Created a complete game design. *Now* what?
Unknown
here goes:
Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that could
potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of coming
even close to making the game alone .. you are simply the one that
detailed, very effectively (having great knowledge of what is and is
not possible in a computer game), and to great detail how the game
will work. I am a programmer, but would poorly making graphics and
sounds (compared to what's out there today).
What options do you have with that design?
Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
best-selling game by someone else?
Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)? Books /
web sites / references .. anything.
Thank you very much for any info.
Eric Marcoullier
You can throw it away or put it in a drawer somewhere. Those are
essentially your two options.
> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
99% of companies don't even accept unsolicted designs and will return
them unopened.
> Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
If you like, but it won't do much good. After all, no one's going to
see your design, so no one's going to steal it.
> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
> best-selling game by someone else?
Not a cent.
> Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)? Books /
> web sites / references .. anything.
Look through the archives of this newsgroup as well as
comp.games.development.industry
Check out Gamasutra -- they have some solid articles.
The plain truth is that everybody who is IN the games industry has a
dozen games they want to get made. If they're lucky, they'll get to
make one or two of them in their lifetime. Most of the time they'll be
making a game that either marketing or a publisher tells them to make.
The odds of you selling your game design (even if you are as talented as
Miyamoto and it's the best design in the history of games) are pretty
small.
If you are really interested in games, get a job at a games company.
They always need artists and programmers, and testers, too. Work your
way up the ranks, make positive contributions to the games you work on
and maybe someday you'll get to implement your design.
Best of luck to you.
Eric
---------------------------------------------------
Eric Marcoullier -- er...@marcoullier.com
http://www.marcoullier.com -- 781.354.4433
Founder and Product Manager of the Following Sites:
IGN, Next Gen Online, Game Players Online, BuzzSite
Currently trying to secure a Game Producer Position
---------------------------------------------------
Rainer Deyke
news:3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net...
> After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information, so
> here goes:
>
> Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that could
> potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of coming
> even close to making the game alone ..
Do you have the money to hire people to make it for you? Are you already
working as a game designer at a company that is capable of making the game?
If you answered "no" twice, the game will never be made. You *might* be
able to use the design document to get a job as game designer, but by the
time they let you do your own design, the original document will be horribly
outdated.
--
Rainer Deyke (ro...@rainerdeyke.com)
Shareware computer games - http://rainerdeyke.com
"In ihren Reihen zu stehen heisst unter Feinden zu kaempfen" - Abigor
Kasey Chang (use EXCITE.COM instead!)
> here goes:
> What options do you have with that design?
You'll have to AT LEAST program a prototype. Use what you know.
HTML slide/show is fine, if it illustrates your concept. Or use a Quake
mod if it's an action game, or whatever game that supports your genre
and comes with a full editor. Remember, Starcraft started as a Warcraft
2
mod (not exactly, but the first concept demo WAS done as such).
> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
Absolutely not. No game companies will DARE read your design
for fear of lawsuits. They'll get one of their interns (who has
absolutely
NO power whatsover) to open it. If he finds a game idea, it'll be
stuffed
back into an envelope, with a statement that says they did NOT read it,
and returned.
> Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
It doesn't matter.
> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
> best-selling game by someone else?
Not a penny, unless you have a prototype and convince the brass that
it's
worth developing. And for that, you'll need your own development studio.
> Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)? Books /
> web sites / references .. anything.
There's quite a few of those "Game Design" books, but believe me, I've
been in the industry and I *know* what I'm talking about.
--KC
Unknown
Eric Marcoullier <er...@marcoullier.com> wrote:
]> What options do you have with that design?
]
]You can throw it away or put it in a drawer somewhere. Those are
]essentially your two options.
]
]
]> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
]
]99% of companies don't even accept unsolicted designs and will
]return
]them unopened.
Which means 1% of them will.
]
]> Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
]
]If you like, but it won't do much good. After all, no one's going
]to
]see your design, so no one's going to steal it.
If you believe that, then you should have said above that 100% of
companies don't even accept unsolicited designs and will return them
unopened. But instead you said "99%". Do you see that means that 1% of
them will open them? Do you realize that means that someone *will* see
it? Just thought I'd help you out of your haze of pessimism to get
back on track with basic math.
]
]> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns
]> into a
]> best-selling game by someone else?
]
]Not a cent.
I'm not talking about any games you've tried to write.
And again, I said "ASSUMING it turns into a best-sellig game..." You
certainly are quite jaded.
]
]> Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)?
]> Books /
]> web sites / references .. anything.
]
]Look through the archives of this newsgroup as well as
]comp.games.development.industry
]
]Check out Gamasutra -- they have some solid articles.
I'm amazed you even offered information, based on how suicidal the
rest of your response is. Do people a favor, if you can't offer
positive information, crawl back under your rock.
Stephan King got a *great* many rejections for his first book, and was
even told he had "no talent", probably by a great many people just
like you that said "you'll never get a cent.. give it up". Yet look at
him now. Sorry your own experience has made you completely and utterly
jaded, but fortunately there are still many others that don't feel
that way. Try not to infect anyone else with your crappy attitude.
]The plain truth is that everybody who is IN the games industry has a
]dozen games they want to get made. If they're lucky, they'll get to
]make one or two of them in their lifetime. Most of the time they'll
] be
]making a game that either marketing or a publisher tells them to
]make.
Yeah, that's why you see adds looking for designers.. they are just so
innundated with ideas, they can't choose and need outside people to
offer them even more.
]
]The odds of you selling your game design (even if you are as
]talented as
]Miyamoto and it's the best design in the history of games) are
]pretty
]small.
Then you realize there's still a chance, right? Look at someone that
*does* get their game published eventually and it becomes a best
seller. If they had originally listened to fools like you, it would
have never happened, now would it? Of course not. Now, aren't we all
glad they ignored such pathetic attitudes like yours? *I* am. You
could learn from this.
To those that are not as completely jaded with the concept:
I've taken the current RTS theme, and made some critical interface
modifications that take it to the next level. When I've shown my idea
to others, and originally passed it off as "this is a game that's
being worked on.. doesn't it sound cool?!".. EVERY TIME they were like
"oh my god!! who's doing it??! where's the web site?! when's it coming
out?!". Then I told them it's my design .. so I'm sure their opinions
were quite objective, as they were given before they knew it was my
design.
Yeah, I'm sure people who've made the RTS games already have all these
ideas.. they've just chosen to implement a crappier version of the
ideas because they were holding off on taking the genre to the next
level.
