#160917 - Reverse_Parn - Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:47 pm
In reply to this post:
I blame Nintendo. They should support NDS developers better.
#160935 - silent_code - Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 pm
@ Reverse_Parn: Believe me, they do offer great support, you just have to be allowed into their clubhouse. ;^)
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
#160973 - tepples - Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:58 pm
| silent_code wrote: |
| @ Reverse_Parn: Believe me, they do offer great support, you just have to be allowed into their clubhouse. ;^) |
So why didn't Treasure put support for mods in this GCN game? And what's the easiest way for a small team to go from 0 to eligible?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#160983 - silent_code - Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:10 pm
<OFFTOPIC>
Regarding your first question: Could you rephrase that, please?
Second question: I am not a leading / managing person, just a mediocre programmer. ;^D (Although now I am 1337 for posting more than 1337 times. X^D )
... But, well, I think the best thing a team can do is make a decent design document (D3 ;^D ) and a small prototype (not neccessarily running on the NDS - can really be anything, as long gameplay resembles what it's going to be like on the target hardware) that demonstrates the game's core gameplay, then send it to some publishers and see how things work out.
But there is no easy way. It's hard work and must be taken seriously.
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
Last edited by silent_code on Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:13 am; edited 1 time in total
#160986 - sgeos - Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:14 pm
| silent_code wrote: |
... But, well, I think the best thing a team can do is make a decent design document (D3 ;^D ) and a small prototype (not neccessarily running on the NDS - can really be anything, as long gameplay resembles what it's going to be like on the target hardware) that demonstrates the game's core gameplay, then send it to some publishers and see how things work out.
But there is no easy way. It's hard work and must be taken seriously. |
Time to fork this topic.
First, you need to realize that publishers sell games to make money for themselves. All of their decisions revolve around this key point. The publisher needs to feel that A) they will not waste time/money dealing with you, B) they can make money selling your game, and C) they can make enough money selling your for it to be worth their time.
Now, there are basically three approaches you can take. For what it is worth, some publishers will not work with you unless they have some sort of a preexisting relationship. Assuming they look at "outside projects", here are the approaches you can take:
I) Document the game you want to make and go begging for the resources to make it. The publisher's reaction is going to be "Who are you, and why should I give you anything to work on this?" If you can satisfactorily answer those questions, your project will be funded if it otherwise fits into their overall portfolio. If you have not release a title that has sold a bunch of units, chance are the publisher will not be interested in working with you because they have no guarantee that you will even be able to complete what you have on paper.
II) Create a demo of the game you want to and go begging for the resources to make the complete version. Again, the publisher's reaction is going to be "Who are you, and why should I give you anything to continue working on this?" Having said that, the answers to those questions are less important to the extent that the demo speaks for itself. If the demo looks interesting the publisher may willing to negotiate with you. An advanve to complete the product may or may be possible (ie, you might to finish development out of your own pocket). Your game may be branded ("Your ghouls are neat, but we want to release a Hello Kitty title.") or otherwise tampered with so that it fits the needs of the publishers portfolio. If they don't think they can release it as is or turn it into something else they are otherwise interested in, it is time to approach another publisher. There are cases where a publisher may actually be interested in a demo, but they decide not to deal with it for fear of complications involved in getting it out the door.
III) Complete a game and go looking for a publisher to sell it for you. This is probably the most cut and dry and the publisher's reaction is going to be "What do you have? Will it sell?". The publisher is either interested in it as is, or they are interested in a modified version (as above) or they are not interested at all. Seeing as the game basically complete, they do not have to worry about it not getting finished, so it is easier for the publisher to say yes. Chances are, some modifications may be requested. Or they may not be. It just depends on who you are dealing with and how hands on they are.
If you want to become a licensed Nintendo developer, there are a similar set of hoops you need to jump through. Nintendo wants to know that A) you can complete projects (track record), and B) that you can protect their trade secrets (not under capital or otherwise at risk of bankruptcy and have a secure environment). Seeing as they ultimately want to sell carts to you, they will also want to know what you are planning to make (not objectionable) and how you plan to sell it (business plan). There are probably licensing fees, but I don't know anything about that. To the extent that you clear all the hoops, you are good to go.
