[quote name='SimonForsman' timestamp='1348645420' post='4983915']
I've inherited a few mid sized projects at work and it took a bit over 50 hours just to get a decent grasp of the codebase.
In some cases, it's easier to just use your own codebase, and port the existing features.
Actually, even if that process took significant time, it's probably saving time in the long run.
[/quote]
The problem really is that we get paid by the hour by our client, they want bugs fixed and features added today (or yesterday in many cases)
[size="1"]I don't suffer from insanity, I'm enjoying every minute of it.
The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!
A couple of months ago I found an add for a game called Dragon Wars here on gamedev. It was a multiplayer turn based game that was claimed to be "85%" complete. But what hooked me was an impressive array of completed art assets so I decided to follow it up with the author. After chatting with him a while on skype I was convinced that this project would be a good investment of my free time. The author presented himself well and his project well and overall it seemed good.
After we disscussed terms (not much realy, just potentional profit sharing etc) and I agreed he sent me a rar archive and asked me if I could "get it online again quickly". "Huh?" was my first thought but I siffed though the archive wich turned out to be a messy mix of outdated design docs, random notes, assets and java source code that wasnt even in the correct package structure... I then asked him the login details of the server thats supposed to host the game but he said he didnt have the "websites password onhand". I asked him If the games website was self hosted on the same server thats supposed to host the game server. He could not answer me but after I asked a couple more questions I eventualy decucted that the websites hosted on a cheap shared hosting solution... At this point i wasnt impressed anymore but I thought I decided to pursue it just a little longer to see how it turns out. So i took the time to sort out the source code. The first thing I noticed is that it relies on a mysql database but I could not find any sql scripts in the archive to set up the database. So I asked him but he once again had no idea what I was talking about. So i went and i manualy created the neccesary tables by reading the source. Not difficult just tedious and annoying... I decided that I use my own dedicated server to host the game in the meantime. Its pretty much idling most of the time anyway. It took me almoust a day to sort everytihg out, set up the databsase, compile, upload and run the server, compile upload and run the client etc (btw I had to upload the client to my own website in the meantime becuase he was incappable of uploading it to his). Anyway moments before I got everything working he skypes me and tells me that "Its taking long, All you needed to do was run the game". At this point I should have just left. I obviously over estimated this person a bit but since I allready spent the whole day setting this up Il at least want to see it run.
Anyway... It turned out to be a horribly incomplete and bug infested... It would crash for different reason each time and the game mechanics were all glitchy "85%" my ass. I asked him what happened to the previous programmer but I also could not get a straight answer. This game was a clone of an old popular game called cyberwars. This guys "design document" was 95% cyberwars with a couple of tweaks. I knew I could not work with this person but I also didnt need to. He somehow managed to trick an artist or 2 into creating a complete art set. And he even got a sound engineer to make sounds... So I thought "Hey, Il just fix this game up and host it on my website with ads on the sides". Its not like the author is capable of hosting it anyway and other than somehow ripping of good artists he didnt actualy contribute anything, Hell il even give him credit as the "desighner" and give him a portion of add revenue (and of course give credit to the old artists who abandoned the project 2 years ago with the old programmer)". I ended up working more or less 90 hours on it over a period of 2 and a half months. I completely stabilzed the game, completed incomplete feutures and created its new gui from scratch (you can see the screenshots on my website, before that the gui consisted of standard java swing componants) Unfortenetley... He thought his "contribution" was worth a bit more. I heard things like "Ive been planning this game my whole life" and "I am a good team leader". Now i realy didnt care much for potentional ad revenue Origanely i just wanted to work on an interesting project... But when he said the he wanted 90% of the cut for his "contributions" I was more that a little vexed. Then he insisted that I hand the source code over to him and give him full ownership "so I cant steal his "work"" """""" """"" """". You can say "but you should have agreed on this from the start" however the origanell agreement was moot anyway since in the origanel agreement I just had to "do a little bit of programming on a 85% complete game".
Ive stopped working on the project and it feels like a massive waiste. The game is still running on my site and to be honest I would love to continue working on it more but this person makes it pretty hard... If I can get ahold of the origanell artists and programmer I could probely just ask them for permission to use their work and cut him out completely but thats not realy in my nature.