So if anyone has any positive feedback, would appreciate the
information. It's not a new game .. it's a game based on a design
that's already proven popular: standard RTS, most closely resembling
age of empires (which is a best seller), but which offers *critical*
changes in the way you interface with the game to take it to an
amazing new level. These changes address the features that are most
often deemed as a hinderance to the enjoyment of the game, and then
some.
Thanks.
(someone not dissuaded by the negative masses)
Unknown
"Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net...
]> After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information,
]> so
]> here goes:
]>
]> Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that
]> could
]> potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of
]> coming
]> even close to making the game alone ..
]
]Do you have the money to hire people to make it for you? Are you
]already
]working as a game designer at a company that is capable of making
]the game?
]If you answered "no" twice, the game will never be made. You
]*might* be
]able to use the design document to get a job as game designer, but
]by the
]time they let you do your own design, the original document will be
]horribly
]outdated.
And I'm sure you would have been one of the book publishers that would
have told the then "undiscovered" Stephan King he "had no talent". Not
to compare myself with him, but instead to compare poeple like you to
the fools that turned him away when clearly that guy was a
best-selling author waiting to happen. You could learn from this.
Thanks for the useless reply, but perhaps I've helped *you* out.
Tony Gowland
> have told the then "undiscovered" Stephan King he "had no talent". Not
> to compare myself with him, but instead to compare poeple like you to
> the fools that turned him away when clearly that guy was a
> best-selling author waiting to happen. You could learn from this.
> Thanks for the useless reply, but perhaps I've helped *you* out.
Yeah, that's the second time you've used that metaphor, which is broken. If
the people at the books publishers wrote their own books the chances are
King's stuff wouldn't have been looked at. Simpel fact: Designing games, and
writing books, are not the same thing.
You also ask for help and ideas, and when presented with the idea that your
game will never be made you start lashing out at the people who are trying to
help you, by stopping you from wasting your time.
I daresay you'll say bad things about me, like you have the last two
respondants. If that makes you feel better, you do that. It won't help you get
any further in your game-designing dream, and you may actually hinder
yourself, since you're blinkering yourself to the truth.
--
Tony Gowland
"I mean, asking for opinions then ignoring the advice given is a bit stupid."
"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:3a8d4b1d...@news.earthlink.net...
Gerry Quinn
>Stephan King got a *great* many rejections for his first book, and was
>even told he had "no talent", probably by a great many people just
>like you that said "you'll never get a cent.. give it up". Yet look at
>him now. Sorry your own experience has made you completely and utterly
>jaded, but fortunately there are still many others that don't feel
>that way. Try not to infect anyone else with your crappy attitude.
But how many publishers accepted his *idea* for his first book?
Gerry Quinn
--
http://bindweed.com
Puzzles, Strategy Games, Kaleidoscope Screensaver
Download evaluation versions free - no time limits
New puzzle challenge: "Dragon Scales"
Peter James Cowderoy
"sorryn...@noemail.com" wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 18:44:33 -0500,
> Eric Marcoullier <er...@marcoullier.com> wrote:
>
> ]> What options do you have with that design?
> ]
> ]You can throw it away or put it in a drawer somewhere. Those are
> ]essentially your two options.
> ]
> ]
> ]> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
> ]
> ]99% of companies don't even accept unsolicted designs and will
> ]return
> ]them unopened.
>
> Which means 1% of them will.
>
No, it means "maybe someone will, I don't know what the exact odds are
but they're very very slim". Or to put it another way, add nines after
the decimal point to taste.
> Do you realize that means that someone *will* see
> it? Just thought I'd help you out of your haze of pessimism to get
> back on track with basic math.
>
Now multiply by the odds of them looking at it for anything more than
amusement, then the odds that it's any more impressive than what they've
got, that it's in a genre they feel like doing, that they can convince
anyone to fund the actual development...
Then take the reciprocal and compare it to the number of companies out
there. If you're lucky you've found one or two. Now you just have to
hope they're not going to rip you off...
> I'm not talking about any games you've tried to write.
> And again, I said "ASSUMING it turns into a best-sellig game..." You
> certainly are quite jaded.
>
Once again, not a cent, because they won't owe you anything. Game
designs aren't copyrightable, only the document they're written in.
> ]> Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)?
> ]> Books /
> ]> web sites / references .. anything.
> ]
> ]Look through the archives of this newsgroup as well as
> ]comp.games.development.industry
> ]
> ]Check out Gamasutra -- they have some solid articles.
>
> I'm amazed you even offered information, based on how suicidal the
> rest of your response is. Do people a favor, if you can't offer
> positive information, crawl back under your rock.
>
Hey, guess what? Negative information is actually *useful*. It helps you
figure out what not to do.
> Stephan King got a *great* many rejections for his first book,
As do many others. Do you think you're both as good in your field and as
lucky as King is?
> ]The plain truth is that everybody who is IN the games industry has a
>
> ]dozen games they want to get made. If they're lucky, they'll get to
>
> ]make one or two of them in their lifetime. Most of the time they'll
> ] be
> ]making a game that either marketing or a publisher tells them to
> ]make.
>
> Yeah, that's why you see adds looking for designers.. they are just so
> innundated with ideas, they can't choose and need outside people to
> offer them even more.
>
Wrong. They need people to work in-house choosing between them, and
ironing out all the details (98% of the work, by experience).
> ]
> ]The odds of you selling your game design (even if you are as
> ]talented as
> ]Miyamoto and it's the best design in the history of games) are
> ]pretty
> ]small.
>
> Then you realize there's still a chance, right?
Yes, in the same sense that if I remember my quantumn physics correctly
a tunnelling effect may cause a naked supermodel to appear in front of
me from thin air and proceed to help me carry out my sexual fantasies.
We're playing poker, you haven't seen your hand yet, I show you that I
have a king high straight flush and we're not playing with wildcards -
would you bet? Would you give the response above to someone who told you
to fold?
> Look at someone that
> *does* get their game published eventually and it becomes a best
> seller.
Name me one.
> To those that are not as completely jaded with the concept:
> I've taken the current RTS theme, and made some critical interface
> modifications that take it to the next level.
Whoopee. I have a nice little checklist of similar modifications myself,
and I'm sure several thousand other people do. Anyone reasonably
intelligent who's spent any time playing the genre can pull such a list
straight out of their arse.
> Yeah, I'm sure people who've made the RTS games already have all these
> ideas.. they've just chosen to implement a crappier version of the
> ideas because they were holding off on taking the genre to the next
> level.
>
Or possibly because it wasn't worth the risk or no-one would offer them
a large enough advance to sustain them while they developed the game.
Economics sucks, that's your first lesson for trying to get anywhere in
this industry.
Sorry, I left my obscure quote at home today...
Tony Gowland
Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never happen today.