-Brendan
#160994 - silent_code - Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:24 pm
<OFFTOPIC>
Oh, I totally forgot to mention, that you have to do some market research and A BUSINESS PLAN (includes the former)!
I haven't read sgeo's whole post, yet, but I think he indicated that, too. (Now I have and he did. :^) )
@ sgeos: I partially disagree with point 3. It may happen, that publishers will take a nearly finished gamea and sell it, but I doubt any majors will do that. Publishers want to have controll over their investment, that's why they hire external or send internal producers. From what I hear, even for internal studios, it's very uncommon to get the green light for production without any of the publisher's representatives.
A team, that has a game nearly done is risking to have to rework most of it, because the only publisher that was willing to even let the demo be tested, wants it that way. So, you've wasted time and efford.
There are exceptions, sure, but those are outstanding, very promissing products.
Another way would be to publish your game yourself. That requires some sort of online shop and / or some k? for running prints. Advertisement is another story. :^/
PS @ sgeos: I assume your post is not directed towards me... right? It's just not clear to me, because of that quote. :^D (I'm easy. :^) )
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
Last edited by silent_code on Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:12 am; edited 1 time in total
#160997 - sgeos - Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:29 am
| silent_code wrote: |
| @ sgeos: I partially disagree with point 3. |
Naturally, I stand by point 3. For what it is worth I suspect publishers rarely see complete quality games from unknown parties.
| silent_code wrote: |
| It may happen, that publishers will take a nearly finished gamea and sell it, but I doubt any majors will do that. |
If they think it will sell, and they don't have to shell out any cash to make it, why would they not take it if matches their portfolio? It can be out the door as marketing sees fit because it is already done. Some inhouse studios can not guarantee working seamlessly with marketing.
Budget- we don't want tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to get this made because it is already done. Your budget consists of marketing expenses and other things you have no intention of telling us anything about anyway.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Publishers want to have controll over their investment, |
What investment? The game is done. You are talking about a royalty deal. You want someone who is willing to sell your game and collect money doing it. If they desire or require rework those details need to be negotiated. If you would rather see the game not released at all than severely tampered with, then just be fussy and they will be interested or not.
| silent_code wrote: |
| that's why they hire external or send internal producers. |
Irrelevant for something that is already made. Their options are A) it meets our needs, we will take it, B) it kind of meets our needs, but this is what you need to do for us to take it, or C) good job, but it's not what we are looking for right now; better luck somewhere else.
| silent_code wrote: |
| From what I hear, even for internal studios, it's very uncommon to get the green light for production without any of the publisher's representatives. |
Of course not. Internal studios are asking for money. Point three refers to something that is basically complete with no intention of an advance on royalties... because the game is already done. This is very different from an incomplete project because the options are A) release it as is, B) test is some more and then release it, C) rework it and release it. In theory it could be out the door (ie, carts ordered) by the end of the week, although in practice this is not going to happen.
| silent_code wrote: |
| A team, that has a game nearly done is risking to have to rework most of it, because the only publisher that was willing to even let the demo be tested, wants it that way. So, you've wasted time and efford. |
If only one publisher is interested and they require massive rework, have you wasted your time? Maybe, maybe not. It depends. Your options may be A) show a demo that gets ignored, or B) show a complete game that gets completely reworked and then released as something else. In this case, would you rather rework your game to get it released at all?
If you have a finished quality product, someone ought to be interested in it basically as is unless your timing is horrible or you have a lot of enemies. Rework is expensive and you would be a fool rework your game for free.
| silent_code wrote: |
| There are exceptions, sure, but those are outstanding, very promissing products. |
If your product is not commercial quality, don't waste your time or theirs.
| silent_code wrote: |
| PS @ sgeos: I assume your post is not directed towards me... right? It's just not clear to me, because of that quote. :^D (I'm easy. :^) ) |
Just adding my opinion to the conversation. My post is directed at whoever wants to read it.
-Brendan
#161001 - silent_code - Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:12 am
I guess this is... <OFFTOPIC>
(I am still relaxed, so you can picture this post that way. :^) )
Although I logically agree with most of what you write, you forget one important point: There seems to be a "different logic" when it comes to management and publishers. That may not be true for all of them, but the more common ones are definitely among them.
