A proposal to increase popularity
by antoine stroll · in General Discussion · 12/21/2012 (7:38 pm) · 37 replies
Garage Games should use crowdfunding to develop a short, but polished, game (maybe an ARPG or first person/third person RPG) with modding and open source community in mind. It should be a genre that has mass market appeal and which players want to expand their worlds, flesh them out, and customize them. Garage Games can capitalize the modding community in order to and expand your user base and influence.
Community
Let me first tell you about myself, I am a volunteer on the OpenMW project which is a reimplementation for The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind game content.
OpenMW is a huge project spanning four years, over a dozen past and present programmers, many non-programmers who work on PR and site maintenance, a switch from the D programming language to C++, and two project leads. It's still miles away from being actually playable.
Yet OpenMW is not an anomaly, there are many similar projects including GemRB (Bioware's Infinity Engine), Dark XL(Daggerfall), Qgears(FF7), amongst many others in all genres http://osgameclones.com/. People are not only willing to dedicate their free time to playing games, but increasingly to improving and preserving them.
Why
There's a vast amount of modders and modding teams. Currently, these artists and programmers are learning how to use the software of Garage Game's competitors. And once modders are hooked into a world setting and have learn the development tools they are likely to stay loyal.
Think if Garage Games created a low cost and short ARPG in the vein of Elder Scrolls. Using Torque's tools, fans would flesh it out and modify it. Each talented modder/modding team creating content for your IP increases the value of your IP. Think of Armada II's success due to Day Z.
If Garage games can reengage the diy community and the open source gaming community, it can utilize the vast amounts of free labor people like myself spend on the intellectual property they love. Create an IP people will care about and provide the tools for fans to enhance that IP. This includes community generated marketing and documentation in addition to modding efforts.
Garage Games can compete with larger company's for creative mind-share by using this free labor. People who buy the game and want to mod it will be tempted to spend money for Garage Games feature rich packages for making their works. These teams will also make improvements to the engine on Github. If the community desires new features not currently present in Torque 3d, you could do other more campaigns. Let the public fund your development.
Garage Games is in a unique position to offer a low cost game and, more importantly, the tools to enhance the game. Community enhancements increase adoption and participation in a positive cycle. Every time someone makes an art asset, quest, or mod the value to the buyers goes up. It's like the fax machine, the more people using fax machines the more value there is in owning a fax machine. I mean it worked, businesses still have fax machines in 2012.
Valve Software understands this which is the motivation behind their marketplace feature which allows users to upload their works and even buy and sell from other users. What Valve is doing is basically creating a huge library of art assets (or you can think of them as props) that can be used by fans to enhance the visuals of their game and make mods more aesthetically appealing. But they are outsourcing this work to the community. It's brilliant.
- As many modders are young, you could have people first learn video game production on your tool chain.
- If you can get Torque working on Ubuntu Linux, you could approach Valve about bringing Torque to their new Valve Box system which could bring a huge new wave of users to your engines.
How:
Crowdfund this game project. I am partial to RPG's, but it obviously doesn't have to be an RPG. Do a Kickstarter or indiegogo campaign, emphasize the company's indie history, its open sourced engines and the goal of porting to linux. Come up with some catchy along the lines of, "We want to allow anyone to become a developer, because we believe games will get better."
You should release the code for the game at release, but not the game assets. However, to make your project stand out from every other game, promise to make the art assets public domain within some fixed amount of time. Let's say one decade. You could say something like, "We want the gaming community to shape and adapt this game to different visions. We think from this base people will make wonderfully unique creations and since users are investing their time and that investment should pay out. That's why we promise to eventually make all art assets of the game open source. In ten years the game will become the communities." Then you could talk about some games that came out a decade ago that still look great today.
Crowdfunding would pay for the development of art assets. Then you sell the game (or game assets) at somewhere between $5-20 dollars and folks immediately have access to Torque's tools. You are promoting your engines and your tool-sets through this game and increasing your user base.
Create terms where users must own your game in order to buy and use derivative works. Let's say Bob made a great mod that he wants to sell to people for 3 dollars. Your game is sold for 10 dollars. The customer must pay 13 dollars for both in order to play Bob's mod. That way you always make the money off it. Maybe you get a percentage from Bob's sale as well. This is a fail safe in case a user makes a more compelling game than yours and that's what people are buying. Think of those people who bought Armada II just for Day Z.
Also remember that if you release the source then users can change it in radically different ways. Someone could make an incredibly difficult and immersive mod while another team can take the game and modify it to be cel shaded and targeted for children. Now users have more choices that reflect their tastes and you make money from each variant. They could license your engine if they wanted to make it standalone. You could even have monthly design and coding challenges like "design and animate the cutest character" or "design a dungeon with the most unique trap door."
Get a good writer and make a compelling story and setting. Insinuate and reference a bigger world then what is there and playable. Maybe you could have a library with books that talk about these other places, flora and fauna, arcane magic, and epic events from the world's history. This will act as a spring board for your modders. Referencing an extinct ancient societies with vast ruins and exotic locales. Fans will try to make those places.
There is a fan project called Tamriel Rebuilt that is nearly a decade old. Their aim is to recreate all of Morrowind's mainland. They only had game lore as a basis and yet it is still going strong with an active community. http://www.youtube.com/user/TamrielRebuilt?feature=watch
Promising to make the art assets public domain is, to my knowledge, unprecedented in gaming. It will engender good will and attract media attention. If your game is a success you can do episodic updates in new locales (without the promise to open source those assets). You could also do other crowdfunding campaigns for other genres with similar conditions to this. If the project is an utter failure you've done a good deed for the community and maybe someone can salvage it. If its the success I think it could be, then you've reinvigorated your company.
After the Kickstarter, consider doing biweekly updates like Wolfire games to keep people excited. Wolfire games has 54,000 Youtube subscribers. Your youtube channel could feature work from the rest of the GG community. OpenMW does a release video every 5 to 6 weeks for the last 10 months and we have almost 1,000 subscribers. Do you guys have a facebook page and youtube channel?
Promote the hell out of it on moddb and make it easy for community based localizations. Expect and encourage developers from all over the world to make your game more compelling and so get fans to translate it for you http://joostdevblog.blogspot.kr/2012/08/our-experience-with-crowdsourcing.html. Do interviews with IGN, Kotaku, Gamespot, Slashdot, Reddit, Moddb, Indiedb, Gamedev.net, etc. Make sure people know about the project and then give frequent updates.
Consider making episodic updates. Look at Valve's success with Half life 2. Want to add some new functionality to the engine, combine it with game content and crowdfund! Do people want tutorials? Do a crowdfunding that adds some new features and explains them. Short episodic content seems particularly well-suited for crowdfunding as I haven't seen a project get more than 8 million.
You could do future game projects in other game genres without the promise of open sourcing your art assets. Once people know who you are and know you make good games and are a company with good ideals they'll be more likely to support you without such an eye popping promise.
You have to first demonstrate what the engine can do. Make the game fun and compelling. If you can, make sure it's easy to add new skills and abilities by not hardcoding values.