--
Tony Gowland
"Although he's the only one I can think of."
"Peter James Cowderoy" <psy...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3A8D553C...@nottingham.ac.uk...
>
Rainer Deyke
Your analogy is flawed because Stephen King submitted a completed book.
What do you think would have happened if he submitted a mere outline?
Nobody would have even read it, and rightly so. This is because *real
authors*, the kind that can actually complete a book, already have millions
of ideas of their own, any one of which could be turned into a bestseller by
the right team.
In the end, only implementation matters. Take Unreal Tournament. There is
not a single novel idea in the game: everything was taken from previous
first person shooters. Yet the implementation was great, so UT managed to
beat most of their competition and become a bestseller.
I certainly don't need your help. Unlike you, I have the resources to
create the games I want to create.
Arklan
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote in message
news:%Xcj6.3758$Dd3.1...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
Jason Shankel
Ben <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:3a8d47ab...@news.earthlink.net...
> Yeah, that's why you see adds looking for designers.. they are just so
> innundated with ideas, they can't choose and need outside people to
> offer them even more.
> Then you realize there's still a chance, right? Look at someone that
> *does* get their game published eventually and it becomes a best
> seller. If they had originally listened to fools like you, it would
> have never happened, now would it? Of course not. Now, aren't we all
> glad they ignored such pathetic attitudes like yours? *I* am. You
> could learn from this.
>
Yes, companies advertise for designers because, well, games have to be
designed. That does *not* mean that they are sitting on their arses crying
to heaven for someone to bring them a good idea. It means that they
typically have several product concepts in the pipe and they need qualified
designers to flesh them out. Just like they need qualified programmers to
code them and qualified artists to generate content.
That doesn't mean that you should give up on getting your game published.
It means that you should understand what the best routes to getting
published are. Basically, your two options are to implement it yourself or
to go to work for an established company and promote your idea from within.
No one is going to buy your design and implement it for you. If you think
that any "best sellers" get produced this way, check out www.pcdata.com. Of
the top 20 PC titles, exactly 0 were implemented under your proposed rubric.
--
Jason Shankel
Maxis/EA
s h a n k e l "at" p o b o x . c o m
Play rich, creamery OpenTrek at www.pobox.com/~shankel/opentrek.html
I am Jack's throbbing spam filter
Arklan
tony, you have a point, but i understand where this guy is coming from. he
asks a question, which un fortunately has a bad answer. but, instead of
telling him ways to get it looked at, such as going to a game broker or
other such type that is paid to sell nothing but the idea, there fore making
it a solicited idea, and thus getting ,lots of companies to look at it,
people just tel him it is hopeless. that is not the right way to do it.
so ben, here is what i suggest. when you get a completed design doc, do
what ya would in the acting industry. get an agent. with thier help, your
idea will have a chance of getting in front of someone with the power to
make it. now, the odds are still against you, but this route, there is a
chance. good luck to ya.
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote in message
news:m7cj6.3631$Dd3.1...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
Carl G.
Ben wrote in message <3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net>...
>After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information, so
>here goes:
>
>Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that could
>potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of coming
>even close to making the game alone .. you are simply the one that
>detailed, very effectively (having great knowledge of what is and is
>not possible in a computer game), and to great detail how the game
>will work. I am a programmer, but would poorly making graphics and
>sounds (compared to what's out there today).
>
>What options do you have with that design?
If you _really_ think the game will be a best-seller:
1. Mortgage your house and spend your life-savings developing the game
yourself. Start your own company. Do the programming yourself and hire
people to make the graphics and sounds and to market the game. It's a
gamble, but remember that one out of twenty new game companies may not go
bankrupt within the first two years.
2. Spend a few years implementing the game yourself with the best sounds and
graphics that you can. Then, show the game to venture capitalists. Let
them know that you need money to improve the graphics and sounds and to
market the game. Offer them most of the profits.
>Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
No, most companies would be annoyed if you sent them your idea. The company
will not pay you for an idea. Start your own company.
>Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
You can't copyright the idea, but you can copyright the expression of the
idea (the idea expressed in a written document, an implemented game, etc.)
by including a copyright notice ("copyright 2001 by xxxx"). If you use
original, non-obvious, algorithms in your game, you may be able to patent
the algorithms (but the patents won't stop people from using them, they will
just give you legal "ammunition" if you sue them). The original graphics
and sounds used in game can be copyrighted (which I guess is one reason why
graphic artists and musicians get paid more than people who have game
ideas).
>How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
>best-selling game by someone else?
Nothing. If someone else spends the money to make and market the game, they
will get the profits. If you want to receive the profits, you need to make
and market the game yourself.
Illustration: A really good idea for a greeting card, complete with original
artwork and text, will get you around $100 after you assign away all of your
rights. If you could find a company that will look at your game idea (most
won't because they are afraid of future lawsuits), they may buy all of your
rights to the game for around the same amount. Unfortunately, while a
greeting card company can produce several birthday cards each year, a game
company can only produce a few games per year. Most game companies have
more than enough ideas of their own, and don't need more ideas. This means
that a game company may not be as generous as a greeting card company (i.e.,
expect maybe $20).
The computer game industry is not the only one that pays little for ideas.
Very little is paid for ideas for books, movies, television shows, plays,
game shows, magazine articles, etc. What is paid for, is the implementation
of these ideas.
If you want a chance to get "rich", you are probably better off working a
minimum-wage job and using your salary to play the lottery.
>Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as possible)? Books /
>web sites / references .. anything.
_Software Development, A Legal Guide_ (ISBN 0-87337-209-3) by Stephen
Fishman
>Thank you very much for any info.
You are welcome. Don't get discouraged, but realize that creating a
marketable computer game is a lot of hard work, and you will have to do most
of the work yourself.
Carl G.
Eric Marcoullier
hard on him. Personally, I had just got turned down for the gaming gig
I was hoping for and now get to start back at ground zero. Not exactly
the best frame of mind :)
HOWEVER, it has been wondered aloud on this board more than once why
people seem to think that they can just write up a game design and hope
to sell it. I've got an uncle who is still pissed as hell that Nike
won't make a hat he designed and split the profits with him. We laugh
at him too.
This guy obviously is new in the world of games and if he REALLY wants
to make a game some day, he needs to be told how it is as soon as
possible. There ARE ways to get into the industry, but they don't
involve writing design docs. Why blow smoke up his ass?
As for your suggestion to get an agent -- yes, it's not TOTALLY outside
the realm of all that is possible that his game could end up getting
made that way. My shares of Snowball may suddenly be worth $20 each,
but I'm still driving a Saturn POS.