And yes, the publisher has to invest money, even into "finished" games. PR (which needs preparation to be good and to translate into sales) and print ("to make DVDs") costs are among the things a publisher will pay for. The budget for that can easily be as big as the development budget itself. (Except for Duke Nukem Forever. ;^D )
There have been a lot of games that cost more to produce (develop, market etc.) than the money that sales generated. Good companies can go down that way (this is generally speaking!) (Looking Glass - RIP :^C )
Publishers always want the least risks. Releasing a product you had no creative control over isn't exactly a "no risk" scenario... especially when talking about a first product and a first business relationship (that's what the question was about).
Then, how does a publisher know a game is good enough to be sold? There has to be a lot of testing and adjusting to be made and sometimes (I guess it more like most of the time) products, that looked promissing and nearly done in the beginning, turn out to need a major revamp.
But we could go on forever with this discussion, each having a seemingly valid meantal image of our very own point of view on the same thing.
I'm just saying that there is no one way, nor are there two or three. As a young development team, you just have to keep trying and to put effort into the project. And understanding how the business works also helps a lot.
I don't have too much experience with all of that (from the business side), so I am not much of a help here. Also, I haven't pitched (is that the right term?) a game to a publisher myself, although I know peope (in person) who have (some were successful :^) ).
| sgeos wrote: |
| First, you need to realize that publishers sell games to make money for themselves. All of their decisions revolve around this key point. The publisher needs to feel that A) they will not waste time/money dealing with you, B) they can make money selling your game, and C) they can make enough money selling your for it to be worth their time. |
That's the point and we both agree with it. :^)
Btw: The game industry is somewhat simmilar to the music industry. In order to get your record published you either have to rerecord existing songs entirely or you have had put a lot of money into the first recording to begin with. Well, in the latter case, it's not guarranteed that you won't have to rearrange or rerecord at least some parts or remove songs etc. It all depends on what the publisher thinks it can sell the most.
Anyways, it was nice having a chat with you. :^) It's always good to check out how others think about certain topics, as one can learn a lot from sharing experiences. I enjoy that very much. :^D
Good night. :^)
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
#161008 - a128 - Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:29 am
This thread is so offtopic. Let's move this from DS development to DS homebrew
#161012 - sgeos - Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:05 am
| a128 wrote: |
| This thread is so offtopic. Let's move this from DS development to DS homebrew |
| silent_code wrote: |
| I guess this is... <OFFTOPIC> |
I've already stated that it is time to split this thread. I would do it, but I'm not a moderator, so I can't.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Although I logically agree with most of what you write, you forget one important point: There seems to be a "different logic" when it comes to management and publishers. |
I'm not sure what you mean by management. All companies have management.
I will be explicit about one of my assumptions. No publisher is going to be shy about rejecting your project. There are a lot of risks and other considerations, so chances are great that the first few places you approach will not be interested. Interested means that they think they can make enough money selling your to cover all expenses and turn enough of a profit to justify tying people up who could otherwise be doing something else. Making money for you is nowhere on their list of priorities, it is just a potential side effect of doing business with you. (Yes, some publishers fail to pay developers.)
I will also explicitly state what I mean when I say a project fits into a publisher's portfolio. Every publisher has an idea of the kind of games that work with their image. This may be "children's games", "online network games", "high quality games based on movies", "anything that sells at least 500K units", etc. If you make a single player GTA clone that does not look like a 500K+ seller, none of the above publishers will be interested. The "high quality games based on movies" might be interested in shoehorning your project depending on what you have. If it looks like your game might sell 470K units, the "anything that sells at least 500K units" publisher may or may not be willing to work with you bumping the quality of your product up if they think it can be made to break 500K. The other publishers may or may not look at your game, but they will ultimately turn it down even if they do. To recap, this means that a pulisher who sells only "children's games" will look at your project and turn it down even though they think someone can sell over 400K units. Why? A GTA does not fit with their image.
| silent_code wrote: |
| And yes, the publisher has to invest money, even into "finished" games. |
Yes, manufacturing and marketing. Shipping basically a manufacturing expense and there will be other miscellaneous xxpenses.