Lesson? Hell i realy dont know... make youre own deduction
After developing a few small (3 weeks, 2-3 months) games, and now doing a big (1 year) one, I find that the two biggest roles ( there are others :/ ) in a one man indie project are: Lead programmer and Art Director. Thankfully, I am able to play both roles because I am a programmer (scientific computing), and used to be a hobbyist comic artist (so I know a little art). IMHO,
1. It is much easier to direct art than lead the programming.
Anyone can tell good art from bad. And if you are the lead programmer, you know how to work with sprites (for example). If an artist supplies you with the sprites of the appropriate dimensions, you know how to code it into your game. On the other hand, if you know art but no programming, it is impossible for you to tell good code from bad. It is impossible for you to use code snippets that other programmers produced in your game.
*I am saying this with regards to 2D games. I have no experience with 3D.
2. You can cut back on art but not programming.
You can always make a heavy text game, use stick figures, stock art, palette swap, use free art etc. It might even be possible to cut back on the art so much that a non-artist (or someone who can't draw at all) can produce a game. E.g. Make a text based game or use free/stock/cheap art. But you can't do the same with programming. And if no one in your team can program, you're finished.
3. It is much easier for artists to come and go, but not programmers.
Like others have mentioned, an artists can spend much less time producing something that contributes to the project. E.g. A friend of mine spent 2-3 hours producing a nice sketch and now it is being used as concept art for a character in my game. Programmers, on the other hand, have to spend considerable amount of time just reading and understanding the existing pile of code. There is no way for a friend of mine to spend 2-3 hours "producing" useful code.
I'm coming at this as an artist with very limited experience coding, so please bear with me.
Creating a sketch concept shouldn't take "2-3 hours".
To me, an artist should be willing to pound out a dozen "sketch" concepts in like 20 minutes to get ideas on paper for the team to look over before going on to make more refined ideas. Taking those refined concepts and make model sheets; then from those to creating the models. And after, obviously skin, rig, animate, bake, etc.
The entire process to create a game ready asset should really take maybe 2-3 days in my opinion and I'm admittedly a very, very fast artist.
And this is comparable to programmers in my opinion. The team I work with had the engine working and playable in the game play style we wanted on the first day of a "game jam marathon". Ever since then, they've been refining and implementing, just as the artists and I have been creating and refining our contributions.
And programming is cut all the time. That's exactly what happens when a feature is dropped or cut since the scope is too large. Whenever I have worked on a game, (which is still a limited experience at this time, I admit) even what many people consider a simple game, there is always room to refine and distill that game. To take out needless bloat.
But don't get me wrong, I know programmers are important. They're like the engine in a sports car. Without it, the car might look fast and cool, but it's just going to sit and do nothing else.
All I'm trying to say is that the art assets need time to be refined and tweaked just the same as the code.
?
Of course it is possible to make a game without knowing how to program. That's what all the gamemakers are for, after all. (The most well-known being the RPG-Maker, but there are others for other genres as well).
Sure, it's quite likely that a game which was made this way is going to suck, but so is a game which uses no or only free/stock/cheap art.
Yes, programmers are important and definitely the least swappable members of a gamedev-team, but, at least when it's been planned from the beginning, even they are not indispensable. Nobody is.
bw,
Tobl
Think my post was helpful? Want to thank me? Nothing easier than that: I sure am are a sucker for reputation, so just give it a little keycode 38 if you like. ^^
3. It is much easier for artists to come and go, but not programmers.
While I don't agree with any one point completely, I think this is closer to reality than the other points. I'm a programmer and I know that it can be difficult to jump into code that you didn't write and start fixing bugs or adding new features right away. More so with code that is not well structured. There are times, depending on who developed the code that modifications are actually quite easy and take very little work. As far as the art is concerned I think that yes you can add and remove artists easier, but I think that each artist has their own style. The game will seem more polished if you can keep the same group of artists on board for the whole game.
The entire process to create a game ready asset should really take maybe 2-3 days in my opinion and I'm admittedly a very, very fast artist.
All I'm trying to say is that the art assets need time to be refined and tweaked just the same as the code.
Agreed. It can take a great deal of time and effort to create good game ready assets, which is why "art director" is the 2nd biggest role a lone indie has to play. I was just trying to illustrate how an artist can join the project for just 2-3 hours and contribute positively to it by producing a few pieces of concept art. On the other hand, a programmer will need quite a bit of time just to get acquainted with the existing code.
