"I think this is why Japanese games aren't doing so well...1992: id Software releases Wolfenstein 3D. Moving and shooting can be done simultaneously.2009: Capcom releases Resident Evil 5. Lacks ability to move and shoot simultaneously."

" I think this is why Japanese games aren't doing so well...1992: id Software releases Wolfenstein 3D. Moving and shooting can be done simultaneously.2009: Capcom releases Resident Evil 5. Lacks ability to move and shoot simultaneously. "

"

@Delta_Ass said:

" I think this is why Japanese games aren't doing so well...1992: id Software releases Wolfenstein 3D. Moving and shooting can be done simultaneously.2009: Capcom releases Resident Evil 5. Lacks ability to move and shoot simultaneously. "

Interesting comparison. I'm going to make a guess here and say that Resident Evil 5 probably sold a hell of a lot more copies than Wolfenstein 3D did back in the day."

" That debate was a lot more thoughtful than I honestly expected it to be, given the general precedence on Western sites seems to be to simply say, "lol, Japan is irrelevant and they don't know jack shit what to do next." Thus, as someone who uses Japanese on a daily basis and will be temporarily living in Tokyo starting next month, as well as somebody who respects this legitimately healthy debate, I'll throw my hat into the ring and provide another perspective on the matter. Whether anybody else agrees with what I have to say is another matter entirely, but how I see things is how I see them, so take it for what it's worth.

A number of factors contributed to the rise and dominance of Japanese games in the post-crash industry throughout the 80s and 90s and I think a real understanding of this is necessary in order to get a true handle on the topic at hand. Historically and culturally speaking, there may be nobody better set up from the outset to create games than the Japanese and this is for several reasons. To begin with, most video games are, by nature, very aesthetically-driven experiences. The quality of the visuals may vary from game to game, but save for some scant exceptions, graphics are a core part of what it means to play video games. They can be used for a variety of purposes, from displaying a creator's unique vision to eliciting specific sensations. This has very intimate ties to the Japanese experience itself. The language and the culture formed around it have a deep appreciation for the aesthetics of most everything, and not just on a superficial level. Kanji, for example, may be a series of characters employed in writing, but they're very deliberately designed to be graphically evocative. Different radicals/traits used to make up a whole Kanji can convey meanings on their own and this is done entirely pictorially, rather than something such as phonics as in a number of Western languages. If you delve further and look into the major pieces of art which have since become famous around the world, you'll often find that their designs are done just as much for symbolic reasons as they are for presentation. Being able to use all of this heritage in something as synthetic and electronic as a video game has, traditionally, given Japanese developers quite an edge, in my opinion.

But what also can't be denied is that the Japanese have a very rich history of just games in general, too. Some may have been imported from other countries, but their impact and continued relevance even into modern times cannot be overstated. Go and Shogi, for example, may have high difficulty curves, but the possible strategic intricacies coupled with their constant historical proliferation has helped games at large become quite respected in modern Japanese society. This is the reason why arcades are so successful there, as they tie in the innate social side of humanity with yet another fundamental cultural part of Japan.

This isn't to say that the West doesn't have an appreciation for aesthetics or games, but I think they're implemented in a different way such that they were, until fairly recent, more difficult to directly incorporate into developing games. "Good artistry" has typically entailed different things than in Japan, for example, and was therefore a lot more difficult to achieve until the past few hardware generations due to technological limitations. Furthermore, if you define aesthetics in the most abstract sense, then a large percentage of the most critically lauded human works in history haven't been visually-oriented at all, but arguably lie predominantly within literature. Eastern and Western cultures both have strong back catalogs of superb authors who worked in the written word and made it work beautifully, but in the case of the West, the proliferation of texts such as the Bible has ensured that most people in the West have a more universal appreciation for the written word in terms of aesthetics (ie: the flow and style of a work) versus the aesthetics of something such as a painting. Partly due to, again, technological limitations--cartridges didn't always have enough room for lots of text and great gameplay--and also because few developers have had traditional writing backgrounds, this has prevented the West's version of aesthetic appreciations to come to fruition until fairly recently in video games. As for the history of games, while things such as chess and, in the case of Tetris, petronimos have had huge cultural impacts, mainstream perceptions of what a game is and how one should function have been more of a detriment to Western game development than it has over in Japan. Games can also have the perception of being used for entertainment as well over there, but they haven't been traditionally stigmatized as being used solely for that purpose, unlike how games are usually seen overseas.

So what, in my opinion, led to the decline in relevance and revenue for Japanese developers? Probably a mixture of changing business tactics on the part of console makers, as well as more Western talent appearing and finally having the means to really catch up with their Japanese counterparts. After the first PlayStation was released, Sony, ironically a Japanese company, was able to make huge strides with Western developers because their licensing terms were a lot "kinder" and more flexible than Nintendo's had traditionally been. (There is a reason why the Nintendo of the 80s and 90s was perceived by some to be a very rough-talking business that almost monopolized the revitalized game industry.) Far less restricted on a financial and publishing front, Western developers were finally able to start applying the lessons they had been taking for years from their Japanese counterparts and create their own market which would, as we all know, become a huge force with which to be reckoned. Technological limitations became less and less major to the extent that developers weaned more on Asimov and Salinger than, say, Yoshimoto Banana and Sei Shounagon, were better able to realize their imaginations and visions better than in previous generations. The fact that Western audiences were able to finally able to have a larger swath of experiences that resonated with them personally, rather than ones which, while still well-crafted, were less relateable due to cultural hurdles, probably helped significantly in making the Western market the largest one there is today.

Now for the other important question: What do I think Japanese developers need to do to remain important in games on an international level? I think that, first and foremost, they need to always retain that unique identity it is to be Japanese when they continue to make their games. Continuing to make money will probably mean that some will compromise their conventional practices in favor of being more "universally appealing" for worldwide release, but I think they should nonetheless figure out how to make their games continually feel Japanese so that they don't lose their uniqueness and feel like mere rehashes of Western games. I say this because I think part of the reason why Japanese games have been so appealing and profitable is precisely because they're different and, at times, seemingly exotic in nature. Not everyone is bound to necessarily appreciate that, but I believe that for integrity's sake, Japanese developers should never completely foresake their own culture just go make in-roads with the Western markets. However, I nonetheless feel that a lot of them do need to take this time as a learning experience and research very, very closely what it is that makes a number of Western-developed games so successful these days and adapt their gameplay and development philosophies accordingly. As with any industry, making video games is a matter of adaptation and survival of the fittest. It's how, as I already pointed out, that Western developers have been able to economically and influentially usurp Japanese developers and create the international market that it is today. If Japanese developers can pull that off and maintain their cultural identity, then I think they'll eventually be on the rebound. Perhaps the playing field will never again result in their utter dominance again, but it could become more even than it is now if Japanese developers take the right steps now and in the coming years. I seriously doubt that their side of the industry will become so irrelevant that they will be driven to the point of oblivion.

Again, this is coming from the perspective of a speaker of both English and Japanese. I speak the former natively, but as I mentioned earlier, the latter language is just as important to me in my daily life. I merely provide these opinions in the hopes that they contain a perspective not commonly seen in these debates. To me, the issue of Eastern vs. Western developers is a much more complex one than many would perceive it to be and I hope that this post has shed light onto why I see it that way. Agree or not, I hope this at least contributes a bit to future discussions on the matter. I, at least, enjoy putting my background to good use in times like these.

"