Gross Profit = Units Sold * (Sale Price - Manufacturing Expense Per Unit) - Shipping Expenses - Other Miscellaneous Sales Expenses
The size of your game, and the save game requirements should pretty well limit you cart choices and therefore define manufacturing expense per unit. There is a good chance the publisher is going to have a sales price in mind if they are interested at all. Before your project is sold, "units sold" is going to be an estimate. Your target market is going to help define potential units sold. I'm operating under the assumption that shipping expenses and other miscellaneous expenses are ultimately going to be negligible.
Net Income = Gross Profit - Development Expenses - Developer Royalties - Marketing Expenses - Other Miscellaneous Expenses
Gross profit, the result of the above equation, is the money on the table after all units have been sold. Development expenses are whatever the publisher needs to shell out to get a program that can be sent to the factory, probably a lump paid out in milestones if they are interested at all. Developer royalties are any extra money the developer receives later and publishers are known for going through great pains to make to this figure a zero. Marketing expenses are going to be controlled by the publisher and I doubt they will give you much information about them, but I may be wrong.
Return on Investment = 1.0 - (Money Left Over at the End / Money Thrown in at the Start)
If we spend $100 to make $70, our ROI is -30%. If we instead make $112, our ROI is %12. An ROI of 0% is a waste of time (unless other long term goals are being supported). Both your project's projected net income and ROI are going to need to be favorable from the publisher's perspective, or they will reject your project.
As the world goes, almost anything can be negotiated. This usually translates to a bad deal for the developer. If you are too fussy, the publisher will lose any interest they might otherwise have had. "Too fussy" depends on what you bring to the table.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Then, how does a publisher know a game is good enough to be sold? |
Someone on the other end is going to play your game. They may not beat it. You may or may not want to point certain things out to them so they get noticed. Note that they are not going look at your demo until you sign something that says you won't sue them if they release something very similar to your project.
| silent_code wrote: |
| There has to be a lot of testing and adjusting |
And this takes time, which translates to salaries (money) and opportunity cost for the publisher. Your project will be rejected if you make a bad first impression.
| silent_code wrote: |
| sometimes (I guess it more like most of the time) products, that looked promissing and nearly done in the beginning, turn out to need a major revamp. |
Welcome to the messy world of dealing with other people? The publisher knows all of this, and that is why they are more than willing to turn you down ASAP.
| silent_code wrote: |
| I'm just saying that there is no one way, nor are there two or three. |
It depends on how you define your terms. Perhaps I should redefine mine to remove ambiguity.
I) You ask for the entire development budget up front.
II) You ask for the part of the development budget after you have started the project.
III) You foot the bill for development.
I suppose you could throw money at the publisher, but I've never heard of that. You could also ask for extra money, but you may be asking for a deal breaker.
| silent_code wrote: |
| As a young development team, you just have to keep trying and to put effort into the project. |
You also need to realize that you will be turned down, but hopefully not by everyone. In this day and age, you could run out of publishers to approach.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Also, I haven't pitched (is that the right term?) a game to a publisher myself, although I know peope (in person) who have (some were successful :^) ). |
I suppose you could use pitch. "Publisher shopping" is another term.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Btw: The game industry is somewhat simmilar to the music industry. In order to get your record published you either have to rerecord existing songs entirely or you have had put a lot of money into the first recording to begin with. |
In other words, you need to make a commercial quality product? Naturally, it depends on what you are making and who you intend on approaching, but if you are not aiming for 100K to 1M units based on some objective criteria, I think you are wasting your time. Aim != hit the mark, which is why aiming for 3K units is a waste of time.
I suspect silent_code and myself actually agree, but we are defining our terms differently and operating on different assumptions.
-Brendan
#161014 - keldon - Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:45 am
Before I go to the studio (so I will have to skip that last post, sorry) ... here are some other options:
- Develop your game and then apply for a job and pitch it to your producer after some time in the team!
- Develop your game on multiple platforms such as Windows, flash or java (possibly doing so using a scripting language with JIT compilation to allow the most amount of code/logic to be shared). This allows you to test the game against a market and may build up a buzz.
- Pitch it to GAME, they have already published titles and may be the best bet for indie's!!!
