Something really bugging me

#1 I think you're missing something here...you're getting an engine that I would say, is at the top of the catagory as far as quality, flexiblity and useability, for $100. You're getting the source code to that engine, you're getting support for that engine by the guys who wrote it, and you're getting distribution from a reliable source. I would encourage you to do some research into other engines and their licencing. To the best of my knowledge, the only engine that comes close to this in price is the LithTech engine that is used in No One Lives Forever. For $500 you get the engine, without the source code, and from what I understand, it's a mess. So for $400 less, you get a superior engine, and the source code. If you don't like the licence agreement, don't licence the engine. It's as easy as that.

#2

Quote:
The problem is, no one really knows what GarageGames expenses are, and Garage games doesn't have to justify their expenses. Hosting for this site, and GarageGames internet connection, etc, are all pretty expensive, and I'd imagine Garage games could charge whatever they want as a fee for hosting my project. And whats to stop GarageGames from making deductions for the same expenses to multiple developers?

Where are you getting this from?

Quote:
"Net Proceeds" shall mean all monies received by Licensor for the sale, license or use of the Games If Licensor sells or licenses Licensee's Game as part of a compilation or collection of games, Licensee shall receive its pro rata share of the payments for such compilation or collection.

That seems pretty clear to me that it's the money they collect for selling your game, period. I don't see any additional charges in the agreement.

And GarageGames does have to justify their expenses:

Quote:
Licensee shall have the opportunity to audit Licensor's books and records related to such royalty payments hereunder, once every other year until the Games are no longer sold or licensed, and for one (1) year thereafter.

I suggest you read the entire agreement, and ask questions if you don't understand it.

#3 I think you're missing the point. I don't have anything against Garage Games. I think it's a good idea. the thing is I understood this to mean that even if I wrote a game with my own engine, and distributed it through Garage Games, I'd have to wait for Garage Games to recoup whatever they claimed as expenses before I see one dime. I'm cautious because I've been working in games for several years, and I've seen how creative publishers can be with their book keeping. A real publisher however, will pay a developer for the development for a game, and that's considered part of the publishers expense. Here, there is no consideration given to the fact that I pay 100 dollars for the engine, 800 for VC++, 3500 for Max, 600 for Photoshop, and I need two computers at least to build and test a multiplayer game. You can dismiss this if you want, but these are very really expenses for anyone who wants to seriously develop a game for you; and we haven't yet considered the time it takes for a small team to produce a game worth paying even five dollars for. You assume that any hobbyist has these things at their disposal, and some might, but having them and actually owning a license are two different things. When you develop software you intend to make a profit on, the tools you use to develop must be legal licenses. Which means anyone who wants to get the most out of that engine you so kindly offer for a mere 100 dollars must shell out at least 5 grand extra to get the most out of it. So yes, we developers have upfront expenses as well, and you really need to consider that.

#4 That is a very valid concern. One that I have had many times when getting paid by royalties because the expenses line is very standard in a publishing agreement. Normally, what is deducted are things like COGS (cost of goods, like CD's, and packaging, and documentation), sales commissions, etc. GarageGames does not have most of those kinds of costs, but the agreement needs have the line in case we do a compilation CD that is sold via the site, or for unforseen expenses that would fall under this category.

We do have to account to our developers, so it would be very difficult to slip in things that are not actually expenses related to publishing. I hope this alleviates some of your concerns.

Jeff Tunnell

#5 So, we've established that net means net (not gross). Is there any chance of you guys changing the agreement to start paying royalties at sale one (say 10%), and ramping them up to the full 50% (when expenses are met)based on performance? I know this isn't standard as far as royalty agreements go, but I think I've made a pretty good case for why this should be, and Garage Games isn't exactly the standard business model. Having the agreement set up as it is now, the developer assumes a great risk (as does garage games) but it seems the greater risk is shouldered by the developer. I think ammending the agreement would encourage more developers to get involved and probably produce better quality products.

#6 Mike:

You may not be the kind of person this site is targeted at. Instead of approaching it from a "startup business owner's" standpoint, for example, look at it from the viewpoint of a mod-maker. Serious mod-makers (and especially mission designers for single-player games like the Thief series) probably spend a hell of a lot more time on their projects than you ever will, knowing that they can't sell their creations, producing sometimes professional-quality work for the sheer joy of creating.

