arrogance of most non-indies

[cliffski]

I work full time for a big games company, and make my games in my spare time. One of the particurly clueless and talentless fools working here repeatedly tells me that my games 'arent proper games' and that they dont 'count' as being 'real' games. Despite the fact that the shiny new car outside is paid for by them, apparently they dont really sell any copies.
The guys obviously a retard, but I was wondering if the rest of you get the same nonsense from people you know working on retail games?
In my experience, retail develoeprs tend to be the most inefficient, clueless and talentless cross section of coders, whereas indie develoeprs seem to use proper software development and work much harder. Is this just my experience, or yours too?

[digriz]

I also work for a big game company. Most of the people here are unaware of the size of the indie game scene here. The ones that are aware is because i've told them about it.

Some are even considering doing there own indie games now.

There can be a certain about of snobishness from big game companies about this kind of thing but not on the scale of calling them non-games.

I think most people have a certain perception about shareware games being low quality. I hate to say it but for a large portion this is still the case. But more and more Gems are starting to shine through now.

[svero]

No matter what you do there will always be detractors. I've learned to just avoid those negative people and get on with my life. Lead by example. At the end of the day you have the extra car above what you make, and he's got the one salary. He's probably jealous.

[Savant]

In my experience, retail develoeprs tend to be the most inefficient, clueless and talentless cross section of coders, whereas indie develoeprs seem to use proper software development and work much harder. Is this just my experience, or yours too?
While I agree with your sentiment, this section just sounds like you're lashing out like a scorned child.

Most retail programmers that I've known have been some of the smartest guys I've ever met. Maybe you're working at the wrong companies.

[Jack Norton]

No matter what you do there will always be detractors. I've learned to just avoid those negative people and get on with my life. Lead by example. At the end of the day you have the extra car above what you make, and he's got the one salary. He's probably jealous.
Yes, true words!!
Not only fellow programmers but almost ANYONE will be your detractors. I think that envy is their true feeling.
Think about it, you earn money making something you love. You can work anywhere there's a internet connection, like our svero from beautiful beaches with busty babes in bikini around (even if isn't your case, in theory any indie could do that).
Is this enough to be jealous no? :)

[svero]

like our svero from beautiful beaches with busty babes in bikini

Actually I'm in asia so most of the women aren't busty. There are some babes though.. now if they only liked me...

[lakibuk]

tells me that my games 'arent proper games' and that they dont 'count' as being 'real' games.
This got me curious. Did your co-worker elaborate on why your games aren't 'proper' and 'real' ?

[cliffski]

While I agree with your sentiment, this section just sounds like you're lashing out like a scorned child.

Most retail programmers that I've known have been some of the smartest guys I've ever met. Maybe you're working at the wrong companies.

Maybe I am, I've worked at two big UK companies, and come accross maybe 5% good solid coders and 95% guys who haven't a clue. This may indeed be just where I worked, which is why I ask.

[cliffski]

This got me curious. Did your co-worker elaborate on why your games aren't 'proper' and 'real' ?

apparently unless a game sells a million copies its not a real game. Doesn't seem to matter that most of the ones he defends lost money ;(

[simonh]

Just tell Molyneux to shut his big fat gob ;)

[Anthony Flack]

I've only ever met one person who worked in the "proper" games industry. He was an EA vice president and he thought what I was doing was good. He also seemed quite enthusiastic about the idea of doing a game by yourself "like the old days!"

[Raptisoft]

Just tell Molyneux to shut his big fat gob

ROFL! This had my on the floor.

On Topic: I agree with those who say "jealousy." Let's face it, what we do is fun, rewarding, and the chicks would be all over us if we were just 6"4', blonde, blue eyed, and had the stature of Greek gods. Not everyone can say that.

[Mike Boeh]

Most programmers are arrogant, it just comes with the territory.

And actually, I think indies are particularly arrogant. Dan MacDonald's theory is that it's a prerequisite, because only someone who is truly arrogant can believe they can go out and independently make money with games.... Sounds about right to me :)

[baegsi]

I first read "arrogance of most indies" and wanted to agree. It's on both sides. Indies say "your game is not creative etc", non-indies "only AAA titles are real games". Personally, I don't think it makes much sense to seperate "we vs. them" anyway. You either make good/professional work or you don't. The kind of game/distribution model doesn't matter, they just require different skill sets.

Besides that I think it's always s best to not waste energy on other people's opinions.

[kerchen]

During my years at EA/Maxis, I worked with many bright people and I also worked with hacks who wouldn't know an application of the Observer pattern from a hole in the wall. The folks who say indie games aren't 'proper' are the same kind of people who think striking out on your own requires venture capital or the backing of a major studio. Just ignore 'em.

[joe]

Our graphican worked at a game company before and as we finished Absolute Blue he showed it to some of his ex-co-worker. One of them said that he can't believe that we think we will sell any copies of it. He said, that it's a nice freeware game but you can't make any money with it.

Now we know that he wasn't right. At least we have been sold a few copies.

Probably it's not arrogance of the people when they want to make you feel down. They are probably envious on you :D

[Hiro_Antagonist]

I know a lot of people that work at a large cross-section of retail gaming companies, and all of them that I know are worthy of respect. In fact, they're all better devs than I am, and I'm not *that* shabby.

Also, agreeing with what Mike/Dan said, I have to that that in my observation, Indie devs are even more arrogant on average than the retail devs. I'm sure I'm a bit guilty of that, but the worst offenders are the ones that are always slamming retail games and yapping about how they're so much better. Please.

-Hiro_Antagonist

[mahlzeit]

A lot of people are under the mistaken impression that "the shareware days are over", especially for games. Technology has evolved, the games you see in the stores have evolved, so how can something that looks so 20 years ago possibly sell?! I used to believe that too until I stumbled across Dexterity games and into the indie scene. Not that I have been any making money with my games yet... :)

[Mjonesgraphics]

What people tend to forget is that whereas a "real" game spends 5 years in development, has a staff of around 100+ and cost millions to produce, an Indie game can be brought to market quickly and cheaply and still make a profit. Something the HUGE games might never do despite all the millions spent on advertising. I've worked on huge games that tooks years, sent people to hospital, and cost a fortune. They also lost money. Now that big business is invloved, the mainstream games are becoming more and more like the movies. The money's less willing to take risks, and so we see less and less risks being taken.

I think we'll find the new ideas coming out of the Indy scene rather than the big corporations.

"not real games..."

Pfft....

Somebody needs to be kicked squarely in the nether regions! ;)

Mark Jones
www.mjonesgraphics.com

[Coyote]

I was one of those arrogant non-indies, too.

Now I'm an arrogant indie.

So is there a common thread here? :)

Anyway - what I've mostly noticed is that the guys who are fresh outta school, full of piss and vinegar and feeling on top of the world because they get to write GAMES for a living tend to be the most arrogant. They are going to make the NEXT GAME of their favorite series (or something) and its like a dream come true. Anyone who doesn't have a budget as big as theirs, a marketing campaign as big as theirs, a team as big as theirs, and magazine coverage as big as theirs is either a poor unfortunate still working their way up, or a hopeless dabbler who is really just marking time until he gets hired by a "real" company to work on a "real" game.

After these guys have worked zombie hours for derivative games, discovered that they are NOT going to be able to work their way up the corporate ladder to get their own "dream games" built, worked on cancelled projects, and nearly had their love of games trampled by the realities of the industry, they often have a change of attitude. They start getting jealous of the little guy doing his own thing - the enterpreneur starting up their own shoestring studio to be a "gun for hire" and maybe work on their own thing on the side, or even the little indie quietly laboring away on something small and fun (and maybe even profitable).

I don't know that it's universal, but it seems that most of the people who manage to survive four or five years of the corporate grind in game industry tend to take a much mellower, holistic attitude. Though it might take more time to get to the point of imagining 25,000 sales as "successful."

Maybe that's only "old school" game developers that I'm thinking about - the ones who remember when they had a lot of fun playing games that weren't written by 100 people on a $10 million budget. I don't know if the younger generation of game developers will end up thinking that way or not.