Finally, android is going to become increasingly important. You should approach Google about an Android version. Maybe you could get some Google Summer of Code students as it would benefit Google to have another game engine available for their platform.
links:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JoshBycer/20121218/183785/Fan_Choice_The_Impact_of_Greenlight_and_Kickstarter.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/179493/Usergenerated_content_When_game_players_become_developers.php#.UNrW-HfP7Ek
http://freegamer.blogspot.kr/
http://workbookproject.com/culturehacker/2011/06/19/the-power-of-user-generated-content/ (Just really about encouraging and enabling users to remix existing art assets).
http://www.moddb.com/
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Quake_-_family_tree_2.svg
http://code.google.com/soc/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/12/10/why-valves-steam-box-pc-console-will-be-a-game-changer/
Community
Let me first tell you about myself, I am a volunteer on the OpenMW project which is a reimplementation for The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind game content.
OpenMW is a huge project spanning four years, over a dozen past and present programmers, many non-programmers who work on PR and site maintenance, a switch from the D programming language to C++, and two project leads. It's still miles away from being actually playable.
Yet OpenMW is not an anomaly, there are many similar projects including GemRB (Bioware's Infinity Engine), Dark XL(Daggerfall), Qgears(FF7), amongst many others in all genres http://osgameclones.com/. People are not only willing to dedicate their free time to playing games, but increasingly to improving and preserving them.
Why
There's a vast amount of modders and modding teams. Currently, these artists and programmers are learning how to use the software of Garage Game's competitors. And once modders are hooked into a world setting and have learn the development tools they are likely to stay loyal.
Think if Garage Games created a low cost and short ARPG in the vein of Elder Scrolls. Using Torque's tools, fans would flesh it out and modify it. Each talented modder/modding team creating content for your IP increases the value of your IP. Think of Armada II's success due to Day Z.
If Garage games can reengage the diy community and the open source gaming community, it can utilize the vast amounts of free labor people like myself spend on the intellectual property they love. Create an IP people will care about and provide the tools for fans to enhance that IP. This includes community generated marketing and documentation in addition to modding efforts.
Garage Games can compete with larger company's for creative mind-share by using this free labor. People who buy the game and want to mod it will be tempted to spend money for Garage Games feature rich packages for making their works. These teams will also make improvements to the engine on Github. If the community desires new features not currently present in Torque 3d, you could do other more campaigns. Let the public fund your development.
Garage Games is in a unique position to offer a low cost game and, more importantly, the tools to enhance the game. Community enhancements increase adoption and participation in a positive cycle. Every time someone makes an art asset, quest, or mod the value to the buyers goes up. It's like the fax machine, the more people using fax machines the more value there is in owning a fax machine. I mean it worked, businesses still have fax machines in 2012.
Valve Software understands this which is the motivation behind their marketplace feature which allows users to upload their works and even buy and sell from other users. What Valve is doing is basically creating a huge library of art assets (or you can think of them as props) that can be used by fans to enhance the visuals of their game and make mods more aesthetically appealing. But they are outsourcing this work to the community. It's brilliant.
- As many modders are young, you could have people first learn video game production on your tool chain.
- If you can get Torque working on Ubuntu Linux, you could approach Valve about bringing Torque to their new Valve Box system which could bring a huge new wave of users to your engines.
How:
Crowdfund this game project. I am partial to RPG's, but it obviously doesn't have to be an RPG. Do a Kickstarter or indiegogo campaign, emphasize the company's indie history, its open sourced engines and the goal of porting to linux. Come up with some catchy along the lines of, "We want to allow anyone to become a developer, because we believe games will get better."
You should release the code for the game at release, but not the game assets. However, to make your project stand out from every other game, promise to make the art assets public domain within some fixed amount of time. Let's say one decade. You could say something like, "We want the gaming community to shape and adapt this game to different visions. We think from this base people will make wonderfully unique creations and since users are investing their time and that investment should pay out. That's why we promise to eventually make all art assets of the game open source. In ten years the game will become the communities." Then you could talk about some games that came out a decade ago that still look great today.
Crowdfunding would pay for the development of art assets. Then you sell the game (or game assets) at somewhere between $5-20 dollars and folks immediately have access to Torque's tools. You are promoting your engines and your tool-sets through this game and increasing your user base.
Create terms where users must own your game in order to buy and use derivative works. Let's say Bob made a great mod that he wants to sell to people for 3 dollars. Your game is sold for 10 dollars. The customer must pay 13 dollars for both in order to play Bob's mod. That way you always make the money off it. Maybe you get a percentage from Bob's sale as well. This is a fail safe in case a user makes a more compelling game than yours and that's what people are buying. Think of those people who bought Armada II just for Day Z.
Also remember that if you release the source then users can change it in radically different ways. Someone could make an incredibly difficult and immersive mod while another team can take the game and modify it to be cel shaded and targeted for children. Now users have more choices that reflect their tastes and you make money from each variant. They could license your engine if they wanted to make it standalone. You could even have monthly design and coding challenges like "design and animate the cutest character" or "design a dungeon with the most unique trap door."
Get a good writer and make a compelling story and setting. Insinuate and reference a bigger world then what is there and playable. Maybe you could have a library with books that talk about these other places, flora and fauna, arcane magic, and epic events from the world's history. This will act as a spring board for your modders. Referencing an extinct ancient societies with vast ruins and exotic locales. Fans will try to make those places.
There is a fan project called Tamriel Rebuilt that is nearly a decade old. Their aim is to recreate all of Morrowind's mainland. They only had game lore as a basis and yet it is still going strong with an active community. http://www.youtube.com/user/TamrielRebuilt?feature=watch
Promising to make the art assets public domain is, to my knowledge, unprecedented in gaming. It will engender good will and attract media attention. If your game is a success you can do episodic updates in new locales (without the promise to open source those assets). You could also do other crowdfunding campaigns for other genres with similar conditions to this. If the project is an utter failure you've done a good deed for the community and maybe someone can salvage it. If its the success I think it could be, then you've reinvigorated your company.
After the Kickstarter, consider doing biweekly updates like Wolfire games to keep people excited. Wolfire games has 54,000 Youtube subscribers. Your youtube channel could feature work from the rest of the GG community. OpenMW does a release video every 5 to 6 weeks for the last 10 months and we have almost 1,000 subscribers. Do you guys have a facebook page and youtube channel?
Promote the hell out of it on moddb and make it easy for community based localizations. Expect and encourage developers from all over the world to make your game more compelling and so get fans to translate it for you http://joostdevblog.blogspot.kr/2012/08/our-experience-with-crowdsourcing.html. Do interviews with IGN, Kotaku, Gamespot, Slashdot, Reddit, Moddb, Indiedb, Gamedev.net, etc. Make sure people know about the project and then give frequent updates.
Consider making episodic updates. Look at Valve's success with Half life 2. Want to add some new functionality to the engine, combine it with game content and crowdfund! Do people want tutorials? Do a crowdfunding that adds some new features and explains them. Short episodic content seems particularly well-suited for crowdfunding as I haven't seen a project get more than 8 million.
You could do future game projects in other game genres without the promise of open sourcing your art assets. Once people know who you are and know you make good games and are a company with good ideals they'll be more likely to support you without such an eye popping promise.
You have to first demonstrate what the engine can do. Make the game fun and compelling. If you can, make sure it's easy to add new skills and abilities by not hardcoding values.
