Incorrect Assumptions

tim-cain game-development game-directors industry-myths publishing bonuses player-behavior

Abstract

Problem: Viewers of Tim Cain's YouTube channel frequently misinterpret his statements, projecting assumptions about the game industry that don't match reality.

Approach: Tim walks through the most common incorrect assumptions he sees in his comments section, correcting each one with examples from his 42+ year career.

Findings: Most misconceptions stem from oversimplifying complex realities — people assume game directors have total control, that passion guarantees quality, that sales correlate with reviews, and that developers get ongoing royalties. None of these are reliably true.

Key insight: The game industry is vast and messy; no single person's experience represents the whole, game directors are constantly overridden or constrained, and players' purchasing behavior rarely matches what they claim to want.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxlES8odU9A

1. Tim Speaks From His Experience, Not the Whole Industry

The game industry is bigger than movies, television, and music combined. Tim has never worked in indie, never done mobile, and never truly worked on a AAA-budget game (all his titles are double-A at best, except arguably WildStar which he left before completion). When he says something about the industry, it's implicitly scoped to his experience. He shouldn't need to put a caveat on every video.

He compares dismissive commenters to people who shut down others during the MeToo movement by saying "I never saw that" — just because you didn't experience something doesn't invalidate someone else's account.

2. Game Directors Don't Always Get Their Way

Tim describes the game director as a "benevolent dictator" who breaks ties and makes final calls, but in practice directors are constantly constrained:

  • Leads override them — Tim especially defers to art leads since he's colorblind and not strong at judging art. If you like or hate how his games look, that had nothing to do with him.
  • Company owners override them — If you don't own the company, the owners can mandate features. Tim draws the line at unethical requests but otherwise complies.
  • Publishers override them — Whoever pays has final say. Arcanum got SecuROM and multiplayer because the publisher demanded it. The Outer Worlds had publishers pushing for microtransactions (they said no to that one).

3. Game Directors Don't Love Every Feature in Their Games

People assume that because something shipped in Tim's game, he must have wanted it there. Several reasons this isn't true:

  • Ran out of time — Features get half-implemented or fall back to inferior alternatives.
  • Miscommunication — Tim asked for something, got something that technically matched the description but wasn't what he meant, and there was no time to redo it.
  • Ability gaps — Sometimes nobody on the team had the skills to implement what was requested.
  • Engine limitations (real or perceived) — On every game where Tim didn't build the engine, at least one feature is missing or wrong because someone said the engine couldn't do it — and they were wrong, but nobody knew that at the time. Modern engines are complex enough that even experienced developers don't know all their capabilities.

4. Nothing Guarantees a Good Game

Tim has never said passion, good communication, or any production methodology guarantees a good game. These things help, but he's seen passionate teams make bad games and seemingly disengaged teams make good ones. Games are complicated.

5. Sales, Reviews, and Budgets Are Not Connected

A common assumption is that high sales mean good reviews, or big budgets mean high sales. These things aren't even correlated:

  • Games can sell well and review poorly.
  • Games can have huge budgets and flop commercially.
  • The single biggest correlator with sales is marketing budget.
  • When a publisher realizes late in development that a game is great, they often increase its marketing budget — which creates a misleading appearance that quality drives sales directly.

Breakout indie hits with no marketing exist, but Tim advises against counting on that strategy.

6. Players Don't Do What They Say They'll Do

Tim uses the airline industry as his favorite analogy: passengers complain about no meals, cramped seats, and baggage fees, but when a $15-cheaper ticket appeared with no food, most people bought the cheaper ticket. Airlines followed the money, not the complaints.

In gaming, players say they want originality, but sales data shows they actually want familiarity (sequels do well) and high production values. A game that offers a polished version of something familiar will outsell an original concept. The industry has learned to make what people buy, not what people say they'll buy.

Tim acknowledges this is frustrating — he's made many niche games — but it's the reality of trying to go mainstream.

7. Bonuses and Royalties Are Rare and Unreliable

The game industry is fundamentally different from film, TV, and music when it comes to post-release compensation:

  • Most work is work-for-hire — You get a salary, and that's it.
  • Bonuses are typically one-time — If the game does well and you're still employed a few months after launch. Layoffs or quitting before the bonus date means nothing.
  • RPGs sell for years but developers see no ongoing payments after the initial bonus window.
  • Companies go under — Tim has had studios close months after shipping a game, eliminating any promised bonuses.
  • Publishers sometimes ignore contracts — And suing them is impractical because they have deeper pockets, will defend aggressively, and no other publisher will want to work with you afterward.
  • No residuals exist in gaming — Unlike actors and screenwriters who get residuals, or musicians who get royalties (though even that is changing — Tim notes Trent Reznor's complaint that music has become a commodity), gaming has always been a commodity. Ongoing royalty arrangements are extremely rare.

8. References