I’ve taken the liberty of translating the 4Gamer interview with Keiji Inafune, originally published on Friday, October 29th and discussed in this thread. Hopefully this will help folks understand the motivations behind his departure from Capcom as well as his future plans.
As I can’t claim that the translation is perfect, any feedback is welcomed.
Thanks to Mandoric for spot-checking a couple of trouble spots with the translation.
4Gamer (4G): Thank you for your time today. Recently, you’ve made some rather extreme remarks and taken on many projects, so today’s interview is to follow up with what you meant and how you’re doing.
Keiji Inafune (KI): Thank you. But I’ve already decided to leave Capcom.
4G: What?
KI: I’m quitting. There’ll be an official announcement, but that’s all I can say for now.
4G: This interview has taken a sudden turn. Why did you decide to quit? Your statements have been provocative, but you’ve always spoken as someone from Capcom, wanting to change the company.
KI: Yeah, I want to work at Capcom. But, how should I say… Circumstances are such that I can’t work there anymore.
4G: I can easily imagine that there might’ve been issues with your statements or projects, but were there really such big problems?
KI: What should I say… I’d probably say that Capcom’s path as a company has changed. Though my leaving just comes as a result. It might get pretty long, but do you mind if I explain?
4G: Please do.
=== What the Japanese game industry’s doing wrong is: making developers into salarymen, myself included. ===
KI: The reason why I’m quitting is basically because I think that the game industry itself must change the way it goes about making games. You might think I’m being hypocritical, but the really big wall that the Japanese game industry is hitting is the changing of its creators into salarymen.
4G: I think I know what you mean, but please elaborate.
KI: Well, when I was about 20, I was really passionate and entered the game industry, but now I’m in my mid-40s. It’s a matter of my age. My generation is, for better or worse, holding the game industry back.
4G: Do you mean that the system of companies committing to employ for life is spoiling people?
KI: That’s right. There are a lot of people who take their company’s commitment for granted and don’t work as hard as they should. This could be said of the entire industry, and of course Capcom is no exception.
4G: You might say that, but you were also employed in that system.
KI: That’s true. And that’s exactly why taking action to change things is so troubling. I was in the position of being a naysayer, and yet was assured a paycheck the next month. No matter how much one is late or skips work, or even no matter how lousy a game is made, the next month’s paycheck was always guaranteed.
Basically, saying such things in that position, the reaction was, “What are you talking about, Inafune-san? What exactly are you going to do about it?”
4G: In Japan’s traditional lifetime employment system, if people are underhanded, an environment is created in which working hard is just their own loss, right?
KI: In short, it’s like a communist state. Working as hard as you can is your own loss. Not working hard becomes more advantageous. But doesn’t that get in the way of making games? You can’t make good games by just taking it easy.
4G: However, although there were many problems, it’s worked out until very recently. Why do you think that things have changed so suddenly?
KI: It’s because there was no competition before. For example, in the game industry 20 years ago, no matter what kind of game you made, you could sell 200 or 300 thousand copies. If you even made a decent game, it’d sell 500 thousand or a million copies. But those days are over.
4G: Why’s that?
KI: For one, competition has intensified, and furthermore, players have gotten “used to” games. To use a simple analogy, any kind of erotic picture will turn on a middle school student, right? (laughs) Oh, but it’s not like that so much anymore…
4G: Well, I guess I understand. (laughs)
KI: More. More. People always want more fun and prettier graphics, right? This is to be expected, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. But that’s where a problem arose. The players’ demands and the creators’ demands wound up parting ways.
4G: Oh, maybe it looked like a graph showing the change from a company’s net profit to a loss?
KI: Right. At first, it can be a good thing. Between the players’ demands and the creators’ demands, the creators’ way took over and both sides’ expectations increased at the same angle on the graph.
But, after a point, the players’ demands took over. Whether it was the players’ demands increasing at an unprecedented rate or the creators’ slope trailing off, I’m still not sure. But the way it’s going, I think that expectations have risen to a point that’s impossible to catch up to.
4G: So, few games are able to break the records of the last mega-hit.
KI: That’s right. Well in Japan, it’s Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, and Monster Hunter, right? And Pokémon and such. It’s a very limited set of products. Others aren’t well-established, so they don’t sell.
4G: I see, so this is getting back to your previous point.
KI: It’s not a system where you don’t get paid your next month’s paycheck if the game doesn’t sell. Even if it doesn’t sell, you still get your paycheck the next month. Because people are used to working in such a system, against such competition, the sense of wanting to make a better and better game has weakened. It’s like, “I’m just doing what I was told to do.”
4G: That must really hit home for a lot of people.
KI: Particularly, for example, “Is 500 thousand copies sold in Japan enough?” If you look at the numbers, 500 thousand copies sold is great, and that might get you 2 billion yen ($25 million). After paying for development costs, promotion, corporate expenses, and business overhead… Thinking about all of that, 2 billion yen really doesn’t cover it.
4G: Of course, PS3-level blockbusters will run 2 or 3 billion yen ($25-37.5 million). But if you’re a producer, what do you do when you see those kind of numbers? Obviously it’ll vary from person to person.