And most importantly; document your code like you plan on selling your code as a development studio with publishing (or a publisher with a studio) would have a much easier job in adopting your game and expanding on its development (possibly).
#161027 - silent_code - Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:43 am
@ sgeos: A very good post. :^)
What I meant by "management logic": As you have pointed out, you might have a kick ass game in development, but only when the time is right, will publishers be interested and then you have to find one, that actually cares about how cool this game is. Management is all about numbers and marketing (what else? It's their job. :^D ) and there might even be people who don't play games and have no idea (not totally clueless, but like in "Games? Whatever! Pass me the figures.") about what their company is actually selling, but they know how to be successful (if they are good at what they are doing ;^) ).
@ keldon: Yeah, cool, I also forgot about that possibility! :^D
PS: Not every company has designated management personnel (very small ones), but most have and after all, someone has to do it anyway. :^)
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
#161033 - sgeos - Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:15 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| - Pitch it to GAME, they have already published titles and may be the best bet for indie's!!! |
Could you provide a link? Googling GAME is futile.
| silent_code wrote: |
| you might have a kick ass game in development, but only when the time is right, will publishers be interested |
Awesome games released late in a system's life cycle tend to sell poorly. Sometimes they are not released at all.
| silent_code wrote: |
| and then you have to find one, that actually cares about how cool this game is. |
Not only that, they need to be able to sell it. The person on the other end may actually reply with something like, "I tried your game. It is awesome. Unfortunately, we have no idea how to sell it." alternatively "Unfortunately, we don't have the resources to push an original title right now."
| silent_code wrote: |
| Management is all about numbers and marketing (what else? It's their job. :^D ) |
Management should be about the the long term goals of the company. Every company should have a mission statement management attempts to work towards. All of the best companies out there actually do this.
| silent_code wrote: |
| and there might even be people who don't play games and have no idea (not totally clueless, but like in "Games? Whatever! Pass me the figures.") |
Or they like games, just not the games they happen to be selling. I suspect there are some nethack junkies out there who are working on mad 3D titles. I suspect there are people out there who work on licensed E-rated games but prefer to play wilder titles. My grandma plays nothing but tetris. The president of a book publishing company once said, "There is some c**p you just need to publish." As far as video games go, those are the endless sequels and licensed drivel the market is plagued with. It is easy to sell, and publishers don't want to go bankrupt.
| silent_code wrote: |
| PS: Not every company has designated management personnel (very small ones), but most have and after all, someone has to do it anyway. :^) |
Somebody has to do it. If management does not get done, the company will not last long at all.
-Brendan
#161048 - tepples - Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:40 pm
| silent_code wrote: |
| <OFFTOPIC> |
Split. This appears to be a perennial discussion, so I'll add the month and year to distinguish this edition from the previous ones.
| silent_code wrote: |
| Regarding your first question: Could you rephrase that, please? |
Nintendo's developer support web site is called Wario World. But a GameCube game developed by Treasure and published by Nintendo is also called Wario World.
| sgeos wrote: |
| If you have not release a title that has sold a bunch of units, chance are the publisher will not be interested in working with you because they have no guarantee that you will even be able to complete what you have on paper. |
On which platform should a new developer of games in a style suitable for handhelds "release a title that has sold a bunch of units" before approaching a Nintendo licensee? I guess I) is out unless you happen to like Java Micro Edition as much as the DS.
| sgeos wrote: |
| If your product is not commercial quality, don't waste your time or theirs. |
What makes a product "commercial quality"? I know plenty of people who prefer my tetromino games to those of the Tetris franchise, for various reasons.
| sgeos wrote: |
| To recap, this means that a pulisher who sells only "children's games" will look at your project and turn it down even though they think someone can sell over 400K units. Why? A GTA does not fit with their image. |
But the engine for an urban sandbox game can be reworked for another urban sandbox game. For example, given an engine for a GTA 3/4 style game (not necessarily 1/2/Payback), I could see a total conversion that takes place on Sesame Street, albeit without the weapons. So a developer could take approach III) with publishers of games in the same genre and approach II) with other publishers, right?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#161050 - keldon - Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:52 pm
| sgeos wrote: |
| http://www.mcvuk.com/news/31063/GAME-explains-own-brand-strategy |
My apologies: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/31063/GAME-explains-own-brand-strategy
#161058 - sgeos - Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:38 am
| tepples wrote: |
| On which platform should a new developer of games in a style suitable for handhelds "release a title that has sold a bunch of units" before approaching a Nintendo licensee? |
The platform is irrelevant. Handheld or portable status is largely irrelevant. You need to show that A) you do indeed finish projects, and B) your finished projects make money. If you broke a million units in $1 PC shareware sales, and you want reinvest some of that into a retail DS release, I highly suspect people would look at your offer.