And to think, I'm actually in a BETTER mood today :)
Eric
In article <3%ej6.12742$Nj5.8...@bgtnsc07-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Arklan" <Ark...@aol.com> wrote:
> tony, you have a point, but i understand where this guy is coming from.
> he
> asks a question, which un fortunately has a bad answer. but, instead of
> telling him ways to get it looked at, such as going to a game broker or
> other such type that is paid to sell nothing but the idea, there fore
> making
> it a solicited idea, and thus getting ,lots of companies to look at it,
> people just tel him it is hopeless. that is not the right way to do it.
>
> so ben, here is what i suggest. when you get a completed design doc, do
> what ya would in the acting industry. get an agent. with thier help, your
> idea will have a chance of getting in front of someone with the power to
> make it. now, the odds are still against you, but this route, there is a
> chance. good luck to ya.
---------------------------------------------------
Unknown
"Kasey Chang \(use EXCITE.COM instead!\)" <ksc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
]
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net...
]> After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information,
]> so
]> here goes:
]
]> What options do you have with that design?
]
]You'll have to AT LEAST program a prototype. Use what you know.
]HTML slide/show is fine, if it illustrates your concept. Or use a
]Quake
]mod if it's an action game, or whatever game that supports your
]genre
]and comes with a full editor. Remember, Starcraft started as a
]Warcraft
]2
]mod (not exactly, but the first concept demo WAS done as such).
Now we're talking. Rather than trying to dissuade a person like the
other posters, you offer useful information, even if the odds do seem
fairly limiting. I congratulate you for that.
]> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
]
]Absolutely not. No game companies will DARE read your design
]for fear of lawsuits. They'll get one of their interns (who has
]absolutely
]NO power whatsover) to open it. If he finds a game idea, it'll be
]stuffed
]back into an envelope, with a statement that says they did NOT read
]it,
]and returned.
So for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions.. perhaps in the
form of a game company that is naive in that respect), the ones that
are aware of lawsuit potential only get new game ideas from inside
designers?
]> Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
]
]It doesn't matter.
]
]> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns
into a
]> best-selling game by someone else?
]
]Not a penny, unless you
Yes, it's the "unless you"'s I'm looking into .. the part of the whole
scenario, no matter how remote, that has a hint of it working out..
]have a prototype and convince the brass that
]it's
]worth developing. And for that, you'll need your own development
]studio.
See? Was that so hard. So it's clearly no longer "not a penny" in this
case, so my question still stands:
How much can you expect to make off the idea ASSUMING IT TURNS INTO A
BEST-SELLING GAME by someone else?
]
]> Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)?
]> Books /
]> web sites / references .. anything.
]
]There's quite a few of those "Game Design" books, but believe me,
]I've
]been in the industry and I *know* what I'm talking about.
Yes, I understand your experience in the industry has been quite
limiting. Being that you know what you're talking about, why don't you
let me know how much you can expect to make of an idea assuming it
turns into a best-selling game, assuming you have a prototype and
convince the brass that it's worth developing?
You know, no wonder so many games, even the good ones, suffer from
bonehead features .. the companies limit themselves to only getting
ideas from the few people in their employ (or the ideas those in their
employ stole from conversations they listen to others having). I've
made unique suggestions in forums of other games over the years, and
many times have seen some of these suggestions magically show up in
their expansions or follow up games. So believe me, I *know* what
*I'm* talking about .. but this time, I'm not going to let the fools
benefit from this idea, especially since, on the whole, in my opinion
and many others (who didn't even know it was my idea), it
revolutionizes RTS to take it to the next level.
If anyone has any more useful information, feel free to post.
Unknown
you say is:
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:28:44 +0000,
Peter James Cowderoy <psy...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
]> To those that are not as completely jaded with the concept:
]> I've taken the current RTS theme, and made some critical interface
]> modifications that take it to the next level.
]
]Whoopee. I have a nice little checklist of similar modifications
]myself,
]and I'm sure several thousand other people do. Anyone reasonably
]intelligent who's spent any time playing the genre can pull such a
]list
]straight out of their arse.
And by some chance, everyone that's made RTS games out there are
utterly clueless to these ideas, and hence we are forever doomed to
play crappy versions of RTS game, while everyone else around them is
"pulling such lists straight out of their arse" with ease. You're an
idiot. Stay in your little negative world of nothing being possible,
and save your bullshit for someone that would be swayed as if you have
a clue. You don't.
Unknown
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
]> Name me one.
]
]Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never
]happen today.
Don't tell Tony about it.. he's got his head shoved too far up his own
ass to see past his own shit.
Unknown
"Arklan" <Ark...@aol.com> wrote:
]roller coaster tycoon.... chris sawyer did that almost alone!
That would be a great example. Unfortunately, Tony (and the other
psoters with similar "the world is full of shit" attitudes) will never
learn from this and kill continue to operate in a world of severe
lack. You almost have to feel sorry for them.
Unknown
"Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
]
]
]Ben <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
Sounds like you have two types of designers then. Those that flesh out
details of a design someone else already created, and those that come
up with designs from scratch.
]
]That doesn't mean that you should give up on getting your game
published.
]It means that you should understand what the best routes to getting
]published are. Basically, your two options are to implement it
yourself or
]to go to work for an established company and promote your idea from
within.
]
]No one is going to buy your design and implement it for you.
Maybe. Maybe not. If I was the owner of a game company that made, say,
RTS games, someone came to me with a well detailed plan of how to take
it to the next level, if it sounded good enough, bet your ass I'd come
up with some sort of contract with this person, who would get some cut
of the final product -- perhaps not even a very big cut. But to ignore
such opportunities, as a game develper, means I'd clearly have my head
up my own ass (which I suppose would explain why so many games have
such bonehead features, if they don't just suck outright).
]If you think
]that any "best sellers" get produced this way, check out
www.pcdata.com. Of
]the top 20 PC titles, exactly 0 were implemented under your proposed
rubric.
You're basing your claim on 20 titles. That's wonderful. Thanks for
the useful statistical sampling of the industry.
My whole point is not that this is easy, or should happen every day,
or anything simple. The point is that even though the odds might be
quite bad, no need for others to try and trash others for seemingly
feeling like they have a decent chance in spite of the odds. And the
attitude of game makes (as described by the select few know it alls so
far of course) would lead one to believe they are a clueless bunch,
and it's a shock anything useful, let alone fun, ever gets made.
Unknown
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
]> And I'm sure you would have been one of the book publishers that
would
]> have told the then "undiscovered" Stephan King he "had no talent".
Not
]> to compare myself with him, but instead to compare poeple like you
to
]> the fools that turned him away when clearly that guy was a
]> best-selling author waiting to happen. You could learn from this.
