You're looking for information about taking your trilogy and getting it developed. I'm moving this to the Business forum.

O.K. Thank you!

P.S I want to add. That people don't really need to read books. :)

I already have basic story line for game written. Here is list of documents I have translated into good English:

1. Short game description: (It doesn't describes aspects I am not enough professional with, like game mechanic or AI for example. Such things will be depending on studio, which will develop the game):

2. Story line of 2 main heroes, Alexander and Zarina: (each one have his own original story, nature, and path in the game. I added and changed things compare to original book and make game story line richer):

3. Appendixes for story lines:

4. Characters short description list. (Includes all characters from main heroes to crowd)

5. Short descriptions of all three books. ( to show perspective and possibility to create more games based on the story)

So I am trying to find studio or people who will want to create such studio and make a game based on my story. I believe the story may help to create AAA game not worse then Wit?her, let's say.

Personally I am not looking to rule things, or even to create 3D content, although it was my main occupation in several last years. For me is most important to bring my story to people. And video games media is a most perspective and interesting way to do it, for my opinion. So I see my part as scriptwriter.

I believe that my story is interesting and worth effort but I have a problem. I am not a person who has contacts among the people who can help to implement this plan. Most of the effort and time I spent on creation rather than on communication. And now it is playing against me.

I am open for advises and offers. I will be grateful if someone will share contacts of people and studios who may be interested in such collaboration.

Mr. Necturus,
It will be expensive to turn your trilogy into a computer game. If you don't have a business plan (a solid idea for the best way to generate money with your game), then it'll be difficult for you to obtain the funding to hire a developer and self-publish your game. Your best bet, then, is to license your IP to a publisher. But a publisher will likely be hesitant to take the risk unless and until your trilogy has acquired a sizeable following. We (the members of this forum) can tell you how to do the things related to getting a game developed, but it's up to you to first make your IP attractive enough that a publisher will want to invest in it. Good luck!

Thank you Tom. Actually I am open to any ideas, and thinking about this way too.

But my plan A is to try to interest serious studios in my story. I know its maybe called fantasy plan A. :) But I want to give him a tray.

I spend years to came to this point. And now I want to see if it work to be continued.

But my plan A is to try to interest serious studios in my story.

But why? Studios can't afford to make your game. They need money. Publishers have money. Developers don't.

Because if there is a strong team with experience and abilities to make game we have, (together with interesting story) all reasons to ask for money publishers or investors.

Personally I am creator, not a manager. So I have a little hope to create studio alone. But I have something that not every AAA game have. Original Universe and talent to create game story on it's base.

Sorry for my English. I already mentioned it is not very best.

But I have something that not every AAA game have. Original Universe and talent to create game story on it's base

I could quote a million articles for this...

The problem is that you don't have a game currently, you have a story. I understand your angle, but a story is not a game, even if you've actually written an entire trilogy of it.

Now the above states that not every AAA game has an original universe, and while I'm tempted to disagree, I will humor this thought and reply in kind: the reason for this is likely that the universe the AAA is based around is less risky. Choices were likely made to insure the title was profitable as no one in their right mind would invest millions into a game only to see it burn to the ground because people didn't like it. From this standpoint, it is easier to understand why publishers might go for sequel over new risky titles with engaging unique stories and gameplay.

Another misconception here is that money is unlikely to fall from the sky. In other words, no one will take your idea to fruition (and let you keep your creative control over it). A lot of people have a lot of ideas, and even assuming a world where ideas could be objectively classified as good best or bad, everyone's own ideas will unmistakably feel better to them than yours. If you want to make a game about your story, you need to shove it up someone's throat (I'm pretty sure Tom mentioned this on Sloperama, so have a look at his sig as there's a lot to learn in there!).

If you want to make a game about your IP, you really have two choices:

- Make it yourself (in which case you're likely to become the manager, or at least will need to find a partner than wants to be the manager, but that won't happen randomly off the web except in some extremely rare cases)

- Sell the idea to a publisher (as Tom mentioned) and just a 'story' won't sell. Remember, they get a lot of stories, but they're not into making stories, they're into making games. If you pitch a game, you'll need a pretty good GDD and a GDD isn't how the story will flow alone, it actually needs to describe the features, input/interactions, look and feel, etc.

Even with a kickass GDD in hand, you're likely to need a prototype to demonstrate why the game is fun (because reading 40 pages of your 'dream project' is likely to end with a few folks yawning even if the concept is kickass).

So as Tom said, we can advise you on the path to take, but randomly finding skilled people (to make a AAA?!) off the web that happen to be mysteriously idle, and like your story enough that they're willing not only to not get paid while developing it for years, but likely accept to pitch in (marketing, hire freelancers, etc.) is not a viable plan.

In short, I would suggest to keep an open mind with these 2 options even if they're not what you had in mind: readjusting your plan is what you need to be able to do if you want to see this game come to fruition, and this would be just the first of many adjustments to come.

If you don't believe you can make this adjustment, then it is likely that you don't want to see this idea come to fruition sufficiently, and there's nothing wrong with that, otherwise the world would be filled with a lot more bankrupt people, the google play store would have even more shovel ware, and it would be near impossible to stand out from the mass with genuinely good game to the point where making games would no longer be a profitable venture for anyone (until fewer games get made, and the best get to stand out again).

In my article on getting games done, I speak briefly to this fine line between a project you'd like to see come to fruition, and a project you actually intend on delivering (which comes with many sacrifices). It could be a good place to start? (sorry for the self-promo there, but in recent memory, I don't recall seeing an article that mentioned the difference between these two, and I feel it is a very relevant question to answer in this indie bubble age).