What Can The Art of War Teach Us About Game Development?

Statue of Sun Tzu in Yurihama, Tottori, Japan

Note: This entry was based on Samuel B. Griffith’s translation of The Art of War, specifically The New Illustrated Edition (Copyright Duncan Baird Publishers 2005). All quotations are Griffith’s translations.

Part 1: Estimates, Waging War, and Offensive Strategy

Introduction

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War was written approximately 500 years before the common era. Despite its age, the work still has relevance to modern warfare. And, as it turns out, game development. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, there are parallels between those two fields. Both are expensive and prolonged endeavors. Both involve the coordination of large, segmented groups of people and diverse talents toward a common goal. Both feature frequent examples of a disconnect between the perspective of those at the top of the organization and the experience of those dealing with day to day operations. And both are largely concerned with managing risk.

The Art of War is divided into thirteen chapters, on subjects ranging from estimates to espionage. I will be exploring groups of chapters over a series of entries. It is possible that nothing in these posts will be a blinding flash of revelation, nor will anything in Sun Tzu’s writings alter the course of the industry. I would only suggest that there is something for the modern game director, producer, or publisher to gain from thinking about Sun Tzu’s philosophy about combat, and how one could apply it to business.

How Publishers View New IP

Recently, 1Up’s Chris Pereira penned an article examining how Bethesda’s Dishonored bucked the notion that new IP will not sell well at the end of a console cycle. The article brings up an interesting argument and, perhaps, draws the right conclusion, but misses the underlying issues.

The gist of Pereira’s argument is expressed thusly:

[A successful launch for Dishonored] is encouraging news. As wonderful as seeing refinements of the franchises we already know and love can be, it’s the completely original titles that are often the most exciting to see.

But considering what we’ve been led to believe, this doesn’t make much sense. This month marked seven years since the Xbox 360 was released, and six years since the PlayStation 3 and Wii debuted. With it only being available on 360, PS3, and PC, the launch of the Wii U (coming just over a month after Dishonored’s launch) can’t be used as the reason for why Dishonored has done well. If anything, it signals either the end or fast-approaching end of this generation of consoles, so surely Dishonored had no business performing the way it did.

In logical terms, Pereira’s argument through the bulk of the article goes like this: if Dishonored sold well, then the assertion that new IP will not sell well late in a console’s life cycle has been rendered false. There is a kernel of truth in his assertion, but the fault in his logic is that publishers do not believe that new IP is absolutely guaranteed to fail during a console’s twilight years, only that there is a better return on investment for sequels.