[kerchen]

Maybe that's only "old school" game developers that I'm thinking about - the ones who remember when they had a lot of fun playing games that weren't written by 100 people on a $10 million budget. I don't know if the younger generation of game developers will end up thinking that way or not.

I believe that as game creation technologies have become more accessible (both in terms of cost and learning curve), the chance for a small team to try something new and different hasn't been better in last 15 years. This availability of technology coupled with pent up demand for an alternative to mainstream studio products *should* result in even more developers (young and old) choosing to go the route of the indie. For that reason, some mainstream devs may feel a bit threatened by the prospect of being on the wrong horse and therefore get a bit defensive when confronted with the reality of indie devs making good money making the games they want to make. Any dev that thinks the only games worth making must cost $10M either has their head in the sand or is whistling past the graveyard.

[JoeMaru]

I think your situation is unique. I have a lot of friends in the 'real' industry, and pretty much all of them really like and respect what we have done. Most have told me that that wished they has the balls to do what we did.

On the other hand, I see many more indie devs who think they know more about game design and coding and *whatever* than all of the industry vets that I have worked with.

Most (not all) of the people I worked with at a bigger game shop were very talented and smart people.

There are all kinds out there.. I don't try to classify these guys at all as my experience has been the opposite of yours, and I really think it is relative to who you interact with.

[arcadetown]

I've worked for countless companies as a consultant programmer and ran into tons of arrogant types, most of who couldn't code themselves out of a simple sorting algorithm. Literally only 20% of the programmers out there really know what they're doing and the other 80% are carried along by those core guys. There's lots of arrogant people everywhere, including indies. Good thing I've learned to be easy and thick skinned. Plus it helps that I know I'm the best ;)

[Nexic]

I've never gotten this kind of thing from retail programmers, as I've never worked for a software development company. However I get this thing constantly from hardcore gamers and Carmack wannabies.

One of these people was currently planning his own game which was apparently going to be just like Silent Hill 3, BUT BETTER, and he was going to pay for it with money he had earnt over the summer ($1500). Funny thing is he can't program, do any kind of art, or compose. He was apparently going to hire people to make it for him... with $1500...

I'm not exaggerating!

[Tertsi]

One of these people was currently planning his own game which was apparently going to be just like Silent Hill 3, BUT BETTER...
I'm not exaggerating!

There's a kid or two posting something like this in the gamedev.net Help Wanted section every week. ;)

[Abscissa]

There's a kid or two posting something like this in the gamedev.net Help Wanted section every week. ;)
Heh, yea. I once came across a request that was like that, except he wanted the work done for free, within a few months, and he wanted it to be a full 3D engine, with 128-bit color, and curved surfaces (Note that this was around the time Quake *1* came out).

[otaku]

Heh, yea. I once came across a request that was like that, except he wanted the work done for free, within a few months, and he wanted it to be a full 3D engine, with 128-bit color, and curved surfaces (Note that this was around the time Quake *1* came out).

I remember that post. Romeo? Romero? Yeah, Romero something. Did that game ever come out?

[Abscissa]

I remember that post. Romeo? Romero? Yeah, Romero something. Did that game ever come out?
Ouch! That's gotta be one of the biggest Daikatana slams I've seen - and that's saying a LOT ;). (Although personally, I consider his and McGee's departures to have been the downfall of id. But I digress...)

[milieu]

I work full time for a big games company, and make my games in my spare time. One of the particurly clueless and talentless fools working here repeatedly tells me that my games 'arent proper games' and that they dont 'count' as being 'real' games. Despite the fact that the shiny new car outside is paid for by them, apparently they dont really sell any copies.

It's pretty obvious that the guy is insecure and jealous of your accomplishments, and probably just trying to get you pissed off. What I'm wondering is why you are wasting your time by repeatedly having this conversation? Don't engage him in a discussion over it...in fact, I wouldn't talk to him any more than was absolutely required by the job:

Him: You know, that game of yours is pretty lame. I bet I could make it in a week.
Me: Hey, that's great. <walk off to get coffee>
<time passes>
Him: How many copies did it sell?
Me: You know, I can't really remember. Have you looked at bug #8704 yet? <walk off to get coffee>

repeat as necessary.

[cliffski]

It's pretty obvious that the guy is insecure and jealous of your accomplishments, and probably just trying to get you pissed off. What I'm wondering is why you are wasting your time by repeatedly having this conversation? Don't engage him in a discussion over it...in fact, I wouldn't talk to him any more than was absolutely required by the job:

Him: You know, that game of yours is pretty lame. I bet I could make it in a week.
Me: Hey, that's great. <walk off to get coffee>
<time passes>
Him: How many copies did it sell?
Me: You know, I can't really remember. Have you looked at bug #8704 yet? <walk off to get coffee>

repeat as necessary.

of course you are absolutley right, its just tough to remember that in the heat of the moment, even thought he currently has more bugs than anyone else...

[Hiro_Antagonist]

It's pretty obvious that the guy is insecure and jealous of your accomplishments, and probably just trying to get you pissed off. What I'm wondering is why you are wasting your time by repeatedly having this conversation? Don't engage him in a discussion over it...in fact, I wouldn't talk to him any more than was absolutely required by the job:

Or better yet, encourage him to *do* it, since he's obviously the ultimate judge.

Or politely explain to him deeds are measure by actions, not blustering.

Or say in no uncertain terms that people who think they're superior at something they've never even tried are simultaniously wankers and poseurs. Allow him to connect the dots.

Either way, with that outlook, he'll be a small rat on a big ship until he finally gets frustrated and leaves the industry. And he'll tell everyone that'll listen about how it's someone else's fault. It always is with that type.

-Hiro_Antagonist

[soniCron]

Here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/13/) is another example of non-indie arrogance. With a dash of ignorance for flavor. ;)

[arcadetown]

Here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/13/) is another example of non-indie arrogance. With a dash of ignorance for flavor. ;)
Guess that explains the little magic pill he's popping in the picture on his site (http://www.livejournal.com/userpic/32185717/7696797).

[Ratboy]

Here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/13/) is another example of non-indie arrogance. With a dash of ignorance for flavor. ;)
Y'know, the line between ignorance and arrogance can get pretty thin...

[Spaceman Spiff]

Yeeeeooooowie... Spend all day coding and look at what I miss....

Time to refill the Improved Flamethrower.

Cliffski: You need to not let people get under your skin so much.

You can ship a game that sells 7 million copies and sill encounter plenty of snots who'll tell you that it was a hack effort and they could do a better job with 2 hands tied behind their back.

And you'll meet plenty of fools that have no idea that anything less than a big studio game is even possible, much less practical.

Either way man, letting them get to you just wastes your time and energy. You've already shown the clueless co-worker that the money is there - he's just decided that he won't listen to you no matter what. Don't fall into his trap; blow him off hard if necessary. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO PROVE TO HIM

Now as for incompetent developers, it's may be your employer, because there are a lot of shops out there that employ professional standards and development techniques, and can teach you a lot, even if you just came from another such place.

I think Coyote is in sync with me: There is a lot of arrogance to be found in all corners, but it probably inversely proportional to experience. Detractors and Envy are part of the landscape, so is Ignorance and Hubris.

Some people have called me arrogant. Some think I'm a great guy. I've gotten plenty of feedback on both. I take the bit that’s useful and become a little better each year. The rest is just a diversion on the way to wherever I am going. At least by pushing forward, I’ve accumulated some stories along the way.

This business of ours can pay off. We know that. It can also go nowhere. Working for a ‘big games company’ can pay off. It can also go nowhere. I’d like to think along the way, we make our own luck.

[svero]

The board's been getting a little dull without princec around so much so I think you should invite this guy here to joing the discussion :-)

[Abscissa]

The board's been getting a little dull without princec around so much so I think you should invite this guy here to joing the discussion :-) What, the combination of me and soniCron isn't good enough? ;) (j/k, soniCron)


Here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/13/) is another example of non-indie arrogance. With a dash of ignorance for flavor. ;)If you don't mind me asking, I'm curious what parts of that post you disagree with and why.

