Slashdot Log In
Why Game Developers Go Rogue
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Aug 06, 2008 09:30 AM
from the be-your-own-boss dept.
from the be-your-own-boss dept.
cliffski writes "Jay Barnson interviews the new crop of indie game developers.
How could anybody abandon the steady paychecks, access to the best tools and engines, large teams of skilled colleagues and the glory of working on one of next holiday season's blockbusters for a chance to labor in relative obscurity on tiny, niche titles?
Steven Peeler was a senior programmer at Ritual Entertainment. For him, leaving and forming the one-man studio Soldak Entertainment came down to a desire for creative freedom. 'I really wanted to work on an RPG, and Ritual only made shooters,' he says. 'There were some annoying politics going on that was really frustrating, I disagreed with the direction the company was taking, I was really tired of pushy publishers and I just wanted to do my own thing.'"
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Because we can (Score:3, Insightful)
'Nuff said.
Re:Because we can (Score:5, Insightful)
Version 1:
"I really wanted to work on Performance Parts, and Auto Parts Company X only made roof-racks and cargo-nets," he says. "There were some annoying politics going on that was really frustrating, I disagreed with the direction the company was taking, I was really tired of pushy investors and I just wanted to do my own thing."
Version 2:
"I really wanted to work on graphics apps, and Software Company Y only made custom data management software," he says. "There were some annoying politics going on that was really frustrating, I disagreed with the direction the company was taking, I was really tired of pushy clients and I just wanted to do my own thing."
Why should we care just because they're a game developer?
Parent
Re:Because we can (Score:5, Interesting)
Why should we care just because they're a game developer?
The Escapist cares because they're about games. In fact, so is games.slashdot.org. And at the moment, while big game titles are working with multimillion dollar budgets, indie games seem to be thriving. A look inside that part of the industry is certainly interesting.
But why there's no customdatamanagement.slashdot.org, I have no idea.
Parent
Re:Because we can (Score:5, Interesting)
If there are any indie developers here,can I add to a little wish list? Please?
How about a nice little indie FPS,please? Hell,you don't HAVE to have the uber super Crysis thing going,a lot of buds and I still are quite happy playing Soldier of Fortune I. What we are tired of is the same damned stupid as a stump bad guys,zero realism,cookie cutter WW2 crap. I want a game where the bad guys are smart enough to make me work for it. I want a game where I can shoot the gun out of the bad guys hand,or make him have to limp because I put one in his kneecap. And some really good sniping,as opposed to shooting around a guy half a dozen times while he stands there would be nice too.
How about some horror FPS like Nosferatu? Or maybe an end of the world and I have to fight my fellow survivors kind of thing? The point is there are a lot of ways to make a FPS stand out that don't involve monster graphics cards. But all we get from the big boys with the exception of one or two titles are the same old tired themes over and over. I would personally love to try and buy something new and fresh,even with SOF I or II graphics. Because as the Wii has shown us,it is about the fun. And the last half dozen games I've demoed are anything BUT fun,just more stupid AI wrapped in flashy graphics. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV. And if you'll excuse me I'm going to play some SOF II or NOLF II. Now THOSE were fun.
Parent
Re:Because we can (Score:5, Interesting)
Our (lucky) 13th title [blogspot.com] will try to fit the bill for a fun, indie-developed FPS. However, the feedback we've received over the years is that a) it's difficult for an indie developer to get the public's attention with same, and b) many (not all) gamers demand the eye candy. Valve picked up our latest [steampowered.com], and people are vocally split into two camps -- "This is fun despite the simple graphics" vs. "This looks like crap, so I won't play it." It's still been good for us, but it's absolutely received less attention for not being both fun and pretty at the same time.
Parent
Re:Because we can (Score:4, Interesting)
The article's not about why they went indie, it's about people who went indie. Why they went indie is one small component of an article that also addresses some of the challenges they faced in the transformation and how well it has or hasn't worked for them.
Did you even RTFA or are you just griping for the sake of it?
Parent
Not quite, I'm affraid (Score:4, Informative)
Err... not quite... let's go through those one by one:
Heh. Some people are under the impression that game programmers end up millionaires, like John Carmack, but the vast majority are actually paid a piss poor wage. And it becomes even less tempting once you do a total of the time worked, including unpaid overtime (some companies don't even just do it for the final crunch, but most of the time), and divide your wage by it.