Finally, android is going to become increasingly important. You should approach Google about an Android version. Maybe you could get some Google Summer of Code students as it would benefit Google to have another game engine available for their platform.
links:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JoshBycer/20121218/183785/Fan_Choice_The_Impact_of_Greenlight_and_Kickstarter.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/179493/Usergenerated_content_When_game_players_become_developers.php#.UNrW-HfP7Ek
http://freegamer.blogspot.kr/
http://workbookproject.com/culturehacker/2011/06/19/the-power-of-user-generated-content/ (Just really about encouraging and enabling users to remix existing art assets).
http://www.moddb.com/
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/Quake_-_family_tree_2.svg
http://code.google.com/soc/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/12/10/why-valves-steam-box-pc-console-will-be-a-game-changer/
#2
As for the rest. Not sure... But I have been not sure about allot of things.
12/22/2012 (6:07 pm)
I do agree that Android Support is needed for torque in general.As for the rest. Not sure... But I have been not sure about allot of things.
#3
Forgive me in advance.
This is your first post here at GarageGames and I know nothing about your credentials as a Public Relations or Marketing manager. What I do know is your a volunteer for OpenMW and have a biased opinion towards Role Playing Games.
While I personally can welcome and appreciate your opinion as a community member, I have to say that your post seems a bit presumptive.
I am much more inclined to follow the suggestions of the community members that have been here since GarageGames was founded and especially the opinions from the owners of GarageGames LLC.
Since you appreciate RPG's, here is an example you can also appreciate to convey how your post reads:
You and I are driving in a small town. You and I come to a stop light and idle our cars, side-by-side.
You look over to me and rev your engine.
I notice your intention to goad me into racing with you and I smirk at you while I keep a peripheral view of the stop light.
I rev my engine in response.
The Light turns green and you speed off while leaving a trail of burning rubber smoke behind you.
I put on my turn signal and make a left turn.
12/22/2012 (6:36 pm)
@AntoineForgive me in advance.
This is your first post here at GarageGames and I know nothing about your credentials as a Public Relations or Marketing manager. What I do know is your a volunteer for OpenMW and have a biased opinion towards Role Playing Games.
While I personally can welcome and appreciate your opinion as a community member, I have to say that your post seems a bit presumptive.
I am much more inclined to follow the suggestions of the community members that have been here since GarageGames was founded and especially the opinions from the owners of GarageGames LLC.
Since you appreciate RPG's, here is an example you can also appreciate to convey how your post reads:
You and I are driving in a small town. You and I come to a stop light and idle our cars, side-by-side.
You look over to me and rev your engine.
I notice your intention to goad me into racing with you and I smirk at you while I keep a peripheral view of the stop light.
I rev my engine in response.
The Light turns green and you speed off while leaving a trail of burning rubber smoke behind you.
I put on my turn signal and make a left turn.
#4
I would like to hear criticisms of the idea itself rather than old analogies. If you have professional game development knowledge, I am genuinely interested to hear why this is infeasible or a bad idea.
If you race you may appreciate what your car can still do and not let it rust completely out in an overgrown lawn in that small town.
I'm sure your also aware of the company's current Indiegogo campaign, its open source initiative, and its stiff competition from the likes of Unity 3d.
12/23/2012 (8:03 am)
My "credentials" were used to emphasize the added value of fan culture. People like myself are willing to do work and advertising for free for things we believe in. It's true that I am new to this community. However, ideas are not limited to long time users. If I have somehow completely misjudged some aspect of the Garage Games culture that make this idea impossible, then please let me know. I think this could be beneficial to users and a business like Garage Games. I would like to hear criticisms of the idea itself rather than old analogies. If you have professional game development knowledge, I am genuinely interested to hear why this is infeasible or a bad idea.
If you race you may appreciate what your car can still do and not let it rust completely out in an overgrown lawn in that small town.
I'm sure your also aware of the company's current Indiegogo campaign, its open source initiative, and its stiff competition from the likes of Unity 3d.
#5
You missed the point of my response. Your post, while seemingly educated, is presumtive.
While I can appreciate intelligent people for their knowledge and even admire the most brilliant for their conversations, I would still feel compelled to point out their presumptions about what might be best for the Indie Dev or the engine they choose.
I don't argue the points you make in your post. I only point out that your post seems to point out that the Indie Devs that have been successfully making games with this engine are somehow missing the mark to make Torque 3D as popular as you envision and in light of that you continue to express how we should use our time and our engine of choice to suit your perspective; Backing up your post with common sense and references.
If you were hired as a team member for one of the Studios that are producing RPG games, then I would say that the Studio is lucky to have a member of your insight... at least for the duration of that game title.
I just don't agree that your insight is the "One Size Fits All" for the whole community and especially when your first post presumes to know the magic answer to popularity and profitability for every Indie Developer in the community.
If your passionate about your position in this discussion thread, then your efforts might be better directed to GarageGames as an employee rather than posted in the General Discussion for every Internet surfer to read.
12/23/2012 (9:36 am)
I mentioned to forgive my post beforehand. You missed the point of my response. Your post, while seemingly educated, is presumtive.
While I can appreciate intelligent people for their knowledge and even admire the most brilliant for their conversations, I would still feel compelled to point out their presumptions about what might be best for the Indie Dev or the engine they choose.
I don't argue the points you make in your post. I only point out that your post seems to point out that the Indie Devs that have been successfully making games with this engine are somehow missing the mark to make Torque 3D as popular as you envision and in light of that you continue to express how we should use our time and our engine of choice to suit your perspective; Backing up your post with common sense and references.
If you were hired as a team member for one of the Studios that are producing RPG games, then I would say that the Studio is lucky to have a member of your insight... at least for the duration of that game title.
I just don't agree that your insight is the "One Size Fits All" for the whole community and especially when your first post presumes to know the magic answer to popularity and profitability for every Indie Developer in the community.
If your passionate about your position in this discussion thread, then your efforts might be better directed to GarageGames as an employee rather than posted in the General Discussion for every Internet surfer to read.
#6
I am noticing trends and think they provide a unique opportunity, I am personally not in a position to enact them, so I want to share them. I do hope that an employee sees my post, which does address GarageGames itself in almost every paragraph and not individual developers, but you are right in that any dev could use the idea. It would be most beneficial to GarageGames though. At best I hope it acts as a launching pad for ideas similar, but different to, the plan given above. I want to get the idea out there and shot down if it's truly bad. Refined and altered if not. I'm planting seeds.
"I just don't agree that your insight is the "One Size Fits All" for the whole community and especially when your first post presumes to know the magic answer to popularity and profitability for every Indie Developer in the community."
The crux of the idea is to offer to modders and tinkerers something that can be enhanced and radically changed. I absolutely disagree with your point and feel you've missed the point. The whole idea is what interesting and new variations can come from this game and that GarageGames would express that in a kickstarter campaign to get funding.
Let me reiterate the idea in numbered steps:
1)GarageGames gets money using crowdfunding to make a game (in any genre, I just think RPG's lend themselves well to modification). To make the project unique and stand out they promise to release the art assets to the public domain in the future, which makes fans feel their time modding a game is more of an investment because the art assets will become public domain. It sets it apart from Valve, Bethesda, and Mojang who will forever own the characters and settings.