EDIT: Hey, post #500! I talk too much! :D

[soniCron]

What, the combination of me and soniCron isn't good enough? ;) (j/k, soniCron) Hey, I'm fully aware of our reputations of arrogance. :D


If you don't mind me asking, I'm curious what parts of that post you disagree with and why. All of it, except that the way things are done currently isn't working. Have I got the solution? No. Does he? Hell no! :D For about as much background as we need, check out this entry (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/12/).

[Uhfgood]

I have no experience in the game industry as such, nor do I really know that many indie developers (except through some online chatting) -- The only arrogant people i've seen are the really smart ones, or really exceptionally good at one thing or another. Has to do with how their brain is wired. They couldn't possibly see how you cannot absolutly understand such a simple concept (whatever it is) that they think is simple, that naturally they think you're not any good. It's not exactly something they can help, their brain is wired to a point where they have the high level thinking it sort of puts them head and shoulders above the rest, to a point they've distanced themselves from everyone around them. You have all seen "true artists" these are the guys with a chip on their shoulders the size of cleaveland - they're so great, they're so talented you couldn't possibly do what they do. Problem is alot of the times they're right. But they can't really identify with you because these things were never a struggle for them. It's sort of like a spoiled rich brat who hasn't had to beg for food just to live. If it comes natural you usually become arrogant about it. This is the same way for programmers as anyone else.

cliffski - Maybe he just can't help it, and you can pity him for not being able to see the opportunity ;-)

[mahlzeit]

About arrogance: I noticed that often self-confidence is mistaken for arrogance by people who are less secure of themselves. As if you're doing something you're not really "supposed to", and how does he have the nerve?! <shrug> Of course, there's nothing wrong with a little arrogance. ;)

[soniCron]

About arrogance: I noticed that often self-confidence is mistaken for arrogance by people who are less secure of themselves. As if you're doing something you're not really "supposed to", and how does he have the nerve?! <shrug> Of course, there's nothing wrong with a little arrogance.I'm not convinced that many people actually know what "arrogance" actually means. It seems to be about as misused as the word "alleged" (or "allegedly"). There is a big difference between arrogance and self-confidence. Arrogance is a state of overbearing self-worth. (I don't think I need to define self-confidence!) It's usually pretty easy to pick the defining factor of a person if you simply converse with them. If the person is willing to admit they're wrong at any point (and actually admit it, not just try to shut you up), they're probably very confident. Otherwise, they're usually arrogant (or you're just wrong ;)). Of course, I totally agree that self-confidence is far too often confused with arrogance.

I'm also not convinced that it's even ok to be a little arrogant. Just as anything in excess, self-worth, when taken too far, is bad. There's definately nothing wrong with being a little over confident, but again, I've described the difference between arrogance and confidence.

I get accused a lot of being arrogant a lot. While I am in many of cases, in so many more I am not. I have a tendency of sticking my hand into the fire before knowing what's cooking, but most often I'll get accused of being arrogant when I'm the one cooking. You'll never see me have a hard time admitting I'm wrong or conceding when I'm in err. I embrace the ability of self-recognizing fault and use that to my advantage, and I encourage anyone to do the same.

As far as that guy looking down on the indie game scene, he's clearly arrogant by guilt of ignorance. Same for the guy who plans on changing the business model for mainstream game development. But he at least has the excuse of being a stupid kid! ;)

[Savant]

I think any reasonably intelligent person can tell the difference between someone who is confident and someone who is arrogant.

It's usually those who are arrogant who try to explain it away as confidence. In my experience, the truly talented and smart people are those who tend to stay relatively quiet, keep their heads down, and get the work done.

[Abscissa]

For about as much background as we need, check out this entry (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zephyrxero/2005/07/12/).
Ah. That explains it :D . When I originaly read what he said about the industry, it did sound like he was just aping what he had heard a lot of mainstream industry folk say, and this confirms it. Before, I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt that "Well hey, maybe he is one of the industry folk that had started saying it."

[Davaris]

Hey I'd be agreeing with the idiot. The less competition the better. ;)

[Sparky]

That's weird. Everyone I know in the "real" games business (EA, etc) has been really supportive of our efforts (and eager to beta test!). In fact, a lot of them have expressed a desire to go off on their own and develop games, too. :)

[ZephyrXero]

I'd be nice if you could explain exactly what you find arrogant/ignorant about my little post? By the way, it's moved here (http://zephyrxero.blogspot.com/2005/07/alternative-funding-for-game.html) now and there's another one (http://zephyrxero.blogspot.com/2005/07/open-source-and-commericial-videogames.html) that goes along with it.

Also, I don't see how my post was listed under "non-indie" being that my project is 100% independent..and indy developers are who the article was aimed at.

[Anthony Flack]

I love this board. Everything comes home to roost!

[soniCron]

I'd be nice if you could explain exactly what you find arrogant/ignorant about my little post? Sure.

Arrogant - Via your post, you display a sense of overbearing self-worth marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of your superiority toward others. (Cite: Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/arrogant))


Ignorant - Via your post, you clearly display a complete lack of understanding of the mainstream game development industry by suggesting inane ideas, such as:

In order to get funding, you suggest that, "you start spreading the word that you need investors."
That's certainly not sound financial advice and far from the reality of obtaining investment. You seek investment. You don't "[spread] the word." Spreading words for investment is like spreading peanut butter: it won't get you anything but a sticky mouth.


What if nobody that hears word that the project needs money? "Fund it yourself."
I'm not sure many studio employees would be willing to pay for their own project, especially since they are the reason projects cost so much money.


Once you've made back the money borrowed from the investors, "you split the profits 60/40 from that point on (60 being the developer cut)."
While you go on to explain why you chose the "60/40" ratio, your numbers are completely arbitrary. Basing a financial model on random numbers is fiscal suicide unless, of course, you get lucky. Of course, you picked 60/40 because, "I think 60/40 is a very fair ratio."


You suggest, "The developer is now getting a rather nice cut of the profits (if we luck up and there are any)..."
There may be some industry professionals who are interested in self-funding, splitting on random ratios, and finally "luck up" to actually get anything back from their investment. But I can't think of any.


You justify your position by suggesting, [i]"you give your team a price cut. Your team gets paid a substantially smaller portion than the average developers upfront."
I can imagine no team at any studio willing to take a cut of half their pay on a risky project in order to be, "guaranteed a direct cut of the profits." You suggested earlier that if we "luck up," we can make any money at all. An employee won't be to thrilled to risk his wife and two kids' health on their studio's luck.


"Traditional publisher/developer houses could do this too, but they'd rather just pay their employees more, rather than give them a cut because it's usually less money that way."
Perhaps they could, but I suspect that it's the employee who would rather get paid more (to take care of his wife and two kids).


Because the studio will be paying the employees half what they normally get, "there is less investment risk, you now have a stronger control of the profits and creative freedom."
That is, provided you "luck up" and don't f*** up. But being responsible to a studio full of employees and their desires to continue feeding their wife and kids, I'd say you have far more "investment risk." You're no longer responsible to some money grubbing businessmen, you're responsible for 10's of individuals who would be ruined if the project fails.


Next, you suggest, "you will tend to want to divide your profit sharing by the basis of how much work each person did and how important their role in the development was."
Are you suggesting we pay the lead art director more than the coffee guy? Brilliant!


"Because the development team's pay is directly affected by the games sales, it will be more important to them that it is successful..."
If risk was equitable to success, there'd be no homeless people.


"The whole point here is to make development a more personal process..."
If the studio doesn't "luck up", I'd hate to see all those employees taking everything personally. Game development may become riskier than the postal service!


"...and keep as little money as possible tied up in abstract businesses."
After all, we're here to make games, not stupid money!


Now, you suggest the studio, "not buy the most expensive, be-all-end-all workstations."
I find it hard to believe that the longer the harddisk is thrashing, the more productive the developers are.