The inside joke is that they haven't offshored games to India and China yet, because those guys don't work for _that_ little.
So trying for indie, I dunno, seems a lot less of a loss. You don't even need to sell many copies to make the same wage as before.
1. Not everyone works with a Sid Meier or Will Wright. There are a lot of game programmers working for a lot less talented designers. In fact, your average entry job probably will be for some no-name company making a flop, and with a designer who makes up for less skill by having a bigger ego.
2. The movie will show _you_ and get you a bunch of fans, if you're a talented actor. Those best directors and writers will make _you_ shine. If you're a talented game programmer, the best you can hope for is that you'll be a name by the half of the credits, and the designer is treated by the press and fanboys as the only one who mattered. It's more akin to being the third cameraman on the credits of a movie. So it's a bit easier to break away as a game programmer, because the ego factor to keep you in line just isn't the same.
3. Those actors are often allowed a lot more creative input, to those directors and writers. Harrison Ford is the perfect example with his changes. Probably the best known being the scene where Indy shoots the swordsman. As a game programmer, probably nobody will give a shit about _your_ vision. The testers have more of a chance to change anything than you do, and God knows that for a bunch of companies the testers are ignored.
4. Up to what age do actors get to play and be worshipped? The average game programmer is chewed up and shit out by the games industry, as a burned out husk, before reaching 30. A lot of them even earlier. Sometimes having celebrities shit on you, still is just being shit upon.
While the games industry does have a couple of very skilled people, the average programmer there is there only because he wanted very little money and generally didn't mind the overtime and being treated badly. And again, will make up for lack of actual skill, by being legends in their own minds.
Most games won't even break even, and end up subsidized from the profits of EA's sports games and the like.
Plus, there's a lot to be said about the "glory" of being one of the guys whose code was launched buggy and untested, and had reviewers and players ranting about poor quality ;)
And again, most of the glory will go to the game designer, while you'll be lost in the credits.
So to sum it all up, being a game programmer is very very unlike being a super-star actor. The whole ego thing that works for actors... well, as a game programmer you're probably more motivated by either (A) a misguided sense of altruism, as in, "ah well, at least I'm doing something useful and making it possible for other people to have fun," or (B) being unrealistic enough or in outright denial about your position and chances for something better. Or often both.
Parent
Mostly lack of business acumen (Score:5, Informative)
You can be the greatest programmer in the world, but until the realities of the market are well understood, you're going to be starving.
The fact of the matter is that very few independent programmers make it big. Those that do either got lucky or had a good understanding of business. It's easy to go off on your own and create what you want, but it's a completely different thing to garner interest in the product and sell it for a profit.
The reason why game developers "go rogue" is because they are inherently a seat-of-the-pants type personality who see personal pleasure and freedom as the highest attainable goals. While those are fine goals, without a solid business understanding, those goals area farther away from the independent game developer than if they stayed at a large employer.
Re:Mostly lack of business acumen (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're barking up the wrong tree a bit here. History is chock full of studios founded by programmers, artists, and designers that broke off from their employer to do something interesting. In many cases, it was to escape the employer's risk aversion. i.e. It's not that games other than First Person Shooters don't sell. It's that large companies know that FPSes sell, so they don't want to take a risk on anything else.
The smaller studios, OTOH, have an opportunity to pursue new gaming styles and lines of games that don't have to align with what the big executives THINK will sell. Sometimes they make it big. More often, they manage to prove out the market before being folded back into a larger company. That larger company then sees "hot new opportunities" that didn't exist before. Could the large company have opened up the market to begin with? Sure. But why take the risk when someone else will do it for you?
The end result is that these smaller studios (these days often referred to as "Indies" partly due to the low investment capital needed to start making modern games) make their money in a tried and true business fashion: An exit strategy.
The fact of the matter is that very few small business owners make it big. (Investors like to tout the "90% of small businesses fail" number.) There's nothing inherently different about the gaming sector.