Look at it from that standpoint. Suddenly you are given tools that compared to your previous ones are nearly god-like, and are far more affordable than most tools we use to make skins!

Suddenly, 'how will I get my money back' seems a little petty. The fact that you can sell your work at all excites me; I don't care if I don't make $100 on everything I make, I just want to be able to sell a game that I created from the ground up.

Also, I hope you don't mind if I do dismiss your concerns about monet. You do not need your expensive tools like 3DS Max and so forth; Milkshape works just fine for things like this, and the makers of 3DSMax are coming out with a cheap tool geared towards game developers. So you can scratch that off of your list of costs. In addition to which, anyone who thinks they actually need Adobe Photoshop to create textures and skins should be given a twirling wedgie.

If you're serious about this, for God's sake get yourself a team together! I don't count your two computers as an expense at all. In fact, all you need are some dedicated beta-testers to test multiplayer -- and to do it a lot more usefully than you can by yourself, unless you want to go to the added trouble of simulating a poor connection.

Seriously, look at it from the point of view of the Mod-Makers. You will quickly find that most of your worries fade away, to be replaced with the joy of creation.

#7 No offense, but the "joy of development" line does not fly here. Garage Games is a business, they are providing a good service, but the goal is for them to make money. If I simply wanted to make something cool and wanted exposure I'd get the full HL SDK and make something for that. I'm not calling GG a predator here, but the wide eyed enthusiasm of people like yourself is exactly what is going to make GG money, and if they make money, you should not shoulder so much risk, and you should be paid correctly for your work.

As I said, the minute GG begins selling your product, your mod team is now a business. YOU WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR YOUR CUSTOMERS. YOU WILL HAVE TO OWN LEGAL SOFTWARE. That is unless you don't mind shelling out 150,000 for each cracked license on your computer now to the BSA.

As for GMAX, it's out of the question now for several reasons.

1) It's not available yet
2) It's worthless as a development tool unless your company or GG pays Discreet a licenseing fee (which I'm sure won't be cheap) to develop tools for it specific to V12.
3) Discreet I'm certain will ammend the EULA so that you will not legally be able to use it to develop for profit games and mods.
4) This V12 engine if I'm not mistaken, has exporters from Max. Max is 3500 dollars. I think time wise it would be cost prohibitive to try to write tools for another app.
5)Milkshape is buggy and not full featured. I can accomplish more much quicker in Max than in MS, again making development quicker and much more cost effective.. Plus MS does not currently support V12 and who knows if it will.

OK, I can use Paintshop, that's still at least 60 or 70 dollars.

I think the guys writing the engine will agree that even if I was writing code for a single player game two PCs is an absolute must for debugging purposes.

I'm not expecting to start a dev house based on whatever I may or may not make for GG. But this is a business to them, and if you're going to make a game for them and expect to sell it, you have to treat your development as a business.

#8 You raise some legitimate points. Notice that I say 'some'.

GG is not being 'predatory'. What you fail to understand is that we -- meaning the Mod community in all of its various facets -- can take an engine and create something beautiful using, to speak plainly, shit for dev tools.

Milkshape is legal -- if you register it, it costs $20. Paintshop? No thanks -- I'm using 6 different free graphical editors, which is irritating but it works for me.

gMAX isn't an option. How right you are. But there are quite a few (admittedly buggy) open-source polygonal modelling tools out there. Level design? Erm, Worldcraft anyone?

As for 2 PCs -- come on! Who doesn't have 2 PCs nowadays? I'm only 17, and I have 3 -- a 66Mhz that is now my Linux box, an Athlon 750 Mhz l33t gaming rig, and a Pentium III 700 I use for work purposes. I'm not rich, either; I bought it all with wages earned from a part-time job while I try to make myself into a r33t Java Programmer. (And I'm getting there). But the point is, I would have all of this stuff whether I had heard of GG or not. Only now I can make money.

#9 Btw -- 3DS Max is 'quicker and more cost effective' than Milkshape? How is that? Does it cost more? Yes. Will it work for the v12 engine? Yes, because it handles 3DS format. When I modelled for Tribes I used Milkshape; it will work for Tribes 2 I have heard, and if it works for T2 it will work for the v12.