But the reason to not buy the "be-all-end-all workstations" is because, "The less money your company has to spend on development, the better your chance for finding enough investors."
Paying 20 developers "30-40 thousand" is roughly $600-800,000. Per year. 20 "be-all-end-all workstations" for 20 developers at ~$3,000 is somewhere in the ballpark of $60,000. Once. A project that extends to 3-4 years can cost as much as $3.2 million. The $60k for development machines is less than 0.002% of the entire development cost. And if the studio does provide less than adequate machinery, development time can increase, possibly exponentially, costing far more than even a $7,000 workstation.


And finally, you conclude your first post with, "Yes, this business model is a little risky, but that's why it's called business."
The "business model" (if you really want to call it that) you propose is far more than just "a little risky." The potential for the failure of an individual is greatly exagerated with such a "model". When a publisher, or other external investor, invests money in the project, they also bear the weight of the risk involved in such a business, "especially in the entertainment industry."


In your next post, on the topic of Open Source Software, you suggest, "One more great benefit [of open source] is that because there are so many programmers examining the code, bugs and filtered out at a very rapid rate while development of new features is usually much faster than traditional methods as well."
In theory, this is true. In reality, only the most popular projects get any attention from others willing to work on the project. And most of the time, people are far more willing to use the software than acutally contribute to it. Call it human nature. Because of this, development of new features is almost never "much faster than traditional methods". If it were true, most people would use open sourced software instead of commercial software. It is that reason that Linux is lagging so far behind Windows, and even Mac, in both usability and audience.


"But do keep in mind that not all open source software is free of charge."
To what do you reference?


Next, you suggest that studios should, "use open source content creation tools. Almost every tool we use to create our games has a free, open source alternative to it."
But you fail to mention that all but a select few are far inferior to their commercial adversaries. The following suggestions are utter jokes when compared to real commercial tools:

Dev C++
Blender
The GIMP
Inkscape
Audacity
Rosegarden

They are all likely to be either too buggy, too incomplete, or too poorly constructed to be used in a regular, efficient workflow for a game studio.


"And if you're looking for something similar to Microsoft's Direct X, SDL is a very nice package."
...and uses "Microsoft's Direct X" while in Windows.


You then go on for two oversized paragraphs why studios should open source their engine.
The problem this raises is one all too familiar to a Linux user: duplication of effort. With everyone releasing their own Open Source Software, nobody's spending the time to work on others'. This (neglect) is what equals death for most OSS projects.


You suggest that, "all of ID Software's engines, Quake 3 and older, are open sourced now too."
Last I knew, the Quake 3 source wasn't going to be released for some time due to licensing issues. Of course, I could be wrong about this one, though a Google search (http://www.google.com/search?q=quake+3+open+source) reveals nothing to support your statement.


"Through clever algorithms and standard encryption and authentication methods you can make your public code even harder to crack than the normal hidden code."
We typically refer to "hidden code" as obfuscated code. But in your reference, what you're really talking about is obfuscated software. Not code.


"Once the engines and development tools of games become more standardized..."
How is standardization supposed to occur with everyone releasing their game engine and all the duplication of effort?




...Also, I don't see how my post was listed under "non-indie" being that my project is 100% independent..and indy developers are who the article was aimed at. Well, before you conveniently modified your original blog entry, there was no indication that you were an indie. In fact, it sounded like you were not only not in the mainstream gaming industry*, but also not in the independent arena as well. (And "indy" means "Indianapolis".)

*Your blog entry about being jealous of your friends that attend FullSail has since been deleted.

[luggage]

Sonicron: There's just a lot of opinions you disagree with there, that does not neccessarily make them 'ignorant' opinions.

[soniCron]

Sonicron: There's just a lot of opinions you disagree with there, that does not neccessarily make them 'ignorant' opinions. He obviously doesn't know the first thing about business and is talking as though he thinks he does. Thus, he is ignorant (http://www.answers.com/ignorant).

[luggage]

Just to pick out one of your points...

What's 'inane' about...
"And if you're looking for something similar to Microsoft's Direct X, SDL is a very nice package."
...and uses "Microsoft's Direct X" while in Windows.His point is absolutely spot on. Whether SDL uses Direct X is completely irrelevant to the point made. If you're looking for something similar to Direct X then SDL is a good alternative, it's cross platform and easy to use.

If someone said to you, "I'm currently working with Direct X but I'm loooking for another API to use, any ideas?", I'm sure SDL would crop up in an answer.

All he's done is put forward a suggestion on how things might work. There's nothing wrong with that and certainly not worth jumping up and down on him for. I've worked 10 years in the games industry and there's not much completely outrageous there - idealistic probably, but not outrageous.

[soniCron]

Just to pick out one of your points... You're absolutely right. There's a point to be picky, and a point to be too picky, and it looks like I crossed that line. Thanks for calling me out on that! ;)



All he's done is put forward a suggestion on how things might work. There's nothing wrong with that and certainly not worth jumping up and down on him for. Again, you're absolutely right, but it's possible you missed the point. The original discussion was that he was being arrogant to think he knew enough about the industry and that it was his ignorance about the subject that lead to such a conclusion. I certainly had no interest in jumping up and down on him for it, but he asked if I "could explain exactly what [I] find arrogant/ignorant about [his] little post?" So, I enumerated the problems I had with his blog entry.

My suggestions were certainly not meant as an insult to him, but rather as a point of contention.

[ZephyrXero]

Sonicron, it appears you're being pissy towards my statements for some reason above what you have stated. One thing you forgot to mention was that all the figures and such were all arbitrary and the article was meant to be taken very loosly. The actual way you implement a system can be very different than the one I described.

Also, on the payment ideas...once again, the numbers I used were arbitrary. Me and my wife have made it living on around $15,000 for the last few years, so I think $30 or $40 would be great personally...

The whole reason I focus on money is so that you or I can continue to make games we like rather than what some idiot in a marketing department came up with. If it doesn't sell, and you really gave it your all, it may just be a bad game. If none of your games are successful as you seem to really fear, perhaps you are in the wrong industry (How's that for arrogance?).

As for if you think it'll be successful, we'll just have to wait and see. My first game should be done within the next two years, so we'll find out then.

Lastly, on the open source front...the whole point of open source is to not recreate the wheel (unless you think you can make a better one). The overall point of that article is that game engines are a dime a dozen these days, so there's no point in everyone making their own from scratch.

[Kai Backman]

Lastly, on the open source front...the whole point of open source is to not recreate the wheel (unless you think you can make a better one). The overall point of that article is that game engines are a dime a dozen these days, so there's no point in everyone making their own from scratch.

I'll just comment on the Open Source 3D engines. Based on my own experience of using OGRE in production you wastly underestimate the cost of integration and overestimate the suitability of a graphics engine. Integrating someone elses code does always take effort. In the end you have to understand a lot of the code yourself to be able to fix bugs that your players encounter. Also, the space of possible 3D engines is very large. Even a good engine can't cover everything. The more the engine covers, the more code there is to understand adding to the integration cost. The less the engine covers, the less general development interest it receives and the more it becomes a potential competitive advantage. There are always tradeoffs.

Open Source is good, but you make it sound like a silver bullet. Fred Brooks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet) has a few things to say about silver bullets .. ;)

[soniCron]

Sonicron, it appears you're being pissy towards my statements for some reason above what you have stated. First of all, I'm not being "pissy" towards your statements. Second, what reason beyond mentioning your blog entry as an example of arrogance would I have to be "pissy" towards you or your statements? I don't even know you.



One thing you forgot to mention was that all the figures and such were all arbitrary and the article was meant to be taken very loosly. The intention of the above enumerated list was to inform you as per your request, not educate readers of this thread that have not already read your blog entry. The blog entry's apparent intention was to inform your readers that you "propose (http://www.answers.com/propose)... an distrobuted investment model (http://www.answers.com/model)" for game development. Proposing a model is not a good example of giving something loosely.



The actual way you implement a system can be very different than the one I described. Clearly, I agree with you.



Also, on the payment ideas...once again, the numbers I used were arbitrary. I think I've already established your numbers were arbitrary.



Me and my wife have made it living on around $15,000 for the last few years, so I think $30 or $40 would be great personally... I'm sure you can live in relative comfort on $15,000 wherever you are, but extrapolating your experience with that of a professional in the industry is unrealistic. With much, if not most, studios being located in major metropolitan areas which extremely high costs of living, $30-40,000 is piss to live on, and certainly wouldn't comfortably live an entire family. Again, I was just demonstrating your ignorance of the mainstream game industry.