Parent
Re:Mostly lack of business acumen (Score:5, Interesting)
No, AAA titles still cost more than ever. What has changed is that the market has become more willing to accept "retro" titles. These titles are not much more sophisticated than, say, a SuperNES title, but they still get to take advantage of technological advancements. Hand drawn art, sampled compositions, and relatively complex physics engines can all be done on a budget these days. If you're willing to spend a little extra on a pre-fabbed 3D engine, you can even use off-the-shelf 3D models to throw your game together.
That's why a few guys can go from making Flash Games to making one of the most popular downloadable titles today. They already had team members or contractors able to make the assets. All they needed to do was use the Wii's technology to step up to their A game and make it happen.
Is there a larger investment involved in a console title? Yes. But that's all part of the risk/reward aspect of running a small business.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
in todays society, if you are programming for a company, you will have to put up, or no paycheck. In atleast 90% of america's economy it is political and ego stroking. Making someone look good. Only way you can get away from this, is if you are the Sole Programmer in a company of One... and at that, you will have to stroke someone's ego to atleast sell your code/product.
Re:Mostly lack of business acumen (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact of the matter is that very few independent programmers make it big.
I think that's exactly the mentality many developers are trying to escape by "going rogue". Many of them would be happy making a modest living, never "making it big", while creating the games they want to make.
There is another article [escapistmagazine.com] in the same issue of Escapist that describes the history of Kingdom of Loathing. Nobody's getting rich there, but they jobs a ton of game developers would kill to have.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What is insightful about this comment?
There is a lot of space between a starving programmer and "making it big". Their goal is not to make it big, but to make a living with what they love.
You don't have to be Picasso to make a living with painting. You don't have to be Metallica to make a living with music. And you don't have to be Sid Meier to make a living with your games.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Mostly lack of business acumen (Score:5, Insightful)
You can be the greatest programmer in the world, but until the realities of the market are well understood, you're going to be starving.
The fact of the matter is that very few independent programmers make it big.
Another fact of the matter is: independent programmers don't need to make it big. They just need to make a decent living doing what they love, and that's certainly achievable if you know your market well. That last bit is important. You're no longer just a programmer, now you're suddenly also a marketer.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
One drawback of indie games: Local multiplayer (Score:5, Interesting)
Should I just bite the bullet and develop my prototype for Windows?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Should I just bite the bullet and develop my prototype for Windows?
No, just do it literally. It's been years. If you haven't solved it yet and you're still posting the same old crap, your prototype isn't ever going to be made, much less a finished game.
Stop trying to hide your QQing under the guise of actually doing something development-related
Re:One drawback of indie games: Local multiplayer (Score:4, Informative)
You're missing the best way to do it, IMHO: contact an Asian microconsole manufacturer, and work with their ROM to develop your own game.
There are numerous (maybe hundreds?) Asian microconsole manufacturers, and all of them are happy to license their subsystems cheaply. The one I think of most often when I come up with my brilliant (and soon forgotten) video game idea is Jakks Pacific. They have a great subsystem that can probably unite more than one player, and it outputs to SDTV standard. I'm fairly sure (but not 100%) that they even have expandability options so you can even offer updates via a plug-in cartridge.
Contact one of these companies and see what they can offer you in terms of licensing their subsystems. Get their backend code structures, and start developing. Yes, I'm sure they're limited in resolution, game size, etc, but it's a great way to get your foot in the door for little money, and see if you have what it takes to develop an entire game from scratch.
Back in the late 80s and early 90s, I was a "developer-producer" of a series of BBS doors that ended up multiplayer. This was an amateur hobby, but one of our doors ended up successful enough (about 100 installations multinode). It took seriously 15 designers to make this text-based game, including copywriters, ASCII graphics artists, C or Pascal code developers, integration developers, alpha testers, beta testers, customer service people, and one MASM assembly language programmer who I don't think had any social skills or even knew how to dress himself. It was a BIG game to implement, and it had no real graphics or high end interactivity. So I'd think a video game with multiple players means a HUGE leap of faith, a big risk, but maybe a big reward.
Good luck.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Make a prototype. Develop it for the PC but make it portable. Pimp your prototype to smaller development houses. All three major console developers are trying to promote indie games through their download services, so if you have a solid prototype and are good at selling your idea, you'd have a shot.