Of course it is possible to make a game without knowing how to program. That's what all the gamemakers are for, after all. (The most well-known being the RPG-Maker, but there are others for other genres as well).
Sure, it's quite likely that a game which was made this way is going to suck, but so is a game which uses no or only free/stock/cheap art.
You are right. We can in fact cut out both programming AND art entirely and make, for example, pen & paper tic-tac-toe.
Perhaps I should rephrase it to: "It is far more restrictive to cut out programming. e.g. use a game maker. Than it is to cut out art. Any 2D game (not sure about 3D) can still be made using simple, cheap or free art. But if you switch to a game maker, you will be forced to modify your game."
Also, a game which uses no or only free/stock/cheap art can still be very good! I love text-based games (browser-based, MUDs etc) and there are quite a few very good ones. E.g. "N", "Geometry Wars", "I made a game with Zombies in it!" or various Flash games on Newgrounds with amateur or stick figure art.
In addition, one can always make a free parody or tribute using existing game graphics. The sprites in Starcraft: Brood Wars for example are easily obtainable and several very good Flash game tributes have been made. (I made a flying shooter this way once)
This thread has gotten quite long and I haven't read everything so I apologize if this is a repeat. What bothers me the most is people stating they are a studio when it's quite obvious they are working from their parents' basement or in a single bedroom apartment. Unless you've registered your business, are remitting taxes, and have dedicated office space - you are not a studio. The biggest dead giveaway that you are not a studio is the fact that you can't pay me. Studios have access to funding and/or an income from their previous game(s). Lastly, if you are not of legal age to enter into a contract (usually 18) don't even bother. I will never work (even free work) if I'm not protected by a contract. In short, don't lie about being a studio when you are just one person with an idea.
Bottom line: Really, all I care about is whether or not I'd be wasting my time.
What do I get out of the partnership?
If you're paying me fairly to work for you, then it's not a waste of my time since I'm getting something out of it (money!). But, how much you pay me had better be proportionate to the work I'll be doing. If you just wrote a five page word doc and called it the game design and I have to do all the rest, I'll be putting in 99.9% of the effort and will expect to get appropriately compensated. If we expect to make $100k, I'd better get $99,900!
If you're not paying me, then I'm already incredibly disinclined to do anything for you because I don't work for free. What will I get? What is the likelihood of project success? My commitment to the project will be as wishy washy as I perceive the legitimacy of your promises to be. If your promises are contingent upon project success and the project looks like it's going to fail, then I'm out. (Note: It can fail in its construction phase or in its business phase)
I'd be happy to work together with Servant of the Lord. He sounds like he's got his shit together and the project will most likely succeed whether or not I'm a part of his team. That's motivating because instead of worrying about whether or not the project will succeed, I'm worrying about whether or not I'm pulling my weight and being an asset instead of a liability to the team. He's got what it takes to see a project through to the end and will deliver results. If you're a designer trying to put together a team, you need to implicitly include evidence that suggests a high probability for project success. What experience do you have? Have you shipped a game in the past? Have you been a part of a team which shipped a game? What will you contribute to the team which a programmer can't do? If I can do everything you do, but you can't do everything I do, then why do I need you?
If you're recruiting, you're also the implied project manager. The project manager for a project is like a train engineer trying to convince people to climb aboard, stay aboard, and get them to the final destination (project success). If at any point your passengers don't think they're going to get to the final destination, they'll jump off and hop onto another train. What kind of train are you operating? Does it exist? Is it a hype train or is it based on something of substance? Is the track already laid to take us to the final destination or do we have to build the track along the way (which means we don't know where we're going)? Once the train gets moving, you are going to be the one shoveling coal into the engine furnace to keep it going with full steam ahead! If your train loses momentum (lack of progress), or steam (lack of money), or derails (lack of direction/side tracked), your passengers are going to jump off and you'll never get them to the end destination. Then, you don't collect the fare and don't get paid. So, when you're recruiting, you're really trying to convince the candidates that you're the best train engineer to take them to their destination. Note that your passengers will have different destionations they want to visit along the way! Some people may just want to make money, some people will want to learn and get experience, others will want to test out an idea/concept, others want recognition, comraderie, status, fame, stability and benefits to provide for their family, etc. The best train engineers can run a train which visits everyones wants/needs while getting everyone to project success. Those are the projects everyone wants to join and be a part of (its not exclusive to just programmers!).