If it doesn't sell, and you really gave it your all, it may just be a bad game. If none of your games are successful as you seem to really fear, perhaps you are in the wrong industry (How's that for arrogance?). I'm not sure if you're singling me out when you say "you," but you seem to be forgetting the number of people that typically work on a game in a development studio. Not one single person is responsible for the entire success of the game, and I don't think many people would be willing to put their faith (and family) in the development habits of 19 people they don't know for 3-4 years. Now, if I fail to make a successful living in this industry, then you're absolutely right, I'll have been quite arrogant. However, I'll have been responsible to only myself.



...the whole point of open source is to not recreate the wheel (unless you think you can make a better one). And I was merely stating that is one of the major flaws with open source as well. Many people think they can create a better one, so instead of improving the existing software, they break off and do their own. Now we've got two projects pulling against each other, trying to get the same thing done. Multiply that by N, and you can see the current state of the Linux community. I love open source. I use a lot of it. But I'm certainly not going to say it's a solid business model. As it stands, no console manufacturers allow GPL or LGPL'ed software to be used on their console. How does that fit in to your idea? Were you aware of that? If not, then you were ignorant of that as well.



The overall point of that article is that game engines are a dime a dozen these days, so there's no point in everyone making their own from scratch. Is that why you suggested in an elongated paragraph that game developers should open source their engines?


Look, buddy. I don't even know you. I haven't the slightest interest in getting into a flame war about this, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about, yet you think you do. That makes you arrogant (http://www.answers.com/arrogant) and ignorant (http://www.answers.com/ignorant). It's not a matter of opinion. I'm not even saying your propsed investment model is bound to fail, but I'm suggesting it will because you don't know how the industry works. You've demonstrated this in several cases.

There's no reason to get upset. If you can't take the criticism, then don't put your thoughts on the Internet. If you hadn't found this topic we had finished discussing over a week ago, someone else would be saying something behind your back somewhere else. That's the nature of the Internet. You can't regulate what people say about you, so in order to avoid it completely, you just have to withdraw entirely.

There are a lot of folks on these forums that don't like what I say. They will make it very clear to me they don't like what I say. I will discuss what I said to them, and if possible, concede that I was wrong or attempt to convince them otherwise. If I were to think highly enough of myself, I may even suggest people are talking negatively about me through PM and email. You're not alone in this.

The point is, if you have an opinion, and tell everyone, there are literally billions of other people that have their opinions, and many will tell you they disagree. Some in front of you, some behind your back. I told you to your face (in your since-deleted blog comments). You disagreed with me, and challenged me to tell you why I had such an opinion. I did. You didn't like it. That's too bad, because you seem to value my opinion far more than you should.

[ZephyrXero]

In order to get funding, you suggest that, "you start spreading the word that you need investors."
That's certainly not sound financial advice and far from the reality of obtaining investment. You seek investment. You don't "[spread] the word." Spreading words for investment is like spreading peanut butter: it won't get you anything but a sticky mouth.
Ok, you're trying real hard with this one. So I didn't word it like you like...big deal.

What if nobody that hears word that the project needs money? "Fund it yourself."
I'm not sure many studio employees would be willing to pay for their own project, especially since they are the reason projects cost so much money.
I go into more detail on this later in the article. It's only a feasable option if you already have the money for it. Double-Fine had a large portion of it's funding for Psychonauts done by it's lead designer, Tim Shaffer, for example.

Once you've made back the money borrowed from the investors, "you split the profits 60/40 from that point on (60 being the developer cut)."
While you go on to explain why you chose the "60/40" ratio, your numbers are completely arbitrary. Basing a financial model on random numbers is fiscal suicide unless, of course, you get lucky. Of course, you picked 60/40 because, "I think 60/40 is a very fair ratio."
As I've already stated, these are just arbitrary numbers at the moment... it's mearly an estimation/guess.

You suggest, "The developer is now getting a rather nice cut of the profits (if we luck up and there are any)..."
There may be some industry professionals who are interested in self-funding, splitting on random ratios, and finally "luck[ing] up" to actually get anything back from their investment. But I can't think of any.
You're just making assumptions here.

You justify your position by suggesting, "you give your team a price cut. Your team gets paid a substantially smaller portion than the average developers upfront."
I can imagine no team at any studio willing to take a cut of half their pay on a risky project in order to be, "guaranteed a direct cut of the profits." You suggested earlier that if we "luck up," we can make any money at all. An employee won't be to thrilled to risk his wife and two kids' health on their studio's luck.
If Daddy was concerned about this he should have gone into a more predictable field than game development. But, this point is a rather large portion of my argument. First off, "half" is once again arbitrary...we might be talking 2/3 or even 3/4 here. The whole point is to make your cost of development lower so that you have an easier time funding your project. If you plan well and sell a decent amount, your crew should make close to what they would have normally made, if not more.

"Traditional publisher/developer houses could do this too, but they'd rather just pay their employees more, rather than give them a cut because it's usually less money that way."
Perhaps they could, but I suspect that it's the employee who would rather get paid more (to take care of his wife and two kids).
I don't know if you've looked at the average price of employment in America, but it's far less than $60,000 a year. According to the US Bureau of Labor the average worker makes about $36,764 a year. Are you also assuming that wife isn't working as well?

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather make less money doing something I enjoy rather than making a bigger salary working for someone like EA. This is sounding fairly non-indie of you now...

Because the studio will be paying the employees half what they normally get, "there is less investment risk, you now have a stronger control of the profits and creative freedom."
That is, provided you "luck up" and don't f*** up. But being responsible to a studio full of employees and their desires to continue feeding their wife and kids, I'd say you have far more "investment risk." You're no longer responsible to some money grubbing businessmen, you're responsible for 10's of individuals who would be ruined if the project fails.
This is what some like to call natural selection. If you make crappy games and can't even sell a few thousand maybe you need to do something else with your life. But, your budget should already be planned out for meager sales in the first place, which is the reasoning behind this argument. Let's say you have a team of 16 guys working on your game for 2 years at an average of $35,000/year. That'll put your labor budget at $1,120,000...so assuming you made smart choices elsewhere, we'll put your budget for this game at $1.5 million, which is still fairly small compared to mainstream developer/publishers. Now here we'll have to get approximate again, but lets say you sell your game retail for the average price of $49.99. Let's say you make $35 off each box while your publisher and retailers split the rest. That means you'll only need to sell 42,858 copies to pay off the initial investment. Now of course, if you sell your game as a direct download and keep all the profits you won't even have to sell that many. But, I'd probably suggest selling your game for a smaller price like $29.99 at it make take you a few more sales to make it back then. Regardless of the scheme you go with, if you sell at least 100,000 copies (which is considered a flop by the big guys), you'll have made back your investment and have gotten to pay your team a little something extra.

Next, you suggest, "you will tend to want to divide your profit sharing by the basis of how much work each person did and how important their role in the development was."
Are you suggesting we pay the lead art director more than the coffee guy? Brilliant!
You're just being an ass here...and what's a small indie developer doing with a guy who just sits around and makes coffee anyway?

"Because the development team's pay is directly affected by the games sales, it will be more important to them that it is successful..."
If risk was equitable to success, there'd be no homeless people.
Have you ever worked retail before? Or even for a large corporation? Do you know how knowing that you're contribution to the company is considered inconsequencial to the head of the company can affect job performance? If your team feels like they're making their own game and not just another project for Ubercorp they'll feel much better about it and probably do a much better job. The IGDA has some good papers about quality of life you might want to read sometime...

"The whole point here is to make development a more personal process..."
If the studio doesn't "luck up", I'd hate to see all those employees taking everything personally. Game development may become riskier than the postal service!
See above. Also, I hate the phrase "it's just business"....that's the biggest croc of bullsh*t I've ever heard. If it's your business, then it's gonna be personal regardless. If your game is a flop, of course your gonna take if personally.