| tepples wrote: |
| I guess I) is out unless you happen to like Java Micro Edition as much as the DS. |
You can also make cell phone games using Flash. I) is out unless you have an industry track record. You could release games for the PC, iPhone or anything else so long as a significant number of people are trading cash to play them.
| tepples wrote: |
| What makes a product "commercial quality"? |
The quality is up to par with other commercial products. If you make your own soap, but it has lye pockets in it, that is not commercial quality soap. Games on that are up to par with less fancy released commercial titles are going to be "low quality", but commercial quality none the less. Things like the NES games rereleased on GBA are a special category.
| tepples wrote: |
| I know plenty of people who prefer my tetromino games to those of the Tetris franchise, for various reasons. |
A products user base is not the same thing as a customer base. Plenty of people like nethack, but few of them would pay for it. Due to the number of units that need to be sold to make retail publishing worth the effort (this will be different for say, cell phone games), a product's customer base is going to be measured in at least thousands of units sold. Units sold != total users, as there may be more than one user per house and pirates do not count either. So, the two questions are... What are your net sales (gross sales minus returns and discounts) in dollars? What is your customer base in thousands of units sold (round down)? Because the answers to these questions are $0 and 0 units for free games, free games are completely off the radar.
| tepples wrote: |
| But the engine for an urban sandbox game can be reworked for another urban sandbox game. For example, given an engine for a GTA 3/4 style game (not necessarily 1/2/Payback), I could see a total conversion that takes place on Sesame Street, albeit without the weapons. |
I had not thought of that, and you are right. The thing is, in house developers start mature engines. If you send them GTA meets Mortal Kombat, even if you can make Sesame Street meets the Teletubbies using the same engine it is probably going to be so far off the mark that you are talking about a different game as far as... probably everyone is concerned. Even if they realize that you could make SSmtT, they may not think it is even worth bringing up. Afterall, to the extent you made GTAmMK, it can be assumed that that is what you are interested in making.
| tepples wrote: |
| So a developer could take approach III) with publishers of games in the same genre and approach II) with other publishers, right? |
In theory, yes. Afterall, it rarely hurts to ask. Furthermore, even if you attempt III), the publisher may see it as nothing more than a demo.
Fascinating. As a developer, you might rather work with a retailer because they might be less apt to step on your toes. The distinction between what a retailer and a developer does is greater than that of a publisher and a developer. Also, a guaranteed retail release is fantastic. To the extent it is "in-house" they may be more apt to push the product than that of a 3rd party publisher.
Is GAME a Europe only shop?
-Brendan
EDIT: Here is a link to the GAME Group plc home page.
#161076 - tepples - Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:53 pm
| sgeos wrote: |
| tepples wrote: | | On which platform should a new developer of games in a style suitable for handhelds "release a title that has sold a bunch of units" before approaching a Nintendo licensee? |
The platform is irrelevant. |
How so? Control methods vary per platform. You wouldn't do Kirby Canvas Curse on an NES controller or on a phone keypad that isn't a touch screen. In addition, expected production values also differ based on the hardware's capability, which brings me to the next point:
| sgeos wrote: |
| Handheld or portable status is largely irrelevant. |
My reasoning was that people would more likely consider paying for a single-player, low-graphic-spec game if it's on a handheld than if it's on a modern 2 GHz PC.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#161080 - silent_code - Sun Jul 27, 2008 11:23 pm
My understanding was, that this applies to the prototype. It could be on any platform, as long as you are able to show the game's core gameplay and have plans on how to adapt it to the target hardware.
But I could have misunderstood that. :^)
Well, anyways, that's what I have been writing.