]> Thanks for the useless reply, but perhaps I've helped *you* out.
]
]Yeah, that's the second time you've used that metaphor, which is
broken. If
]the people at the books publishers wrote their own books the chances
are
]King's stuff wouldn't have been looked at.
AND they would have missed out on using an author's work that would
have been many times more successful than their own work. So clearly
what you've very neatly pointed out is, if book publishers behaved
like game publishers, then the book publishers would also clearly be
suffering from the heads-up-their-asses syndrome. No, far from being
broken, this metaphor is all too perfect. Thanks for clearing it up
even more.
]You also ask for help and ideas, and when presented with the idea
that your
]game will never be made you start lashing out at the people who are
trying to
]help you, by stopping you from wasting your time.
That's just it.. it's your *opinion* I'd be wasting my time. Yet you
come off acting like it's gospel, and mentioning bullshit like "put it
away in a drawer or throw it out". Please. Get over yourself, and if
you have nothing more useful to say, stop posting.
Unknown
"Arklan" <Ark...@aol.com> wrote:
]
]tony, you have a point, but i understand where this guy is coming
from. he
]asks a question, which un fortunately has a bad answer. but, instead
of
]telling him ways to get it looked at, such as going to a game broker
or
]other such type that is paid to sell nothing but the idea, there
fore making
]it a solicited idea, and thus getting ,lots of companies to look at
it,
]people just tel him it is hopeless. that is not the right way to do
it.
THANK YOU!!! My GOD I was beginning to think no one got it (that the
industry must be flooded with jaded fools), but Arklan describes it
perfectly. I hope to god you are a designer in the industry.. they
need people like you in it.
]
]so ben, here is what i suggest. when you get a completed design
doc, do
]what ya would in the acting industry. get an agent. with thier help,
your
]idea will have a chance of getting in front of someone with the
power to
]make it. now, the odds are still against you, but this route, there
is a
]chance. good luck to ya.
Perfect. You describe ideas of what my possibilities are, you describe
the chances as not being too great, but you don't try to act like
"give it up .. throw it out .. you've got to be kidding .. etc.".
This, unfortunately, is too much to ask of a few others. I appreciate
you posting.
Nathan Mates
sorryn...@noemail.com <Ben> wrote:
>> have a prototype and convince the brass that it's worth
>> developing. And for that, you'll need your own development studio.
>See? Was that so hard. So it's clearly no longer "not a penny" in this
>case, so my question still stands:
[First, fix your quoting style. Use '>'s instead of ']'s. Also, get
over this griping over RTSs-- that's so out of date.]
You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in simpler
terms:
Idea on its own: not worth a penny
Idea with implementation: worth more.
Ideas are plentiful, so their worth isn't anything. It's the
implementation that takes time-- building a prototype, getting tens to
thousands of man-hours that actually costs something. And that's why
an implementation is valuable: companies have fewer of these man-hours
left until the game is finished. It's the difference between a idea
for a novel and the first draft of the novel-- a LOT of work has gone
into the second.
As the original poster mentioned only an idea and not an
implementation, the advice given him was entirely appropriate: your
idea is worthless until you turn it into reality.
Nathan Mates
--
<*> Nathan Mates - personal webpage http://www.visi.com/~nathan/
# Programmer at Pandemic Studios -- http://www.pandemicstudios.com/
# NOT speaking for Pandemic Studios. "Care not what the neighbors
# think. What are the facts, and to how many decimal places?" -R.A. Heinlein
Unknown
Eric Marcoullier <er...@marcoullier.com> wrote:
]As the first guy to publicly kick his ass, I agree that we were a
bit
]hard on him. Personally, I had just got turned down for the gaming
gig
]I was hoping for and now get to start back at ground zero. Not
exactly
]the best frame of mind :)
Yes, it was obvious there was a very negative outlook on your
opinions.
]
]HOWEVER, it has been wondered aloud on this board more than once why
]people seem to think that they can just write up a game design and
hope
]to sell it. I've got an uncle who is still pissed as hell that Nike
]won't make a hat he designed and split the profits with him. We
laugh
]at him too.
Yes, I understand the point that a great many designs show up that are
really not good enough to be touched. However, if those with ideas
that *are* good enough to be used are swaded by the results of others
with less than stellar ideas, nothing spectacular would ever get done.
]
]This guy obviously is new in the world of games and if he REALLY
wants
]to make a game some day,
I don't really think I do. I love RTS games, and after exhausting Age
of Empires II and Starcraft, I've gotten an acute sense of what's
wrong with them, and have designed a radically different command
structure to take the game to the next level. I'd love for someone to
write it, but unlike most other suggestions I've made in game
creator's forums, I don't want my ideas simply lifted, used, and
gaining no credit whatsoever. I've gotten to the point where I feel I
can make better versions of some of the ideas I see in most games I
play. This belief has been fueled over the years by the few times my
suggestions in forums seem to start showing up in future games
(although they still managed to screw it up in some cases).
]he needs to be told how it is as soon as
]possible. There ARE ways to get into the industry, but they don't
]involve writing design docs. Why blow smoke up his ass?
No one said to. But no one said "Why not try and crush his will?", yet
you seemed hell bent towards that end. Perhaps if those are the only
two choices you can think of, blowing smoke up someone's ass might be
the more positive choice (although I personally can think of other
choices that are even better than that).
]
]As for your suggestion to get an agent -- yes, it's not TOTALLY
outside
]the realm of all that is possible that his game could end up getting
]made that way.
So are you catching on yet then? Possibilities, and opinions as to the
likelihood of those possibilities producing results were what was
asked for. Not an attempt to beat me down when I've expressed the
desire to get a design (for a modified RTS game.. not even a brand new
type of game) acted upon.
Unknown
"Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8d4b1d...@news.earthlink.net...
Oh really? And yet these great ideas are all overlooked, and less
ambitios ideas in RTS games are all we're seeing at the moment. Ok, ..
uh I get it.
]
]In the end, only implementation matters. Take Unreal Tournament.
There is
]not a single novel idea in the game: everything was taken from
previous
]first person shooters. Yet the implementation was great, so UT
managed to
]beat most of their competition and become a bestseller.
Yes, the implementation.. the interface.. HOW the game is supposed to
work. They took the FPS concept, and said "it would be kick ass if it
did x, y and z!!". *THEN* they wrote it (why would they BOTHER writing
it if they didn't have the unique differences in their version of this
FPS game design??! If they wrote it before even being aware of such
things, then they're even dumber than I thought)
Well that's exactly what I have done. I've taken the RTS concept (Age
of kings and starcraft being the best example) and made critical
*implementation* changes: how the game will behave ; how the user will
interact with the game. Every detail on how the game will be
implemented hammered out completely.
