Close
Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Tokyo Game Show and the myth of the "average gamer"

Tokyo Game Show and the myth of the "average gamer"

Fri 21 Sep 2012 6:45am GMT / 2:45am EDT / 11:45pm PDT
EventsOnlinePublishing

We debate whether TGS is "relevant"; but in the internet age, all audiences can be global

Game release dates come and go, but for as long as most of us can recall, the games industry's calendar has been punctuated by a handful of major events that serve as showcases for our wares. Some have waxed or waned over the years; ECTS has long-since disappeared, while the likes of Germany's GamesCom, the UK's Eurogamer Expo and the US' Penny Arcade Expo have grown rapidly in prominence. Others have remained as stable fixtures. E3 runs at the start of summer in LA; Tokyo Game Show heralds the arrival of autumn in Tokyo.

In recent years, it's been a little more complex than that, since we've been forced (some of us less willingly than others, and with occasional bouts of unseemly kicking and screaming) to accept the broadening of many definitions - most notably, the definitions of what constitutes gaming hardware and what constitutes a gamer. Major device or platform announcements from Apple, Google and Facebook are a big deal for the games business now, much to the eternal disgust of the more traditionally minded, and Amazon is set to join that list in short order as well. With those companies (and bigger game companies, too) now tending to avoid general-purpose trade shows and hold their own announcement events instead, it's no wonder the calendar is getting a bit packed.

"We are, thankfully, getting past the point where everyone who works in games assumes that the audience for games is made up of people much like themselves"

In that context, it's not hard to see why TGS is greeted - this year, as every year - with a discussion over whether the Japanese show is still relevant to the industry. For most people, this is a bit of a hypothetical dialogue - more of a proxy debate for the question of Japan's relevance to the modern games industry than a real discussion about TGS itself. For some, it's a bit more pressing, not least because it's bloody expensive to send staff from the USA or Europe to TGS either to run a stand, to hold meetings or to cover the event.

In either case, though, it's not a new debate. Anyone posing the question "is TGS still relevant?" ought to remind themselves that it's a question which has been posed for the best part of two decades. It's been the topic of op-ed column every September, regular as clockwork, since the mid-nineties, and the balance of the discussion has shifted significantly against TGS (and Japan in general) since the Xbox 360 rose to prominence and the JRPG, once a benchmark genre for console gaming, fell from grace with the main body of the press at the end of the PS2 era.

The fact that it's an old discussion, though, doesn't mean that it's not a relevant one - or that the answer has stayed the same for all these years. In fact, on the surface, it's not hard to see the TGS detractors' point. Looking at this year's event, one could argue with some conviction that had Sony announced the PS3 super-slim back at GamesCom as we all anticipated, there would have been almost nothing whatsoever of any consequence at the show for the average western gamer.

While that statement is absolutely true, there are a couple of problems with it. Firstly, there's the assumption that TGS is trying to be an Eastern version of E3, replete with huge platform and title announcements. The reality is that TGS is more of a consumer show than anything else, with a few keynotes preceding it for good measure; it's more comparable to something like GamesCom or PAX than it is to a dedicated trade event like E3. One could argue, then, that the show's detractors are being disappointed by its failure to provide something it never aimed to provide in the first place.

"One could argue that the show's detractors are being disappointed by its failure to provide something it never aimed to provide in the first place"

The second problem, to my mind, is with the idea of the "average western gamer". I have no idea who that is any more, and nor do you, but I'd hope that both of us recognise that it's probably not anyone who resembles either of us very much. We are, thankfully, getting past the point where everyone who works in games assumes that the audience for games is made up of people much like themselves; yet while that's a more mature and intelligent attitude to take, it does also rob us of a lot of certainty around phrases like "the average gamer", which suddenly lose all meaning.

In fact, as the industry grows and expands, we're increasingly forced to acknowledge the sheer breadth of tastes and interests among its audience. That forces another uncomfortable realisation - that there's no such thing as "average", or even as "mainstream". There are successful products and unsuccessful products, and a wide spectrum in between; there are games which successfully ignite the passions of one niche market and become cult hits, and games which are very competent jacks-of-all-trades and become breakout commercial successes by tapping into a host of different niches.

Moreover, there's a huge geographic difference in tastes and interests - a pronounced one between Japan and the West, but also a significant (and often under-estimated) one between the USA and the Europe, and even between the UK and Continental Europe. Yet even this difference is not absolute; it pushes the lines around on the chart, but doesn't change it completely. There are gamers in New York who share more tastes with compatriots in Osaka than they do with other gamers in the next block over, and gamers in Berlin whose interests have more in common with someone in Los Angeles than they do with someone in Munich.

