Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Feedback Requests' started by patrox, Jan 6, 2006.
I am astonished too.
Ola Z. deverves to be the director of Big Fish Universe. But I doubt he would ever like to be. I wouldn't, neither if I had one tenth of his talent and ten times his need to make money. I fully respect++ Emmanuel's decision and I am certain he did for (his) better, but I'm really astonished so many of you see this with enthusiasm..
Anyway, good luck Emmanuel: something tells me you'll need it.
Let me add with some sort of authoritativeness that PTK's OpenGL code is not the best in the world.
Just to clear my points:
It's clear that money wise, at least in the short term, this is a big win for Emmanuel, as well for BFG anyway.
What an ex employee like me that became an Indie doesn't understand, is how could one ever want to follow the opposite route. Either Emmanuel never had to eat bitter pills from a stupid boss, or he is just different than me (lucky him), but I think that demotivation will reach him, sooner or later, this is IMHO unavoidable now.
Ok, probably his contract allows him an easy quit and then he can found a new company.. but I really fail to see how an Indie could want to be incorporated, or eaten by a bigger fish, to talk more in tune.
I think the real Indie here is BFG, not FP. But BFG seems (and rightly so) motivated only by market shares, while to make decent games and enjoy doing so, you need to feel 101% independent. While FP's games, being "clones" ((tm) Savant) may not be the best examples in the world of "inspiration and love for what one does", I don't think that this incorporation will improve it, rather, those excellent games being slightly unoriginal may be the sign that motivation/inspiration was already not at the top and thus things could potentially get worse when your new boss, after all the smiles and handshakes, start behaving like a boss - as is his right and duty to do.
But anyone has his own temperament, of course, and I should not apply mine to others' choices.. Anyway, g'luck!
In fact, I'm technically and legally an entrepreneur, but I'm just (re)doing for a job what has always been a hobby. As long as it can give bread to my daughter, my wife and me, and gives us little extra, then it will be the most beautiful job in the world. Expecially not having to depend by any stupid bosshole.
Also, talkin' about money, personally I don't think it makes any sense to desire more than you need. Of course you may need a lot (for example to buy a house, instead to pay rent). In this capitalist society there's an exaggerate tendency to measure quality of life with amount of money you got. Statistics of suicide and of use of psycho-drugs, for example, prove that the formula is quite incomplete.
I would have given up the programming and designing if I kept growing, like Paul did, to cater to the business side full time -- which is what he is most passionate about. I've been in that situation already in my previous business (which is why I sold and left), so I am excited that I can remain part of the team that builds the games, and yet benefit from the experience, top testing and distribution capabilities that Paul and his team have put together.
In terms of the jump in production values, I can't take all the credit. Jerome (graphics) and Jean-Marc (sound) have a great mind of their own, and provide as much creative input as they draw pixels or compose music. We bounce ideas off each other and we try to be very unforgiving with eachother's work.
In terms of the deal, I'm not 'wrapping things up and exiting', quite the opposite. You can read this deal any way you like, but I'm genuinely happy to have joined BigFish and only our actions will prove so. A year ago, "the law" was that a meat-eating monophasic sleeper who makes 3D accelerated, 20 MB casual games, starting anew in 2005, stands no chance.
I totally agree - to many people are playing by forumalic rules here. It seems to me that people here are getting a bit stuck on certain values regardless of their business objectives and that is it's own path to non-independance... instead of being a slave to 'da man', you become a slave to an ideal. Adapting to change, and seizing opportunity should be encouraged for any entrepreneur - kudos to Emmanuel for doing so.
Given that FP doesn't use an inhouse engine, ownership of the sources has no plus value than what it is supposed to be used for.
Instead imagine acquiring a game company, like e.g. Arcadelab, that has put years and years of manwork on their engine and inhouse tools (they wrote even a top-quality graphics application which alone is worth a lot!).
This is not meant to put down FunPause or what they accomplished but how was what they did not formulaic? Crank out clones until someone acquires you. That's not a new or unique strategy.
I'd take the money, same as Emmanuel did, but come on. Don't paint their rise to success as something different than the path that most here are trying to follow.
lol, I was very new to casual games then and really didnt realise that people DO buy games that have stolen mechanics with a new theme attached. Plus I was led astray by the 'mainstream' media as whenever they mention independent games it's always about some new play innovation. when you really get down to it there isnt that much really.
Congrats Emmanuel, you have landed yourself with a position that you can do what you want without unwanted financial pressure, and isnt that what we all want? Well done
I agree it's a perfectly common business strategy. My point is, that it's not the "indie" way. For this business it's the best example of success and "thinking outside the box", "dancing to your own drum" or "flying in the face of common teachings" that I have seen yet.
Here's why: The "Indie" way tends to be based on the religious teachings of Steve Pavlina from several years ago. The line I quoted of Emmanuels hit the nail on the head - he broke almost every "Indie best practices" rule and yet, he achieved greater success, in a shorter time period, then most of us ever will. That's doing it his way. The path was not original, but the thinking and belief was.
"no plus value than what it is supposed to be used for"
What does that supposedly mean? As picman said, with the source code they can port the game to whatever platform they wish (btw, PTK's source code will be available to registered users this year).
dp... dp... dp...
... I know I'm not, that is, I am not interested in making obvious games to "ensure" success.. I would be bored out of my brain long before I could release a cloned game.
I also don't plan on being "aquired" if that chance ever came my way (Unlikely). I am doing it because I love doing it, but I want to make money doing it to be able to keep doing it!!!
So even though my personal ideals and goals are completely different from Funpause's (sans making money) I can still see WHY he deserves the plaudits he is getting because it fit in with his plan. Why people can't just accept that I don't know. It's not as if most of us were ever going to fall in love with a funpause game (like we may with people like Positech, Pom Pom or even Valve/Id etc) and are now upset in case their future output gets ruined - so why is it such a big deal?
Why can't we just say "well done" without picking everything to pieces everytime?
Can't it be accepted as implicit that not everyone's goals are the same and we can only contribute what we can to the greater whole of the industry and get on and do it without trying to debase every other route to similar goals?
Why is every story of success that doesn't fit in with one's personal ideals, met with negativity and concern from certain areas?
Seriously, people, take a look at yourself and your work and put all that passion into creation instead of destruction.
It's called a discussion - as opposed to a congratulatory circle jerk.
Sorry, English is not my native language. So let me try to rephrase:
1st case: if you acquire full sources for a game that uses PTK and other public libs, then you're acquiring the rights for that game only (and all the possible conversions).
2nd case: Instead, if you acquire full sources for a game that uses an inhouse game engine, let away tools (map editors, etc..), like an Arcadelab game or, to talk retail, Quake3, you are acquiring the technology to build many more games with that.
Thus the value of the 2nd case is much much higher.
Personally, I'm affected by the NIH Syndrome and I've invested years and years of hard work on my sources and tools, so I'd never accept the 2nd case, although I'd sell the sources of a stand alone product, assuming it doesn't peek too much at the global thing of mine.
You're right, but keep in mind that most probably BFG already has its own engine and toolset, so another one won't be that much useful to them, unless it's a top quality one (Reflexive's anyone? )
just an historical notice: While most of people on this forum (including me) was still ocupying themselves with "Atlantis that - atlantis this" Emmanuel made Fairies, not that long ago after Fairies were left some peace of mind Emm. becomed director of BFGE.. Now you will need 2-3 weeks to digest this bone - I wonder what Emm. will manage to do in that time. This debates about what someone should or should not do and "indie" are getting so boring. I will just go back to listening Iron maiden and making games for kids
Congrats to the former Funpause team.
May continuous success be with you all.