Alternatively, grab the XNA development kit and a XNA Creator's Club membership, and target your game to the 360. Your audience will be limited to other XNA Creator Club members, but you can go on to pimp yo
Re:One drawback of indie games: Local multiplayer (Score:5, Insightful)
Historically != Modern Approach
* WiiWare
* XBox Live
* PlayStation Network
These are all services that Indies are able to break into these days. For a small investment (free - $600 for XBLA, $2000 for a WiiWare dev kit) you can make your game for one of these consoles, then offer it for download for a small fee.
Case in Point: Defend Your Castle [wikipedia.org] went from a single-player flash game to a local multiplayer title that happens to be the third most popular game on the WiiWare service.
Now if you mean "Indie" to mean "Homebrew", you're barking up the wrong tree. Go get a copy of DevkitPro [wiibrew.org] + a copy of Twilight Princess for the Wii. That will allow you to develop local multiplayer for a console. Another option is to support XBox 360 controllers on Windows PCs. They are designed as USB devices intended for plugging into either a computer or a console. You can then encourage players to purchase these controllers.
Assuming your homebrew title is good enough, that is...
Parent
Chance to do something different (Score:5, Insightful)
A steady paycheck looks good on paper and many people are perfectly happy working on someone else's ideas for their entire lives. Eventually though, people with a creative streak have to have an outlet or they go insane. Sometimes a part-time hobby is enough, sometimes it means quitting the steady job.
Re:Chance to do something different (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking as someone whose done it (not in the games industry, but a similar life changing career move), there can come a time when you'd rather be happy and poor then well off and having to do what someone else says all the time. This is especially true for people of a creative flair.
Besides, if things go well, the period of time with little money will eventually end. Even if not, you won't have that constant feeling of 'I should have done that thing' for years afterwards.
Believe me, that's a killer. I've worked with people who chose the safe path over their dreams, and they tend to be unhappy about it.
In one case, the guy was so openly bitter (in his case about not having risked going to medical college), that he was quite unpleasant to anyone else who talked about taking a chance with their own careers/lives.
For myself, I spent several years perpetually broke, but undeniably happier then I'd been for years. I'm not broke any more, but I'm still happy.
Parent
Steady Pay Checks ? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure why anyone refers to employment as a games developer as "steady". They are precarious outfits, pathetically dependant upon "hits" that may or may not come again, until they burn you out and drop you like a stone.
An easy explanation for developers "going rogue" is that the pay is so very very bad that the difference between unemployment and salary whilst you write the code is so small that it is not as hard a decision as in other lines of work.
Re:Steady Pay Checks ? (Score:5, Funny)
Not steady pay checks. How do people miss this easy to find fact?
- Mages take almost 3000 xp to make level 2,
- Rogues take only 1250.
Do the math.
Parent
Re:Steady Pay Checks ? (Score:4, Informative)
Having worked in a computer game development studio for two years and received a job offer at another, I can safely refute your statement. Game development companies pay just a bit under market for the positions they fill, and usually retain people for a number of years.
A lot of studios go under, I admit. But it's not too hard to find your next position, often working alongside the same people you've worked with before. The pay is not "very very bad" or anywhere near unemployment wages. The author of the original cited article (my brother) has had a few rocky times with a few different studios, but manages to be the sole breadwinner for his family of four in a middle-class neighborhood just fine as a developer for a smaller studio.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've become wary of the game development "industry", not because of the terrible pay, but the terrible hours. Or at least, the incredibly stupid combination thereof. Even your brother's article mentions the brutal hours that just drive intelligent people away.
Gone Rogue ... RPG... (Score:5, Funny)
User Killed by Pun lvl. 2 with 0 XP.
W2 = loser, 1099 = winner (Score:5, Interesting)
Tax-wise, leaving your "stable" job adds to inherent features to your new job future: greater risk, greater reward.
I have had one W2 job in my life, and I will never do it again. All I saw around me was politics, inefficiency, vying for position, inefficiency, back stabbing, inefficiency, nepotism, and inefficiency. When I saw something that I could do better, faster, and cheaper, I had no reason to "sell the idea" to management because either they'd take it (and climb the ladder) or they'd sit on it due to a pet peeve.