_________________
July 5th 08: "Volumetric Shadow Demo" 1.6.0 (final) source released
June 5th 08: "Zombie NDS" WIP released!
It's all on my page, just click WWW below.
#161097 - keldon - Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:54 am
| tepples wrote: |
| How so? Control methods vary per platform. You wouldn't do Kirby Canvas Curse on an NES controller or on a phone keypad that isn't a touch screen. In addition, expected production values also differ based on the hardware's capability, which brings me to the next point: |
Hmm; well I guess some DS/Wii specific controls do not translate well to other platforms ... but if you develop your game with removable game components and are able to produce the game (pushing whatever brand you suggest to the publishers) then you will have a slightly stronger case than an inflexible game system that only works with one control method.
| tepples wrote: |
| My reasoning was that people would more likely consider paying for a single-player, low-graphic-spec game if it's on a handheld than if it's on a modern 2 GHz PC. |
What about flash/browser games?
#161166 - Reverse_Parn - Tue Jul 29, 2008 5:03 pm
This just in: Nintendo is suing the makers of R4, Ninjapass and other companies.
http://news.google.com/news?ned=tus&rec=0&hl=en&ned=tus&q=nintendo+sues&btnG=Search+News
I wonder why Nintendo is so hostile towards "illegal games". Do they really consider homebrew illegal? Maybe they are referring to the r0mz
#161171 - sgeos - Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:00 pm
| Reverse_Parn wrote: |
| I wonder why Nintendo is so hostile towards "illegal games". Do they really consider homebrew illegal? Maybe they are referring to the r0mz |
"Nintendo" is not just one mind. Whereas I am sure they have a corporate culture, I'm also sure the minds in R&D are much different from those in legal.
| Reverse_Parn wrote: |
| I wonder why Nintendo is so hostile towards "illegal games". Do they really consider homebrew illegal? Maybe they are referring to the r0mz |
This may be a "don't step on my toes, back off" move.
People sue when they feel threaten and there is money on the table. Sometimes either one will suffice. I'm sure piracy is a concern, but don't forget that Nintendo is in the business of making physical carts.
-Brendan
#161174 - Reverse_Parn - Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:57 pm
Brendan,
Are you the troll on the Sierra forums? You talk just like him. Lots of words, but not really saying anything. :) Hahah. JK. Seriously, are you him? Cuz that guy is annoying. If you are him, I recommend hiding behind an alias...
I'm also looking for Kratos, if you see him, reformat his PC for me. Broomie's cool tho. You can let him live. :P
Remember kids: Homebrew isn't allowed on Nintentoes! Don't let anyone else tell you otherwise. (Just ignore it. My R4 is the *reason* I bought a Nintendo.)
This is actually typical Nintendo behaviour. They've always been like this. It's frustrating.
#161177 - gauauu - Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:46 pm
| Reverse_Parn wrote: |
Are you the troll on the Sierra forums? You talk just like him. Lots of words, but not really saying anything. :) Hahah. JK. Seriously, are you him? Cuz that guy is annoying. If you are him, I recommend hiding behind an alias...
I'm also looking for Kratos, if you see him, reformat his PC for me. Broomie's cool tho. You can let him live. :P |
What are you talking about? Sgeos is an established, respected, and non-obnoxious member of this community. We'd appreciate it if you would aspire to be as well.
| Quote: |
| I wonder why Nintendo is so hostile towards "illegal games". Do they really consider homebrew illegal? Maybe they are referring to the r0mz |
Unfortunately, it seems that the majority of people who use flash devices and whatnot are in it for the piracy. From a business perspective, Nintendo believes it's worth the tradeoff of making us homebrewers mad, in order to prevent losses due to piracy.