Using 3DS Max for the v12 is like using Adobe Photoshop for your skins. Think like a mod-maker, not an accountant!

Better yet, think like a gamer.

#10 Oh, and about me being a 'business' by releasing my game to GarageGames.com -- nope. I'm not handling inventory. I'm not dealing with the people that can't install the game on their system. If there is a bug, I'll fix it -- but if I don't GG will; they'll just charge me for the time it takes.

And I don't worry about that at all, because if my game is important enough for them to spend time fixing, that means it is making them money. And it would be making me just as much money as it does them.

#11 Mike,

All business owners must assume risk. Maybe you need to look into lessening the "risks" you list. For instance, use Milkshape instead of 3DS Max for a savings of $3500; use Dev-C++ instead of MS C++.

As to the risk of creating the game, I see that as the same risk a musician takes when learning to play an instrument. We are giving you the opportunity to get a market leading "instrument" in the V12. You will have to weigh the risks as you see them and then decide if they are worth the downside.

Our goal is to help independent developers make games, and in turn, make money. If we do that, we will create an enduring company that will eventually bring great products to market. If we mess with our developers and partners through accounting schemes, we won't be in business long.

We intend to make this work.

Jeff Tunnell GG

#12 Sometimes I just like to debate so let's continue this...

You're ok with using free and buggy tools to create games, and are willing to spend valuable time writing addtional tools for development when a tool path already exists. I like your "can do" attitude.

All that aside, why are you arguing against the idea of recouping your very real development costs from the start? You can preach the for the love of the game sermon all you want, but the fact of the matter is they will be selling your product, and your time is valuable. If there is money being exchanged for your product you are completely entitled to recoup your expenses as well. You've spent months and months working on something, GG (who is required to provide you nothing more than source code for your 100 dollars) simply throws your product up on the site and immediately starts getting paid on their investment.

I guess it's the Republican in me. Everything boils down to money. I don't think a single developer on this board can honestly say they just want to make something cool and that's it. Everyone here is attracted to this because there is a potential to make money. I can't see a valid argument why GG's time and expenses have a higher precedence than those of the developers other than this is GG's house so we play by GG's rules. The power however is really in the hands of the developers. GG is not profitable without the hard work of people like you. I just feel that this partnership needs to be better reflected in the contract.

Again, this is all my opinion, and I'm not attacking GarageGames.com or the mod community.

EOL

#13 I can't believe no one is backing me up on this, maybe I'm wrong.

As far as cost effectiveness is concerned, I'll explain it this way.

In developing a game I intend to be sold will purchasing Max save me 3500 dollars worth of time over using MS? Most deffinitely. Max has a much larger tool set that allows me to work much more quickly and effectively than MS. Max also supports features that MS does not and won't.

In developing a game I intend to be sold will the tools provided by MS C++ save me 800 dollars worth of time? There is absolutely no question it will.

In developing a game I intend to be sold will having two PCs save me say 3,000 dollars worth of time? There is no doubt it will.

Jeff, I'm sorry that analogy is about 100 yrds from coming close to making sense to me.

I do agree that you won't be around long if you screw over developers, however, you are going to have to earn peoples' trust. You won't get it unconditionally (at least I hope you won't, but it looks like I could be wrong). I think adjusting the agreement is a good step in the right direction. I don't trust people who tell me I'll get mine on the back end.

#14 I'm not sure I'm understanding your problem here, Mike.

If you would rather shell out money for more expensive tools, fine. I wouldn't buy 3DSMax unless I A)had the money (at which time I would buy it so fast that the checkout girl would get windburn) or B)had a job that required it. I have neither, and fortunately it appears that using the V12 engine I won't need to buy 3DS.

Apparently, you place a lot higher value on your time than I do. That is probably because I consider this play, while you consider this work. I don't think you are getting the 'big picture' here:

I would buy this engine from them even if the license said they could sell it and I wouldn't get a cent.

They are not asking you to take financial risks. They are giving you an opportunity that you would not have before. WHAT OTHER ENGINE WOULD YOU USE? I have to tell you that I almost tore my spleen out laughing when you mentioned HL. (Half-Life). If you want to make a game with that, I have some pyramids to sell you, not to mention a couple of tons of scrap metal in the heart of Paris! All you have to do is remove it.