When I pitched these ideas to others, as if a game company was already
doing this, the reactions I got were amazing (I wanted an objective
reaction, not one geared towards the fact I designed it).
If anyone else had these ideas, we'd see a game like this. We don't.
It's at the same stage UT was at at some point: the concept is there,
and if people that could implement it agree, we'd have a best seller
on our hands when we're done. But they wouldn't have jack to implement
if somoene didn't come up with these breakthrough design ideas (ideas
that might go down all the way to how it should be implemented at
every detail). A great game cannot exist without someone to design
exactly how it will work (what will make it very popular and likeable
by those who play it), and those that will actually sit down and do
the implementation. I'm the former. I'm looking for the latter. And to
assume, as the former, your chances of being compensated are null and
void is a joke. Programmers don't have jack without someone else
spelling out to them *what* would make a game fun. But you don't see
me saying "well, program this idea, but when you're done, don't expect
to get much besides a pat on the back". But that's exactly what some
of you people are saying. Catching on yet? I doubt it.
]
]I certainly don't need your help. Unlike you, I have the resources
to
]create the games I want to create.
*rolls eyes* I'm happy for you. If you were in the room, I'd give you
a pat on the back for reassurance you clearly need. When you actually
make a game that is decent enough, let us know. Sorry it bothers you
that someone else is actually excited about an idea, and has more
confidence about their idea than you've had in what sounds like far
too long. But then, I'm getting used to reactions like yours.
Unknown
nat...@visi.com (Nathan Mates) wrote:
]In article <3a8d4bbe...@news.earthlink.net>,
]sorryn...@noemail.com <Ben> wrote:
]
]>> have a prototype and convince the brass that it's worth
]>> developing. And for that, you'll need your own development
studio.
]
]>See? Was that so hard. So it's clearly no longer "not a penny" in
this
]>case, so my question still stands:
]
] [First, fix your quoting style. Use '>'s instead of ']'s. Also,
get
]over this griping over RTSs-- that's so out of date.]
[First, if you're looking for more to bash over, looks like you've
found it. Get over griping over which quoting characters people should
use-- that's so out of date]
[Second, if you believe RTSs are out of date, then it's obvious you
would never be someone that just might take the genre to the next
level. Given the negative nature of your reply, I'm not surprised. I,
fortunately, am not so held back by such negative, fearful concepts,
or limiting beliefs.]
]
] You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in simpler
]terms:
]
]Idea on its own: not worth a penny
]Idea with implementation: worth more.
You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in simpler
terms:
Great idea with implementation: worth a hell of a lot
implementation WITHOUT that great idea: Worth so little by comparison
Great idea: now potentially worth a lot, when considered how it makes
all the difference between "implementation WITHOUT that great idea"
and "Great idea with implementation".
]
] Ideas are plentiful, so their worth isn't anything.
You need to realize there's a difference between all ideas. Not all
ideas are created equal. Some are outstanding. Others are mediocre at
best. Having this degree of difference destroys the argument you're
attempting to make.
]It's the
]implementation that takes time-- building a prototype, getting tens
to
]thousands of man-hours that actually costs something. And that's why
]an implementation is valuable: companies have fewer of these
man-hours
]left until the game is finished.
I never said implementation was worthless. I'm arguing against the
concept you seem to have that the idea is worthless. To the contrary,
implementation WITHOUT these great ideas can become so much less
worthwhile implementation, and being it's the great idea that can
multiply how worthwhile the implementation process is, suddenly it can
become quite obvious how valuable these *great* ideas are (as opposed
to mediocre ideas). But you go right on implementing just any old idea
(after all, implementation is where the value is at), while great
ideas that are in quite possibly in your reach get ignored until
someone else snatches them up, and then effectively multiplies how
much worth their implementation will end up being, being coupled with
a great idea, rather than just a mediocre one.
]It's the difference between a idea
]for a novel and the first draft of the novel-- a LOT of work has
gone
]into the second.
And said work would end up being worth so little if the idea in the
completed novel is crap compared to the idea in the novel that has yet
to be created. But in your mind, the completed novel is a goldmine,
**no matter which** idea behind the scenes is better, so you go ahead
and try to sell that crappy novel.
Tom Sloper
that's really your name), I don't see why all the secrecy as to your
identity. Why come into this forum wearing a mask? I understand not
wanting to get junk email, but the standard way of circumventing the spiders
and bots is to just add a human-readable anti-spam device into your genuine
email address. From our side, it's a little weird speaking to someone who
insists on wearing a mask.
That aside, Ben wrote:
>After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information,
I keep forgetting that it's the other game design newsgroup
(news:rec.games.design) that has an FAQ, written by David Alex Lamb (look
for posts titled "rec.games.design - what it's for (mini-FAQ)"). Maybe I
ought to write an FAQ for this NG. Lamb's FAQ is a good starting place for
wannabees. His full-blown FAQ is at
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/home/dalamb/Games/design/design.html
>so here goes:
>Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that could
>potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of coming
>even close to making the game alone .. [snip]
Ask yourself the following questions:
1. Do I want a career in making games? If yes, continue on to question 2 --
if no, then I'm sorry but you can forget about your design, it'll never go
anywhere.
2. Am I ready/willing to work on other games besides this one? If yes,
continue reading my reply -- if no, then I'm sorry but you can forget about
the career too (nobody will pay you to implement your design).
3. Will I ever design another game as good as this one? If yes, then you
could well eventually be a game designer, so should seek a job in the games
biz -- if no, then I'm sorry but you are not cut out to be a game designer,
but at least you could still get a job in the games biz.
4. Am I a team player or am I a lone wolf? If the former, then you should
apply for a job in the games biz. If the latter, you will have to do it all
yourself.
>I am a programmer, but would poorly making graphics and
>sounds (compared to what's out there today).
OK, the "lone wolf" trail is still a possibility, but you'd have to pay
artists and sound engineers.
>What options do you have with that design?
>Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
As I say in Lesson #4 at my website (http://www.sloperama.com/advice.html),
I recommend that you do this, only in the course of applying for a job. But
you will have to overcome the problem mentioned by other respondents: game
companies resist seeing outside submissions without first signing submitters
to a legal agreement called a Submission Agreement. Game companies open
themselves to legal actions otherwise.
My thinking, though, is that if you have your game design with you when you
go on the job interview, you could say something like, "I have written a
game design. I'd be glad to show it to you only for the purposes of showing
you that I'm a creative person and a good communicator, and I'm NOT worried
that you're going to steal the idea. I've got it posted on my website for
the world to see anyway, and you're not going to grasp the whole concept if
I just flip the pages so you can see what I can do."