2) The design of the game encourages modification.
3) Interesting mods bring in new customers (as modding projects make mods for different tastes and sensibilities), increasing sales and raising the number of potential modders.
4) At some point in the future (maybe the tenth anniversary) the art assets are open sourced. This completely open sourced game can be used by University's to teach game design. Students from around the world start learning GarageGame's engines.
5) Now people can play the original game for free and 10 years of its mods. They can see the source code and hopefully get hooked on the engine and want to start making their own games commercial games with it.
Just like this proposed game, the idea is open to modification and reuse.
12/23/2012 (4:17 pm)
I don't think this is a magic bullet. Just consider the idea and whether it is logical, new, interesting, makes sense financially, and could improve the status of the company.I am noticing trends and think they provide a unique opportunity, I am personally not in a position to enact them, so I want to share them. I do hope that an employee sees my post, which does address GarageGames itself in almost every paragraph and not individual developers, but you are right in that any dev could use the idea. It would be most beneficial to GarageGames though. At best I hope it acts as a launching pad for ideas similar, but different to, the plan given above. I want to get the idea out there and shot down if it's truly bad. Refined and altered if not. I'm planting seeds.
"I just don't agree that your insight is the "One Size Fits All" for the whole community and especially when your first post presumes to know the magic answer to popularity and profitability for every Indie Developer in the community."
The crux of the idea is to offer to modders and tinkerers something that can be enhanced and radically changed. I absolutely disagree with your point and feel you've missed the point. The whole idea is what interesting and new variations can come from this game and that GarageGames would express that in a kickstarter campaign to get funding.
Let me reiterate the idea in numbered steps:
1)GarageGames gets money using crowdfunding to make a game (in any genre, I just think RPG's lend themselves well to modification). To make the project unique and stand out they promise to release the art assets to the public domain in the future, which makes fans feel their time modding a game is more of an investment because the art assets will become public domain. It sets it apart from Valve, Bethesda, and Mojang who will forever own the characters and settings.
2) The design of the game encourages modification.
3) Interesting mods bring in new customers (as modding projects make mods for different tastes and sensibilities), increasing sales and raising the number of potential modders.
4) At some point in the future (maybe the tenth anniversary) the art assets are open sourced. This completely open sourced game can be used by University's to teach game design. Students from around the world start learning GarageGame's engines.
5) Now people can play the original game for free and 10 years of its mods. They can see the source code and hopefully get hooked on the engine and want to start making their own games commercial games with it.
Just like this proposed game, the idea is open to modification and reuse.
#7
Here is the distinction between GarageGames LLC and the members:
GarageGames is not in the business of making games.
They are in the business of producing Engines for making Games.
They produce the ground work necessary for Individuals, Studios, and Schools, to make their own Game with the use of the tools provided.
The company believes that if they supply the right tools that even the newest member to the community can be so inspired and produce a game.
The community members are each as unique as their engine code. Each member in the community takes the tools provided by GarageGames and modifies the engine code to suit their intended project or game.
As soon as the member modifies the tools or even adds to the tools list, the engine is no longer identical to any other member in the community.
I read the forums here on a daily basis to stay current on the development of the members and Studios that blog or supply a resource or ask for general advice. I cannot remember ever reading a post that asked for the advice that you offer. Which means you presume that every member here in the community would benefit from your advice simply because you graced us with your presence and offered it.
If I would come to your home as a marketing engineer, for example, and enter your home to sell you on a concept of personal perception I might very well be presuming to know you need the advice, wouldn't I ?
You might think something like 'Who is this guy from nowhere, What qualifies him, What makes this guy think I need his advice, Why does this guy assume I can do better for myself if I just follow his advice?'
You would likely disregard anything I mentioned in my marketing pitch because who knows more than you do, the direction you intend to take and that you already have a plan drawn out.
Now imagine that multiplied by thousands of individuals, studios, and schools. All of them reading your proposal to increase popularity.
How many of them do you truly hope to transform with your proposal if they even want to read your suggestion?
How many of them actually need the advice you propose?
I am a Machinist. I wouldn't ever go into another Machinists shop and make suggestions to the owner or the employees about how to increase productivity while keeping expenses to the lowest possible factor.
On the other hand, I would have no problem entering another Machinists shop and learning how they operate then stand idle by until they discover they need another machinist that understands the process, with which they can discuss alternative methods. At that point I could join the discussion and offer my professional opinion or proposal.
You see, your proposal is better suited for in-house discussion on a per Indie or per Studio level... meaning your advice could go along way if you apply it to the right channel.
I do admire your enthusiasm and knowledge about the points you make. I think that if you apply your skills to a single Individual or Team or Studio that requires your advice, that the product would have a good shot in today's market.
12/23/2012 (7:01 pm)
Antoine, rather than disassemble the thread in to smaller quotes for clarification, I'll just rephrase my response.Here is the distinction between GarageGames LLC and the members:
GarageGames is not in the business of making games.
They are in the business of producing Engines for making Games.
They produce the ground work necessary for Individuals, Studios, and Schools, to make their own Game with the use of the tools provided.
The company believes that if they supply the right tools that even the newest member to the community can be so inspired and produce a game.
The community members are each as unique as their engine code. Each member in the community takes the tools provided by GarageGames and modifies the engine code to suit their intended project or game.
As soon as the member modifies the tools or even adds to the tools list, the engine is no longer identical to any other member in the community.
I read the forums here on a daily basis to stay current on the development of the members and Studios that blog or supply a resource or ask for general advice. I cannot remember ever reading a post that asked for the advice that you offer. Which means you presume that every member here in the community would benefit from your advice simply because you graced us with your presence and offered it.
If I would come to your home as a marketing engineer, for example, and enter your home to sell you on a concept of personal perception I might very well be presuming to know you need the advice, wouldn't I ?
You might think something like 'Who is this guy from nowhere, What qualifies him, What makes this guy think I need his advice, Why does this guy assume I can do better for myself if I just follow his advice?'
You would likely disregard anything I mentioned in my marketing pitch because who knows more than you do, the direction you intend to take and that you already have a plan drawn out.
Now imagine that multiplied by thousands of individuals, studios, and schools. All of them reading your proposal to increase popularity.
How many of them do you truly hope to transform with your proposal if they even want to read your suggestion?
How many of them actually need the advice you propose?
I am a Machinist. I wouldn't ever go into another Machinists shop and make suggestions to the owner or the employees about how to increase productivity while keeping expenses to the lowest possible factor.
On the other hand, I would have no problem entering another Machinists shop and learning how they operate then stand idle by until they discover they need another machinist that understands the process, with which they can discuss alternative methods. At that point I could join the discussion and offer my professional opinion or proposal.
You see, your proposal is better suited for in-house discussion on a per Indie or per Studio level... meaning your advice could go along way if you apply it to the right channel.
I do admire your enthusiasm and knowledge about the points you make. I think that if you apply your skills to a single Individual or Team or Studio that requires your advice, that the product would have a good shot in today's market.
