You know, I rather wish this fellow had made a comment that would give me an excuse to make a news story out of this interview. Unfortunately, he didn't, but I rather do think people should read this, especially people who expect their games to be decent. This interview is ripe with choice bits. You can read it here.
Does anyone else see the sick humor of Bonnell's statements? I propose we have him removed from the species, to preserve the industry. A single death is little price to pay from preventing him from making any further impact.
Bruno Bonnell said:1UP: Between the rise of companies like Infogrames, Ubisoft, Titus and Microids in the late 1990s, what is it with the French and the videogame industry?
Bruno Bonnell: It's that a generation of French students has been educated under computing and mathematical models. Don't forget the country's depth of culture either. I was a wannabe movie producer myself at first, until I realized I could invent the movies of the 21st century.
As a nation, we had a base of raw talent ready to pounce on any creative outlet, and videogames presented just such an opportunity at the time. But truthfully, most French are bad businesspeople. We kind of burst onto the scene for a while, then lost steam as we went along. It's no wonder only Ubisoft and Infogrames have survived thus far -- these are the only two companies which decided to break out of the Franco mindset.
Bruno Bonnell said:1UP: Let's look at all the studios you bought, then shut down -- Accolade, Gremlin, Legend, etc. One word: why?
Bonnell: A company is a living body -- people don't understand that. Nothing about a company is set in stone. Let's say you buy an Accolade or a Legend. If a studio isn't performing up to standards, you can always change your mind, change the management, etc. Failing that, you can also incorporate people into other parts of your organization. Shutting down an operation is a purely pragmatic decision -- it has nothing to do with lack of respect. In many cases, a studio, as much as we're fond of it, just may not be delivering the necessary level of quality in its products we demand.
Bruno Bonnell said:1UP: Where do you see interactive entertainment headed in the years to come?
Bonnell: The future of interactive entertainment is clearly headed towards easier user interfaces and more accessible games. People want to play what they want, when they want. Remember the old days of radio in the U.S.? People listened to music all day long, and programming was formatted. Then we became surrounded by music. The videogame business has been similarly insulated. Now we can download on demand, and play outdoors. Consumers are pushing towards having much more freedom in terms of their gaming experience -- that's why mobile and online gaming is growing.
A second evolution is also going to happen in the space where games have traditionally been seen as an art form. In the past, game designers have viewed making their creations as something like producing an opera...they want to produce something epic, titles that offer 30-40 hours of in-depth (and sometimes open-ended) play. Consumers are moving towards a desire for something more complete, and more exciting. It's as if they want to make the move from opera into pop music.
A new generation of consumers is growing that wants quick, fast-paced entertainment that's instantly gratifying. After all, dancing along to a pop song is more fun than watching a three-hour opera, isn't it? The problem is that in the past, the critics in our game industry have largely been opera specialists. This is going to change going forward.
Does anyone else see the sick humor of Bonnell's statements? I propose we have him removed from the species, to preserve the industry. A single death is little price to pay from preventing him from making any further impact.