Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Orymus3

Member
  • Content Count

    2194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Orymus3 last won the day on April 25

Orymus3 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

18854 Excellent

About Orymus3

  • Rank
    4th Place - The Week of Awesome 2014

Personal Information

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Orymus3

    Game pitch - help needed

    I would also recommend you take a look at more examples of decks and how they're made. There is no need to copy their template, but it might show you what's missing here.
  2. Have you tried cold-calling actual devs?
  3. So I think there are two issues here. The easy answer is: because they don't need one. The more complex answer is: some people don't actually need a producer (a bit more on that later) and because this can be true, a lot of people may erroneously assyme this applied to them (oh, we're a small team, we can talk and keep on top of everything) which, unfortunately, is often a mistake. It's not the only mistake a small startup team may make though, and most likely, not the most damaging, so in asking why rookies and making rookie mistakes, there's hardly any answer worth proposing: they just didn't know better, and they'll need to figure things out on their own because they understand the value of someone handling management, scheduling, budgeting, etc. Now, I said some people genuinely don't need a producer, and I mean it. When we started this team here, we knew what we wanted to do. We were a bunch of senior level pros with many a title to their name. We knew we wanted to keep a tight-knit team, and embraced the 'jack of all trades' nature of our overlapping skillset. In essence, at any given point, any one of us can make a call that would feel 'Producer'-like, but we're also all fully apt when it comes to self-management. It would be hard to add a Producer to this team without that person running out of work, and feeling out of place very quickly. There is also added value in foregoing the centralization of these processes, as each individual then acquires a more holistic vision of the whole, making autonomy all the easier to foster. Does that work in all team? Absolutely not! Are there strings attached? Definitely! Is it worth it? You BET it is. So I can only assume that it is common for new startups to see the upsides, ignore the downsides, and fail to see the constraints, and think that paying for one fewer person (who's not contributing value directly) is 'lean'. Obviously, meet any business above 10 (or 20) and you'll soon come across someone who does these things fulltime, 'Producer title or not'...
  4. So... We've started building what I would refer to as 'Game Templates' (not 'engines') and we're trying to ascertain whether there's any demand for what we're doing. The realization came from working in parallel on projects that would require several common 'pieces'. Nothing user-facing, mind you, but rather, a set of tools that, if done right (modular, limited assumptions) could result in tangible gains without rendering more complex any attempt at stepping out of what the tech was made for. We've leveraged these tools to give our clients very fair discounts (and we're getting a lot of positive and constructive feedback on the work done so far) but it also gives us a slight edge which eventually helps pay for the tech itself. On paper, this is a win-win. My question here is whether you feel this would be a viable model. As a decision-maker, would you be more likely to purchase an asset off the store and integrate it in-house (possibly cursing in the process as many of these 5-star rated assets are ultimately only good so long as you don't leave the realm of what they were meant to do, and then there's a steep learning curve and bad surprises when you DO want to leave the scope of that) or consider hiring a team that promises to leverage their tested proprietary tech and let them handle the 'custom' game code (at which point it becomes a question of whether you trust the team, and their claims)? There's an undeniable tech angle to this, which I'm more than willing to expand on, especially given the realization that this was the way to go came from having been in studios before that took a different route to middleware development and failed either by producing tech that was too complex (and tried to do too much) - becoming narrow in what it could do - or failing on the service end by providing it 'as is' with some kind of a customer hotline or in-house jumpstart team, but ultimately leaving it up to the developer to figure things out. At any rate, any insight on the matter would be greatly welcomed. Thanks! (@Mod: I wasn't sure where to post this, but it feels 'at home' here given the business angle. If you feel it would benefit more from being in a tech-related forums, feel free to move!)
  5. Orymus3

    Seas of Fortune - Live on Kickstarter!