#8
Though developed outside of the company, what I'm proposing is not without precedent within Garage Games current way of doing business. If it didn't help sales why would they offer it? http://www.garagegames.com/education/2d
Games still look good from a decade ago. That's one of the ways digital distribution is changing the game industry. Company's are increasingly seeing revenue on old games.
Games today will look good in the future. This proposal would add value to the company's portfolio in a similar way as "Cascadia Kart" does. At the ten year mark when the art assets would go public domain, it's true that it is a loss of those (probably small amount of sales at that point) from the game. But it won't be ugly and it can transition to a loss leader of sorts. Attracting amateurs, hobbyists, and educational institutions, because when the assets did become public domain you could promote that all over the place. It could come preinstalled on any computer with a button that says, "Made with Torque 3d want to download the trial version?" If fans made new art assets that would further add value for classes prototyping projects.
Maybe that ratio of perpetual sales from an IP vs releasing the work to the public domain is the weak spot in the idea. I don't know enough about sales, but it seems to me as a good trade off.
I think the idea is best suited to a company licensing their engine rather than a specific indie studios. Garage Games could partner with a game developer though, but I doubt that developer would like making their artwork public domain.
Maybe just a kernel of this proposal is usable. There are plenty of permutations that might more sense than what I've suggested. Maybe Garage Games works out a deal with a game developer to cross promote a kickstarter for a game made with Torque 3d that is never released to the public domain, but does eventually be incorporated into sales bundles of the engine as demonstration material. It would still make more people aware of the Torque 3d and Garage Games.
I apologize that I don't want to stand around with you in someone else's shop until they say, "Hey, got any new ideas customer?" and you say, "Not really, but that guy over there seems to be reading a lot. You ask him, yet?"
I'd rather put it out there. If it's bad, it's bad. If it makes you grumpy because I haven't paid my dues, sorry. I get why you think I'm presumptive and I don't mean to say that anyone is doing anything wrong. Technology companies are usually looking for new ideas and business opportunities as the market changes and new opportunities present themselves. I'm saying to Garage Games, "Does this make sense? Could it be an interesting experiment? Could it help publicize your company? Could it help you grow your business?" They don't have to take the time to respond.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond though and I don't take offense. I'd just rather talk about the idea.
12/23/2012 (9:55 pm)
I do understand your point that Garage Games doesn't actually making games, but doesn't the 2d version of the engine come with a complete game for educational institutions? An example with all the code to look at with art assets? Though developed outside of the company, what I'm proposing is not without precedent within Garage Games current way of doing business. If it didn't help sales why would they offer it? http://www.garagegames.com/education/2d
Games still look good from a decade ago. That's one of the ways digital distribution is changing the game industry. Company's are increasingly seeing revenue on old games.
Games today will look good in the future. This proposal would add value to the company's portfolio in a similar way as "Cascadia Kart" does. At the ten year mark when the art assets would go public domain, it's true that it is a loss of those (probably small amount of sales at that point) from the game. But it won't be ugly and it can transition to a loss leader of sorts. Attracting amateurs, hobbyists, and educational institutions, because when the assets did become public domain you could promote that all over the place. It could come preinstalled on any computer with a button that says, "Made with Torque 3d want to download the trial version?" If fans made new art assets that would further add value for classes prototyping projects.
Maybe that ratio of perpetual sales from an IP vs releasing the work to the public domain is the weak spot in the idea. I don't know enough about sales, but it seems to me as a good trade off.
I think the idea is best suited to a company licensing their engine rather than a specific indie studios. Garage Games could partner with a game developer though, but I doubt that developer would like making their artwork public domain.
Maybe just a kernel of this proposal is usable. There are plenty of permutations that might more sense than what I've suggested. Maybe Garage Games works out a deal with a game developer to cross promote a kickstarter for a game made with Torque 3d that is never released to the public domain, but does eventually be incorporated into sales bundles of the engine as demonstration material. It would still make more people aware of the Torque 3d and Garage Games.
I apologize that I don't want to stand around with you in someone else's shop until they say, "Hey, got any new ideas customer?" and you say, "Not really, but that guy over there seems to be reading a lot. You ask him, yet?"
I'd rather put it out there. If it's bad, it's bad. If it makes you grumpy because I haven't paid my dues, sorry. I get why you think I'm presumptive and I don't mean to say that anyone is doing anything wrong. Technology companies are usually looking for new ideas and business opportunities as the market changes and new opportunities present themselves. I'm saying to Garage Games, "Does this make sense? Could it be an interesting experiment? Could it help publicize your company? Could it help you grow your business?" They don't have to take the time to respond.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond though and I don't take offense. I'd just rather talk about the idea.
#9
I really like that you are taking an interest in GG. The links you provided should help people finding ways to gather interest in their title as well as helping out gathering interest in the engines. Well thought out publicity is good.
I disagree with the release of the code at release. This can allow for easy modification of the engine to allow cheating that is not readily detectable. You would need to verify the exe has the same binary footprint, it would create version mismatches, and inspire copycat knockoffs. If you are building a game studio as an independent business you end up degrading the worth of the company and possibly scaring investors away. Another reason is a lot of the needed resources are already available here at GG. So it really does not benefit to release code. Now, I could see doing what Valve did and release binary plugin in code modules. They do not release the code of the engine itself, just the plugin interface and the API.
Thanks for joining our community. I hope you stick around and I hope you start using the engines. You will gain great insight from doing so.
12/24/2012 (5:28 pm)
@antoine,I really like that you are taking an interest in GG. The links you provided should help people finding ways to gather interest in their title as well as helping out gathering interest in the engines. Well thought out publicity is good.
I disagree with the release of the code at release. This can allow for easy modification of the engine to allow cheating that is not readily detectable. You would need to verify the exe has the same binary footprint, it would create version mismatches, and inspire copycat knockoffs. If you are building a game studio as an independent business you end up degrading the worth of the company and possibly scaring investors away. Another reason is a lot of the needed resources are already available here at GG. So it really does not benefit to release code. Now, I could see doing what Valve did and release binary plugin in code modules. They do not release the code of the engine itself, just the plugin interface and the API.
Thanks for joining our community. I hope you stick around and I hope you start using the engines. You will gain great insight from doing so.
#10
Thanks for your input. I see your point, making the source code would make online cheating a real problem. I don't see a way around that for like a competitive shooter, but what if the game, if it included multiplayer, was designed to be played with one to several friends cooperatively.
That way cheating is discouraged by real world relationships. It wouldn't be that you are playing with strangers, which people tend to treat less humanely than people they actually know.
I remember playing counter strike with a friend one-on-one and he was invisible and he kept killing me. Instead of being frustrating in that situation, it was hilarious. I downloaded the same cheat and we kept doing predator style kills on each other for an afternoon. I admit that we joined a couple multiplayer games and tried using it, without great success. Then we got disinterested with it and went back to the main game.
Concerning the risk of copy-cat games, that is already a huge part of the game industry. It would be worse because a person wouldn't have to even develop a derivative work, they could just copy the code.
One possibility would be to gradually open source the project. Modding tools available at launch, source code released after several years, art assets open sourced at ten years.
The company wouldn't face immediate copycats making competing projects with the source. It would gain mods and fan made content at launch. At year three or four, the time interest in the game is dipping, the source is opened up and more ambitious mods could be made (renewing interest in the original game), and then once again at year ten when the art assets are made public domain students and hobbyists all over the world can start making their own good looking games with this library of company/community made art assets and learn the company's engine. If they want to make a commercial work then they have to license the engine.