This guy Peeler ignores the absolute greatest reason to quit and go solo: being called back in for sometimes 10X the pay, from your old employer. When I left my only W2 position (at a whopping $21 per hour back in 1992), within 3 months they called me back in, and I offered myself at $60 per hour. Within a year I was at $120 per hour, and had enough to hire own my W2 goons to play nice with the customer. And they were hired out at $120 per hour and paid quite a bit less (although I offer all of them the option to start their own business and subcontract, which many do).
For a gaming engineer, being an employed underling offers little other than so-called "stability." See how stable you are when you get fired or the company goes under. Out come the dreaded CVs, while you pound the pavement looking for another 40 hours a week W2 job. If you're a contractor, you can work for 10, 20, 50, thousands of firms on a regular basis, and if a few go under or cut you, you're out maybe 5% or 10%. Don't put all your eggs in one basket.
It's like homeownership: if your boss knows you have a mortgage, you're screwed. He has no reason to offer you incentives (better pay, better hours, better perks, etc) because you have another God to pray to: your bankster. The same is true with a W2: your boss knows he's your only source of income, and as such you're stuck with bad pay, bad hours, bad perks.
Go solo, everyone. Cut the unbilical cord and if you're a hard worker, you'll prosper. Then find about 10 of your previous coworkers, offer them a few bucks more an hour, and bill them out at 5X their pay to not just your old employer but their competitors, too. 3. Profit!
Re:W2 = loser, 1099 = winner (Score:5, Insightful)
Go solo, everyone. Cut the unbilical cord and if you're a hard worker, you'll prosper. Then find about 10 of your previous coworkers, offer them a few bucks more an hour, and bill them out at 5X their pay to not just your old employer but their competitors, too. 3. Profit!
It's called being a contractor and the reason you charge 5x your old salary is because you have to pay your own social security, health insurance, 401K, etc etc etc.
There's a lot more to a W-2 salary than the money in your pocket after taxes.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I admit, I am lazy and taking the W2 route.
Thank you for admitting this. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with saying "I really don't want to find customers, bill them, fight them for payments, track dozens of jobs, drive to different places every day, travel the country, just for a few extra bucks and more free time when I need it, because I am lazy." In fact, I appreciate those who respond to my questioning their W2-status with "I'm just lazy." It's a breath of fresh air because it means they THOUGHT
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Great for when you are single, but the health coverage balance changes considerably when you settle down. I'm freelance and have been since '95. Our first child cost us over $23k in medical birthing bills. I swear they just make crap up and everyone in the build gets to raise an invoice. A high deductible is fine for single life when you take care of yourself. It's bloody awful when you have kids that seem to discover new ways to require medical treatment.
This is why this country is a mess. A couple wants
don't get sick -- Re:W2 = loser, 1099 = winner (Score:5, Insightful)
I have had one W2 job in my life
That speaks for itself. You really have had very little experience, and people should take your anecdotal analysis with a grain of salt. I have had many W2 and 1099 jobs, and in the long run I greatly prefer the stability of W2 jobs, even though I really enjoyed the weird hours, huge paychecks, and random nature of my early contracting jobs.
I'd say try it before you get too old, or at least give moonlighting a shot.
Go solo, everyone.
1099 jobs are great when you are young, healthy, and full of piss and vinegar and can afford to start life over again if you screw up. If you want to go solo over age 30, make damn well sure you have a contingency plan, or are networked and diversified out the yin-yang.
Also, don't get sick! Unless you live in a state that has passed laws allowing groups of people to pool money and buy discount healthcare, you are F-U-C-*-E-D. Once you go on record with a HINT of chronic illness, you will very likely not be able to get insurance. The government mandates that insurance companies sell you insurance if you have a pre-existing condition, but they don't mandate the price. You could very easily could end up requiring to pay $3~5k per month for health insurance.
I'm eternally grateful that W2 companies get such great deals on group health coverage.