    Let's WHALE!
  6. Hey folks, Turns out I completed work on Red Cell - Agent Green and it is now on Itch.io! Bit of a throwback retro title, I'll admit, but for any arcade / Amiga fan, could be in for a real treat (and the music is a great track by Nils 505 Feske!) (Video doesn't do it nearly justice, but for the sake of showing something). Oh did I mention local Coop? Just hook two gamepads to that rig of yours and beat the crap out of that game!
  7. Welcome Agent Green... And here we go, Red Cell: Agent Green is finally released on Itch.io! Don't believe me? Now you should! It was quite the journey from simple gamejam entry for the Week of Awesome III to here, but I'm glad I stuck with it. The game is now coop, has leaderboards (thanks Gamesparks!) and is a lot harder to deal with. Hoping to add new modes in the future too! See the whole story here I won't take more of your time, until I actually add more to it. (If you DO play the game, do drop me a line, I'm always curious to hear what people thing!)
  8. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    Which is what I do right, but it's nonetheless tiring...
  9. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    Of course, I don't ever ask for a plumber, I do my own plumbing, but I can easily translate your example to that of an electrician which, in my book, requires an expert (if you screw up, well you can die basically). And I agree, there's much to be said of code architecture: a lot of prospect clients come to me with 'almost finished games' and I end up telling them: 5k to fix it, 3k to start from scratch and finish it. Your pick And they don't get it. Anyway, didn't want to come across as someone that don't enjoy my work or my clients, it's just the rev-share guys (the arrogant ones specifically, as the others are easy to discuss with, even though I still don't get why they'd reply to me knowing I'm not into rev-share...)
  10. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    I'm not disputing any of that, what I don't get is when they say they were, for all intents and purposes, expecting you'd do this for free while they wait for you to get done with their idea. I can only imagine, if one agreed to it, they'd probably do some seagull management and come asking 'why isn't it done yet?' too...
  11. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    Been having trouble with the website (or with my brain?) lately and haven't been able to see either of your replies to this thread before (and I was kinda hoping you'd chime in!) Note here though that my 'indie' rate is about half yours, and that it isn't uncommon for me to have a very similar discussion to the above except the second to last line looks more like "Are you crazy? People are starving in the world and it's your fault" type of stuff Must be because I'm Canadian, people think they can throw pretty much anything at us.
  12. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    I wouldn't got as far as say this is the majority though. I don't really have that much insight into 'my competitors' beyond what my clients tell me (why they chose to work with me, etc.).
  13. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    Uh? Well, in my experience, contracting out can be very profitable (both ways). Whether for assets (short term) or more involved work (development etc.) I've worked for clients that have turned up a (significant) profit, and I've contracted people whose work ended up being profitable. I think your skepticism may either be based on your inability to do the work or your general distrust of contractors in general, or even the actual ROI of the idea itself, but is certainly not grounded in the actual value of the work that could result from someone (the right person, of course). It feels to me like your argument has more to do with the distrust part, and the perceived low likelihood you would turn up such a contractor, moreso than the actual value of the work, which is a bit outside the scope of what I was going for: there are a lot of frauds out there, few of which actually have a reputation to back their claims. Within my circle, dev recommendations are far from rare, and I've had several clients vouch for me on new potential assignments to date, so I don't think that, in my particular case, the 'rev-share first' part comes from a perceived risk on picking the wrong contractor.
  14. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    I think it goes a bit further than that though: If I partnered up with, say, an artist, on his game, and he'd offer rev-share, I'd be like: So, you do (roughly) 50% of the work, you control the IP, and we split the sales? Even then I feel this isn't exactly fair, as he still owns the IP, etc. But in essence, yes, this is more or less the problem I see.
  15. Orymus3

    Opinion on collaborating with hobbyists?

    I wouldn't say making games is futile. The amount of 'luck needed' decreases significantly with experience. Sometimes it's because of the experience itself (making fewer rookie mistakes, resulting in a genuinely better game) and sometimes it is based on a bias (AAA veteran dropoff studios get more press than a 18 years old basement indie on average, but not always). What's more, there are 'yes-men' everywhere, they will tell someone else their idea has value, even if it doesn't. I've put myself in a position where I can afford to say no, I pick my projects, and I never have to take on projects I don't think genuinely stand a chance. Of course, some projects are more risky, but the work being done isn't any less valuable there. I've always been very self-conscious about my value in the industry, and for the past 6-7 years, I've kept a close watch on whether I was 'profitable' (even before, when I was still an employee). It matters to me. I also engaged in gamejams (notably the Week of Awesome II, III, IV) just to make sure I'm still relevant, that I can still do the work, etc. I'd hate to be a fraud, so I keep on testing myself to measure the extent of my abilities. So, it is entirely possible to be inspired, but getting paid is also the means through which you secure serious developers: people that aren't just there because they need to (if you want some of THOSE, there's thousands on freelancer.com, and my experience working with them is consistently bad at best!) My line of reasoning is, if the work I did so far has proven time and time again that my work is worth (more than) the $ I'm asking for, this is fair, and nothing like 'dreaming'. Now, how to assemble that work in such a way that it has value, that's actually the other person's role (it's their game after all) but even there I try to help because I do care about what I work on. I'm past the point of needing to work on projects for the sake of money, I'm at a point where I want these projects to have a legacy of their own. But luck still plays a huge part, and though I take serious risks on my own games, I shouldn't take the bulk of the risk when working on someone else's idea, that's where I draw the line. It is a professional service exchanges, in a market that's governed by capitalism. There's nothing wrong with it, and even if there were, these are the rules we've all agreed to operate with (although I'll admit I've done more than my share of barter to lessen costs). It would be different if we were talking about 50 50 partnerships, which we're not: my contracts clearly state that the ownership of the work is my clients, not me. They get to reap the massive upside, so it makes sense to also face the appropriate level of risk. If one of these projects skyrocket, they make tons, whereas I won't, so why should I take that kind of risk? Also, the simpler, shorter answer is: I can afford to say no to every rev-share because I've got more than enough paid projects, so why should I take any risk if there's simply no upside to it? (whatever will be said of rev-share based projects, they're still generally less promising because the reasons that led someone to rev-share in the first place is a good indicator of how shaky the foundation is).
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!