Pretty good interview with the man himself. Revealing. The ego is still there, but more subdued than it's been in the past.
And then it comes out:
"I mean, yes, it is successful. Is it enough? No, it's not. I don't care what you say, if you're a designer, you're competitive. You have to have that gene inside you. My measure is simply this: There are a billion devices. How many times should my game be downloaded? A billion times. That's my success metric."
No. No. A designer must always recognize the constraints of the system within which they design. You can never please everyone. Whatever your goals are as a designer, you have to know how well those goals match with the public's desires. That will put an upper bound constraint on what your target number should be.
Look at the devices. You would think 100% of the population would own a smart phone. And yet this is not the case. It is 77% right now. And that's across ALL smartphones. The iphone is so successful because of who it alienates by its design as much as who is in it's target.
Really, I don't see how any of his games were even designed for a large market to begin with, so he's still talking crap here. I think he does have a true designers brain, but it's coupled with this "must make the biggest and best game ever so that EVERYONE likes me!" complex that completely undermines everything he tries to do.
I think that successful creatives need a healthy dose of "fuck those who don't like my stuff" to go along with their desire to make greatness.
A healthy dose.
Not Phil Fish levels.