"...and keep as little money as possible tied up in abstract businesses."
After all, we're here to make games, not stupid money!
The whole point here is to grow the developers' wallets, not the company. This goes along with keeping it personal....

[ZephyrXero]

continued from last post due to text size limits...

Now, you suggest the studio, "not buy the most expensive, be-all-end-all workstations."
I find it hard to believe that the longer the harddisk is thrashing, the more productive the developers are.
I'm not saying buy a crappy machine. What I'm saying is..do you really think buying that Athlon 4400 is going to make your guys that much more productive than a 4000 for half the price? It's just called being frugal...which as independent developers, it's the only option we really have.

But the reason to not buy the "be-all-end-all workstations" is because, "The less money your company has to spend on development, the better your chance for finding enough investors."
Paying 20 developers "30-40 thousand" is roughly $600-800,000. Per year. 20 "be-all-end-all workstations" for 20 developers at ~$3,000 is somewhere in the ballpark of $60,000. Once. A project that extends to 3-4 years can cost as much as $3.2 million. The $60k for development machines is less than 0.002% of the entire development cost. And if the studio does provide less than adequate machinery, development time can increase, possibly exponentially, costing far more than even a $7,000 workstation.
That money can add up... Also, see above.

And finally, you conclude your first post with, "Yes, this business model is a little risky, but that's why it's called business."
The "business model" (if you really want to call it that) you propose is far more than just "a little risky." The potential for the failure of an individual is greatly exagerated with such a "model". When a publisher, or other external investor, invests money in the project, they also bear the weight of the risk involved in such a business, "especially in the entertainment industry."
All businesses are a risk. The entertainment industry is always a gamble no matter what you do. You might put tons of money into a project, have the best advertising team known to man, and everone on your team thinks this is the greatest game ever invented...but that doesnt' guarentee you a single sale.

In your next post, on the topic of Open Source Software, you suggest, "One more great benefit [of open source] is that because there are so many programmers examining the code, bugs and filtered out at a very rapid rate while development of new features is usually much faster than traditional methods as well."
In theory, this is true. In reality, only the most popular projects get any attention from others willing to work on the project. And most of the time, people are far more willing to use the software than acutally contribute to it. Call it human nature. Because of this, development of new features is almost never "much faster than traditional methods". If it were true, most people would use open sourced software instead of commercial software. It is that reason that Linux is lagging so far behind Windows, and even Mac, in both usability and audience.
Well, that's why you don't reinvent the wheel if there's already a good enough one out there. Open Source development is a much more organic process...and the better projects continue while the others fade out, just like natural selection. If you dont' think you can make a better engine than what's already out there, don't.

"But do keep in mind that not all open source software is free of charge."
To what do you reference?
Sure, how about Saga of Ryzom by Nevrax?

Next, you suggest that studios should, "use open source content creation tools. Almost every tool we use to create our games has a free, open source alternative to it."
But you fail to mention that all but a select few are far inferior to their commercial adversaries. The following suggestions are utter jokes when compared to real commercial tools:

* Dev C++
* Blender
* The GIMP
* Inkscape
* Audacity
* Rosegarden

They are all likely to be either too buggy, too incomplete, or too poorly constructed to be used in a regular, efficient workflow for a game studio.
It's all a matter of personal prefference really. These programs can do anything their expensive cousins can it just might take a little more know how. If you don't like a feature, you're always free to improve it with open source ;)

"And if you're looking for something similar to Microsoft's Direct X, SDL is a very nice package."
...and uses "Microsoft's Direct X" while in Windows.
So what does MS DirectX offer for your Mac and Linux gamers? Does DirectX run on a Playstation or Gamecube? The more platforms your game is released for, the better your chances of finding an audience. Oh, by the way...SDL uses OpenGL, not DirectX

You then go on for two oversized paragraphs why studios should open source their engine.
The problem this raises is one all too familiar to a Linux user: duplication of effort. With everyone releasing their own Open Source Software, nobody's spending the time to work on others'. This (neglect) is what equals death for most OSS projects.
See above...

You suggest that, "all of ID Software's engines, Quake 3 and older, are open sourced now too."
Last I knew, the Quake 3 source wasn't going to be released for some time due to licensing issues. Of course, I could be wrong about this one, though a Google search reveals nothing to support your statement.
Well, Quake 2 and older definitely are and I had heard they finally released Q3 too...but maybe not. It will be within the next year if not I'm sure, Carmack said so himself...

"Through clever algorithms and standard encryption and authentication methods you can make your public code even harder to crack than the normal hidden code."
We typically refer to "hidden code" as obfuscated code. But in your reference, what you're really talking about is obfuscated software. Not code.
Not really sure your point here...once again just complaining about the way I worded something.

"Once the engines and development tools of games become more standardized..."
How is standardization supposed to occur with everyone releasing their game engine and all the duplication of effort?
As already stated multiple times, you don't release a hundred different engines. You pick the best one and move on... You clearly have very little knowledge of what open source is, and my article was not intended for someone who didn't already know a little something of it.

[Jim Buck]

Now here we'll have to get approximate again, but lets say you sell your game retail for the average price of $49.99. Let's say you make $35 off each box while your publisher and retailers split the rest.

Whoa, I had to jump in here to say that's not even vaguely close to reality. Not even id Software could get $35 of a $50 price tag in a deal with a publisher/retailer.

[luggage]

As it stands, no console manufacturers allow GPL or LGPL'ed software to be used on their console. What do you mean by this? The Linux PS2 kit came with quite a lot of software. ODE is used in several titles and that's GPL as far as I know.

Just out of interest - how much industry experience do you have?

And you really shouldn't be surprised that people find terms like 'arrogant' and 'ignorant' offensive. They're not the most polite statements you can find.

[ZephyrXero]

I'm sure you can live in relative comfort on $15,000 wherever you are, but extrapolating your experience with that of a professional in the industry is unrealistic. With much, if not most, studios being located in major metropolitan areas which extremely high costs of living, $30-40,000 is piss to live on, and certainly wouldn't comfortably live an entire family. Again, I was just demonstrating your ignorance of the mainstream game industry.

Once more.. many developers are quickly realizing that building their studios in major metropolitan (read expensive) areas was a bad idea and are looking to move.

As far as my responce goes...I just don't want other people to get jaded about my article because you don't like it. I'm merely here to defend it. After this discussion it's become increasing clear that you're fairly ignorant and arrogant yourself. I checked out your game company link...nice selection. Way to go off on my lack of experience...

[Jim Buck]

What do you mean by this? The Linux PS2 kit came with quite a lot of software. ODE is used in several titles and that's GPL as far as I know.

Yeah, and *tons* of console titles use zlib.

[ZephyrXero]

Jim...I know that's not the current model. That's one of the major points of my argument.

[soniCron]

I'm not sure many studio employees would be willing to pay for their own project, especially since they are the reason projects cost so much money.
I go into more detail on this later in the article. It's only a feasable option if you already have the money for it. Double-Fine had a large portion of it's funding for Psychonauts done by it's lead designer, Tim Shaffer, for example. Again, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about! Double-Fine was dropped my Microsoft after the game was long overdue. Tim Shaffer took a huge risk by investing his entire life savings into the project afterwords. This is not the kind of behavior to be emulated as a standard business practice.



While you go on to explain why you chose the "60/40" ratio, your numbers are completely arbitrary. Basing a financial model on random numbers is fiscal suicide unless, of course, you get lucky. Of course, you picked 60/40 because, "I think 60/40 is a very fair ratio."
As I've already stated, these are just arbitrary numbers at the moment... it's mearly an estimation/guess. I think we've identified your picking numbers arbitrarily several times already. No need to beat a dead horse.




There may be some industry professionals who are interested in self-funding, splitting on random ratios, and finally "luck[ing] up" to actually get anything back from their investment. But I can't think of any.
You're just making assumptions here. Far more reasonable assumptions than the ones you're suggesting.



If Daddy was concerned about this he should have gone into a more predictable field than game development. A publisher paying you $90k a year to make a game isn't close to the level of risk you're asking the employees to take. In the current develompent model, they get paid no matter what. In yours, they may get paid chicken scratch for 3-4 years and nothing else to show for it. Right now, it's a matter of endurance of harsh hours and work, and not nearly as much, "Will I have a job tomorrow?"



The whole point is to make your cost of development lower so that you have an easier time funding your project. Well, I think you've identified the driving force in all business.



If you plan well and sell a decent amount, your crew should make close to what they would have normally made, if not more. Speculation. Risky speculation. Very risky speculation.



Perhaps they could, but I suspect that it's the employee who would rather get paid more (to take care of his wife and two kids).
I don't know if you've looked at the average price of employment in America, but it's far less than $60,000 a year. According to the US Bureau of Labor the average worker makes about $36,764 a year. Are you also assuming that wife isn't working as well? You're driving me mad! I don't give a flying f*** about the "average price of employment in America"!! We're talking about a specific industry here, not the whole of America! That kind of reasoning is entirely contrary to what we're discussing and only further proves you are ignorant of that which you speak!



This is what some like to call natural selection. If you make crappy games and can't even sell a few thousand maybe you need to do something else with your life. We've already established that not one person is responsible for the success of an entire game.



... Regardless of the scheme you go with, if you sell at least 100,000 copies (which is considered a flop by the big guys)... Please, cite your sources.



Are you suggesting we pay the lead art director more than the coffee guy? Brilliant!
You're just being an ass here...and what's a small indie developer doing with a guy who just sits around and makes coffee anyway? When did we start talking about small indie developers?



If your team feels like they're making their own game and not just another project for Ubercorp they'll feel much better about it and probably do a much better job. We're talking about the entertainment industry, not microwaves. Dedication != a selling product. If it did, there'd be a hell of a lot more successful studios around, wouldn't there? Have you played Daikatana?



If it's your business, then it's gonna be personal regardless. If your game is a flop, of course your gonna take if personally. And yet, I wonder if not making any money because of a flop would be the dollop on the cake of homocide. ;)

[soniCron]

What do you mean by this? The Linux PS2 kit came with quite a lot of software. ODE is used in several titles and that's GPL as far as I know. If I am mistaken, I appologize. I had witnessed a discussion between a few developers a couple years ago about said subject, and it was implied that was the case. If not, I concede that point. ;)



And you really shouldn't be surprised that people find terms like 'arrogant' and 'ignorant' offensive. They're not the most polite statements you can find. Would you please offer me a better suggestion for these. The words I chose are accurate, fitting, and not at all misplaced. It's not as if I called him a f***tard. Perhaps I missed something?

[luggage]

And where do you get 2-4 years from? Let along $60,000+? None of the developers I've worked at have spent 2 to 4 years on a project and very few developers have earnt that much.

heh. Perhaps the two are related?

Edit - better clarify that. That's not to say companies don't spend 2 to 4 years on a project or pay staff $60,000. Just to say that it's entirely possible, and in my experience more likely, that developers get paid less and spend less time on a project.

[luggage]

Would you please offer me a better suggestion for these. The words I chose are accurate, fitting, and not at all misplaced. It's not as if I called him a f***tard. Perhaps I missed something?"There are some points you make which are possibly mistaken". "You may have overlooked this...", etc.

Diplomacy is your friend. Otherwise you end up with two people picking each others posts to pieces.

[Ricardo C]

Sonicron, what's your development experience? I thought you were working on your first game. Have you worked in the industry in any other capacity?

[soniCron]

I'm not saying buy a crappy machine. What I'm saying is..do you really think buying that Athlon 4400 is going to make your guys that much more productive than a 4000 for half the price? It's just called being frugal...which as independent developers, it's the only option we really have. While it's very important to be conscious of spending decisions, did you note the insanely small percentage of development cost the machines take?



Paying 20 developers "30-40 thousand" is roughly $600-800,000. Per year. 20 "be-all-end-all workstations" for 20 developers at ~$3,000 is somewhere in the ballpark of $60,000. Once. A project that extends to 3-4 years can cost as much as $3.2 million. The $60k for development machines is less than 0.002% of the entire development cost. And if the studio does provide less than adequate machinery, development time can increase, possibly exponentially, costing far more than even a $7,000 workstation.
That money can add up... Also, see above. I know. I did all the math for you.



All businesses are a risk. The entertainment industry is always a gamble no matter what you do. You might put tons of money into a project, have the best advertising team known to man, and everone on your team thinks this is the greatest game ever invented...but that doesnt' guarentee you a single sale. Think about that statement very, very carefully. Now, think of your previous arguments and how they may conflict.



"But do keep in mind that not all open source software is free of charge."
To what do you reference?
Sure, how about Saga of Ryzom by Nevrax? Aah, I see. You're mistaking open source not being free with content not being free. The software is free, however.



It's all a matter of personal prefference really. These programs can do anything their expensive cousins can it just might take a little more know how. That is simply not true. Have you used any of their "expensive cousins"? Apparently not.



As already stated multiple times, you don't release a hundred different engines. You pick the best one and move on... You clearly have very little knowledge of what open source is, and my article was not intended for someone who didn't already know a little something of it. Don't be reduced to empty arguments. You have no basis for that attack. However, I'd again like to remind you that you charged game developers with releasing their engine with an open source license. Which is contrary to what you're saying now.

[soniCron]

Sonicron, what's your development experience? I thought you were working on your first game. Have you worked in the industry in any other capacity? Am I out of my element calling him out?

[Ricardo C]

Did I say that? ;)

I want to know what makes you any less ignorant of the realities of the industry than he is. I read his proposal, and while I find it less than realistic, it's not wholly unsound. He makes some decent points, if you analyze them for what they are instead of simply scanning his argument for holes.

[soniCron]

"There are some points you make which are possibly mistaken". "You may have overlooked this...", etc. Perhaps we should change the title of the thread to "the non-indie people who's points are possibly mistaken"? :D


Diplomacy is your friend. Otherwise you end up with two people picking each others posts to pieces. You're absolutely right. I've got quite a ways to go before I meet a diplomatic criterion. However, at least I have gone from silly to civil in the few months I've been on these boards. ;) No more, "Your game was a compete waste of time, bandwidth, and storage!" posts, eh? :D

[soniCron]

Did I say that? ;) I want to know what makes you any less ignorant of the realities of the industry than he is. Very well. You've caught me! :D

[luggage]

You're absolutely right. I've got quite a ways to go before I meet a diplomatic criterion. However, at least I have gone from silly to civil in the few months I've been on these boards. No more, "Your game was a compete waste of time, bandwidth, and storage!" posts, eh?And for that we're extremely grateful! ;) At least we will be when you get your hands on our next title. :D

[soniCron]

@ZephyrXero: I'm sincerely apologetic for arguing with you a point of which I have no grounds to argue. I read your blog and in my infinite ignorance assumed you were out of your gourde and didn't know what you were talking about. The truth of the matter is, I haven't any solid basis for arguing anything I did, as well. While I still adamantly disagree that it's a viable solution for the mainstream game development industry that we know today, it's apparent that it's already in use in the independent development community. Two veterans of the mainstream industry have piped up in your favor and have thus thrust me into my place. Hope you become a regular member of these boards, and I'll be looking forward to your upcoming (2 years?) project. Take care, never give up, and see you around! ;)

[Omega]

This is why none of you get anything done.

[Anthony Flack]

Double-Fine was dropped my Microsoft after the game was long overdue. Tim Shaffer took a huge risk by investing his entire life savings into the project afterwords. This is not the kind of behavior to be emulated as a standard business practice.

Yikes! I hope it's working out okay. Tim Shaffer is great; I'd hate to see him wiped out.

Now, it's all very well getting employees to shoulder some of the risk, but if you do, then you'll need to get them involved in the decision-making process too. It's unrealistic to expect someone to risk everything on the success of a game, when they don't have control of it. If everyone shares the risk, then everyone shares the control, then everyone fights and everything falls to bits. It's not fair if you're taking risks and taking orders.

Re: using free alternatives to expensive software - that's a negligible saving, that would cause all kinds of hassle and decreased productivity. The saving would turn into a liability in no time at all.

[ZephyrXero]

To: Sonicron, sorry if I flew off the handle there either..I just really didn't like finding my post as an example of the "arrogance of most non-indies".

While some of my ideas may be idealistic, it's better than just sitting around and taking it from the big guys ;) Nothing ever happens without taking a little risk...but I'm sure everyone here already knows that. I really wish I had found this place a better way, but I look forward to talking to everyone :)

To Anthony: I'd definately hope that'd be part of the plan ;) I really like this quote from one of the Pixar guys: "...it's about figuring out how to make Art a team sport".

If anyone's interested, my game I'm working on right now is an old-school style side-scroller/platformer but with 3D graphics for all the kids who can't appreciate anything but. I guess the proper term would be 2.5D ;) Our team only has 4 people right now, and we're all in college, but we hope to have our game done by the time we graduate.

PS. ODE uses the BSD license... and that was a Goldfish (http://www.pepperidgefarm.com/fun_snacks_goldfish.asp), not a "magic pill"

[Jim Buck]

Jim...I know that's not the current model. That's one of the major points of my argument.

Yeah, but it could *never* be that large of a %.. neither the publisher nor the retailer would make any money. I know how much Sony pulls in per copy off of the retail price of *their own* PlayStation games.. it's much smaller than you would think. (I'm just hoping your plan doesn't involve being capable of demanding such %'s... only if you sell through your own website can you get this type of %. :) )

[stan]

This is getting seriously off-topic, but neither ODE nor zlib are GPL or LGPL.

[Anthony Flack]

To Anthony: I'd definately hope that'd be part of the plan I really like this quote from one of the Pixar guys: "...it's about figuring out how to make Art a team sport".

Yeah, but as more people get involved, it gets exponentially more complex to manage. And if you have a situation where 10 people are all in charge, what you actually have is nobody in charge. It might be a team sport, but you still need a team captain.

And if you're not able to control what direction the game goes in, it's just not fair for you to be have to shoulder the risk of it doing badly. If you're just the sound guy, it's not your fault if the gameplay sucks.

[Nexic]

If anyone's interested, my game I'm working on right now is an old-school style side-scroller/platformer but with 3D graphics for all the kids who can't appreciate anything but. I guess the proper term would be 2.5D Our team only has 4 people right now, and we're all in college, but we hope to have our game done by the time we graduate.

Anything like Pandemonium? (PS1) If so it sounds interesting, I really liked that game :)

[ZephyrXero]

Not sure, never played Pandamonium :/ The gameplay is mainly inspired by Sonic the Hedgehog, Mario, and Donkey Kong Country.

As for the risk and such of the payment idea... Not everyone on the staff has to follow the formula. You could mix it up where some people are taking the risk and others aren't. But the ones who aren't have given up any rights to profit sharing...still, too many of these people and your budget will be just as bad as a normal one and defeat the entire purpose of it. A music composer would be a good example though, they may only spend 6 months working on the game while everyone else spent 2 years, so it'd make more sense for them to follow a more traditional salary option.

[ManuelMarino]

Going back to the topic, arrogance of the most non-indies...

I think that arrogance is something more inner so, it depends the kind of guy you have in front of you... it's not something related to the job, role or whatever else.

There are people very powerful in the world that are also bright and cool, and stupid and useless guys that feel to be god... and viceversa of course.

Just saying that it's something related more to individual psychology than the job, class, group, status etc etc etc.

I think that life is very very complex and full of accidental events to be arrogant and feel superior to other people.

You can be skilled and cool in a specific thing, music or games, commerce or sport. But someone else is skilled in another thing too... so, everyone has a skill and a talent and so on.

It's stupid to feel superior to someone else... means you don't have consciousness about life, people, etc etc.

My two cents :cool:

[Ska Software]

I like it when friends say something about my games like "wow that looks almost like a real game... not to say your game's not real... uh... I mean... "

Then I usually kick them in the face for "insubordinance."

This is why I have no friends.

[sparkyboy]

Well, I may as well throw my hat into the ring! :p

Around 10 years ago, I was 'IN THE ZONE' so to speak and within 6 weeks or so, had learned enough 'C' to create about 5 or 6 prototype versions of games(even went as far as using assembly to shift them bits around that bit faster! :D )

Now on presenting my endeavours to various third parties, what did I receive in return?.......

'Not bad, but I wouldn't pay for that tho'.If you can't make a H/life or Doom then I'd give up if I were you.Oh and don't forget, there's no money in games!'

This is not the exact dialogue, but you get my drift.
Fast forward 10 years! The video game industry is bigger than Hollywood ( in terms of net gain!)

Is the above 'ARROGANCE', 'RESENTMENT', or just plain 'JEALOUSY'??
I don't know, but what I do know is this...........

Do not listen to 'NEGATIVE' feedback that presents no 'POSITIVE' way forward!! ;)
As for myself, if I had had the courage of my convictions, maybe, just maybe, I would be up there with Mike, Steve, Thomas??

Arrogance/Resentment/Jealousy can breed a crisis of 'CONFIDENCE'.It certainly did in my case!! :o

So good luck to ALL and as NIKE says.................


JUST DO IT!!

All the best


Mark.

[cheese_phantom]

I think there is an attitude in people that are specialized in certain areas of game development. If they only have one of the skills and their survival in the game industry depends on their contract they have with a big game dev company, they seem to be a bit more conservative about games done by indies with multiple skills. I think they try to reflect their idea about their merely narrow chances to make a game independently on those that can do it. And there are two common ways of argumentation: Either by referring to the power structure in the industry and the markets, which boils down to "you can't compete with the big guys, no matter how good you are"; or by referring to the most obviously weekness of that particular indie-game like for example "these graphics suck", "the concept is nice but is there really someone who would buy and play this?" etc etc... I believe that some of these guys just can't show faith into Indie projects, because they are just interested in the big money. They would say "wow" to the worst graphics just if they know it's a project backed up by EA. So the decider here seems to be very often the back-up of a publisher. Some call this "to be reasonable" or to be "professional" or "to be realistic". Sometimes I just think it's some sort of conservatism since you feel that your ass is save if you're in a big company and attempting something else is just risk and unnecessary effort.

Not that all indie developers are very clever, creative and idealistic; some of them seem to be as "professional", "realistic" and "reasonable" as their conservative counterparts in the industry and everything from their wannabe marketeer websites to their games really suck, but I think what distinguishes the true indie developer is that they have this "games first" thing. Some apply this "games first" philosophy on a simpler level and you can feel that they lack a certain depth, but some are truly genius people and make you feel that not selling games, but making and playing games counts for them.

After all, when you play a game like Sim Golf, you see that the philosophy was "games first" and that the designer did not just trust into the back-up from Maxis or EA. The opposite is a game like LucasArts "Star Wars: Galactic Battleground" which has such a lousy attitude towards design that all you can read in the game is "money first".

As long as you make "games first" games, I think you don't have to worry about what others say.

[Sysiphus]

Those of us who work in small game companies -non indies- must be multidisciplined, just as much as you indies(I have to make not only all type of graphics and anims, also sound and written stuff), and when so much pressure(I allways feel more pressure in small companies than bigger; almost all depends on you, but you don't have control on your bosses decissions..), is not comfortable; I'd rather be an indy even earning only the minimal a month -in my case would be very minimal- than this...

Have some friends in big ones...And yep, they're allways too worried bout the latest normal maps technology or latest Modo+Zbrush integration, and the coders...well, they reach home destroyed enough to do other thing than lay on the sofa and see a video tape with a pizza.(same I do too often)

Those which I know there, aren't much arrogant bout indies; they even look at it as a possibility to make Their Game...But they have to much stuff to pay to take the risk. People like me may be more near: small companies never have stability, is only slightly different than make games for your own.
Probably this all changes drastically depending on the country.

Imho, indy games have the big advantage...freedom. No boss. No bad marketer above you with zero technical knowledge. Huge advantage. And the possibility to polish a game as much as you wish, and in the way you wish. In the 4 game companies I've been, never is possible to do this. If weren't for the money, or the stability, the ones working in big game companies, all should be jealous bout indies, or that from my point of view...