#161341 - tepples - Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:16 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| tepples wrote: | | How so? Control methods vary per platform. You wouldn't do Kirby Canvas Curse on an NES controller or on a phone keypad that isn't a touch screen. In addition, expected production values also differ based on the hardware's capability, which brings me to the next point: |
Hmm; well I guess some DS/Wii specific controls do not translate well to other platforms |
Especially because tablet PCs are few and far between.
| keldon wrote: |
| ... but if you develop your game with removable game components and are able to produce the game (pushing whatever brand you suggest to the publishers) then you will have a slightly stronger case than an inflexible game system that only works with one control method. |
So what kind of "removable game components" would you add to make a platformer work with a touch screen? Or a phone keypad or a PC keyboard that doesn't allow more than one button to be pressed at once?
| keldon wrote: |
| tepples wrote: | | My reasoning was that people would more likely consider paying for a single-player, low-graphic-spec game if it's on a handheld than if it's on a modern 2 GHz PC. |
What about flash/browser games? |
People can find decent SWF games on Newgrounds for $0. For a jar or swf or js game, is an advertising-supported model viable, or did you have some other revenue source in mind?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#161374 - keldon - Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:03 am
Browser games can generate revenue through subscriptions and [possibly] advertising. In regards to removable game components in a platformer, you could have a particular weapon such as a target missle that the touch screen and mouse would operate, not available on a phone! Clearly it is not possible to have a system that makes use of all available features while still being able to translate to all platforms.
In this case you would want an alternative option of gameplay that is just as fun as the target missile. Instead you could have it replaced with an auto target system for the missile.
In general I was thinking more on the lines of designing the gameplay for the PC/Browser, but being able to translate well to the DS - where you would have already prepared the design to make use of the added features rather than scratching your head once you got the deal.
So it's more of a design strategy issue than anything else.
#161411 - tepples - Sun Aug 03, 2008 1:39 am
| keldon wrote: |
| Browser games can generate revenue through subscriptions |
In my experience, people are willing to sign up for "free reg. req." such as on The New York Times. But as soon as they see a field for a credit card number, the vast majority will press the back button. Webkinz is one exception to the rule.
| Quote: |
| and [possibly] advertising. |
You mean like in Neopets?
| Quote: |
| In regards to removable game components in a platformer, you could have a particular weapon such as a target missle that the touch screen and mouse would operate, not available on a phone! |
I was more worried about how movement and jumping would be handled if only one key can be pressed at once.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#161416 - sgeos - Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:27 am
| tepples wrote: |
| sgeos wrote: | | tepples wrote: | | On which platform should a new developer of games in a style suitable for handhelds "release a title that has sold a bunch of units" before approaching a Nintendo licensee? |
The platform is irrelevant. |
How so? Control methods vary per platform. You wouldn't do Kirby Canvas Curse on an NES controller or on a phone keypad that isn't a touch screen. In addition, expected production values also differ based on the hardware's capability, |
In retrospect, I should have said that the platform is largely irrelevant. This certainly applies to your portfolio of past works and it may also apply to your demo. To the extent you can pull the project off, anything in your portfolio matching your target market is going to be a big plus. Naturally, the more work you have done on the target platform, the better. Failing that, the more work you have done with similar authoring tools the better. The goal is really to show that you can get the job done and that you will do a good job. If you can't do that, why should they deal with you? (They shouldn't.)
| tepples wrote: |
| keldon wrote: | | Browser games can generate revenue through subscriptions |
In my experience, people are willing to sign up for "free reg. req." such as on The New York Times. But as soon as they see a field for a credit card number, the vast majority will press the back button. Webkinz is one exception to the rule. |
Of course, but you don't care about the vast majority of people, just the ones willing to suscribe. When it comes to demos, a 1% conversion rate is actually pretty good. In other words, 300,000 downloads equates to 3,000 sales.
Think of it this way, how many people walk by that candy bar in the grocery store before someone picks it up? (Many.) Does the grocery store care that most people are not interested? (No.) The candy bars are there for the people who are willing to pay for them.
| tepples wrote: |
| Quote: | | In regards to removable game components in a platformer, you could have a particular weapon such as a target missle that the touch screen and mouse would operate, not available on a phone! |
I was more worried about how movement and jumping would be handled if only one key can be pressed at once. |
Playing games on cell phones sucks, there is no getting around it.
This is how I would map the keys for the NES megaman:
123 - Jump (left, vertical, right)
4 6 - Walk (left, right)
5 - Shoot
789 - Slide (left, current direction, right)
*0# - Menu / UI / System
You could jump and shoot with this scheme, but it would be annoying. The solution? Don't make stages that require much if any jumping and shooting.
-Brendan