I've been thinking about ways to get oneself established as a startup (i.e. a full-blown development house, not just a sole trader), and the pros and cons of each. How am I doing?
Indie to Pro
Just starting out as an indie, making shareware titles or mods, and then eventually developing full commercial titles and finding publishers for them.
Pros:
Low cost
No publisher deadlines, etc - creative freedom
Cons:
Low income
Could take a long time to reach the 'full commercial titles' point of things.
Commissions/"Contracting"
I've heard that publishers sometimes have a particular bit of IP that they want to develop into a game (e.g. a movie license), and they may go looking for developers who will make it for them. So, present yourself as available for doing that kind of project.
Pros:
Guaranteed publisher (and .: income)
Cons:
Very little creative freedom
The 'traditional' approach
Go out and buy a studio, computers, software, hire some people, and make some games. At some point, persuade some publishers to fund it all.
Pros:
Fairly high level of creative freedom
Get everything to begin with - no immediate need to expand
Cons:
High cost
No guaranteed income (can't find a publisher)
What other approaches have people seen, and did they work?
Superpig
- saving pigs from untimely fates, and when he's not doing that, runs The Binary Refinery. Enginuity1 | Enginuity2 | Enginuity3 | Enginuity4[edited by - Superpig on August 22, 2003 7:54:19 AM]
Richard "Superpig" Fine - saving pigs from untimely fates - Microsoft DirectX MVP 2006/2007/2008/2009
"Shaders are not meant to do everything. Of course you can try to use it for everything, but it's like playing football using cabbage." - MickeyMouse
My method is based on your number one. Not sure if it will work, but i''ll let you know in a couple of years. It''s not just developing your own titles and try to find publishers, it''s also publishing your games yourself!
Pro''s: -much higher income that your (1) (2) and (3). No publisher required. -full creative freedom
Cons: -More risk (you carry the risk, not some outside publisher) -Time for publishing takes up time you can spend on programming (but you can hire someone to do publishing for you)
Difficulties: -You must have the ability to publish something. That means knowing stuff about marketing, legal issues, financial issues, business models, etcetera. I am (almost) a graduated business engineer so I already know most of this stuff. -Distribution: As a small independant publisher it''s going to be difficult to actually get games into your local store. It eighter means developing an entire new (possibaly online) businessmodel or a lots negotiations with local retailers, manufacturers, etcetera. That means eighter a brilliant idea or lots of hard work.
Actually, this is my long-term plan. For the mid-term I want to get into the more ''regular'' GD business. Get experienced (and a stable income!). After that I would like to publish myself or help indy teams publish.
Use whatever you already have and make it a product you can sell, then do games as a sideline. This is how Digital Fiction (''Boxing Fever''/GBC, ''Racing Fever''/Palm) started. They developped a patented legislation search engine they sold to law firms and then used the cash to venture into games.
Pros: - steady revenue stream to milk from (very important!!!) - great business teaching; develop your marketing and sales skills - Can afford to make a lot of mistakes during game development
Cons: - Game development months or years away - Business is not a free puppy; it needs nurturing even if gaming is the ultimate end - VCs and bankers want to finance the whole thing, not just the game venture independently.
Results: - DF is expanding its studio. They got a Nintendo license (first the GBA, then the GameCube) & development systems. They''s negotiating for XBox and PS2.
I think I may take approach number 4 when it actually comes down to it - I have some ideas regarding school intranet systems that are worth exploring...
Still, collecting more of these (perhaps for someone who knows about these things to write into an article? who knows) is good...
Richard "Superpig" Fine - saving pigs from untimely fates - Microsoft DirectX MVP 2006/2007/2008/2009
"Shaders are not meant to do everything. Of course you can try to use it for everything, but it's like playing football using cabbage." - MickeyMouse
Superpig, Your option 2 doesn''t exist. Publishers that have IP (movies etc) are not going to give them to someone unless they have all the things you listed in option 3. There are basically 2 methods to get where you want to go. Start-up and upstart.
Upstart (non-conformist) You follow the shareware/indie to pro route. You have a day job or some other source of income that allows you to do software part time. Over several years the income from software overtakes the day job and you dump the job to go full time.
An alternative upstart method is to find money from FFS (friends, family or savings) that allow you to work full time on your games without having to worry about the day job.
It is hoped that at some point the software revenue will be such that you can create a game/demo/technology that will attract a big publisher to fund you or you just stay as a self published indie.
- With this route you don''t need to do things the way the industry tells you or seek their approval. You have creative freedom but you also have the financial risk and it takes several years to get to the point where you can look at doing a mainstream title.
