inarguable success with the Wii. We can cry split milk over the cynicism of sales figures all we want; for what Nintendo's purpose is and it continuing to exist as the entity it is, that IS the determinant of success. Everything else is ultimately icing on the cake. Remember, the Dreamcast was a critical darling of "hardcore" gamers and you're not going to find many business people that say it and Sega's strategy made Sega a success.
Default_picture
January 10, 2010
Thanks for completely turning around my opinion on the context of your article. If your point is "your opinions are valid, hardcore crowd, but honestly nobody gives a shit in the scheme of things", then you're part of the problem.
Picture_002
January 10, 2010
First of all, I was addressing specifically your assertion about Nintendo. The rest of my article is it's own thing. But you can draw whatever assumptions you want. That's your right. But whatever conclusions you want to draw about me as a person in the scheme of things.... The point my last comment is the argument of whether or not Nintendo as a business is successful is a completely separate conversation than whether or not you or I hard as hardcore gamers agree with how they are successful. As a game critic, I'm in your boat as someone Nintendo left behind. I absolutely wish Nintendo was pushing more games that I could get into on the Wii as opposed to my DS. In terms of how Nintendo's supports their game catalog on that console, I'm personally disappointed. As a gamer, I feel I was part of the consumer base that help build them and they abandoned me. And while Sony and Microsoft haven't, I'm watching them go the route of motion-controls which I don't have faith in and feel they may be following Nintendo down the wrong path. As a game critic, I still feel mostly the same way. Philosophically, I don't know if that audience stays. That said, I didn't think that audience existed in the first place so Nintendo's already proven me wrong once already. I think Nintendo's best served supporting their technology a lot better than they have and putting more of their own effort into seeing third-party hardcore games do well because ultimately I think they'll have to come back to that audience and they may not be there for Nintendo when they need it. But that's of course running on the assumption that expansion of the gaming audience contracts and does so sooner than later. As a person, looking at not as a gamer but a person objectively analyzing business moves and watching bottom line, to this point Nintendo was absolutely brilliant. They are rolling in money the other two companies wish they could have to make up losses. I can't project what happens long-term but to this point the results support everything they've done. That, frankly, is the perspective I think Nintendo sees things. Profits know no loyalties, they take from whoever gives. And we from EA amongst other companies have seen before profits have no morals under the wrong leadership. That unfortunately is the nature of big business. They will take your money if you're willing to give it, but if they can turn profits without you, they'll treat you like they don't need you. And that's exactly what they done. Success in business is based on profits, market share and power. And while as people we can force fair and humane labor practices to be followed, we can't force a company to make something past our collective voice and purchasing power. To this point with Nintendo it hasn't been enough or we wouldn't have reason to be having this discussion about them in the first place. If it somehow offends you I've been trained to divorce my own personal feelings from my ability to analyze that's a you problem. It makes you come off like like the local sports fan that wants to cover his ear and to yell out gibberish whenever some makes the point their favorite team is a business and has to make business decisions that aren't always fan friendly. I empathize, but I never want to be that person. I'm much happier being able to glean the perspective I do. To be able to say that isn't to endorse it. It is not a value judgment. It is a snapshot observation of where we as gamers are with that company. Nothing more, nothing less. Because truth me told, that self-defensive accusation you lobbed looking down on me doesn't make me part of the problem. Having the perspective of seeing things through lens not just through my own personal feelings makes me actually feel not having a Wii and not being there day one to support the hardcore games that have come out, flopped and reinforced the business approach Nintendo has taken. THAT in my view that concerns me as a gamer. And I've dedicated way too much of my time today to Nintendo
Default_picture
January 23, 2010
I've been banging the "Japan is over" drum quite a bit myself lately, and it's simply a personal thing for me. I've been playing games for over 30 years, and in that time I've honed in on exactly what types and styles of games I enjoy the most. The thing is, over the last 10 years or so, the games I want to play simply don't come from Japanese studios. It's really that simple. If Japanese developers begin turning out games that speak to me, I'll be more than happy to purchase and play them. In the meantime, for me at least, Japan continues to fade into oblivion.
Default_picture
January 23, 2010
I really like this article;very informative to my feelings on gaming iteration in general.Even though I agree abit to what both you and Armando have had to say,I'm leaning more towards your on end on the basis that japanese gamig is still very relevant but just as games developed in the western hemisphere,not much has changed or very innovated.You generally over gloss over rips of existing iterations of features implemented in one game going over to the next without anything new being added.Some of those companies can very well be faulted for not trying to harder,but it boils down to the extent of what can be done with existing features and elements until someone can either add-on or reinvent it.This is a notion that is very easily applied to many of the technologies and medical procedures,among other things,available to us in this day and age. Also,I agree with the fact that many countries tend to run games sold in their country moreso than games developed elsewhere,not just on the notion of promoting their countries own product,but to some extent a sense of inferiority either stemming from how they may feel about a game developed overseas or said game from overseas upstaging that country's product and phasing it out.This is nothing new to say the least,but in the grand scheme of things it is totally unnecessary and shows an endearing amount of doubt that something made within in a certain country won't still do well if an item produce somewhere else outdoing it.
Chris17
May 04, 2010

The Japanese games industry is just that- an industry just the same as in the west, and is as prone as any entertainment based industry anywhere to creative bankruptcy. I agree that rumours of the games industry's death here are largely exaggerated, but there's a case to be made for people on the outside looking in and going 'a-ha! Their games are stale and broken! AND their clothes are different to our clothes!'.

Just the same as in the west, there are hardcore gamers and people making products for people who follow their hobby closely and like different things, and then there are casuals who buy one or two games a year. My girlfriend's stoked for Dragon Quest Monsters Joker 2  (quite a mouthful) , and I rolled my eyes a little as she explains it to be the dullest freaking Pokemon aping thing on the planet. Back home there are people for whom Halo Reach will satisfy their gaming itch for a whole year. It's the same thing, really.

The problem is economic factors limiting the commercial success of more alternative games here, which becomes a greater issue than in the combined lump of AmEurope when you consider the Asian market is a good deal smaller than the western one, and the PC market where such things should thrive is essentially nonexistent.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.