"And initially, a lot of companies avoid trying to make a really radical new kind of title for a new system, because that would involve learning a new machine and learning how to make the new title at the same time"
About this Quote
Trip Hawkins is pointing at a paradox the tech industry still can’t stop reenacting: the moment when new hardware arrives, the software that could justify it is least likely to exist. His line is less a complaint than a diagnosis of institutional risk aversion. “Radical new kind of title” isn’t just about creativity; it’s shorthand for expensive uncertainty. Novel platforms don’t merely add features, they rewrite the rules of production. When Hawkins says “learning a new machine,” he’s naming the hidden tax of innovation: pipelines break, tools are immature, performance is unpredictable, and the team’s hard-won instincts stop applying.
The subtext is managerial, almost confessional. Companies aren’t allergic to boldness; they’re allergic to compounding variables. Learning the system and inventing a new genre mechanic at the same time doubles the failure modes and muddies accountability. If the project tanks, was it a bad idea or a misunderstood platform? That ambiguity is poison in boardrooms and publishing calendars. So firms default to safer ports: sequels, familiar mechanics, modest upgrades - products that function as “training wheels” for both developers and the market.
Context matters: Hawkins helped shape early videogame publishing and platform economics, where launch windows, installed base, and developer relations determine who wins. His comment hints at a structural “chicken-and-egg” problem: platforms need killer apps to sell, but killer apps require confidence the platform will sell. The quote works because it frames creative conservatism not as cowardice, but as a rational response to incentives. It’s a reminder that breakthrough art in commercial tech often depends less on genius than on who can afford to be wrong first.
The subtext is managerial, almost confessional. Companies aren’t allergic to boldness; they’re allergic to compounding variables. Learning the system and inventing a new genre mechanic at the same time doubles the failure modes and muddies accountability. If the project tanks, was it a bad idea or a misunderstood platform? That ambiguity is poison in boardrooms and publishing calendars. So firms default to safer ports: sequels, familiar mechanics, modest upgrades - products that function as “training wheels” for both developers and the market.
Context matters: Hawkins helped shape early videogame publishing and platform economics, where launch windows, installed base, and developer relations determine who wins. His comment hints at a structural “chicken-and-egg” problem: platforms need killer apps to sell, but killer apps require confidence the platform will sell. The quote works because it frames creative conservatism not as cowardice, but as a rational response to incentives. It’s a reminder that breakthrough art in commercial tech often depends less on genius than on who can afford to be wrong first.
Quote Details
| Topic | Business |
|---|
More Quotes by Trip
Add to List