If the interviewer agrees, then just flip the pages so he can get a glimpse
of how well organized, presented, illustrated, and thought out your design
is.
If he doesn't want to look at it because of the legal liabilities, just say
"no problem, I understand," and put it away in your briefcase. Hopefully
even just the binder that the design is in is impressive-looking. Hopefully
the rest of the interview goes well, and you make a good impression.
Hopefully s/he'll offer you a job in the company, but it's extremely
unlikely s/he'll offer you the job of "Game Designer" (see Lesson #1 at
http://www.sloperama.com/advice.html).
>Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
Just write a copyright notice on the front page, or in the header or footer
on each page of the document. But like the other respondents have said,
nobody is going to steal your idea (it's too much work).
>How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
>best-selling game by someone else?
A proven hitmaker can license a game concept for about 10-15%, but a novice
can't license a game concept at all. See Lesson #1 at my website, and see
the article at Geoff Howland's website (the URL is in Lesson #1).
>Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)? Books /
>web sites / references .. anything.
At my website I have a number of articles about this very topic, and a page
loaded with links to game design sites.
http://www.sloperama.com/advice.html.
Lastly, I see by your responses to those answering your question that you
are resistant to realistic answers. In general, the answers you've gotten
are realistic (not "jaded" or "negative"). Your response to the naysayers
("Then you realize there's still a chance, right?") reminds me of a line by
Homer Simpson. Homer has purchased some stock in a company called
Animotion, and is watching the news on TV:
Newsman Kent Brockman: "Turning to the stock market, Animotion is up an
eighth..."
Homer: "Yes!"
Brockman: "...after plunging 75 points this morning."
Homer: "Oh... I hope 'plunging' means 'up,' and '75' means '200'!"
Some folks resist hearing realistic answers to their desires and hopes. If
you come here asking questions, and you get answers from experienced
reliable sources, then you should listen, rather than argue back.
It takes a lot of preparation, hard work, and a cooperative attitude to make
it to the big leagues. You can't make it big on one game design -- we're
talking about a career.
Good luck in your career! -- Tom
Tom Sloper
http://www.sloperama.com/advice.html
Tom Sloper
>You're an
>idiot. Stay in your little negative world of nothing being possible,
>and save your bullshit for someone that would be swayed as if you have
>a clue. You don't.
I hereby wish I could withdraw the helpful response I just posted, at least
insofar as this person is concerned.
I hope that a /nice/ wannabee benefits from my words.
Tom Sloper
Nathan Mates
sorryn...@noemail.com <Ben> wrote:
>> You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in simpler
>> terms:
>> Idea on its own: not worth a penny
>> Idea with implementation: worth more.
>Great idea with implementation: worth a hell of a lot
>implementation WITHOUT that great idea: Worth so little by comparison
>Great idea: now potentially worth a lot, when considered how it makes
>all the difference between "implementation WITHOUT that great idea"
>and "Great idea with implementation".
Not every implementation is guaranteed to go any further. [You make
this mistake further down in considering books; snipped below.] Quite
frankly, an idea may suck. But, the implementation lets people see
exactly how that idea works-- the difference between theory and
practice. Many implementations may get sent back to the drawing board
(the idea wasn't worth it), refined (the idea wasn't perfect), or
approved for further production.
An prototype's implementation is simpler than a full game, but it's
an absolutely useful stage in a game's development. You want to ignore
a useful tool, then do so at your own risk. The implementation helps
people decide whether an idea is good or bad. You want to sell your
ideas, you've got to prove it. If you're so sure your ideas will
change the industry, then make (or join the team of) an Open Source
game that puts your ideas into practice. If you're successful, you'll
get what you want.
However, if you just want companies to pay big bucks for your ideas
as to how to change their games, forget it. Age Of Empires (one of the
games you whined about) has gotten great reviews, sold well,
etc. That's a success. And you're trying to come to them and tell them
they're all wrong? Your attitude needs help, your methodology needs
help, your lack of actually doing real work implementing ideas needs
help.
I'm sorry that we have to shoot you down (*again*), as you
apparently didn't learn the first time. You've got a desire to do
something, but in the industry, people respect people who produce
products, not talk. Change your focus from complaining to production,
and you'll go a lot further.
Peter James Cowderoy
Tony Gowland wrote:
>
> > Name me one.
>
> Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never happen today.
>
Didn't that involve the setting up of Team 17 and several succesful
games on the Amiga first?
Peter James Cowderoy
>
> roller coaster tycoon.... chris sawyer did that almost alone!
>
Yes, that's kind of the point, he did most of the actual development as
well :-)
Peter James Cowderoy
"sorryn...@noemail.com" wrote:
>
> This part of your post pretty much nicely sums up how useless anything
> you say is:
>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:28:44 +0000,
> Peter James Cowderoy <psy...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> ]> To those that are not as completely jaded with the concept:
> ]> I've taken the current RTS theme, and made some critical interface
> ]> modifications that take it to the next level.
> ]
> ]Whoopee. I have a nice little checklist of similar modifications
> ]myself,
> ]and I'm sure several thousand other people do. Anyone reasonably
> ]intelligent who's spent any time playing the genre can pull such a
> ]list
> ]straight out of their arse.
>
> And by some chance, everyone that's made RTS games out there are
> utterly clueless to these ideas,
No, they simply don't have the chance to implement them. You want some
evidence? Take a look at the two best selling series (remember,
publishers, the guys developers need money from, are interested in
sales). Take a look at the changes involved. OK, Dune II to C&C could be
viewed as sort-of-large. The *craft games and the C&C series show very
little real evolution at all. This stuff sells, whereas publishers
haven't a clue what you're talking about when you start mentioning
hierarchical command structures with formations at each level of the
hierarchy, for example.
>and hence we are forever doomed to
> play crappy versions of RTS game, while everyone else around them is
> "pulling such lists straight out of their arse" with ease.
Yup. Because the guys with the ideas generally aren't the ones with the
money to create worthwhile content to stick in the games. Note that the
two most succesful RTS series also have good music, and generally
fair-to-good artwork matched with plenty of FMV.
> Stay in your little negative world of nothing being possible,
Oh, I see plenty of possibilities - I'm just not silly enough to assume
that everything's possible. Believe it or not, being told what doesn't
work helps you figure out what might. I'll also go so far as to say that
when you're looking at unorthodox ways of getting things done, you're
unlikely to get away with doing it the same route as the last unorthodox
success. Rollercoaster Tycoon was great, but it was also very very
lucky.
