FoxSpirit said:aka "Steam is the future"
Also, why isn't there any "nice" publisher? I mean, devs are so utterly frustrated by them, if one would come which is pleasant to work with, they would get such a good influx of games to choose from.
Teetris said:Yup, start up money is basically the only real problem here. If you're lucky you can find a team that is willing to work for free until the game launches and then split everything evenly. But for most people that's not an option, especially if they're making their bread from video games. Which is why regular publishers are still the best option for now.
SpaceDrake said:Plus, with Sony seemingly moving to a download-only model for the PSP2
FoxSpirit said:Also, why isn't there any "nice" publisher?
This too.charlequin said:Being nice as a publisher will earn you, at best, a steady income with a strong brand value from your regular consumers year in year out -- which sounds great to most people but is far-less short-term profitable than selling out to a bigger entity, and is completely incompatible with the business realities of a publicly-owned corporation.
Don't be naive. Megapublishers don't get into the positions they're in by being nice.FoxSpirit said:aka "Steam is the future"
Also, why isn't there any "nice" publisher? I mean, devs are so utterly frustrated by them, if one would come which is pleasant to work with, they would get such a good influx of games to choose from.
Rlan said:XBLM seems WAY more difficult to do that than Steam or even PSN. Over the past few months we've seen a bunch of "so called" retail games pop up on PSN going "We're here changing the dynamic of the system! Woo!" Only to fall flat on their face -- see PSN's Superstars V8 Racing released at the end of October go " Permanent Price Drop (PS3) (now $9.99, original price $19.99)".
EA Partners?FoxSpirit said:aka "Steam is the future"
Also, why isn't there any "nice" publisher? I mean, devs are so utterly frustrated by them, if one would come which is pleasant to work with, they would get such a good influx of games to choose from.
I haven't played AssBro multiplayer, but isn't the Ship just an online version of Killer?dygiT said:Has Ubisoft responded to anything Outerlight said or the idea theft from their games?
3-5 years seems like a good time frame yeah. As long as bigger publishers aren't going to all suddenly jump on it (and ruin it by trying to monopolize with their own rules) when they see an investor take great success it should be a good branch of the gaming market.charlequin said:My hope is that in the next 3-5 years someone clever with a decent bankroll is going to make a lot of money off of incubating microloans to indie game startups.
How many new startups (not people like Respawn) did they sign? I think THQ is doing the same thing and even Sony has a similar plan (tho you have to advance the money yourself). Joe Danger is a good exampleFirestorm said:EA Partners?
If Double Fine counts, them. Also Klei for Shank, Hothead for Deathspank.Teetris said:How many new startups (not people like Respawn) did they sign? I think THQ is doing the same thing and even Sony has a similar plan (tho you have to advance the money yourself). Joe Danger is a good example
charlequin said:My hope is that in the next 3-5 years someone clever with a decent bankroll is going to make a lot of money off of incubating microloans to indie game startups.
Yeah, is there any proof that Ubisoft lifted those mechanics from these developers, or is this just an assumption?monkeyhat said:Surely the ACB connection is a bit tenuous? ACB multiplayer was developed by Ubisoft Annecy, the SC spies vs mercs team. Isn't ACB multiplayer a pretty natural evolution of that mixed with the AC universe?
godhandiscen said:Yeah, is there any proof that Ubisoft lifted those mechanics from these developers, or is this just an assumption?
I would honestly be surprised if there was intent in this. Yeah, treating them like crap, Ubisoft needs to answer for that. But like I said earlier, the design is similar to a larp game called Killer. They even made a movie about it (Gotcha?) and I've seen similar gameplay mechanics in single player games. Also, you forgot the AC iPhone game that prototyped the experience in your list.Stumpokapow said:Well short of Bob Woodward reporting on it, there's obviously not going to be any proof, but here's what we do know.
The following games have used mechanics even remotely similar to AC:B
1) The Ship
2) Bloody Good Time (published / "owned" by Ubisoft)
3) Assassin's Creed Brotherhood
So the best case scenario for Ubisoft is that they happened to agree to publish 2, treat the developer like shit, leave the game to die, and totally coincidentally implement the mechanics in their biggest game of the year. The worst case scenario adds intent.