Come on, let's be serious here. You have the ability to use a game engine that easily rivals Q3 and UT -- and in my opinion, trounces them easily. There is one other option, but I won't even sully the forums with the name of an engine that doesn't include the source.

And how much are you going to pay? $100!

Does GG get a slice of the royalties? Sure! A beeeeeg one. But, hey, a little heads up: if you licensed another engine, if you could make a game of commercial grade, and if you could get an agent for your little band of unknowns, you still might not get your product sold to a publisher. And then where would you be?

I'll take the GG method, thanks a lot. If I make something good, I know these guys will tout it, because it's in their best interests to -- not only do they make money from it, but it makes GG look better to have better games attached to it. Compare that to a game publishing world filled with people who would cancel the Babylon 5 combat simulator! /me shakes head in remorse.

#15

Quote:
I guess it's the Republican in me. Everything boils down to money. I don't think a single developer on this board can honestly say they just want to make something cool and that's it. Everyone here is attracted to this because there is a potential to make money.

If you really believe this, I feel sorry for you. Money isn't everything; I would argue that it isn't anything, but this is not the place.

And speak for yourself...I'm certainly not here to make money. I make far more money per hour off my day job than I probably ever will screwing around with game projects. But guess which is more fun? ;)

I'm with Luc; I'd probably buy this engine even if I couldn't sell anything I made with it. I probably spend more than $100/month on computer books. Somehow, I think I'll learn more from reading the code and messing around with it than I'd learn from another couple books on my shelf.

#16 I'm with Mike on this one. The vibe I'm getting is that GarageGames is largely the same as any other publisher, but with an "indie developer" badge slapped on. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's something to be aware of.

The recouping of expenses was Mike's original concern, and I'm equally wary. Jeff made an attempt to assuage this fear wasn't too effective - actions speak louder than words... we'll see. =)

Apparently, you place a lot higher value on your time than I do.

If you're planning on making a living then you have no other choice than to take it seriously.

That is probably because I consider this play, while
you consider this work.

Conversely, Luc, he considers this work, while you consider it play.

They are giving you an opportunity that you would not have before. WHAT OTHER ENGINE WOULD YOU USE?

Renderware is available for $1000, and is a very easy to use package with a straighforward design. LithTech can be had for $500 through the RealNetworks deal, which in the end is quite similar to the deal with GarageGames and V12. Developing a custom engine is a good idea, provided the time is available.

I have to tell you that I almost tore my spleen out laughing when you mentioned HL.

I'm not sure why. With the success of Gunman and Counter-Strike, it's shown itself to be the most lucrative game to develop a mod for.

There is one other option, but I won't even sully the forums with the name of an engine that doesn't include the source.

If you mean LithTech, the source code is indeed available to licensees. Same with SurRender and NetImmerse.

if you licensed another engine, if you could make a game of commercial grade, and if you could get an agent for your little band of unknowns, you still might not get your product sold to a publisher.

You don't license a $250K USD engine on your own, unless you're very well established with a lot of operational capital. A publisher licenses it and assigns you the task of doing something with the license - publishers are open to this because they're able to can a group that isn't performing well, and have another do something with the engine license.

Also, an agent is just a bad idea. Many publishers will not even give them the slightest attention.

#17 I realize that deconstructivism is the easiest method of rebutting an argument on the forum. But I still prefer it when somebody expresses alternatives instead of negatives.

I'm afraid that you are really missing the whole point of the site, both of you. It's called GarageGames.com. It's not a charity site. It's so that people like ME can make games -- and if they're good enough, maybe make some money. If it's professional-grade, probably enough to make another game.

So, give me a scenario. How do you, on guy, make a game that can make money using another engine? And tell me all of the items along the way -- for instance, you obviously will have to buy 3DSMax, pay for that second computer, buy Adobe Photoshop and VC++.

And then there's trying to create an innovative game with those pathetic engines. Quake and UT aren't options for us, so that leaves . . . um . . . LithTech? Yay. Portal-base FPS, anyone?