To your other point about fragmentation, I really don't have an answer for that. You think people would want to reach the greatest amount of people. If someone went off and made a mod that broke compatibility with the main game and added new features, it probably wouldn't be too difficult to incorporate those features back into the main engine.
Like side branches of tree might be where more experimentation happens and when good ideas are made they make their way back to the trunk.
12/25/2012 (9:45 pm)
@FrankThanks for your input. I see your point, making the source code would make online cheating a real problem. I don't see a way around that for like a competitive shooter, but what if the game, if it included multiplayer, was designed to be played with one to several friends cooperatively.
That way cheating is discouraged by real world relationships. It wouldn't be that you are playing with strangers, which people tend to treat less humanely than people they actually know.
I remember playing counter strike with a friend one-on-one and he was invisible and he kept killing me. Instead of being frustrating in that situation, it was hilarious. I downloaded the same cheat and we kept doing predator style kills on each other for an afternoon. I admit that we joined a couple multiplayer games and tried using it, without great success. Then we got disinterested with it and went back to the main game.
Concerning the risk of copy-cat games, that is already a huge part of the game industry. It would be worse because a person wouldn't have to even develop a derivative work, they could just copy the code.
One possibility would be to gradually open source the project. Modding tools available at launch, source code released after several years, art assets open sourced at ten years.
The company wouldn't face immediate copycats making competing projects with the source. It would gain mods and fan made content at launch. At year three or four, the time interest in the game is dipping, the source is opened up and more ambitious mods could be made (renewing interest in the original game), and then once again at year ten when the art assets are made public domain students and hobbyists all over the world can start making their own good looking games with this library of company/community made art assets and learn the company's engine. If they want to make a commercial work then they have to license the engine.
To your other point about fragmentation, I really don't have an answer for that. You think people would want to reach the greatest amount of people. If someone went off and made a mod that broke compatibility with the main game and added new features, it probably wouldn't be too difficult to incorporate those features back into the main engine.
Like side branches of tree might be where more experimentation happens and when good ideas are made they make their way back to the trunk.
#11
I reckon producing a top-notch game using T3D is exactly what's needed - no arguments there! RPGs are a great genre for modding, and not making an FPS would be a great way to show off (and improve!) Torque's ability to make non-FPS games.
In fact, Ron Kapaun is planning a similar initiative. I like the approach he is hinting at, similar to the Blender open movie projects. Use T3D in an open-source tech demo game/level, then roll the improvements back into the engine. Users win because they get to deconstruct the demo game and use the art, engine wins because it gets used in a production environment, users win more because the engine wins, and the producers of the demo win a great portfolio piece.
I believe that while producing a high-quality game using the engine is important, closed-sourcing it isn't beneficial. Unless GG really wants the revenue stream from a small game title, surely they'd attract far more modders and developers using a more open policy. Especially licensing as they do under the MIT license, which permits developers to sell derivative works.
I think Wesnoth is an appropriate example to bring up if we want to talk about modding communities! And Blender from a software/toolset point of view.
12/25/2012 (10:46 pm)
Antoine: thanks for posting! There's no such thing as a humble opinion and it's great to hear yours.I reckon producing a top-notch game using T3D is exactly what's needed - no arguments there! RPGs are a great genre for modding, and not making an FPS would be a great way to show off (and improve!) Torque's ability to make non-FPS games.
In fact, Ron Kapaun is planning a similar initiative. I like the approach he is hinting at, similar to the Blender open movie projects. Use T3D in an open-source tech demo game/level, then roll the improvements back into the engine. Users win because they get to deconstruct the demo game and use the art, engine wins because it gets used in a production environment, users win more because the engine wins, and the producers of the demo win a great portfolio piece.
I believe that while producing a high-quality game using the engine is important, closed-sourcing it isn't beneficial. Unless GG really wants the revenue stream from a small game title, surely they'd attract far more modders and developers using a more open policy. Especially licensing as they do under the MIT license, which permits developers to sell derivative works.
I think Wesnoth is an appropriate example to bring up if we want to talk about modding communities! And Blender from a software/toolset point of view.
#12
Going off topic for a moment, GG needs a Youtube channel where new engine features get shown off and more importantly, a central place where all the amazing project can be demoed. I think a lot of people would subscribe to that channel.
This is really what I'm getting at. I appreciate how clearly you expressed the concept. If GG went the route of making a free game funded by a kickstarter, it would allow the public to also be involved in a project very similar to what Ron's currently working on, by funding artists and coders.
Once the community's first demo levels are out, it could be the perfect time to do something more ambitious like a kickstarter campaign, because you'll have playable demos and videos. The Kickstarter could start by showing all the really polished games made using Torque3d, then talk about the company, then show the demo levels, pitch the idea of making a small modifiable game that's open source code and art assets at launch or open source down the road (which ever fits the company and community's needs best).
If the kickstarter game is open source, it could even build off the demo level. Even if the Kickstarter campaign was not successfully funded, GG people will see the video of the existing demo level in action and they will immediately download it. You could also get some real media attention. Sounds great for promotion.
It could be a great way to give some indie artists and coders some money, attention, pad their portfolio, and GG a small game to get in the hands of anyone on windows. Let's say the project is very successful, there are probably a mixture of engine and editor enhancements that could be offered as stretch goals as well as additional game features. Mac or Linux support could be other stretch goals.
12/26/2012 (2:09 am)
Thanks for those links. That's a really exciting project. Going off topic for a moment, GG needs a Youtube channel where new engine features get shown off and more importantly, a central place where all the amazing project can be demoed. I think a lot of people would subscribe to that channel.
Quote:
I believe that while producing a high-quality game using the engine is important, closed-sourcing it isn't beneficial. Unless GG really wants the revenue stream from a small game title, surely they'd attract far more modders and developers using a more open policy. Especially licensing as they do under the MIT license, which permits developers to sell derivative works.
This is really what I'm getting at. I appreciate how clearly you expressed the concept. If GG went the route of making a free game funded by a kickstarter, it would allow the public to also be involved in a project very similar to what Ron's currently working on, by funding artists and coders.
Once the community's first demo levels are out, it could be the perfect time to do something more ambitious like a kickstarter campaign, because you'll have playable demos and videos. The Kickstarter could start by showing all the really polished games made using Torque3d, then talk about the company, then show the demo levels, pitch the idea of making a small modifiable game that's open source code and art assets at launch or open source down the road (which ever fits the company and community's needs best).
If the kickstarter game is open source, it could even build off the demo level. Even if the Kickstarter campaign was not successfully funded, GG people will see the video of the existing demo level in action and they will immediately download it. You could also get some real media attention. Sounds great for promotion.
It could be a great way to give some indie artists and coders some money, attention, pad their portfolio, and GG a small game to get in the hands of anyone on windows. Let's say the project is very successful, there are probably a mixture of engine and editor enhancements that could be offered as stretch goals as well as additional game features. Mac or Linux support could be other stretch goals.
