Game Companies Get Down To Business - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Software // Enterprise Applications
05:22 PM
Connect Directly

Game Companies Get Down To Business

Being a genius with a great idea isn't enough; gaming companies are following the lead of corporate IT and adopting third-party middleware to make their products winners.

At the Game Developers Conference (GDC) in San Jose, Calif. last week, middleware was everywhere. There were companies selling graphics engines, network engines, systems for generating crowd behavior, physics, and foliage, for measuring player usage metrics, and for managing in-game advertising.

The rapid pace of Internet-related software development recently has made corporate information technology seem backward and stodgy by comparison. But developers of tomorrow's cutting-edge consumer games are taking a page from enterprise developers as the complexity of game development drives adoption of middleware.

"Middleware is almost like a democratization of the technology that guys like [Doom creator John] Carmack pioneer," says Michael Arrington, an analyst with entertainment technology market research firm The Acacia Research Group.

Though the game industry still reveres its technical visionaries like Carmack, programming genius matters a lot less when competently crafted code can be bought by the box.

Or by the company. In July 2004, Electronic Arts, among the largest video game publishers in the U.S., acquired Criterion Software Ltd., a UK-based game developer and maker of a popular middleware package called RenderWare. At the time the company said, "EA places a strategic priority on creating games with a set of tools and libraries that are shared among its studios. RenderWare and RenderWare4--currently under development for next generation consoles--will be combined with EA’s technology to create a common framework for development."

Company spokesperson Tammy Schachter says EA does not normally discuss its internal technology, but acknowledges that EA's development efforts are aimed not just at building games, but at building technology platforms.

"These games are getting so big and complicated that the lone visionary doesn't do it anymore," says John Austin, COO of game middleware maker Emergent Game Technologies.

Not coincidentally, Emergent has an answer to this problem: Emergent Elements, new modular game development software for the creation of 3D graphics with realistic physics, the analysis of live game data metrics, and automated management of development processes.

There are several reasons such tools are finding favor: the introduction of new multicore, multithreaded processors, which are more complicated to program; the growing number of gaming platforms, particularly mobile phones; the additional complexity created by efforts to integrate advertising into gaming; the popularity of massively multiplayer virtual worlds that require massive server infrastructure; and the efforts to develop reusable gaming architectures that can deliver multiple related titles and more predictable profits.

Gaming companies are discovering that the ability to build software effectively impacts their endurance in the marketplace, says IBM Fellow Grady Booch. "It used to be that in the gaming market that you'd hire great people, get some great ideas, get some great artists, launch a game, and you could make some real money and some real impact," he says. "These days the entry costs of building a game are much higher."

That essentially was Microsoft's point when, at GDC, it introduced a pre-release version of its XNA Studio tools and debuted the XNA Framework -- development tools for its Xbox 360 -- "[i]n the face of escalating game development costs, expanding teams and ever more complex hardware technologies," Microsoft says.

According to Geoffrey Selzer, Emergent's CEO, computer games are ten times more complicated and costly to produce than they were in 1994. To better manage dollars and details, he suggests that middleware can save game developers 20% to 40% in labor costs.

Forrester analyst Paul Jackson observes that top titles can take up to three years in development and have budgets around $20 to $25 million and may still bomb in retail. "So anything which mitigates risk, reduces turnaround time, and raises quality has to be good," he writes via E-mail.

There is a downside, however. Echoing a constant theme at GDC in recent years, Jackson says, "For developers, using middleware may mean that their game doesn’t look or feel as unique as it could." He pointed to the sameness of games based on the Unreal graphics engine. "And there may be a performance hit."

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
1 of 2
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
InformationWeek Is Getting an Upgrade!

Find out more about our plans to improve the look, functionality, and performance of the InformationWeek site in the coming months.

11 Things IT Professionals Wish They Knew Earlier in Their Careers
Lisa Morgan, Freelance Writer,  4/6/2021
Time to Shift Your Job Search Out of Neutral
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  3/31/2021
Does Identity Hinder Hybrid-Cloud and Multi-Cloud Adoption?
Joao-Pierre S. Ruth, Senior Writer,  4/1/2021
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Current Issue
Successful Strategies for Digital Transformation
Download this report to learn about the latest technologies and best practices or ensuring a successful transition from outdated business transformation tactics.
Flash Poll