Parent
Re:W2 = loser, 1099 = winner (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sorry to hear about your wife's chronic asthma. I'll tell you a story about the woman I married: she had chronic asthma since she was a child, in the ER 3-4 times per year for steroids. When I met her, I told her she's crazy, it isn't asthma. I took her to 5 "professional" doctors, and she still had the problems. Then I went "underground" and did some research on her asthma. We cut back on her sugars, starches and anything that may convert to sugar in the blood (corn primarily). Within 3 months, she lost about 15 pounds, and never had an asthma attack again. Never. So I'd first look to make sure that her asthma is truly asthma and not a horrible reaction to her diet or things in her environment. I'm not saying she isn't sick, but in all honesty, I distrust those who don't do their duty (i.e., some doctors) in finding triggers to things that can look like a disease, but might just be a dietary condition that is easily fixed.
As for how to handle chronic illnesses, being self-employed is probably not for you. I used to have kidney stones, which were not covered by my insurance. Eventually, I found my doctors who I was able to negatiate VERY good prices to deal with my pre-existing condition. I will never, EVER use insurance for a doctor's visit, a prescription drug (I abhor them, generally), or anything that isn't life- or lifestyle- threatening. My deductible annually is around $10,000, if I remember correctly, and I haven't had an insurance claim for anything in probably 7 years. My healthcare for myself and my family is VERY cheap, and over 7 years I think I've paid that $10,000 deductible in savings 2 times over, maybe more. I'm thinking of kicking it up to a $20,000 deductible if I can find an insurer who will go that high.
For most, health care is a crutch that they think they need, but in all honesty health care in general is not that expensive, if you go and negotiate with your family doctor. Offer cash-on-the-barrel, and many doctors will cut their fees significantly since they won't have to deal with insurance companies or government agencies. My own doctor charges $150 for a visit (insured) but his cash-on-the-barrel rate is $45! He said most people pay a $20 co-pay, but he'd rather get $45 in cold hard cash when they visit. I do, and I'm fine with it.
My insurance is for accidents, cancer, stroke, heart attack, etc. It's not for day-to-day health care needs, but I've forced myself to live as healthy as possible, short of the excessive smoking, scotch drinking, high speed driving, sleep-deprived-weekends-in-Vegas, and the occasional illicit substance use. Oh, and binging on bacon, eggs, and butter probably isn't wise, either.
Parent
Re:W2 = loser, 1099 = winner (Score:5, Informative)
Rycross:
I established a S-corporation, which is basically a corporate entity where the profits and losses flow to and from the shareholders. Eventually I had multiple S-corps, so I incorporated a C-corp holding company for certain assets which I lease back to my S-corps.
Finding gigs is the hardest part, but if you've saved a few years of expenses (and everyone should), you can generally find work fairly quickly. The key is to be prepared to travel, if necessary, and pound the pavement to get those first gigs. Once you're in with a few businesses, word-of-mouth does its job. I'd save that 80% of my new clients are referred by old clients, who get a nice reward for the referral.
Starting out initially is the big scare, but it can be done while you're working your W2 "job." There are MANY organizations who need some simple needs, and are great stepping stones to securing better work (and higher paying work) once you've cut your teeth. Every day I see another opportunity for someone with even basic skills in a variety of markets. If I could clone myself, I'd be a billionaire. Note that I do not advocate self-employment for money reasons primarily, I advocate them for job stability and happiness. It boils down to the "all your eggs in one employment basket" feeling I have: when you have many customers, you have more time to handle your own desires, and have a bit more stability if you can enter various industries and markets so you're not tied to one market that may have its own ups and downs.
Feel free to email me and ask some questions.
Parent
Simply put (Score:3, Informative)
Piracy and Anti-DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting quote from the article:
"Some of them cloak it all with this thin veneer of 'sticking it to the man' and being 'anti-DRM' and 'anti-big corporations.' Despite me giving a free demo, no DRM, innovative games, at reasonable prices with great tech support from a one-man company, the bastards still rip me off and take my stuff anyway."
So in other words, this guy releases his game with no anti-piracy DRM measures and people still play his game without paying him.
I get into piracy arguments with other folks all the time. They talk about how they want "DRM-free" music, information wants to be free, most modern music is crap anyways, etc. But when it comes down to it, they're just being cheap.
Re:Piracy and Anti-DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem in that case is that he hasn't got his business model sorted.