We know that, innately, but for many years it's been easier (it's still easier, in fact) to say "oh, that won't work in the European market" or "that'll never sell in Japan", rather than looking for ways to structure a business (be it press or publishing) around the incredible complexity and diversity of tastes in every major world market. Hence, even though any of us can probably think of western friends who are terribly excited about things announced or showcased at TGS (Monster Hunter, Phoenix Wright, Yakuza, Soul Sacrifice, etc, etc), there's a tendency to assume that they're not representative of any important market or sector. Equally, especially since the failure of the Xbox and the 360 in Japan, there's a tendency to pigeonhole all Japanese gamers as disinterested in what the west produces.

"There's no reason to leave behind potential customers anywhere in the world just because their local market isn't quite at critical mass for you"

In other words, when people dismiss TGS as irrelevant, they're not necessarily dismissing the Japanese market - everyone knows it's huge - what they're actually implying is that the market differences between Japan and the West make their products irrelevant to us and our products irrelevant to them. And once upon a time, that argument was, unfortunately, quite correct. The cost of launching a Japanese game in the west, or vice versa - of which translation is only the first and often the smallest element - meant that you needed to have incredible confidence in its market appeal to be willing to take the plunge.

Yet today, such a viewpoint seems to run counter to the way the industry is developing. We talk constantly about how the barriers to market access are coming down; about how creators and developers can simply make games and present them to consumers, without having to ask permission along the way. We know that digital distribution, whether it's Steam, an App Store, or even the consoles' rather more walled-off gardens, is making it easier and cheaper than ever simply to put a product on the market and see how it does. The same technology is breaking down geographic barriers along the way. If you do digital distribution right, there's no reason why the guy in the New York and the guy in Osaka can't be playing the same game and paying you the same money; there's no reason to leave behind potential customers anywhere in the world just because their local market isn't quite at critical mass for you.

Does this make TGS "relevant"? Perhaps not in the way many of us would like - the harsh reality for the press, for example, is that you still need to weigh up the interest TGS coverage will generate against the costs of sending people there, and that's not an equation that's always going to work out favourably. It does, however, point to how a digital, globalised games industry will look - one in which the question "is it relevant?" will be answered, quite rightly, with the question "relevant to whom?" In TGS' case, it's relevant to its local market, of course (and as such, the show has a bright future domestically), and it will increasingly become a show that's laying out Japan's wares to a market distributed around the world as well. Expect the same to be true of many regional shows in the coming years. The much sought-after TGS junket may yet become a thing of the past - but the show itself, like GamesCom and others like it, will be selling more software than ever to more people than ever. I'd call that "relevant".

11 Comments

Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic

1,584 1,438 0.9
and it will increasingly become a show that's laying out Japan's wares to a market distributed around the world as well.
To do this, however, needs the backing of Western journalism, as well as Western publishers. Go back 20 years and you had the UK SNES magazine Super Play promoting American releases of JRPGs, and in some cases, untranslated JRPGs (Seiken Densetsu 3). Now that digital distro is here, the initial costs that used to be associated with niche products from Japan have lessened (no longer do cartridges need to be manufactured, and manuals need to be printed), but the need for a critical journalistic eye to select and promote products that are of a high quality is still there. Unfortunately, from what I can see, mainstream journalism is too busy fawning over Western products from the big publishers to much care about even some of the more obscure Western games, let-alone Japanese games. (To back up this argument, look at how much people rant-and-rave over the Halo franchise - there are far better FPSs on the PC, but that apparently matters little to journalists who are catering to the 360 crowd).

It's also worthwhile reading this article, which tangentially touches on points raised about promoting Japanese games in the West:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/177991/Steam_Japan_and_missed_opportunities.php#.UFwgbVEQfYM

Posted:2 years ago

#1

Dan Howdle Head of Content, Existent

280 810 2.9
Popular Comment
@Toronto Gamer

You appear to be looking for N4G. They adore the use of insulting language, a lack of manners, big, ANGRY CAPS and a disregard for spelling and grammar as means to drive home their point. You can find it here: www.n4g.com

Nice article, Rob.

Posted:2 years ago

#2

Jessica Hyland Character Artist

327 1,321 4.0
@Toronto Gamer

You're angry that Rob agrees with you? Or are you angry that the question is asked at all? The conclusion of the article is that TGS is relevant as a local consumer-focused show, which is exactly what you're saying. Journalism is all about asking questions and finding answers. Your comment sounds like you read the first two paragraphs and then went into a tirade...