And even if Brotherhood's multiplayer evolved organically out of the mechanics of the games and the similarities to The Ship are merely coincidental, it's kind of odd that Ubisoft picks up an incredibly similar game by a team that had pioneered the idea beforehand, forces them in a contract that ensures that unless the game is a hit said developer will be financially decimated, and then proceeds to put the game out with no fanfare and sends it to die.Stumpokapow said:So the best case scenario for Ubisoft is that they happened to agree to publish 2, treat the developer like shit, leave the game to die, and totally coincidentally implement the mechanics in their biggest game of the year. The worst case scenario adds intent.
Are indie games profitable? What's the average ROI from indie game, what's the median value, and what's the deviation. It's difficult to claim that indie games are such an awesome venture unless you know how they statistically perform, and in current environment it's nigh impossible to collect such data.charlequin said:My hope is that in the next 3-5 years someone clever with a decent bankroll is going to make a lot of money off of incubating microloans to indie game startups.
EviLore said:Tripwire timeline:
-Few guys work on a mod (Red Orchestra) for Epic's Make Something Unreal contest, win the contest and receive a commercial UE2+3 license.
-They use this license to release Red Orchestra as a commercial product, self-published directly to Steam. It's very successful.
-Tripwire expands to ~10 employees, releases the former mod Killing Floor as a commercial product, self-published directly to Steam. It's very successful.
-Tripwire swells to 30+ full-time employees funded by these two successes, with the very ambitious (UE3) Red Orchestra 2 in development.
-Tripwire acts as publisher for the external indie title The Ball on Steam, and announces a second external indie game to be published.
-Announced are two separate mod community projects for RO2, developed concurrently with the game: Rising Storm (Pacific WW2 campaign), and In Country: Vietnam. These two mod teams have access to the RO2 toolkit far before the game's release, are being paid for their work, and if the mods turn out well Tripwire will polish them and release them as paid expansions and give royalties to the mod teams. If they're not up to standards, they'll be released free.
It's pretty brilliant, really, how the Tripwire guys are leveraging their modder roots.
Paradox is very Valve-like.HK-47 said:They are very Valve like in many respects.
szaromir said:Are indie games profitable? What's the average ROI from indie game, what's the median value, and what's the deviation. It's difficult to claim that indie games are such an awesome venture unless you know how they statistically perform, and in current environment it's nigh impossible to collect such data.
It's not easy to count at all. Some devs are transparent, some aren't because of obligations etc. You might have Joe Dangers, Limbos and VVVVVVs of the world that you can be sure made a ton of money, but what about those who sold in the range of 20k, who are probably majority of indie dev scene? (looking at the comments how 100k is a huge and unexpected success)subversus said:it's easy to count. Indie devs are quite transparent in their financials, there're some posts on the web, but I'm too sleepy to hunt for them.
in a nutshell they're really profitable for small teams but not able to sustain AAA-gaming budgets. and that's all that matters.
szaromir said:It's not easy to count at all. Some devs are transparent, some aren't because of obligations etc. You might have Joe Dangers, Limbos and VVVVVVs of the world that you can be sure made a ton of money, but what about those who sold in the range of 20k, who are probably majority of indie dev scene? (looking at the comments how 100k is a huge and unexpected success)
Listing games from Steam's top 10 (or should I say top 5) doesn't help your argument since I specifically said that we don't have any data for indie games which aren't as successful and which are the vast majority of indie releases.subversus said:Amnesia had to sold 37 000 copies for Frictional games to secure a budget for another game which they plan to develop for 2 years. Frictional is a five man team, they live in Sweden. They self-publish, so they get from 70 to 100% of profits. The game costs 20$ on Steam, 25% of copies sold were sold at that price. Also they were selling it directly from their site. Majority of 37 000 copies sold were sold at preorder price (14$ or something like that). They're close to 200 000 copies now. Now you can do some math.
Also search for Minecraft, Recceater posts and so on.
You'd sacrifice a lot of potentially good games in the process, but so be it.Sqorgar said:Mega-publishers have destroyed the game industry. They've taken the garage band, experimental passion that used to personify the game industry and replaced it with what is essentially slave labor building heavily focus tested sequels and licensed crap, then attempting to charge the player for every little aspect, from skins and content that should've been in the game to begin with to the precious ability to actually play the game online.