Start-up (conformist) You attempt to skip the years of slow growth by attracting large scale funding/investment. To do this you need to demonstrate that you are professional. For this you need: i. a full team/studio of industry experienced individuals ii. the necessary paperwork iii. wizbang demo/technology
- This option still costs you money because you need to fund the creation of the demo/technology/paperwork and to feed yourself for 6 months to a year while trying to get a publisher. The advantage is that you skip straight to developing a major title with a major budget. That title could be either an original title or a publisher IP (movie license etc).
quote:
Original post by cbenoi1 4. Start as a sideline
Use whatever you already have and make it a product you can sell, then do games as a sideline. This is how Digital Fiction (''Boxing Fever''/GBC, ''Racing Fever''/Palm) started. They developped a patented legislation search engine they sold to law firms and then used the cash to venture into games.
This isn''t a 4th option just a version on superpigs 1st option. Remember at some point they had to create that legislation search engine that provided their funding. That was most likely done on a part-time basis/self funded.
> This isn''t a 4th option just a version on superpigs 1st option. > {...} You have a day job or some other source of income that allows > you to do software part time.
From my perspective, the revenue source should come from an industry with a different economic risk profile; games development, like feature films, is a very very very risky business (financially speaking). Having a diversified portfolio approach allows you to add increasingly riskier projects to an initially lower-risk portfolio until the company can run exclusively on games projects.
Superpig''s 1st option is to stick with game development all the way to stardom, a risky proposition from my pov. Our variants have one thing in common: find a stable source of income separate from the game business, and transition the businesses at some point in time. We differ only in how to get the seed funding to ultimately develop games. My variant adds one step to yours by growing through a lower risk business first before making the final transition.
Actually, Obscure, my boss disagrees (and he''s been a professional game designer for about 17 years, so go figure... ). He says such things *do* happen, but (a) they''re not usually given to studios with no previous releases - or at least proof that they''re good at the sort of game the publisher has in mind, and (b) they eat your soul.
If a publisher is trying to ''auction'' off the project and IP, it''s usually because no developer wanted to touch it with a barge pole. Fancy making the next Sabrina game? Or maybe one based around the Care Bears? Even once you''ve got the IP from them, they''ll involve themselves in pretty much every aspect of development - they''ll dictate what they want, and expect you to give it to them; even if they don''t know what they''re talking about.
I''m thinking, actually, that I might try and license (of sorts) some ''cult'' IP; for example, Doctor Who. I''ll just drop an email to the BBC, explaining that I''m a student game developer, and could I make a Doctor Who game.. who knows, if it''s any good, maybe they''d like to distribute it through their website? And so on and so forth. It''s a fairly outdated, old franchise, so they have little to lose; the chances are this one guy working in his spare time won''t produce anything that gets seen by more than 100 people, so why stop him?
Richard "Superpig" Fine - saving pigs from untimely fates - Microsoft DirectX MVP 2006/2007/2008/2009
"Shaders are not meant to do everything. Of course you can try to use it for everything, but it's like playing football using cabbage." - MickeyMouse
Sounds like a plan, but it depends on what IP you''re targetting. Some companies are fanatic about their IP''s (remember the Hasbro ribbon campaign??). You might want to check out what IP''s are currently being recycled, as so many old 60''s and 70''s IP''s have been, like "The Avengers".
As you may know, the company I used to work for, and had been at from day one, Creative Asylum went bust this year. The company was a start-up, ALL staff members had at least 2-5 years previous games industry experience, most many more, (we were formed from staff from the in-house development team of a now defunct UK publisher).
As a company we had office space, machines & licensed software, our own technology, our own original game IP (full story boards, playable prototype demos, technology proofs, full design etc), published/retail titles on multiple platforms etc. We'd been going for over 5 years as a company.
The cancellation (the marketing "value" of the license had gone down, the same publisher cancelled 17 other titles on the same day...) of the licensed product we were working on meant an immediate stop in milestone advance payments.
That left us in the position of trying to get new work from publishers before the money in the bank ran out. Unfortunately we didn't succeed.
Many other companies have gone under in the UK in the past two years, all with highly experienced staff & management, titles under their belt. All of those companies have tried to get "work for hire" stuff from publishers, tried to push their own IP etc
Don't think for a minute that it's at all easy. Particularly if you're starting from scratch with very little real experience, contacts etc.
Some general points & observations from my experiences at CA and over the years in the industry (I first tried to sell a game to a publisher 12 years ago...):
1) for the majority of the half decent "work for hire" stuff, publishers are **demanding roughly: - Proven (i.e. used in published game) in house PS2 technology - Team experienced (i.e. published games) in the genre of the IP
2) for work for hire on the non-gamer IPs ("Care Bears" etc), trust me, there are developers queuing up for that work from the publishers. Even the large developers who make games based on their own IP are snapping up that work. That's the "bread & butter" work of the industry. There's about 10 companies in the industry that can afford to turn that kind of work down due to "artistic integrity". The other ~5000 game development companies round the world definately WOULD touch those licenses with a barge pole!
