This has meant that independent developers now have no option but to court the large publishers if they have no other revenue source. In the past the costs of were more manageable, and determined developers working on their first titles could find more mundane sources of finance – usually bank loans.

The result of this is that the best new developers can hope for, if they have no previous titles under their belts, is to gain some kind of deal with a large publisher. This is an understandable desire from their point of view, but from a business perspective it does nothing more than keep them afloat during the development period, and deprive them of the revenues they deserve when the game hits the shelves. There are, of course, alternative ways of doing things. One such is the satellite studios' model. Essentially, this involves one larger and more financially secure developer, namely Peter Molyneux’s Lionhead, acting as a technical and financial advisor for a number of smaller start-ups. The ‘service’ even extends to using Molyneux’s own reputation for publicity purposes for the satellite productions – it already seems inevitable that Big Blue Box’s will be a massive success.

What is also clear, however, is that even large and successful developers crave the kind of financial stability that only access to publishing can provide them. Indeed, it is hard to think of a highly successful developer that has not succumbed to a buyout from a publisher – the list of recent acquisitions is extensive. (MS), (Vivendi), (MS), Westwood (EA), Shiny (Infogrames) and Verant (Sony) were all purchased despite achieving the kind of success that should have ensured their independence. If anything, this is evidence of the gulf in profitability that exists between publishers and developers. Publishers by definition will have many different games at different stages of the product cycle, and can thus count on the kind of constant revenue streams that developers can only dream of. Even the biggest developers are constantly losing money, hoping to make it up again when their next game hits the shelves. It is easy to see why the Stamper brothers could be tempted to sell a company as successful as Rare, leaving the $370 million aside for the moment. No more worrying about revenue streams – as part of the they could rely on profits from other sectors covering their costs. All they need worry about is making the games.

There is also a perception that increased corporate dominance has meant less innovation, and more reliance on licensed properties and sequels. In fact, licensed games were always part of the gaming landscape, and were almost always (rare exceptions noted) mediocre in quality – ET on the 2600 is considered by many to be the worst game ever, for instance. And whilst massive publishers like are the source of many an inexplicable franchise (an entire range), their release catalogue is actually surprisingly diverse. They have released some of the year's most well received games, including 1942 and Medal of Honour. It should also be remembered that publishers do not come any larger than and Sega. If Pikmin and Super Monkey Ball are anything to go by, originality is certainly not a dying ideal.