#13
I think one thing you are touching on is modding tools. What is cool about T3D going open source is that we can now make those tools available to the end user. I completely agree on modding tools. I also think the Quake model of releasing source code is a good one. Which is what you are talking about except you are adding art.
I think art can be sticky though. Some art/media is licensed per product so it could make it more expensive to produce and get artwork that can be released without licensing issues. For instance, art/media suppliers explicitly forbids its art/media being released outside of a game. So a game using that could not release the art/media for use for free.
This would be a similar issue for middleware in code. The licensing on these products are low to keep the cost of production down. T3D MIT is an example of code that had to be rewritten before release because of licensed middleware. So some projects may not make sense to release the code because it may take significant man hours to rewrite for a release. It could also be impossible to release without taking significant chunks out of the code and making it inoperable. A game that depends on vehicle physics middleware is a good example of that.
In the end, making it scriptable and adding dlls (components) to extend the engine may be the way to get around these issues. This is what Valve has done and it ends up in increased sales of their previously released games. So it ends up being profitable for them to keep updating older games with newer engine features. I see this a lot with Half Life 2. There seems to be a lot of updates that come through to make it better. I think this is due to the mods driving it. There are also users making mods and making money from them. This is somewhat unprecedented as it gives modders the ability to earn while they learn.
12/26/2012 (5:26 pm)
@antoine,I think one thing you are touching on is modding tools. What is cool about T3D going open source is that we can now make those tools available to the end user. I completely agree on modding tools. I also think the Quake model of releasing source code is a good one. Which is what you are talking about except you are adding art.
I think art can be sticky though. Some art/media is licensed per product so it could make it more expensive to produce and get artwork that can be released without licensing issues. For instance, art/media suppliers explicitly forbids its art/media being released outside of a game. So a game using that could not release the art/media for use for free.
This would be a similar issue for middleware in code. The licensing on these products are low to keep the cost of production down. T3D MIT is an example of code that had to be rewritten before release because of licensed middleware. So some projects may not make sense to release the code because it may take significant man hours to rewrite for a release. It could also be impossible to release without taking significant chunks out of the code and making it inoperable. A game that depends on vehicle physics middleware is a good example of that.
In the end, making it scriptable and adding dlls (components) to extend the engine may be the way to get around these issues. This is what Valve has done and it ends up in increased sales of their previously released games. So it ends up being profitable for them to keep updating older games with newer engine features. I see this a lot with Half Life 2. There seems to be a lot of updates that come through to make it better. I think this is due to the mods driving it. There are also users making mods and making money from them. This is somewhat unprecedented as it gives modders the ability to earn while they learn.
#14
Each response I read from the OP ignores the response either entirely or partially but always has some new answer of "maybe" this or "maybe" that.
Even some of my own responses were twisted into something that doesn't even remotely reflect the meaning.
Can we let this thread die now?.. it really is not as constructive as it seems.
12/26/2012 (7:17 pm)
Are we still entertaining this thread?Each response I read from the OP ignores the response either entirely or partially but always has some new answer of "maybe" this or "maybe" that.
Even some of my own responses were twisted into something that doesn't even remotely reflect the meaning.
Can we let this thread die now?.. it really is not as constructive as it seems.
#15
Also, I will start using synonyms. How do you feel about perchance? It's sort of festive and seems fitting for the holidays.
12/26/2012 (7:42 pm)
Quote: Each response I read from the OP ignores the response either entirely or partially but always has some new answer of "maybe" this or "maybe" that.Can you give an example, please?
Also, I will start using synonyms. How do you feel about perchance? It's sort of festive and seems fitting for the holidays.
#16
Actually, I like where this thread is going. Antoine has brought up some really interesting points about producing interest. Obviously he has an opinion based upon his own experiences just like everyone else does. I don't want to turn anyone away that has the "big picture" on their mind. A of the time I spend so much time on the details I lose sight of the big picture. Nobody is obligated to continue this line of thought even if it has circularness to it. It will die on its own when people lose interest.
12/26/2012 (7:42 pm)
@Scott,Actually, I like where this thread is going. Antoine has brought up some really interesting points about producing interest. Obviously he has an opinion based upon his own experiences just like everyone else does. I don't want to turn anyone away that has the "big picture" on their mind. A of the time I spend so much time on the details I lose sight of the big picture. Nobody is obligated to continue this line of thought even if it has circularness to it. It will die on its own when people lose interest.
#18
There have to be artists that disagree with current trademark/copyright situation. I mean don't artists get a paycheck from a company who then own their art forever? Isn't it a matter of where the paycheck is coming from? If their art was public domain, they would be allowed to sell derivative works like a book containing character designs, for example.
Interesting point with probably many other examples. Concerning vehicle physics, there are many open source games are using the bullet physics library. Racers include SuperTuxKart and StuntRally. Overgrowth is also using bullet as well as other commercial games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_%28software%29#Commercial_games
There may be other open source tools middleware alternatives.
12/26/2012 (8:17 pm)
Quote: I completely agree on modding tools. I also think the Quake model of releasing source code is a good one. Which is what you are talking about except you are adding art.Yes. If it were successful I would suggest doing a whole series in different genres. GG's RPG project, platformer, rts, etc.
Quote: I think art can be sticky though. Some art/media is licensed per product so it could make it more expensive to produce and get artwork that can be released without licensing issues. For instance, art/media suppliers explicitly forbids its art/media being released outside of a game. So a game using that could not release the art/media for use for free.
There have to be artists that disagree with current trademark/copyright situation. I mean don't artists get a paycheck from a company who then own their art forever? Isn't it a matter of where the paycheck is coming from? If their art was public domain, they would be allowed to sell derivative works like a book containing character designs, for example.
Quote: This would be a similar issue for middleware in code. The licensing on these products are low to keep the cost of production down. T3D MIT is an example of code that had to be rewritten before release because of licensed middleware. So some projects may not make sense to release the code because it may take significant man hours to rewrite for a release. It could also be impossible to release without taking significant chunks out of the code and making it inoperable. A game that depends on vehicle physics middleware is a good example of that.
Interesting point with probably many other examples. Concerning vehicle physics, there are many open source games are using the bullet physics library. Racers include SuperTuxKart and StuntRally. Overgrowth is also using bullet as well as other commercial games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_%28software%29#Commercial_games
There may be other open source tools middleware alternatives.
Quote: In the end, making it scriptable and adding dlls (components) to extend the engine may be the way to get around these issues. This is what Valve has done and it ends up in increased sales of their previously released games. So it ends up being profitable for them to keep updating older games with newer engine features. I see this a lot with Half Life 2. There seems to be a lot of updates that come through to make it better. I think this is due to the mods driving it. There are also users making mods and making money from them. This is somewhat unprecedented as it gives modders the ability to earn while they learn.I agree.
#19
If you want to use artwork with a perpetual and transferable license you either have to own the artwork copyright, hire an artist that agrees to you owning copyright, or buy the copyright from the artist outright. Those are all expensive solutions and for indie games impractical until the studio gets to a critical mass. For instance, I can get awesome music from Lucky Lion studios for a one time fee of $5 a track. However, the license is non-exclusive and does not allow transferring the license. So it comes down to a cost. If the cost is too high the title runs the risk of not seeing the light of day.
