Fear Culture Hinders Game Development

The gaming industry is being held back by a culture of fear that favors following trends and market research over creative vision and personal taste, which are essential for producing truly successful games. This was the conclusion of a workshop led by developer and consultant Rami Ismail at the 2026 DevGAMM Madeira Games Summit. The workshop, titled 'We're moving fast and losing what made us good (creativity, craft & the future),' urged the industry to move away from risk-averse decision-making, arguing that the fear of failure has become a greater obstacle to success than the uncertainty inherent in creative work. The group ultimately determined that unique and successful products are the result of internal coherence and disciplined validation, rather than attempting to appeal to everyone by 'sanding down the edges.' The workshop brought together a diverse group of creators, producers, communicators, publishers, and service providers to discuss how to restore creativity as a central aspect of game development and funding processes, with the idea that current incentives often work against creativity. Games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Peak, and Balatro, which were driven by personal conviction and individual taste, were cited as examples of titles that achieved disproportionate success without being predicted by market analysis. This led the workshop to conclude that the gaming industry's best works are often created outside of market research, and while data is a powerful tool, it is personal taste that drives breakout hits. In contrast, the reflexive need to 'chase the algorithm' or 'make games for everyone' was seen as mechanisms that reduce risk at the expense of creative conviction. The workshop identified four key pillars for a creatively centered game design approach: creating coherence, identifying weaknesses, selling the dream, and connecting the dots. Creating coherence involves making works that do not contradict their own thesis or goals, which requires conviction, time, and continuous validation. Identifying weaknesses applies at the product, studio, and personnel levels. Selling the dream involves communicating and motivating both internally and externally, with the group strongly agreeing that many creatives and leads fail to do this effectively. Connecting the dots involves integrating disparate inputs and incentives into structures that allow the other pillars to succeed. A key point from the discussion was that stagnation is an inevitable result of a fearful industry, and that creative conviction is necessary to maintain a studio's or individual's creative identity. However, excelling in a specific area does not require focusing on a single genre, theme, or demographic, but rather knowing who you are and what you stand for. The group acknowledged that commercial success should be a goal, but argued that adding non-creative pressures for success leads to diluted work. They also recognized that taste is important but inherently divisive, involving a distinction between those who like something and those who do not. Another key takeaway was the difficulty creative people often face in making tough decisions, including letting go of their games. Studios can waste resources seeking validation and chasing ideas that are not good or do not fit the current moment, rather than making a decisive choice early on. The group concluded that the only thing worse than making a wrong decision is failing to make a decision when one is needed. Relatedly, the workshop found that studios and individuals often do not ask for help when needed, which could prevent mistakes and unlock opportunities. The participants recognized that the gaming industry is deeply interdisciplinary, innovative, and iterative, and that no one person or team has all the answers. Finally, the group believed that community building is the most reliable indicator of success, citing examples of 'overnight hits' that were built on carefully cultivated communities. 'Many of the industry's fearful reflexes aim to sand down the rough edges of creative work, creating homogenous and bland works that check all the boxes but are insincere, uninspiring, and uninteresting,' Ismail concluded. 'Courage is a consistent factor of most hit titles; in funding, publishing, marketing, and investment.' While the group agreed with these points, they rejected the idea of returning to toxic structures centered around a creative genius, instead calling for thoughtful leadership, early and disciplined validation, collaboration, and a rejection of fearful decision-making. Ismail summarized, 'The industry's fear of risk is currently the largest risk it faces.'