KI: Well, if you actually see the numbers, going more global is an absolute must. So for the PS3, 500 or 600 thousand copies is considered a hit right now. With those numbers, it’s not like you can cover ever-increasing development costs.
4G: One would think that people would be more aware of this. Is it just naïveté?
KI: Yes.
4G: Hmm… Lately, looking closely at each company’s financial reports, even Capcom made a profit of 8 billion yen ($100 million) last year (reporting term: March 2009). To briefly mention cashflow issues, it’d be impossible for a company making a profit of 8 billion yen have several 2 or 3 billion yen projects at a time.
KI: Yeah, I know exactly what you mean.
4G: So with the rise of the next-gen machines, when the quality of graphics have greatly increased along with development costs all the while the old business model is crumbling, and one company has to completely support many products from development to publishing, it’s obvious that in many cases it’s unsustainable.
Even going from the DS to the 3DS, the development costs go up, and making easy-to-produce DS games – of course that’s not to say developers have it easy – becomes an impossibility. In that kind of environment, how is it possible to become complacent?
KI: That’s exactly why it’s so dangerous.
Anyhow, in this kind of situation, there are lots of people who are taking advantage of their publisher employers. Of course, as everyone knows, there are also independent developers who are working hard, but here in the Japanese game industry where publishers have the advantage, no matter how able the developers, there’s no one who is able to properly utilize them.
4G: What do you mean by publishers having the advantage?
KI: Saying this will make publishers angry with me, but publishers themselves are forcing developers into becoming subcontractors. “For this amount of money, finishing by this deadline,” and so on, and even more than quality, “Aim for this number of sales,” is what’s being pushed.
Of course, that’s not to say that publishers aren’t having developers make all sorts of things that they like, but I can’t deny that even creators with strong brands and skills have to submit to subcontracts.
4G: It seems like that situation is a bit better overseas.
KI: Yeah, it seems so. There are of course publishers who keep developers “like pets,” but overseas there are more independent developers. For them, the goal is to make a hit, grow the company, sell it or do an IPO, and make lots of money. It’s the American Dream.
4G: And in Japan?
KI: If you succeed, you don’t get credit, and if you fail, it’s your fault. Nothing can be done about it. The game industry isn’t at a level where it can value creators and raise them up. It’s the same at Capcom.
So I think this is a really bad situation. Effecting change quickly is a problem.
=== Leaving the umbrella of Capcom, wanting to win or lose as Keiji Inafune ===
4G: Regarding the changing of developers into salarymen, although I can feel such disappointment, it’s a problem of having to restructure the game industry. Not only the lifetime employment system, but it also involves taking a scalpel to the publisher-developer relationship.
KI: Right. With the initiatives I’m taking, I hope to naturally effect change in the game industry.
For some years, I tried the same thing from within Capcom. Take this for example: I was the head of development. That means I was actually at the top of Capcom. I couldn’t go any higher. So it was best for me to just be a salaryman, not doing anything new so as to avoid failing, not doing anything outstanding, quietly dealing with what I was told. Because if I did anything brashly and failed, I would no longer be in that position.
4G: You would be demoted if you failed?
KI: Demoted, or not really being in the same position. People who don’t present new things or create hits don’t win followers. Instead, they’re strict and say things like, “Meet the deadline,” or, “It’s not fun enough.”
4G: So your titles didn’t meet their deadlines.
KI: That happened quite a few times. (laughs) Not really, but as long as the people in charge produce results, one can only follow. So because I was on the top, I had to do well.
4G: But more than that, isn’t it a problem if you’re on top and not really succeeding or failing outright? Generally, it’s easy to retain your position in society: don’t fail. It’s easy to avoid failure, so it’s better not to think, “Let’s succeed.” You don’t have to do anything new, or change anything… So it becomes a predicament in which you can just get by in most cases.
KI: That’s exactly right. There are many people like that in our generation. If that’s “unacceptable,” you’ll want to take more aggressive action, not do so many sequels, and do more.
4G: A bit ago, you said, “I tried the same thing from within Capcom.” Were you able to effect change within Capcom?
KI: If I had, we wouldn’t be talking about this today. (laughs) It’s very much a shock that I wasn’t able to effect change on the business-side in the end.
But what was really shocking was my uncertainty whether or not I’d even been able to effect change development-side. I can’t deny that the thought that, “There’s nothing more for me to do at Capcom,” was a much greater shock.
4G: But as for the problem of developers turning into salarymen, it must’ve been pretty difficult in such an environment. You couldn’t really change things from the inside.
KI: Right. That’s one reason, the problem of management ranks pushing that direction. Numbers, numbers, and more numbers. And one more big problem: the nonchalant way people lived depending on that direction being pushed.
4G: So if you yourself can show by example that it doesn’t have to be that way, things will gradually begin to change.
KI: Yes. Like I said before, even I, inside a big publisher like Capcom, within a big umbrella, completely shielded from the rain, couldn’t just say this or that. So if I left that umbrella and gave up being a salaryman, I could really try and show my own strengths.