3) don't forget that a games company is a BUSINESS. Publishers are as interested in how you run your company, its finances etc as they will be in your ability to do the work. I'd say stretching yourself between the artistic side and the business side means both will suffer!
4) IMO for a startup to survive and grow, it should be formed by people with at very least 5 years commercial experience in the industry. I'd also say you need at least 2 directors:
- someone who's worked in sales or external production for a publisher AND has a good knowledge of pure business. They'd spend their time getting new work, keeping an eye on budgets, maintaining relationships, selling the company and its abilities basically.
- someone who's had a lot of experience as an internal producer or project manager on a number of development teams. Preferably someone who's come up through other roles such as programming or art. They'd run the day to day management of product development, look after scheduling of products, be the highest point of contact for the external producer at the publisher.
5) Some advice: MUCH MUCH MUCH easier and better for you at the moment, particularly in the current industry climate would be to get a job at an existing developer and get a few products under your belt, get the contacts etc. Do the shareware and mods in your spare time and see if they make you anything.
6) At the moment there are far more development companies than there are publishing deals. That's a hell of a lot of competition for very few deals. Only start your own company if you are 100% better than ALL the other companies bidding for that work. Be realistic.
7) After the fall of CA I considered forming another new startup myself - though probably on a smaller scale initially - stuff like mobile games. My conclusion was at the moment, almost all possibilities aren't worth the hassle. I've gone for straight employment again (at an internal studio of a very well known publisher).
Advice in summary: - get a normal job in the games industry at someone elses company
- get a few products out and a few years experience
- do the "indie to pro" thing in your spare time
- watch the industry carefully
- don't just jump in feet first because "it'd be cool to have my own games company and work on original games". Fill in the gaps about how you'd make that a reality - it aint easy, if it was, a lot of people in the industry would be doing it!
- build up some "rainy day" savings (preferably 6 months salary). Even if you're just an employee. That softened the blow of CA going under significantly!
- go for it when you've planned everything AND have some startup capital. NEVER start the company THEN try to raise the money. Get that startup cash, the tech, game design, demo and even prefably a publishing deal BEFORE you leave your existing job.
[*]<br><br>–<br>Simon O'Connor <br> <br><br><SPAN CLASS=editedby>[edited by - s1ca on August 22, 2003 7:19:46 PM]</SPAN> <br><br><SPAN CLASS=editedby>[edited by - s1ca on August 22, 2003 7:20:25 PM]</SPAN>
Simon O'Connor | Technical Director (Newcastle) Lockwood Publishing | LinkedIn | Personal site
quote:
Original post by superpig Actually, Obscure, my boss disagrees (and he''s been a professional game designer for about 17 years, so go figure...
And I have been in the industry for 15 years. During which time I designed/produced 25 game across 80 SKUs (plus working in a management capacity on many more), set up two development studios and set up and ran the design department and the product acquisition department for the biggest publisher in Europe. I KNOW what type of developers get signed cos I sat in that chair.... so go figure
quote:
He says such things *do* happen, but (a) they''re not usually given to studios with no previous releases - or at least proof that they''re good at the sort of game the publisher has in mind, and (b) they eat your soul.
Your boss doesn''t disagree with me, you just didn''t understand my post because the scenario he describes in (a) above is exactly what I was talking about. You can''t just go to a publisher out of nowhere and get them to give you an IP project to work on. Publishers buy IP to reduce risk and only entrust it to studios with a proven track record or a new start-up of the type I described as "Start-up (conformist)" - basically a team with industry experience coming out of existing studios to form their own.
quote:
If a publisher is trying to ''auction'' off the project and IP, it''s usually because no developer wanted to touch it with a barge pole.
There is no such thing as an IP that someone won’t develop. It may be a crap license and they may prefer to be doing something else but there is always someone willing to do it. It''s money and it means the company exists for another year/two during which time they may get the deal you want as a next project.
quote:
Even once you''ve got the IP from them, they''ll involve themselves in pretty much every aspect of development - they''ll dictate what they want, and expect you to give it to them; even if they don''t know what they''re talking about.
Unless you are Westwood Studios or Peter Molyneux this happens on all projects.
quote:
I''m thinking, actually, that I might try and license (of sorts) some ''cult'' IP; for example, Doctor Who. I''ll just drop an email to the BBC, explaining that I''m a student game developer, and could I make a Doctor Who game..
1. It may be old and it may be resting but it isn''t worthless (at least not in the eyes of the IP owner). Infogrames just re-launched the Alone in the Dark franchise with AiTD4 after a gap of six years and serious moves are afoot to revive a similar "resting" BBC show - Blakes 7 after twenty years! 2. They may allow you to do some sort of fan fiction product but you can be sure that no commercial exploitation will be allowed.
). He says such things *do* happen, but (a) they''re not usually given to studios with no previous releases - or at least proof that they''re good at the sort of game the publisher has in mind, and (b) they eat your soul. 
