8,9,10,11,12) Fair point.

13) But isn't this just like book publishing? I mean, the publisher does everything from printing the book, to marketing, and so on, and the authors just have to write the thing. In the book publishing business, you have people like JK Rowling making a billion dollars, but in the game industry you don't see a game designer/programmer/audio guy/artist making a tenth or even a hundredth of that. Doesn't that show how under-appreciated they are?

In the book publishing business, you have people like JK Rowling making a billion dollars

In the game industry, you have Notch/Angry Birds making lots of money.

Notch/Angry Birds/JK Rowling aren't representative though, they are a statistical outliers.
[/quote]

Interesting that you mentioned Notch and Angry Birds. They cost less to produce (compared to AAA games) and does not go through giant publishers. Doesn't that make one think "the bigger the game, the less you make (money wise)"?

Doesn't that show how under-appreciated they are?

Appreciation doesn't come into this. It is a market, a crowded one, and there is supply and demand.
[/quote]

True that.


Edit: Spelling.

[quote name='taneugene' timestamp='1313423144' post='4849424']
In the book publishing business, you have people like JK Rowling making a billion dollars, but in the game industry you don't see a game designer/programmer/audio guy/artist making a tenth or even a hundredth of that. Doesn't that show how under-appreciated they are?

What it shows is that the REAL money is in being a company owner, not a foot soldier on a gargantuan team. If what you want is riches, then work your way up, form your own company, work the company hard for 10-12 years. Bingo, overnight riches. But the guys in the team will just get nice salaries (they won't get rich like Rowling, since they're on a team, not creating the whole thing all by their lonesomes).
[/quote]


I do see your point in that the process of game making involves more than a few person, and in the case of Triple-A stuff it usually involves an extremely large team to create one piece of work. But is it fair to say that I should not create Triple-A titles if I want to get rich from making games (large companies aside because I have no money to create one)? To put it in another way, are Triple-A games mainstream, or are they serving a niche market?

[quote name=rip-off']
[color=#1C2837][size=2]Again, outliers.

Yes, these examples show people making good money this way. But the other thing that they took on is risk. You don't hear of the legions who fail, only the few who succeed.

If you go solo, you won't be paid if your product fails to get to market, or the market isn't interested, or a competitor undercuts you, or something similar. If you get a job working for a larger game company, you'll at least be paid for the time you put into a project, even if the project is later cancelled or fails in the market.

But yes these smaller games show that it is possible, with hard work and dedication, to bypass the AAA publisher scene and still be successful. Capitalism rewards risk takers, not necessarily hard work or creative ability.[/quote]
[color=#1C2837][size=2]

[color=#1C2837][size=2]Unsuccessful/unpublished authors do have a full-time job (this is based on what little research I did, so I may be wrong). You can't really do that if you work in the games industry because your full time job IS creating games (or whatever bits you are making that goes into the game). Your are bound hand-and-foot to the studio/publisher. I guess what I am trying to say is that the games industry, especially when publishers are involved, stifles creativity. Am I wrong in saying that?

I do see your point in that the process of game making involves more than a few person, and in the case of Triple-A stuff it usually involves an extremely large team to create one piece of work. But is it fair to say that I should not create Triple-A titles if I want to get rich from making games (large companies aside because I have no money to create one)? To put it in another way, are Triple-A games mainstream, or are they serving a niche market?

A game with many million sales is not a niche market.

However, it may start as a niche game that spreads to mainstream.

Large games are a business proposition. Before investing $10M or $50M into a game you better be reasonably confident you will recover that money. That necessarily means targeting the masses.

A small game investing $100K and a short development time can target a smaller market. That is what you see with most of the cell phone, iOS, and Android games right now. Small investment, small reward, very rarely someone will hit a jackpot like they do in Vegas.

For a hobby game where you are comfortable investing many thousands of hours of work into a product ($50K? $100K? $250K?) and feel good about the result even if you never see a single cent of revenue from your project, then it is fine. That is a hobby, not a sustainable business, and definitely not something that will help "if I want to get rich from making games". If that is your goal, your odds of getting rich are better if you invest in the lotto or spend your evenings on the floor at a Vegas casino.

[color="#1C2837"]Unsuccessful/unpublished authors do have a full-time job (this is based on what little research I did, so I may be wrong). You can't really do that if you work in the games industry because your full time job IS creating games (or whatever bits you are making that goes into the game). Your are bound hand-and-foot to the studio/publisher. I guess what I am trying to say is that the games industry, especially when publishers are involved, stifles creativity. Am I wrong in saying that?
[/quote]

It is incorrect.

It is your job. You are bound to certain rules to do your job, but that is no different than anything else if you want to make money.


Is a professional artist "bound hand-and-foot" when doing his job to draw caricatures? Of course not. There is a goal and certain rules of art, but there is still incredible latitude.

Is a development team "bound hand-and-foot" when asked to make a miniature golf simulator? Or a kart racing game? Or a tower defense game? Of course not. There is a goal and rules of the game, but there is still incredible latitude.


If you are an indie team with a goal "to get rich from making games", you are similarly employed by your customers.

Having a goal in a professional job does not stifle creativity. It creates an environment in which to build. Could you imagine playing a game like The Sims, and it suddenly turns into a flight simulator? Or playing your favorite FPS and changing your weapons suddenly changes the game into a jigsaw puzzle to construct your weapon? Sure, that might be creative, but in a way like allowing a 3-year-old to color on a masterwork is creative.

I'm glad I've posted this issue and opened up a can of worms. It answered a number of my questions and provided me with some interesting insights.

I have nothing more to ask, so this thread has run its course.

Thanks to all who've contributed to the discussion!