4G: So you could win or lose personally, as Keiji Inafune.
KI: Up until now, for better or worse, I couldn’t go beyond being “Inafune from Capcom.” That was a rather large problem, and I also experienced awhile ago that when the results were good, it was thanks to Capcom, thanks to Rockman. It wasn’t just in the company saying so, but all of the players as well. (laughs) Capcom, you know, Rockman, you know. But when it was bad, of course it was, “What are you doing, Inafune? Don’t screw it up!” This too, was said both by people in the company and by players. (laughs)
4G: But isn’t that the case with any product from a big IP made by a big company? In the case of Final Fantasy, if it sells it’s thanks to the IP, and if not, it’s the makers’ fault.
KI: That’s right. That’s exactly why I want to prove that something can sell because it was made by Keiji Inafune.
4G: Proving that should be easy.
KI: Yeah. After I leave Capcom, if a Biohazard or Rockman title doesn’t sell, there’s the proof. Time goes by very quickly, but in maybe 3 years or so… I can’t really say, maybe sooner than that, I’d like to have my proof.
=== In game development, you have to know what’s necessary for business: you have to eat natto even if you don’t like it ===
4G: So when you get down to it, the reason you’re leaving Capcom is that you have doubts about the structure of the game industry itself, and want to try using your own strength on the outside, correct? By doing so, you hope to effect a “restructuring.”
KI: That’s right.
Wanting to try my own strength is absolutely driven by the desire to know if a game can sell because it’s made by Keiji Inafune. If it’s by Inafune and not “Inafune of Capcom”, then it’s all on me. This was something that was absolutely impossible from within Capcom. Of course it might be called risky, reckless, or courageous, but from a calm, objective position, it really seems reckless.
But up until now, I haven’t just relied on my position. If you’re the head of development, you don’t have to make the game, or even think, just let your employees handle everything and make the final decisions. That would be easy. Because you’re the top. I could’ve just said, “Bring me the final product. I’ll decide if it’s good or bad,” but I’ve never done things like that. I think of the concept myself, I think of the strategy myself, I decide on the character direction myself and say, “Let’s do it like this.”
4G: How many titles have you overseen like that?
KI: Umm… About 10 titles or so.
4G: How many titles does Capcom produce?
KI: If you count all of the minor ones, there are about 40.
4G: So supposing a scope of about 30 titles, you were in charge of about a third?
KI: Yeah, more or less.
4G: How many people were working on those projects?
KI: Just under 900 people, now.
4G: As expected, it takes a lot of people to make Capcom-class games. So you would put it all together?
KI: That’s right. Like I said, my degree of involvement varied, but I was the person responsible. If things took a wrong turn, it’d be a big problem. Having 200 thousand yen of earnings next to 500 thousand yen of expenses is a loss, right?
4G: But isn’t that the nature of the content business? It’s impossible to perfectly read what will be a hit and what won’t.
KI: Yeah. You can’t always read it. That’s why my theory is “zero.”
4G: The theory of strength in numbers?
KI: Yes. In short, if each project doesn’t incur a loss, it’ll add up. In the end, whether it’s 100 thousand, 200 thousand, or even a million yen, it’ll all add up. It’s like having a diverse portfolio. Plus-minus zero. If it’s zero, it’s certainly not a loss.
4G: I see. Aside from administrative and corporate expenses, as long as your projects continue to average above zero, you theoretically won’t go into the red.
KI: That’s right. But, if you lose even 500 thousand yen, this theory suddenly breaks down. So a worst-case zero is fine. So if you don’t get back to at least zero, it’s no good. If everyone worked to at least cover the costs, there’s nowhere to go but up from there.
So for example, if a so-so game plan was made, you can generally tell by the game concept if it’ll get back to zero or incur a loss. In the worst case, you have to get back to zero, so a game concept has to at least have that, so it must be continued until at least that point.
4G: I see. But for creative people, that kind of pressure can be really severe.
KI: Certainly. For me, if just anything is okay, I don’t want to do it. It’s not that I can’t, it’s that I don’t want to. But I had to. Being required to do something will kill you eventually.
So if you’re starving and starving to the point of death, and before your very eyes you see natto [note: fermented soybean paste], which you absolutely hate. “Ugh, I don’t eat natto, so I won’t have it.” Well, then you die. If I eat natto, I can survive. At that point, it’s egotistic to say you won’t eat natto because you hate it, because you’re making the mistake of putting likes and dislikes over life and death. Won’t you just wind up starving to death?
4G: Even if you don’t eat it, won’t someone come and help you? It’s the same salaryman problem as before.
KI: Yes, that’s right. Salarymen think that if you complain long enough, someone will bring you a hamburger. If it’s a hamburger, you’d eat it, right? Things like that. That’s how things have been done for a long time, so that’s how it got this way.
At this rate, Capcom will not eat its natto and die. They shouldn’t let it be, because they’ll die otherwise. We let it be, so it got to be like this. I love Capcom. I want to save it. So I’m not going to just let it be.