I used to think that the solution to bring the game industry back to what it was would be unionizing - empowering the workers against their exploitative owners - but I'm starting to think that the best approach would be to just destroy the owners. Kill Activision, Ubisoft, and EA. Parade their heads through the streets, I say.
szaromir said:Listing games from Steam's top 10 (or should I say top 5) doesn't help your argument since I specifically said that we don't have any data for indie games which aren't as successful and which are the vast majority of indie releases.
Sqorgar said:It's just not right that a developer should have to close their doors after having just released a successful game. Just ask yourself what the game industry would be like if game developers weren't mercenaries for publishers and could create the games they wanted to without fear or each one being their last.
1-D_FTW said:Fuck the mega publishers. That's what so encouraging about the way Steam has taken off lately. Fuck em'. They're parasites who do nothing but kill innovation. I hope they all die off.
I really hope Nadeo got paid a lot of money for selling itself off to Ubisoft, because it seems like an odd time to sell. Just when independent publishing is looking vastly superior to the old system you sell off?
Amir0x said:Hm. Never played Ship obviously, but I did have good fun from the AC:B mode. But the AC:brotherhood mode was still heavily flawed, so I wonder which flaws carried over and which didn't
I'd sacrifice a thousand good games if it meant more great games. After all, the good games I'd be sacrificing would just be sequels to last year's good games, while great games would be their own unique thing, injecting new ideas into the ever growing stale videogame gene pool.Yasae said:You'd sacrifice a lot of potentially good games in the process, but so be it.
I've worked for Activision. I've seen how large publishers work first hand, and let me say this: if good games are getting made, it is in spite of the system, not because of it.The answer is to pick wisely. Large publishers work for some - very, very, VERY advantageously for some - but not all, and typically when they don't work, the dev chose poorly. You want to play in the big leagues, then you better get a big league number of units sold. Otherwise the contracts are not advantageous and you're much better choosing a small publisher or self-publishing.
i guess it's worth stating that there only needs to be half a dozen simultaneous players worldwide to get a fairly complete experience, so despite the anemic community, new buyers will atleast get their money's worth.Jangaroo said:So I just wanted to jump in here and veer a bit off topic and say that the game is really good. Impulsed bought it because of the thread and it's utterly fantastic.
The industry is disheartening sometimes with the way things work right now.
Bar their Rabbids section.speedpop said:I always knew Ubisoft were nothing more than a gigantic turd.
Stumpokapow said:you know the world of goo guys and jonathan braid and a few other rich indies pooled together to do this, right?
szaromir said:Are indie games profitable?
but what about those who sold in the range of 20k, who are probably majority of indie dev scene?
charlequin said:If we're talking PC releases at a $20 pricepoint, under presumed Steam terms of 70/30, a single 20k release per year would bring in $280,000 in revenue -- enough to pay a team of three and rent a small office in many places without being at risk of closing up shop.
charlequin said:Actually no I didn't know that (link?) but also part of what I was thinking there was that someone was going to start laying the groundwork for doing that very soon and the making a lot of money part of it was going to follow within 3-5 years.
You know what? I worked for a former marketing head of Arista, and yet I still say the system needs to exist for the time being.Sqorgar said:I'd sacrifice a thousand good games if it meant more great games. After all, the good games I'd be sacrificing would just be sequels to last year's good games, while great games would be their own unique thing, injecting new ideas into the ever growing stale videogame gene pool.
I've worked for Activision. I've seen how large publishers work first hand, and let me say this: if good games are getting made, it is in spite of the system, not because of it.
SpaceDrake said:The real barrier to entry is getting that initial starting cash to pay for, well, living while you develop that first title.
SpaceDrake said:The real barrier to entry is getting that initial starting cash to pay for, well, living while you develop that first title. After that, success breeds success, really. So long as you keep breaking even at least, you can stay in the business. And even if the pay isn't great, doing something you love is worth a whole lot of money otherwise.
scitek said:Take Bionic Commando for example. It did extremely well as a re-release on the DD services in its 2D form, but up the budget God knows how many times, throw some retail muscle into it and it sells...30k on both consoles combined its first month? The obvious thing to do after Rearmed was such a hit, to me anyway, would have been to jump right into Rearmed 2, but they had to find out the hard way that people weren't looking for a $60 version. There's just too much carelessness going on in the industry, and the whole risk-averse approach they try to take ends up being faulty way too often for how smart these people are supposed to be.