And assuming you can get a real game made with those engines -- hey, it's possible -- I wish you good luck trying to get it published. There are probably hundreds of people hawking games to publishers, trying to 'get into' the game business. Publishers are increasingly turning to the 'sequel' ploy; make a game, build it up, maybe only break even. But the sequel will sell itself. I mean, if Tribes 2 was being pitched without the sequel appeal -- if it was being pitched as an entirely new concept, like Tribes -- the current environment wouldn't allow it to be made.

You can piss and moan about GG -- but what are your alternatives? Good Lord, people. If your game is good enough, it will get out there. If you can make something that will sell, they'll try to sell it for you.

If you have a better alternative, I'll consider it.

#18 Brian, thanks for the support.


Matt, I can understand using this as a learning experience. I will probably shell out 100 dollars myself just to tinker with it.

I'm speaking strictly about people who are here with the idea of taking this engine to create a full blown game. I'm not going to bother going over all these points again.

I'll just say I'm still concerned that you developers are actually arguing against the idea of getting paid properly for your work.

As for other choices, I think HL is currently more viable than V12. Laugh all you want. You can get the full SDK for free by downloading. There is an infinite ammount of resources and documentation available. It's not the latest tech, but you can still make great things with it. Valve is full of a great bunch of helpful guys. Gabe Newell in fact responded to my emails, and even called me at work to answer a question. It's proven that if you make something good enough there is potential to make real money. And finally, it has an installed user base of over 3 million, is the most played online action game, and players don't have to search for your mod. They can download it directly from within the game.

The obvious childish response here is to tell me to piss off and use HL then. Save it.

I'm only trying to point out what's obvious to me. Whether you know it or not, making games can be fun, but it deffinitely is hard work, and your time is valuable.

#19 Well, an independant developer isn't necessarily a lone developer. It's any developer that is an independantly owned business - for example, Rogue Entertainment.

It would be foolish to attempt a triple-A class title on ones own. The time investment into each component (code, art, qa, business, marketing) is too costly.

In addition, the "pro" tools mentioned - while initially more expensive - will be more valuable than the free/cheap ones in the long run. VisualC++'s debugging capabilities and optimizing compiler so far outclass Dev-C++ it's obscene. MAX's larger featureset allows for a more robust and versatile art path.

IMO, LithTech is a good engine. No One Lives Forever has showed us that Monolith can do something right if they try hard enough. KISS: Psycho Circus was a reasonable game, if a bit mediocre. The codebase is quite well done, with an easy to understand architecture. If you want an engine that's easy to get into, it's a good choice. Renderware is also quite a good package - Rayman Revolution on the PS2 used it. SurRender was used in Starlancer... 'nuff said. =)

There are probably hundreds of people hawking games to publishers, trying to 'get into' the game business.

You've said a few times that we're "missing the point". Maybe you're missing ours. We're not coming at this from the wide-eyed how-does-the-industry-work-and-how-do-I-break-into-it angle. We're looking at avenues to take for our next projects. The Tribes2 engine is very enticing, and makes the retail distribution worth at least some consideration.

#20 Um, maybe I'm just being a silly billy here, but if you wanted to make a full game with Half-Life, would people still be able to download it from within the game?

And if so, how would you get paid?

You jump around too much. The fact is, the V12 engine can make games better and cheaper than any other engine out there. Plain and simple. None of the points you have raised are relevant. The only point you have raised of any significance is that you don't think a 50-50 split is a fair deal, because if your game doesn't do really well you won't make enough money to cover your 'costs'.

Once again: AND YOUR ALTERNATIVE IS WHAT?? In your last post you jumped around a lot; you got a 'full-featured game' mixed up with mods. If you want a full-featured game, which engine is better? Which offers more options? V12. The V12 engine is superior.

Given that you can make better stuff with the V12, please explain how you could make money off of a Half-Life game, short of hawking it on the sidewalk. If it's a mod, it's free, just like CS. If it's a full game, fine. (Even though it's an uphill battle with an inferior engine, but if the game you're designing doesn't need much, fine). How do you sell it?

Catch-22, buddy. Your only coherent beef is with GG's methods of paying the game author. But without them, nobody can play your game. Unless, of course, you are not only extraordinarily skilled but VERY lucky, and manage to get your game published the traditional way.

Once again, what other alternatives are there??