In Part I of his two-part essay for Outsourced, Midway Home Entertainment chief marketing officer Steve Allison firmly disputed the notion that videogame marketing and PR needs to change. Instead, he pointed the finger squarely at the developers themselves, and listing ways in which a game's concept and timing could stand to be improved. In the second and final part of his essay, Allison explains why execution is just third on his list of the most important things a developer must focus on--and explains why more game creators should learn the art of the vertical slice--as he finishes up his answer to Level Up's question "How must videogame developers change in order to create bigger hits?"

3. Execution is Only The Third Most Important Factor In A Game's Success. Yes, Third.

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive to make great games. Nor does it mean that a great concept gives developers the license to make a crappy game. It simply means that execution alone is no guarantee of commercial success. The developers who understand this will thrive in the next generation home console business. The ones who don't will fall victim to the realities of the shifting marketplace.

The average reader of this piece, especially one working in the gaming business will say, "Wait a minute. A great game whose review scores average 90 or higher can ship when it's done and it'll still be a great game." Or they'll say, "Whatever the concept may be, a great title is all about the game mechanics." Unfortunately, this is not true.

A great game is one that is a commercial success. Period.

Consumers review games with their wallet, and you don't get to sell them a million units at full price unless a bunch of people love your work--especially at $59 a pop. Sure, your craftsmanship may be amazing. But if your concept is not a powerful and relevant male fantasy, executed in a timely fashion, at a level that delivers on the promise of your core idea, you've probably just delivered the videogame equivalent of an art house film.

An art house game certainly proves that your development team is really talented but it also demonstrates you're really not in tune with the audience.

On March 20^th, we kicked off our Outsourced series of guest essays with a post by Silicon Knights president Denis Dyack, who argued that the marketing and PR of videogames was in desperate need of radical change. Since then, Dyack has continued to press his point in interviews, message boards and other forums. But since Dyack was in effect telling marketers how they should do their jobs, we wondered, what advice would a marketer give developers to improve themselves?

To find out, we approached Steve Allison, senior vice president of marketing and chief marketing officer for Midway Home Entertainment. He's been at Midway since 2003, but we first met Allison when he was serving as Atari's vice president of marketing and business development, a position he held from December 2001 to December 2003 (he joined Atari in 1999, when it was still called Infogrames.) We've had a number of frank discussions with Allison about all things videogame, and we're pleased as punch that he's agreed to share his thoughts with us. Here, then, is his answer to Level Up's question "How must developers change in order to better create videogames that sell?"

In the past several weeks there has been some interesting banter about changing the way games are marketed as we enter the next generation, particularly when it comes to new IP [intellectual property.] But is this really the case? According to our numbers, the actual success rate of new IP over the past four years is just seven percent. In other words, 93 percent of new IP fails in the marketplace. So while the 90-plus review scores and armfuls of awards create the perception that titles like Psychonauts, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami and other great pieces of work were big successes, the truth is that they were big financial disappointments and money losers.

The call for a change in marketing has come primarily from a few developers who have seen their games passed over by the marketplace or by their competitors and decided to reboot their projects a couple of times. Yet I've never seen a highly anticipated game with a truly powerful concept hurt by a product delay. I've been through a few with the Unreal Tournament franchise and the launch of Neverwinter Nights. These were truly anticipated releases that were destined to be big whenever they shipped and have publicity all along the way however long it took. But let's face it: not all games are as highly anticipated as these. If a game loses its momentum because of delays it will be because the concept itself is weak, or because bad timing has made the product either less relevant or allowed a rival developer to get to market first with a similar idea.

So with a success rate of less than 10 percent for new IP, it is not the way we market and launch games that needs revisiting in the next generation. No, it is development that needs reflection, refinement and change.

1. SMB...Mario, like you've never seen him before
2. GOP...Romney attacks "cesspool" of videogames
3. WHO...you are, defined by the way you game
4. NCL...Nintendo CEO disses U.S. division, Second Life
5. WE3...The GTA guys like Grant Morrison's toilet?
6. MMO...but neither WOW nor Second Life. Discuss.
7. HUH...IGN or Gamespot on All-Pro 2K8--whom to believe?
8. RND...Scoop Jackson Q&A on race, rap and hoops