Now, your example of crowd sourcing could help mitigate the costs for a project. Though, it is still an issue with being able to find cost effective artwork that could be redistributed. So, for my projects I will look for low cost artwork and that would limit my options for giving away stuff later. Once I get to the level of an established studio like Id software it could be a different story. I just don't mind paying artists that produce high quality work over and over again. They should be paid that.
On a side note. Take a look at GPL projects versus MIT/BSD projects. GPL projects due to licensing tend to dissuade participation because there is a lack of financial incentive. Unless a GPL product can be used as a service it tends to stagnate and die. On the other hand MIT/BSD projects I am seeing tend to thrive. I am also seeing GPL and LGPL projects shifting to MIT/BSD. When they do they tend to do better. I think this phenomenon is because this development is driven by money just like any other economy. This is not a bad thing IMO. It is just a reflection of the reality that socialized systems do not survive. There must be an incentive for a person to reap the reward of excellence. If that incentive is limited it will naturally limit participation and kill excellence.
12/26/2012 (9:01 pm)
The artwork (music, graphics, models, sound, etc) licensing is interesting. Some artwork is licensing per shipped title, others are licensed on a one time payment for multiple titles. Most of these do not allow the license to be transferable. So you could not legally allow your art pack to be used as generic art for more games. I am guessing this is one of the main reasons Doom/Doom2 only released source code as GPL. There would also be trademark issues. If the art has trademarks in it then it would discouraged of using artwork with that embedded in it. If you want to use artwork with a perpetual and transferable license you either have to own the artwork copyright, hire an artist that agrees to you owning copyright, or buy the copyright from the artist outright. Those are all expensive solutions and for indie games impractical until the studio gets to a critical mass. For instance, I can get awesome music from Lucky Lion studios for a one time fee of $5 a track. However, the license is non-exclusive and does not allow transferring the license. So it comes down to a cost. If the cost is too high the title runs the risk of not seeing the light of day.
Now, your example of crowd sourcing could help mitigate the costs for a project. Though, it is still an issue with being able to find cost effective artwork that could be redistributed. So, for my projects I will look for low cost artwork and that would limit my options for giving away stuff later. Once I get to the level of an established studio like Id software it could be a different story. I just don't mind paying artists that produce high quality work over and over again. They should be paid that.
On a side note. Take a look at GPL projects versus MIT/BSD projects. GPL projects due to licensing tend to dissuade participation because there is a lack of financial incentive. Unless a GPL product can be used as a service it tends to stagnate and die. On the other hand MIT/BSD projects I am seeing tend to thrive. I am also seeing GPL and LGPL projects shifting to MIT/BSD. When they do they tend to do better. I think this phenomenon is because this development is driven by money just like any other economy. This is not a bad thing IMO. It is just a reflection of the reality that socialized systems do not survive. There must be an incentive for a person to reap the reward of excellence. If that incentive is limited it will naturally limit participation and kill excellence.
#20
*Perchance* put the call out for talented people who agree ideologically with the redistributable assets. Like I said above, the artists could merchandise their work. It wouldn't be protected from copy-cats, but if the merchandise were a shirt or a poster they could sign it. The dwarf fortress guys make hand drawn murals for fans who donate to the project. http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/07/19/magazine/24fortress1.html
Musicians and sfx artists would obviously be more difficult. A flattr account? Sell ringtones from the project?
Another possibility is using open game art which hosts things like sfx, music, models, etc. That website might be useful for you, for placeholder assets in your projects.
I wonder what the difference is. Both are creative works that require years of training and talent. Maybe it's the idea of the starving artist that's always depicted in movies and tv. I'm sure it's a reality for a lot of people, but why do I have the image of a gaunt Dickensian pauper with holey gloves sitting on a snowy 1900's London curb? Or an artist living in a New York tenement building with yellowing walls circa 1959.
Let's say the official game, let's call the game Project Torque, was built on Torque3d MIT with open source art assets, would modders who want to make commercial standalone built off Project Torque need to purchase a license from GG or have a profit sharing agreement? I think something like would be necessary for the sustainability of GG.
12/26/2012 (9:56 pm)
Quote: Some artwork is licensing per shipped title, others are licensed on a one time payment for multiple titles. Most of these do not allow the license to be transferable. So you could not legally allow your art pack to be used as generic art for more games. I am guessing this is one of the main reasons Doom/Doom2 only released source code as GPL.I always assumed it was to make end users still buy the game. http://store.steampowered.com/app/2280/ Yep, it's still for sale.
Quote:
Now, your example of crowd sourcing could help mitigate the costs for a project. Though, it is still an issue with being able to find cost effective artwork that could be redistributed. So, for my projects I will look for low cost artwork and that would limit my options for giving away stuff later. Once I get to the level of an established studio like Id software it could be a different story.
*Perchance* put the call out for talented people who agree ideologically with the redistributable assets. Like I said above, the artists could merchandise their work. It wouldn't be protected from copy-cats, but if the merchandise were a shirt or a poster they could sign it. The dwarf fortress guys make hand drawn murals for fans who donate to the project. http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/07/19/magazine/24fortress1.html
Musicians and sfx artists would obviously be more difficult. A flattr account? Sell ringtones from the project?
Another possibility is using open game art which hosts things like sfx, music, models, etc. That website might be useful for you, for placeholder assets in your projects.
Quote:I agree that people deserve compensation. There is an interesting tendency to accept the open sourcing of software, but suggesting open sourcing art work is almost offensive to degrading to the artist. Even I immediately think of an artist being suddenly destitute. But there are tons of websites where artists upload their work just to share with other people.
I just don't mind paying artists that produce high quality work over and over again. They should be paid that.
I wonder what the difference is. Both are creative works that require years of training and talent. Maybe it's the idea of the starving artist that's always depicted in movies and tv. I'm sure it's a reality for a lot of people, but why do I have the image of a gaunt Dickensian pauper with holey gloves sitting on a snowy 1900's London curb? Or an artist living in a New York tenement building with yellowing walls circa 1959.
Quote:I agree, but there are certain exceptions like Linux which is GPL (most developers do work for corporations). I think Garage Game's choice of using the MIT license is great. People should be compensated for their work. Open sourcing art assets would be compensation for all those years of work put in by the community making new art assets, missions, maps, etc, etc. They could turn their mods into standalone games.
GPL projects due to licensing tend to dissuade participation because there is a lack of financial incentive. Unless a GPL product can be used as a service it tends to stagnate and die. On the other hand MIT/BSD projects I am seeing tend to thrive. This is not a bad thing IMO. It is just a reflection of the reality that socialized systems do not survive. There must be an incentive for a person to reap the reward of excellence. If that incentive is limited it will naturally limit participation and kill excellence.
Let's say the official game, let's call the game Project Torque, was built on Torque3d MIT with open source art assets, would modders who want to make commercial standalone built off Project Torque need to purchase a license from GG or have a profit sharing agreement? I think something like would be necessary for the sustainability of GG.
Torque Owner Demolishun
DemolishunConsulting Rocks!
How about?
- Work with a very talented and professional community and share resources when possible.
- Make a game and build up unique IP.
- Share successes and failures of the process in post mortems.
- Make profit.
- Repeat.
Nothing breeds interest like shipped and profitable titles.