If people can take your product and walk without paying, they will, its human nature. If them doing that robs you of your livelihood, then the solution is change the product.
Not DRM, that's a train that goes no place good.
No, the solution would be to have a game with on-line components (even as simple as a score league and competitions with small prizes) that people must be registered users to access. So long as the online componants add value, your users will register and pay.
If not then yours is just another in the sea of games people feel no need to purchase.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the solution would be to have a game with on-line components (even as simple as a score league and competitions with small prizes) that people must be registered users to access. So long as the online componants add value, your users will register and pay.
Your solution is seriously flawed. What you suggest is really just DRM that isn't necessarily "forced" on users. With this solution, you can only take your game in two directions:
1. Make your game suck enough without the online components so it forces people to register the game. However, why would they register if all they know is that your game sucks?
2. Make your game good without the online components and hope people will register it because it's fun. If the game is already fun, why would people w
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who in their right mind would think that making a game suck without an online component would be a good idea?
Methinks you haven't really thought this through.
You add MORE to the game, not take stuff away.
Re:Piracy and Anti-DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
What it comes down to is, pirates will pirate regardless of whether there's DRM or not. DRM is only an inconvenience for paying customers.
"Some of them cloak it all with this thin veneer of 'sticking it to the man' and being 'anti-DRM' and 'anti-big corporations.' Despite me giving a free demo, no DRM, innovative games, at reasonable prices with great tech support from a one-man company, the bastards still rip me off and take my stuff anyway."
And I suppose he has proof that people pirating his games are the same people who claimed they only pirate to stick it to the man?
Parent
Why Game Developers Go Rogue (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hard to not get flagshipped though (Score:3, Interesting)
Game development is a fierce competition though, especially if you aim for the stars at the first try. Just ask the guys behind Flagship Studios, and then these were among the most experienced developers in the industry.
What at least one of them acknowledged though (I forget the name, I think he worked for QA on their sister company Ping0), was that they had a rather poor balance of people knowing how to run a company -- making decent products ship without putting themselves at risk. I.e. they had a large set of very skilled developers and designers, but that there are more essentials to a successful company than this, and he believed FSS made an oversight there.
Easy (Score:3, Funny)
Because smaller companies are more relaxed and not as arsey about hitting deadlines.
a new form of evolution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Through the big-game phase (Score:3, Insightful)
Because they have no other choice (Score:3, Informative)
How could anybody abandon the steady paychecks, access to the best tools and engines, large teams of skilled colleagues and the glory of working on one of next holiday season's blockbusters for a chance to labor in relative obscurity on tiny, niche titles?
Maybe it's because the paychecks are NOT steady, the tools are NOT so great, the colleagues are fresh out of college and kiss too much ass, and their is no glory in being credited on the latest bug-fest of a movie license sellout. I'm looking at you, ElectronicArctivision.
It's often the niche titles that yield the biggest successes. After all, if you're a highly skilled developer or designer, and you're forced to work within the mold of a big-name company, you're probably watching that skill go to waste. Only the freedom of a small, indie shop will give you the room to stretch your imagination and flex your hacking muscle.
Because that's not real (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, and the streets paved with gold. Because, you know, the game industry isn't run by a group of dinosaurs in a market with too little external pressure to drive out famously bad production practices.
The steady paychecks don't exist in a contracted world. The best tools and engines are things that were shaky when they were one-man hacked together ten years ago in C by someone who thought they should still have been writing assembly. The large teams of skilled colleagues are college kids being paid next to nothing while they're burned out by 70 hour workweeks in day one crunch mode shops.
If game design firms like this existed, the two year attrition in gaming wouldn't be 70%. This article is about fantasies of how the industry works, not realities; that's why the author can't figure out what's going on.
Non-compete enforceability (Score:4, Informative)
You would think the big game developers would make their people sign no-compete contracts.
Overly broad covenants not to compete [wikipedia.org] are not enforceable. The State of California in fact considers non-competes to be against public policy. The justification is that everybody has a right to work in the field in which he was trained. Ask a lawyer in your state for details.
Parent
re: When they're accused of a crime. (Score:5, Funny)
These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground ; )
Parent