We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.

The Denis Dyack Interview

Leaving Nintendo

by Steven Rodriguez - July 17, 2007, 7:40 pm EDT

The head of Silicon Knights talks about Nintendo, E3, game previews, and of course, Too Human. Also: Will SK ever make a Wii game? Don't miss this giant interview!

Nintendo World Report: So we’re definitely going to talk about Too Human, but I wanted to start where we left off the last time I talked you, which was about three or four years ago, about the time that you guys split with Nintendo.

Denis Dyack: Right.

NWR: As you mentioned before we started, there are some people who still harbor animosity towards Silicon Knights for leaving Nintendo. We know it was a mutual decision, which is what you said at the time, but there are still some things about it that I have never understood and I wanted to see if maybe we can clear it up. I know there’s some parts of it that you can’t talk about but…

We interviewed you at E3 2003 about Twin Snakes and at the time you said this, "When you think about Silicon Knights and you think about Nintendo, if you’re going to think about us as a separate entity or a traditional second party you’re probably going to be wrong on most accounts. We highly collaborate with EAD all the time and in many senses we’re inseparable. I like to consider us basically a team that’s inside Nintendo that isn’t located at NCL." So what I want to ask you about is, how did you get from that point to splitting with Nintendo about a year later? What happened in that time that so drastically changed your relationship?

Dyack: Well, I guess, thinking that the relationship drastically changed is probably the point of misconception. And so when I said that, and I think it was very, very true, we’re very collaborative when work together with any of our partners. We were—I was exceedingly close to Miyamoto-san and Iwata-san. Iwata-san was the first person to ever visit Silicon Knights from Japan, before he was President [of Nintendo Co. Ltd.]. And so our relationship was much stronger than most developers outside of Nintendo would even have with Nintendo. If that, you know, hopefully that makes sense as I said it. And we saw eye-to-eye on so many things. It was really, we were really close. So the way we functioned, is we considered us, ourselves, part of Nintendo whole, and that’s, that was our modus operandi. And that is what I think that statement came from. And then going from that, that really never changed.

The point where we decided to break off is Nintendo really had a belief in the way they were going, you know, with the Wii, and we didn’t disagree that that was a great direction to go in. However, as much as we tried, we didn’t see how we fit into that scheme. And you know because the type of games we like to make are very large games, very epic, very high production value games where graphics—you know you’ve heard our engagement theory: technology, graphics, audio, content, and game design all matter. And essentially, a lot of the directions that Nintendo wanted to go to didn’t play to those strengths so much, and as much as we really got along, we really were forced with the situation of, "If Silicon Knights really wants to go in this direction, how do we fit in?" And as much as we tried to work it out, we, you know-- and that’s not to say that it can’t work out in the future, but certainly for the time, and at the time, and I think where we’re at now, it just didn’t work out. So I think that’s the best answer I can give to that question. Does that make sense?

NWR: I think so, but the contradiction that I don’t understand is with games like Zelda: Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 on the Wii—

Dyack: Yes.

NWR: Which are the kind of games you’re talking about. Epic, high-graphical standards, at least compared to the other games on the Wii. They tell epic stories, at least, in a certain way they’re epic.

Dyack: Yes.

NWR: Maybe not completely full of dialog or things like that. But is it, is that, am I correct in thinking that is the kind of game that you consider Silicon Knights to be making. Similar to Zelda and Metroid Prime level—

Dyack: Yeah. Yeah I do. I think so, and I think Miyamoto said it publicly that they’re moving away from those type of games and they think that’s not what the public wants.

NWR: Well, I think most of their comments have been that they feel like they can offer those kinds of games as well as the more casual, or party, or smaller type of game that reaches out to a different audience.

Dyack: Well, maybe that’s true. I guess I’ve only heard some of Miyamoto-san’s comments on it, but all I can say to that subject is, hey, look, I think Nintendo is a great publisher. Certainly, you know, they’re kicking ass and filling body bags with their hardware sales, and I think they’re doing very, very well right now. But in the end you did make one comment, you said, "Metroid Prime and Zelda are really good graphics for the Wii." And, you know, what we’re looking at doing, quite frankly, are graphics like Too Human. Where, I love, like don’t get me wrong, I love Nintendo. I do not understand how we can even begin to think about that on the current hardware platform.

It’s a very different approach to doing things, and it doesn’t fit in with our philosophy. So, I’m not saying you can’t do those types of games, but I’m looking at it from a perspective of-- and when I look at it from the company perspective, Silicon Knights really wants to do the types of games we want to do. We’re a creative group and, you know, this is, despite what all the rumors are out there, it’s not, Silicon Knights is not necessarily money-motivated in any way. Actually, quite frankly, it’s quite the opposite. We want to fulfill what we believe is the best creative role and when you do that, when you have a partner and the direction they’re going doesn’t quite fit with that, it’s very painful. And you know, we really, and so does Nintendo of course, wanted to try and figure a way to do it, but both of us mutually just couldn’t figure it out. You know we did agree upon a lot of things like quality, gameplay, there’s just no question. But there are just some things like production value, as far as graphics goes and technology, where we just didn’t see how we could make the fit there. That’s why it happened. It’s really that simple. It’s not that it’s—it’s just a different business philosophy, you know. And quite frankly there’s room for both. And you know, hopefully, we’ll be successful. Clearly Nintendo’s going to be successful and, you know, we wish them all the best and, you know, I’m sure they wish us all the best. And that’s the way it is.

NWR: Well, when you say that the technology of the Wii, and the direction that Nintendo was going with the technology, was insufficient for what you wanted to do with a game like Too Human, how does that jive with the fact that you guys were, on some level, developing Too Human for the GameCube? And then the Wii is based on the GameCube hardware but is considerably more powerful than that. I know you guys, I know you don’t like to talk about Too Human as it existed on GameCube but we know it did to some extent, or at least the engine did because it was used for Eternal Darkness.

Dyack: Right, and largely, you always make, in general, when you talk about things you make broad, sweeping generalizations, and there’s always going to be exceptions too. And I’ve always been one to say you always design a game so it’s hardware independent and the technology matters less and less, and I agree with that, completely. And that’s definitely a statement. And at the time the GameCube was on leading edge hardware. I believed that, I still believe that. I think the GameCube was an awesome system. I thought it got a really bad rap. I thought it was, in my opinion, significantly better hardware than the PS2, but sales didn’t reflect that. And when we talk about doing our full creative vision we’re trying to move away from, and beat, the uncanny valley where characters become lifelike, where you can create these environments that are very immersive with very high production values that compete against Hollywood. You really do want to get, if possible, on the latest, most revolutionary hardware that you can, and certainly the [Xbox] 360 fulfills that. Moving away from that is much, you know-- in the end it’s all about: we think that it should be on the best hardware. Clearly people disagree, and it is what it is, but essentially that’s what it boils down to.

So at the time, Too Human was on, in my opinion, one of the best hardware systems out there. And, you know, when we decided to do Twin Snakes instead of Too Human, you know, the next generation we had to look at, we really, really wanted it to be on the best hardware specs out there. There’s always going to be a lot of disagreement, but in the end production value matters. If you look at a game like, say, Gears of War, that game looks fantastic and a lot of the people solely are sold on that premise. And I’m not saying that’s everything, because clearly I’ve said that that’s not the case with games, but that is a significant factor. And if we’re going to try to do, our mantra is going to, what Silicon Knights believes is the best games out there, then the graphics and the technology are a significant factor.

Share + Bookmark





Related Content

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement