do you wanna be famous?

[NothingLikeit]

I've been watching the olympics lately and I've noticed something about myself, anytime I watch an event where famous people are in the spotlight of the moment I realize I want that to be me. (But in game devolopment)

About two years ago Jason Rubin from Naughty Dog gave a speech at the 2004 DICE conference called the "anti communist manifesto". I caught the gist of it in the May 04 article of Game Developer. I could try to find a link on gamastura but I think it's down.

Mr. Rubin talked about how larger publishers put emphasis on getting major star power out to thier game parties. However, they (allegedly) treat the actual talent behind the games (in this case Jason Rubin) badly. He details how Paris Hilton (Who herself is famous for just being famous) was able to get into a party for the release of HIS game, while he himself wasn't on this list.

So my question/discussion is this. Do you even want to be famous? Hollywood started as a bunch of hobbyists too shooting movies. The indsutry created its own stars and the public found a common bound with these new stars.

Do you think we can do that? I mean we have "stars". But my mom probably has no idea who John Carmack, Shigheru Miyamoto [sic] and Nobou Uematsu are.

I think a huge problem with this that games are seen as packaged goods while movies are "art" Do you think that could change?

I kinda think it could happen. But to the public we still have the "teen boy" time waster stigma. What do you ex industry vets think it'll take for us to have our "spielberg"?

I know this post is long. I've just been thinking about this for a while now...

[Steve Ince]

I'd rather have the kind of fame that respected authors have than the over-hyped "celebrity" fame that seems to have taken over TV and film.

[svero]

I prefer obscurity to fame. I'd rather never be in the public eye. I'm more of a power behind the throne kinda guy :-)

[lakibuk]

I want to fail with dignity.

[Anthony Flack]

I'd rather my work was famous, and I was just some guy who you'd only know about if you cared to look.

[easydoesit]

Wanting Fame led me to this life. Now all I care about is being able to continue doing it for a long long time.

Really the respect of my collegues would be a truly great reward.

[cliffski]

I want my name on my games*, for no other reason than it helps to promote them if there is a 'name' behind them. Thats what Peter Molyneux does. Would the movies have got so much publicity without his name? he even moved from bullfrog to lionhead and kept his hype, because he hyped HIS name, not the company.
Granted its a lot harder as an indie developer, but it helps to have an unusual first or last name. Sadly, some people think I'm cliffyb from epic ;(

*and as I tend to shun portals and publishers, I WILL have it prominently on my future games.

[Chris Evans]

Do I want to be rock star famous (figuratively speaking) like John Romero or David Perry? Not really.

Would I like the people who enjoy my games to know me and follow my game releases? Most definitely. It's part of the reason why I have my picture throughout my website. I may not become famous throughout the game industry, but hopefully maybe in my little corner of the Internet several thousand players will look forward to my game releases.

So I'm with Cliffski on this one. If you market yourself well and build up a solid fanbase, it will make it easier to promote your games and even to transition to other genres and/or projects. As for putting my name on my games, I'll probably only do that once I've actually made a game worthy of shameless self-promotion. :) I'm not there yet, but I hope to be there in about a year or two.

[Adrian Cummings]

No - I just want the money!.

[Speckled Jim]

Why would anyone want to be famous in that way? To look at someone up on a stage and want to be in their position just because they are famous just seems repellent to me.

If someone is good at what they do, they will be respected on some level. Surely that is more important than simply being famous? Fame means nothing, as your Paris Hilton example shows.

Carmack is famous only amongst his peers, to the wider world his name means nothing, and that's just how it should be. He doesn't seek to be famous, he just does what he does, and is good at it. He makes for an interesting contrast with his one time colleague John Romero, who tried to go down that "Rock Star" route, and fell flat on his arse doing so.

[digriz]

In England Sir Pete is a shameless self publicist, his games do well and if ever there is a games magazine featuring quotes from people, undeniably his will be the first one. If ever there is ever a feature on games in tv news, his name will be mentioned or there will be an interview with him. He's the media first port of call for a lot of stuff but interestingly only on the positive parts and that's important, his name is never associated with anything negative.

I don't think there's anything wrong with having a good media profile, these days if you want to be big, it's necessary. Peter Molyneux is almost a brand name for his own software and good on him i say.

My only argument with Peter Molyneux is that the undeniably talented programmers and artists on his teams never get the recognision that they deserve...and no, i've never worked for him so i'm not a bitter ex-employee.

With indie developers, i don't think it's a bad thing for the public to know who the developers are! Afterall people buying your games will associate the company name or your own name with that product and future products. It's the only way you will get repeat business.

Hell, when i discovered the indie scene the first place i found was retro64's site. Now, i wait in anticipation for his new games. I visit his site once a week hoping! .....and no i'm not kissing his *ss here. LOL.

My point is, he's got a good reputation for quality games and to his advantage he has a brand that's very recognisable and makes it stand out.

In response to the original question, I don't know if i'll ever by the game industries spielberg, i'm more likely to end up as the industries Kevin Smith ;)

[Bmc]

I'd rather be rich and unknown

[arcadetown]

I often picture an ultra huge football game packed with 1/4 mil plus people. That's ArcadeTown every single day. People don't come because it's Brian Fisher, they come because they know the brand. All the fame I really care about.

One big difference between movies and games are in movies you're selling the characters that appear on the movie screen and all the hype that entails.

[Speckled Jim]

My only argument with Peter Molyneux is that the undeniably talented programmers and artists on his teams never get the recognision that they deserve...and no, i've never worked for him so i'm not a bitter ex-employee.

That's a slightly odd comment. Even if Molyneux wasn't doing his usual attention seeking, no one else involved would be getting any more of the limelight. The devs all get their names on the credits, and they get paid. What else do they need? If the game is good, they get the satisfaction of having helped to create something worthwhile (and speaking as someone who has worked on plenty of commercial tripe over the years, that goes a long way).

[mahlzeit]

There is nothing wrong with being famous or seeking the appreciation of your peers or the public at large. If you seek fame just to be famous, then you'll lead a very empty life. But wanting to be recognized and respected doing the things you love is not something to feel guilty about. (And Hollywood didn't start as a bunch of hobbyists, but as a bunch of pirates. ;))

[Fabio]

My real aim is to become president of the United States of America.

And being an Indie game developer is definitely the right path to it.

But don't tell it anyone, it's a secret. ssssssssssssh! :D

[digriz]

That's a slightly odd comment. Even if Molyneux wasn't doing his usual attention seeking, no one else involved would be getting any more of the limelight. The devs all get their names on the credits, and they get paid. What else do they need? If the game is good, they get the satisfaction of having helped to create something worthwhile (and speaking as someone who has worked on plenty of commercial tripe over the years, that goes a long way).

I do get your point and you are right, it just seems that whenever a lionhead game comes out, it's pushed as a peter molyneux game rather than a lionhead one. It always seems to be him taking the credit when there is in fact a talented team making the game what it is.

Anyway, back to the original topic.......

[papillon]

I'm not keen on becoming followed-around-by-paparazzi famous, but it would be nice to be known enough that every time some whining news writer made up an article about "There aren't any women in gaming!" fans would tell them of my existence. :)

[Anlino]

Just as Anthony, i would prefer to have my work to be famous. I can't see the big deal from being a famous person - in my eyes, that would only mean less privacy. Though having the fruit of your efforts to be famous, would to me be truly spectacular.

[Artinum]

No - I just want the money!

Ah, a man with excellent sense! I've never understood this urge people have to be "famous". Rich, now, that's different. I rather like the idea of working because I want to rather than to pay the bills.

[PoV]

Haha, now this is a fun topic. I'm reminded back of the days when I when I was the famous child star in the oatmeal commercials. Ahh, those were the days.

Ok, that didn't happen. But like anyone, I crave a certain ammount of recognition. Hoards of screaming fans in an arena as I announce my next game? Naw. Save that for Reggie, J Allard, and other corporate executives who want to be rock stars. Small scope fame, the likes of Stan Lee, Frank Miller, Todd McFarlane. That's the sweet spot, and that's enough. No screaming fans, just crowds of people that respect and follow their work. And with those examples, maybe you get a movie deal too ;). I've always liked the idea of comparing indie gaming and comic books. Though it is a funny contrast that many of the bigger comics get turned in to full on projects by game studios, it's the process and team sizes behind a comic is why I like the reference. A normal one ranges from 1 guy on everything, to 1 guy on writing, 1 guy on pencils, and 1 guy on inks and 1 on colors. Still, it's a small focused team that works together and can build off eachother. Same as us. Small, focused teams. No nulled credits 'cause you were texture artist 4 on big licensed title instead.

[DrWilloughby]

When I was in college an issue of PC Gamer Magazine came out with an article entitled "Game Gods" which had this photo spread of about 30 of the top influential game designers/programmers in the world. My buddy taped that to my dorm room door, knowing that I wanted to be in that article some day.

At my last job I worked with Justin Chin, who was the designer behind Jedi Knight 2. He was one of the Game Gods. I teased him mercilessly about the article. He told me he only got in because he was an alternate and they couldn't get Miyamoto.

I mainly want to be famous so that I can have complete creative freedom and not worry that people won't "get it". I want to be able to really experiment with stuff and still have it sell.

[cliffski]

That's a slightly odd comment. Even if Molyneux wasn't doing his usual attention seeking, no one else involved would be getting any more of the limelight. The devs all get their names on the credits, and they get paid. What else do they need? If the game is good, they get the satisfaction of having helped to create something worthwhile (and speaking as someone who has worked on plenty of commercial tripe over the years, that goes a long way).

I think if you work 8 hours a day for 3 years on a project, and contribute lots of design to it, and a bloke shows up for 3 or 4 meetings a year if he feels like it, and then gets the credit, its kinda annoying. And when the promises of big bonuses become morphed into promises of 'having worked on such a worthwhile game', that kinda annoying too, especially when you realise you earn less money than a bus driver, and your IT buddys of yesteryear drive porsche boxsters.

If you work for a 'big name' developer, you will always be seen as a faceless drone who doesnt contribute anything. Thats why so many people leave games companies, to escape from the shadow of their high profile media-savvy boss.

[princec]

I seem to be heading towards infamy.

Cas :)

[Musenik]

What I'm hearing here is:

We'd like recognition, but not necessarily fame? Sounds great. Where do I sign up? Wait, I already have.

Still, having a few groupies might be interesting...

[Ish]

I'm not bothered about fame but I would like to be known and respected amongst my peers. In the same way I've admired games by people like Warren Specter, Richard Garriott, Sid Meier and Will Wright I'd like one day for an aspiring game designer to look at me in a similar light.

[arcadetown]

Afterall chicks dig programmers and game developers in particular. They all dream of one day learning the inner wisdom of Dr. Megabyte. They all yearn to bow down and grovel to the gaming gods and be waiting for us all backstage at the next big gaming event. Oh wait I just woke up, dream mode = off.

[Ricardo C]

Some minor degree of recognition would be nice (i.e. gamers recognizing me in a shop), but no more than that. Besides, commercial success is the ultimate goal, fame is a very distant second.

[Nexic]

I often picture an ultra huge football game packed with 1/4 mil plus people. That's ArcadeTown every single day. People don't come because it's Brian Fisher, they come because they know the brand. All the fame I really care about.


Same with me, except I picture 13 people standing on top of a snooker table.

[digriz]

I seem to be heading towards infamy.

Also a great place to be ;)

[Speckled Jim]

I think if you work 8 hours a day for 3 years on a project, and contribute lots of design to it, and a bloke shows up for 3 or 4 meetings a year if he feels like it, and then gets the credit, its kinda annoying. And when the promises of big bonuses become morphed into promises of 'having worked on such a worthwhile game', that kinda annoying too, especially when you realise you earn less money than a bus driver, and your IT buddys of yesteryear drive porsche boxsters.

If you work for a 'big name' developer, you will always be seen as a faceless drone who doesnt contribute anything. Thats why so many people leave games companies, to escape from the shadow of their high profile media-savvy boss.

Of course that's annoying. I've been on the receiving end of that. But the fact remains if you remove the big name at the top, it won't change the basic conditions of the rest of the team. You have to accept that if you work that way, those are the conditions. If you want control, you have to do it yourself.

[Julian Gollop]

I am, apparently, more famous than I am rich - which is not saying much. My accountant thinks I am a lousy businessman, and I am more famous for games I made 20 years ago, rather than for the one I made last year. Actually, I care neither for fame or fortune - but I think there is at least some sense of justice and satisfaction for being recognised for what you create, even if it is just a small group of people who appreciate what you do. Indie game developers stand a better chance of achieving this than some poor sod slaving away as a member of some mega-sized team on a mega-game which probably gets cancelled before it's finished.

[NothingLikeit]

Wow, I never expected this many responses. I guess I'm not the only one who has thought about this. :D

I don't want to be so famous that I'm in tabloids or I'm on some crappy entertainment tonight type show. To me, the greatest prize would be an IGF award or even an Game Developer's Choice Award. If I'm able to even gain recognition throughout the industry that would be cool.

That said, it's probably best to not think about that kind of stuff in the beginning and just quietly work toward that goal. I think we all want recognition to some degree. I do think that it's really backwards for some large game companies to treat their only talent badly in favor of some "celebrity".

The comments about Peter Molyneux and Sid Meier brought up an interesting thought. With thier names on the box, hype is created around the game and helps it stand out on the crowded shelf. It's similar to the hollywood hype that was mentioned earlier in this thread. If a movie has Vin Diesel in it or is direct by George Lucas, a certain audience is guarateed to support it.

I do agree that it's unfair for only the designer to get the attention but it's going to be tough to recognize only the lead programmer or lead artist. I thinks things like the Game Developer's Choice Awards is a step in the right direction. Even if a person doesn't want fame, they should at least get financial bonuses for working on award winning games.

[Speckled Jim]

Oh man, don't get me started on George Lucas.

[soniCron]

I think if you work 8 hours a day for 3 years on a project, and contribute lots of design to it, and a bloke shows up for 3 or 4 meetings a year if he feels like it, and then gets the credit, its kinda annoying. What, then, does he do? ;)

[cliffski]

Dont get me started. This is one reason I admire Derek Smart. Many people think he is a git, maybe thats true, I did get an email from him once, and he seemed ok to me, but mainlyl I respect him because he has made sure he gets all the credit for what he has done. By doing something on your own, you can pretty much guarantee that.

[DrWilloughby]

I think if you work 8 hours a day for 3 years on a project, and contribute lots of design to it, and a bloke shows up for 3 or 4 meetings a year if he feels like it, and then gets the credit, its kinda annoying.
I've heard stories about American McGee doing just that. Well and also getting into fistfights with programmers. Lay off the coke, 'merican.

[electronicStar]

As other said I'm not in for the fame but for the money. I have nothing against fame but I'd rather be considered as an evil opportunist producing clones after clones of casual games and be despised by everybody, if it lets me live on a yacht I'm okay with that:p (note that at the moment I'm not producing clones, my first games seems to be an exercise in masochism more than anything else).

As for Molyneux I don't like the guy, I concede he made some good games at the beggining but then he started thinking he was like god of something and all of his latest games are more like boring cr*p. If at least he was breaking technological barriers or inventing revolutionnary new algorythms,that would be great but he doesn't deliver in this domain.
Now that I think of it most of the famous modern names in videogames are just poseurs.(I said most of them)

[Fry Crayola]

I guess I'm like a lot of folk in that I want a certain degree of fame.

The kind of fame that means people who matter know my name and admire my work. I'm not fussed if Joe on the street knows who I am, I dare say I'd prefer the anonymity of it. But if there's a sizeable number of people who follow my games in the same way you might follow a band, and the work itself is recognised by my peers, then that's good.

I could probably make it through life without a spot of recognition and make enough money to live comfortably, but in all honesty I want to be noticed. I think it stems from growing up in a small village where I was the smartest kid in my class at 11 years old, and then heading off to secondary school where I find myself smacked in the face with the reality fish, that I'm actually not that special.

Actually, you could probably trace everything I've ever done back to that, but this isn't a psychiatry thread.... is it?

[Anthony Flack]

He told me he only got in because he was an alternate and they couldn't get Miyamoto

A gaming gods list that doesn't include Miyamoto? That's like a list of gods that doesn't include God. Did Yu Suzuki get in there?

Slightly tangentally, the interviews I've read with Masato Maegawa, president of Treasure, have convinced me he should be on any list of game industry legends.

[NothingLikeit]

I've heard stories about American McGee doing just that. Well and also getting into fistfights with programmers. Lay off the coke, 'merican.


It's funny that you mention American Mcgee. When I read "Masters of Doom" I realized that recognition and fame can go wrong if it goes to your head. In the case of John Romero and American Mcgee (Who I really didn't know who he was until I read the booK) was that the fame went to thier heads. I think it's a problem if you spend more time being a media darling than actually doing your work.

I also think it's wrong for only the designer to take credit for the game. Honestly John Romero would have been just another guy with John Carmack's engines. There's got to be a better way to give the whole team recognition as talent instead of just thinking of them as a drone doing a factory like job.

All bias aside indie studios have a better chance of being recognized as individuals. Thinking back to the people I heard of: Alex Seropian, Sid Meier, Peter Moloneyeux, etc. They all started off as hobbyist developers.

[soniCron]

I also think it's wrong for only the designer to take credit for the game. Do you feel the same way about labeling movies with their directors? Or actors? Do folks in the film industry feel bad about that?

[Anthony Flack]

I think it's probably a good thing for one person to "take the credit" if that person is ultimately responsible for the direction and quality of the end product (it's also important that that person be given that responsibility). Or perhaps two or three people, such as the people in charge of art and music, under the direction of the person in charge of the lot. Yes, there will be many talented people working in the studio, but the person in charge has a responsibility to ensure that there are talented people working in the studio, and that everyone is working together and producing high-quality work.

This person is ultimately responsible if the project comes out crap, too.

That has to be better than just having the publisher take all the credit at any rate.

[NothingLikeit]

No I don't feel the same away about the film industry. I'm not saying that every team member's name has to be on the game box. I'm sure the gaffer from The Matrix doesn't care or even thinks his name should be on the movie poster. (Do they put stuff like that on there?)

[Steve Ince]

All games have a list of credits where everyone who's worked on the game is credited with their contribution, which is right and fair. However, if a single individual owns the IP and has the vision to bring a game to market by pulling the right team together, then it seems just to me that this person be recognised as such and the game be considered "theirs".

If a game is the joint vision of a number of individuals, then the game should really be deemed to "belong" to the company they (presumably) share.

What annoys me most is when development studios don't even get the recognition they deserve on the box cover and must sometimes fight just to get their company logo on the front. I believe that some publishers actively do this so that people will think that they developed the game and know of one instance where this led a minor award being given to the publisher instead of the developer.

[mahlzeit]

Do you feel the same way about labeling movies with their directors? Or actors? Do folks in the film industry feel bad about that?
As far as the "A FILM BY ALAN SMITHEE" possessory credit goes, not everyone is happy about that. It works as far as marketing is concerned, but it is a little unfair to everyone else who worked their butts off on the project.

[Steve Ince]

But would there have been a film for them to work their butts off on if Alan Smithee hadn't been there to "make" it?

[mahlzeit]

But would there have been a film for them to work their butts off on if Alan Smithee hadn't been there to "make" it?
Maybe this is going a little off-topic, but often directors are not the ones initiating projects. (Disclaimer: I am not really in the film industry.)

[Fry Crayola]

Keeping with the film theme for a second, the people who typically get their name on it are the "artists" involved - the director, the actors, the writers and in certain genres the FX team. The people doing mostly technical work are never billed. Aside from the advertising reasons (people don't pay money to see a cameraman at work, whoever he may be) it's mainly down to a lack of influence. The directors, actors, writers etc. do the legwork and it's the technical guys who carry that out.

In that respect, games are similar in that there are a number of people with a large amount of creative input and they delegate a lot of technical (and certainly highly skilled) work to other members of the team, all of whom contribute to the game but few of whom influence the style of the main product. They can't take a bad design and turn it into something great, just as a member of an orchestra can't make an atrocious piece of music sound like a tune from heaven, which is why the big credits go to the guys who come up with the good designs in the first place. They're certainly not ten-a-penny and there's little credit in copycat works.

Of course, a game ought to clearly credit everyone involved in the credits list, but top billing, name-on-the-packaging should go to the creative minds.

[NothingLikeit]

Do you all think that a designer will ever get interviewed by the press or late night talk shows?

[Polycount Productions]

I've been watching the olympics lately and I've noticed something about myself, anytime I watch an event where famous people are in the spotlight of the moment I realize I want that to be me. (But in game devolopment)
Maybe it's a country dependent thing... but I would like Finland to be more famous (rather than I - if I had to pick one). And the darn team went and LOST the ice hockey final match to Sweden... argh the pain...

[NuriumGames]

No - I just want the money!.
Me too! ........ (must reach 10 chars to post)

[jankoM]

I just want me, my wife and my kid that will be poping up soon to live in our own house. If I have to get famous to get to the house, so be it.:eek:

[jetro]

Well, I have got a glimpse of what it's like being famous.. being developer of the widely distributed Dismount games. So many gamers and developers recognize my games and some start to act weird when they hear that I'm the guy behind those. It's really strange to have somebody suddenly literally bow before you, or ask for autograph, especially if you're slightly shy like me. Luckily those situations are rare enough.. but shows that while it is nice being recognized, it'd probably suck to be something like a rock star.

[NothingLikeit]

Maybe it's a country dependent thing... but I would like Finland to be more famous (rather than I - if I had to pick one). And the darn team went and LOST the ice hockey final match to Sweden... argh the pain...

Hey Finland's been getting a ton of Hype from Conan O'Brien lately. Is it true that people watch his show that much over there?

[mindor]

Do you all think that a designer will ever get interviewed by the press or late night talk shows?

Though I have seen Tiger Woods on Jay Leno, or Conan O'brien pushing the latest golf game that had his name attached to it; I think it would be unlikly for a designer to end up on a late night talk show. For this to happen (s)he would probably have to have some other claim to fame as well, or they would have to be responsible for something that the mainstream took a great interest in.

I would be surprised if local press didn't at least request interviews from designers of successful games. Newspapers are always doing interest pieces with local businesses, or authors when they have a new project. I would think this would fall under the same catagory.

As far as wanting fame goes: I would like to be well known and respected for what I do, by those that understand what I do. I would also love to gain a following that got excited when I announced a new project. I wouldn't like to be recognised everywhere I go. That happens too much now as it is, and I'm just the helpful guy at a local drug store.
If I ever ended up on the Tonight Show, I'd just make a big fool of myself.

[Mr.Blaub]

I think games will be brought further into the lives of the masses through the casual game market. Triple A games have become far too insular to anyone who doesn't play games for four hours a day. Casual games have the potential to create hollywood-esque hype, because after all games are art too.

As soon as people recognise this, and it becomes more socially acceptible to whittle away the free time with a casual game, we'll have our limelight.

Having typed that, I would welcome mainstream success, but a cult fandom. A hard core of dedicated fans who loved my games because they meant something to them. I expect many niche developers to have their dedicated fans. The likes of point and click adventures, space shooters and other genres of game which are no longer widely commercially viable.

This way you get plenty of money and recognition from fans who actually count, the people who like your game because it's good.

Here's another route to stardom - make yourself look like you know what you're talking about. I didn't know Chris Crawford existed until in 2005 I downloaded his Trust and Betrayal game. I hadn't heard of any of his other games, but he's written a couple of books and he's very outspoken about game design. That's what's made him famous (in the realm of game design at least).

That and he pulled a crazy stunt involving a quote from Don Quixote at some point ;)

[Andy]

Do you all think that a designer will ever get interviewed by the press or late night talk shows?

I've already tired to answer the requests for interview from different media to Alexey Pajitnov. Explaining that we have no any influence on Alexey in his decisions to give or not to give the interviews.

But holly sh... how many such requests we get!!! :)
So I'd guess YES, this is possible in general... ;)

EDIT: Spell checked the message for Gabriel... ;)

[Anthony Flack]

As soon as people recognise this, and it becomes more socially acceptible to whittle away the free time with a casual game, we'll have our limelight.

Yeah, just like you'd all recognise the people who invented Trivial Pursuit, right? Or was it just one person? Whatever. Who cares!

[Chris Evans]

As soon as people recognise this, and it becomes more socially acceptible to whittle away the free time with a casual game, we'll have our limelight.



Except for the fact that portals and publishers try their best to hide who actually DEVELOPS the games. When you look at a game page on a portal or a retail game box, often times you have to be a super sleuth to find out how made the game.

Unlike movies, game publishers/portals do not promote (or barely mention) the creative talent behind the games. Over the past 25 years in retail, a few personalities have emerged but I still don't think a single game designer could get on Leno or David Letterman. David Perry might be able to squeeze in on one of those Late Late Shows at 2:57am right before the infomercials start but that'd still be pushing it.

Jason Rubin went on a big rant about this at GDC a couple of years back about how Publishers shove their talent to the broom closet even at game launch parties.

I'd say console games (PS2, Xbox, and etc) are pretty mainstream right now yet there still isn't one game designer who's close to being a household name. So I wouldn't hold your breath about getting in the limelight with casual games even if it hits critical mass.

As a game designer, I think this best you can hope for (in terms of fame) is to have a cult following and the respect of peers. That's fine by me.

[NothingLikeit]

Except for the fact that portals and publishers try their best to hide who actually DEVELOPS the games. When you look at a game page on a portal or a retail game box, often times you have to be a super sleuth to find out how made the game.

Unlike movies, game publishers/portals do not promote (or barely mention) the creative talent behind the games.....

Jason Rubin went on a big rant about this at GDC a couple of years back about how Publishers shove their talent to the broom closet even at game launch parties.

Yeah that's very very true. I wonder why though. A lot of people have touched on the fact that movies, music and other forms of art hype up the talent behind the work. It seems like the industry is shooting itself in the foot. I think it'll change as the industry matures. I read about Peter Jackson actually seeking Michel Ancel (The Rayman Guy) to help him create the Kong Videogame. I also think recognition like the BAFTAs and the IGF are doing alot to recognize the talent behind the work.

To change my answer a bit... I think I'd rather have the reconition from the industry. Those and the fans are all that really matter.

[soniCron]

...Michel Ancel (The Rayman Guy)... I think a more appropriate reference would be, "the Beyond Good & Evil guy," because that was one of the finest pieces of gaming ever bestowed upon man. (And the reason Peter chose Michel.) :p

[Mr.Blaub]

BG&E was a great game, but I hated Rayman.

It just seemed so bland, but maybe that's just me.

[Kori]

What interests me is... why do humans want fame to begin with? It seems to be hardwired into our heads, and everyone seems to want it. Why would anyone want a bunch of strangers to seek you out, and want to meet you? What if tomorrow morning you opened your email and found that a thousand people sent you email, telling you how great you were, and every one of them expected a return email. Do you get paid for answering emails from strangers? What’s in it for you?

Why do we want fame? What does the word really imply? It means a thousand or a million people know your name, and want to meet you and talk to you. And what is it that they really want from you? Where is the value? Perhaps they don’t really give a damn about you at all in reality. Perhaps they just want to meet you so they can go back to their friends and tell them they met you, to gain importance and envy of the people they know. If this is true, then the famous person gets nothing of value out of the deal, he’s cheated.

I am not sure where this business of valuing fame comes from in humans. It must be connected to survival in our evolutionary chain. It must have had some value then, but I am not so sure it does now.

Fame does have monetary value. You can command a higher salary or commission for your work.

Fame does have a ‘easy sex’ value. When I was in university plays, women were easy to pick up because I was one of the actors. (Just a supporting actor.)

Even though we are all hardwired to want fame, I suspect (but do not know) that fame was a good thing to have in the past, but with today’s internet and instant media, fame is not a good thing to have in the world we live in. I think you would be opening the doors of your life to every jerk and crazy person in the world, via internet and media. I still want the fame, but something inside me says, take the money and forgo the fame.

I would like those of you who have had a touch of fame, to list the good aspects and bad of your experience with fame. Do you think fame is a good thing or a bad thing to have in today’s world?

Kori

[DanMarshall]

...seems to be hardwired into our heads, and everyone seems to want it.

I work in television. All day every day I talk to people who want to be famous and on TV.

I definitely don't. I've seen what a vile, incipid waste-of-space a thirst for fame can turn you into. Maybe that's why I'm behind the camera. I'm safe behind my camera. Noone can get me behind me camera.

[Artinum]

Maybe it's like the groups of gorillas you see in nature documentaries. All the males want to be the alpha. Perhaps fame is inherited from this - you are recognised, you are loved by millions. You are therefore important.

The majority of posters on this thread seem to hate the idea of fame (though we all would like the money that comes with it). Perhaps we value our privacy too much - the very nature of indie development is that we aren't interested in following the crowd but in doing what we want. Not what we're told to want.

This is all getting very philosophical. It's too late in the evening for this (9pm on a Friday, UK time...) so I'll stop.

[mahlzeit]

the very nature of indie development is that we aren't interested in following the crowd but in doing what we want
But if you're in the crowd, you don't become famous. So if you're an independent spirit, you run the risk of becoming famous. ;)

[Kori]

If you were famous, can you even imagine how many work hours you would waste answering email questions, phone call questions, visitor questions? I mean... that has to get old wasting all that time talking to strangers, and not getting paid for it.

When would you have time to work on your game and have a life? Most of us already have too many interruptions in our life between friends, family, work. How much time will you have left for game making when you are famous?

And when you finally have had enough from the fans, and you tell them to please just go away, because you don’t have time to answer their silly questions, they will quickly turn around and tell everyone, your an AH... stuckup... ungreatful... very bad person.

And you have to remember that nothing is one way in life. If you gain something, you lose something. For every fan who loves you, there will be one fan who hates you. Fame tends to polarize people’s opinion about your work.


As for me, yes, I want to be worldly famous... for one week. That would probably cure me for life.

Kori

[vjvj]

I second the notion of wanting fame for the identity<->ip relationship. I don't care if people accuse me of being a poser rockstar or whatever, if the developers don't do it the publishers will.