By on 31 May, 2012 at 9:30 AM
89 Views | 7 Comments

Randy Pitchford: “All Games Suck Compared To Where They Could Be”

Randy Pitchford: “All Games Suck Compared To Where They Could Be”

Gearbox Software boss Randy Pitchford has made some eyebrow-raising statements in a recent interview with GamesIndustry International, claiming that he believes gaming is still stuck “in the stone ages”, and that “all games suck compared to where they could be.”

“You contemplate that the opportunity for complexity will expand with the technology, and we’re not even close to where [games] could be,” Pitchford said.

“Games suck, frankly. Compared to where they could be, all games suck.”

Get this. Pitchford’s solution to advancing games out of the stone age is billion dollar budgets.

“It’s going to be exciting to be part of a $100 million development team, or a $500 million, or a $1 billion dollar team.

“I’m excited about that. Can you imagine how awesome it’s going to be when we can make a billion dollar game, and doing that’s a great decision because that’s where the market is.

“Think about how crazy these simulations are going to get. And then someday we’ll be living in the Matrix, or the Holodeck, and I’m gonna be writing the software. We’re not even close to what’s possible. We’re in the stone ages, man.”

These have got to be some of the strangest, if not silliest comments I’ve read in a while. And talking of games that suck, well, Duke Nukem Forever was one of the most backward, unimpressive and lacking titles to be released in the last half a decade or more. But that’s not important right now.

I can easily believe that games could be so much more, but really, if they start getting billion dollar budgets, where is that kind of funding going to come from? How long would it take to develop games like this? And most importantly, how much would we have to pay for them?

Yeah his vision is nice. But it’s not really realistic, and just because games are not technologically where they could be, doesn’t mean they aren’t great, impressive or serving their purpose.

Maybe I’m taking these comments in the wrong way. Thoughts?

Source: VideoGamer

If You Liked This, You Should Try These!

Name: Azhar Amien
Location: Cape Town
Position: Editor, Reviews

Azhar has published 2501 posts. Read all of Azhar's posts.
  • http://egamer.co.za Dean Oberholzer

    What you talking about. Duke Nukem Forever was Game of the Year. 

  • Alessandro Barbosa

    So, this D-bag’s visions of “great games” are games that have millions and millions of dollars put behind them? Is he fucking stupid?

    Some of the most inspiring and genre defining games have come from studios that only employ eight people, like Journey. The problem with games nowadays is that they become more business oriented than anything else.

    Publishers force developers to create games that roll in ridiculous amounts of cash because everyone wants to shoot terrorists in all corners of the globe with an M14. No one gives a fuck anymore about games that propel the medium forward, or games that will revolutionize the way the world perceives gaming.

    It’s all about “oh look, we’ve added another million ways you can decapitate your foes, we’re so pushing the fucking limit”. Just look at Borderlands 2. As much as I want to play that game, I know it’s not going to be one that sticks in my mind forever because of its originality. If you use the same analogy that Mr. Randy Dickford has used, than most of the games that his studio has created, and are still developing, suck.

    Basically, don’t listen to this guy. He’s just another “business” man that doesn’t actually give a shit.

    • http://tydvirtaal-agamersperspective.blogspot.com Duncan Hobbs

      Heh, Mr Randy Dickford. Nice.

  • http://twitter.com/Weeman360 Pienaar Anker

    Yeah this guy…. *sigh
    If anything, games are being held back by technology. All the shortcuts programmers have to take, all the optimizing thats needed in order for the game to run smoothly. Thats tech’s fault. Nah I don’t agree with this guy one bit. he’s just a spoiled brat

    • Alessandro Barbosa

      Again, I don’t fully agree with you, to an extent.

      Sure, new technology and easier ways to optimise games is certainly a factor holding back a lot of what could be created in this day and age, but that’s still not going to solve the actual problem.

      The really problem is that many studios have simply become lazy and stagnant, and are far to quick to just make something that fits the status quo to make money. Sure, this industry is about making money, but it’s also killing it at the same time.

      That’s why Indie Studios are so important, because they are the real innovators in this industry. They aren’t bond by publishers that force them to rush games or direct their creative processes. Eventually, indie games are going to be the only things pushing the envelop and giving us new things to try, while AAA development is slowly falling into a pit of monotony :P

    • http://twitter.com/Weeman360 Pienaar Anker

      I agree with you. but we are making 2 different points. My point is: in a race between technology and gaming evolution, technology is behind. (mostly graphics wise though. I know thats not relavent when it comes to good games but it sometimes helps)
      … still sticking to my spoiled brat comment though

  • AG_Sonday

    I can’t see where he’s coming from on this one. Yes, we could have technically stupendous games if we pushed what was possible to the very extremes but that’s not the be all and end all of games. If that’s what he thinks then he’s not only tunnel-visioned but also a hypocrite given how DNF turned out. He probably looked at it and said, “This game is so technically sound it’ll win us more GotY awards then a fusion of BioShock, Heavy Rain and Batman.”

    Limbo is a perfect example of how concept, ideas, exceution, story and so many other little things contribute to making a game fantastic. Heavy Rain was not technically the best game I’ve ever seen but it looked good and played amazingly with easily th most gripping and immersing narrative I’ve ever come across. Limbo was an superb game developed on a tiny budget that is just such a perfect, unique experience.

    I’ve said it time and again but the industry is lacking proper execution when it comes to ideas and in fact, it’s just lacking fresh, innovative risks and ideas in general. To give an example. The Prince of Persia games have not aged well on a technical front. The controls are a bit iffy, the sound is strange at times and yet the gameplay is still fun and good and the narratives are tight-knit and well-told with good characterisation and plots. Those games were made around 6 years ago.

    Just go back to Borderlands 2, Randy.