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Jessica Hyland on 21st September 2012 12:08pm

Posted:2 years ago

#3

Daniel Hughes Studying PhD Literary Modernism, Bangor University

436 496 1.1
Great article Rob. I too find it puzzling that gamers, developers and the press at times fail to take into account how diverse the games industry has truly become--it's as if the most prominent voices are the ones still clinging to old realities rather than taking into account ever shifting tastes, ever shifting business models and ever broadening horizons. In an industry like this, TGS is bound to seem 'irrelevant' to those who get excited over the latest hardware reveal or see E3 as the highlight of the year, but for the hundreds of thousands of attendees in Japan, the Japanese industry in general and for those gamers who have a particular fondness for Japanese games, TGS is as relevant as it's ever been.

Posted:2 years ago

#4
Interesting observation - though have to wonder if this is a little jaded as journo's travel budgets get clipped and they cant go tot the shows they want to?

The state of the consumer games seen with a lack-luster Nintendo launch, and high profile studio closures and executive departures can made many see doom & gloom for the current consumer game industry.

The exhibition is still vital and the social element of exhibiting and promotion supersedes all social networking tools. Calling TGS a let down misses the point of the strong visitor attendance - that its half its original size is just a reflection on the delay on Gen-8 hardware (just look at what happened at E3)!

Posted:2 years ago

#5

Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development

888 1,324 1.5
I didn't actaully realise this was a "myth". I'm an industry nobody running a tiny dev studio for the last couple of decades, and even I've not uttered that phrase once. "Casual", "Mid core", it's all just so much crap, putting labels onto certain intersections of a venn diagram - something you can do an infinite amount of different ways.

Posted:2 years ago

#6
@Paul, please don't be so modest - this is the bread and butter of the independent game scene, it was missing this target business that caused all the problems with the poor turn-out at Develop!

Fundamentally, the business model for the big publishers is so broken that they are grabbing at buzz words and fictional trends (reminiscent of the buzz words created when Gen-6 hardware started to flag).

I was interested to read the EDGE_online feature on Free-Play gaming - did you read any of it? Could that be a model for your business?

Posted:2 years ago

#7

Paul Johnson Managing Director / Lead code monkey, Rubicon Development

888 1,324 1.5
I agree kevin, but the press and all the trimmings is still stuck in the old model as well, so tiny firms can't get any air time or be taken seriously en masse. (This is not on about me/us, we're doin ok, but a general observation).

In fact, the notion of "independent" is itself a misnoner imo, big publishers only occupied the middle years from my pov. I started selling shareware direct, worked for a number of dev firms under publishers, then now mostly sell direct to the public again. It's those "dependent" guys I feel sorry for as they're now on a downward slope unable to miss a single months salary bill before calling the receivers. If our indie venture ultimately fails, I'll be opening a bar in Spain before I go back to being a cog in a corporate sku generator again.

Develop was a wash out for us as we didn't get that much press interest directly from our presentation, but it was nice to press some flesh on a personal level and show our new game off. Not something I'll be repeating though tbh, from a biz point of view it was a net loss even though everyone we talked to seemed to like our product. A few of the presentations/workshops were ok but it was mainly aimed at newbies. That's a good thing but not relevant to us unfortunately.

F2P is definitely where we're going for the future. Even though our current game got crazy review marks from respected places, sales after the first month have dropped to disappointing levels, showing 25% of income (and rising) from IAP's. And this is from a game that wasn't really designed to monetise that way. Our next ones definitely will be! :)

Posted:2 years ago

#8

Tony Johns

520 12 0.0
The TGS is still relevant in my view, because I am an Otaku gamer and I love the anime style games.

That is all I need to say because while E3 kinda bores me when they don't show or focus on what I really am looking for, I can at least say that the Tokyo Game Show does cater to my gaming needs and I would think every gamer show either core or casual, Japanese or American or European show, will have their unique audiences and games they showcase.

Posted:2 years ago

#9

Jim Webb Executive Editor/Community Director, E-mpire Ltd. Co.

2,270 2,439 1.1
Toronto Gamer, I just wanted to make a note regarding the attendance figures for TGS and E3.

TGS is 4 day event with the last 2 days open to the public. TGS also counts every visitor every day separately. The public days draw double the attendance as the industry only days.

E3 is just 3 days and is industry trade only. It also only counts badge totals. Attend 1 day or all 3 days, it's still just 1 count. If E3 were 4 days and counted everyone each day, it would be closer to 182,000. Open it up to the public and you could probably double that figure.

Posted:2 years ago

#10

Gary Davies Lecturer in Games Development, St Helens College

3 0 0.0
Thank you for this article, I have found it extremely useful and have referenced it as part of my assignment material for level 3 students studying Developing Computer Games.

My one criticism as I was looking for something to quote from the article I considered there to be some ambiguity where highlighting "mainstream" and "average" games, then immediately suggesting some games are successful or unsuccessful. Surly these terms are interchangeable or am I being facetious.

Non the less a fantastic debate and one I will enjoy talking through with my students.

Posted:2 years ago

#11

Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now