Peter James Cowderoy
Tom Sloper wrote:
>
> Ben of the fake email address wrote:
>
> >You're an
> >idiot. Stay in your little negative world of nothing being possible,
> >and save your bullshit for someone that would be swayed as if you have
> >a clue. You don't.
>
> I hereby wish I could withdraw the helpful response I just posted, at least
> insofar as this person is concerned.
>
Well, it hasn't made my server yet so I couldn't comment on it :-) OTOH,
I'm not too bothered if this guy flames me here and now. Sooner or later
everyone has to get past the "I know how to do it all better than
everyone else" stage and realise they're going to have to put a lot more
work into how to get it done - god knows I was guilty of that two years
ago :-) As I said earlier, most of us probably could make massive
improvements to our genre of choice given a couple of million to spend -
talking someone into giving you that couple of million is another
matter.
Anyway, if I couldn't take as good as I give I'd be in trouble ;-)
Jason Shankel
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:13:08 GMT,
> "Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
> Sounds like you have two types of designers then. Those that flesh out
> details of a design someone else already created, and those that come
> up with designs from scratch.
>
It's not necessarily two kinds of designers, but two kinds of designs. Some
products are original, designed from scratch. Others are sequels or
knock-offs. Often, a studio will have one or two advanced project teams,
where the designers and artists involved come up with new ideas and try to
develop complete designs from those ideas. Most successful studios also
have teams devoted to mods, expansion packs and sequels, where the ideas are
pretty much set and even much of the design work is done. These teams focus
on leveraging success and mitigating the shortcomings of pre-existing
products.
> ]No one is going to buy your design and implement it for you.
>
> Maybe. Maybe not.
It's pretty much definitely not.
> If I was the owner of a game company that made, say,
> RTS games, someone came to me with a well detailed plan of how to take
> it to the next level, if it sounded good enough, bet your ass I'd come
> up with some sort of contract with this person, who would get some cut
> of the final product -- perhaps not even a very big cut. But to ignore
> such opportunities, as a game develper, means I'd clearly have my head
> up my own ass (which I suppose would explain why so many games have
> such bonehead features, if they don't just suck outright).
>
Publishers are not in the market for ideas. They have them to spare.
They're in the market for talent, people who can take an idea and actually
produce a completed product. Maybe that makes the world an unfair place.
Maybe that makes the rest of us a bunch of cynical, talentless boobs.
But your bitterness and $8.50 will buy you a ticket to the movies and you'll
still be no closer to selling your idea.
>
> ]If you think
> ]that any "best sellers" get produced this way, check out
> www.pcdata.com. Of
> ]the top 20 PC titles, exactly 0 were implemented under your proposed
> rubric.
>
> You're basing your claim on 20 titles. That's wonderful. Thanks for
> the useful statistical sampling of the industry.
>
You're the one who invoked "best sellers". For "best sellers", 20 titles
isn't a statistical sampling, it's the whole damn population.
My point was that *none* of the best selling titles in the past few years
have been based on purchased ideas. They've all been developed by teams
that produced the idea, design AND implementation.
>
> My whole point is not that this is easy, or should happen every day,
> or anything simple. The point is that even though the odds might be
> quite bad, no need for others to try and trash others for seemingly
> feeling like they have a decent chance in spite of the odds. And the
> attitude of game makes (as described by the select few know it alls so
> far of course) would lead one to believe they are a clueless bunch,
> and it's a shock anything useful, let alone fun, ever gets made.
If you think you have a chance, despite the odds, then by all means, pursue
your dream. Understand, I'm not trashing your idea, or even your desire to
have your game published. Quite the contrary, we need more passionate
people in this industry. What I, and the others, have been telling you is
that you have almost no chance of selling just the idea, or even the
completed design, to a studio without an implementation.
Does that mean no chance whatsoever? Of course not. There is a finite,
non-zero chance. But you also have a chance of winning the lottery or being
struck by lightning. I daresay you have more chance of winning the lottery.
After all, *someone* has to win the lottery.
You have to ask yourself, what's more important? Getting your game made, or
changing the way the game industry traffics in ideas? If it's the former,
then I suggest you consider other options besides just marketing the
concept. If it's the latter, well, tilt away Don Quixote.
Also understand that, if some of us are a little terse on this subject, it
comes from *years* of experience in the industry having this exact debate
with yet another generation of would-be game designers who don't want to put
in the work that's required to produce a successful title but want to reap a
reward simply for having their egos stroked.
Game development is hard work, from design to production to coding and art.
Ideas are nothing compared to the amount of work that goes into completing a
game. If you're not willing to be part of the team that actually develops
the product, you have no right to expect a piece of the profits.
Jason Shankel
news:o5hj6.21042$_D.29...@typhoon.we.rr.com...
Aw, don't worry about it, Tom. As "I wanna sell my idea" threads go, this
one has been pretty much par for the course.
Rainer Deyke
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:10:43 GMT,
> "Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
> ]Your analogy is flawed because Stephen King submitted a completed
> book.
> ]What do you think would have happened if he submitted a mere
> outline?
> ]Nobody would have even read it, and rightly so. This is because
> *real
> ]authors*, the kind that can actually complete a book, already have
> millions
> ]of ideas of their own, any one of which could be turned into a
> bestseller by
> ]the right team.
>
> Oh really? And yet these great ideas are all overlooked, and less
> ambitios ideas in RTS games are all we're seeing at the moment. Ok, ..
> uh I get it.
Do you really think Stephen King got to where is now because of his ideas?
Lol!
> ]In the end, only implementation matters. Take Unreal Tournament.
> There is
> ]not a single novel idea in the game: everything was taken from
> previous
> ]first person shooters. Yet the implementation was great, so UT
> managed to
> ]beat most of their competition and become a bestseller.
>
> Yes, the implementation.. the interface.. HOW the game is supposed to
> work. They took the FPS concept, and said "it would be kick ass if it
> did x, y and z!!". *THEN* they wrote it (why would they BOTHER writing
> it if they didn't have the unique differences in their version of this
> FPS game design??! If they wrote it before even being aware of such
> things, then they're even dumber than I thought)
There really aren't any significant "new" ideas in UT. The game is still a
bestseller. How dumb is that?
> If anyone else had these ideas, we'd see a game like this. We don't.
Wrong! When a designer gets to work on a new RTS, he looks at his list of
ideas and picks which ones to implement. Each idea has three risks
associated with it: it might be too difficult to implement, it might not be
fun, or it might be too radical to be accepted by the public. The designer
asseses the risks and picks just enough new ideas to make the game a
significant improvement over previous games. The rest of the list is saved
for sequels.
--
Rainer Deyke (ro...@rainerdeyke.com)
Shareware computer games - http://rainerdeyke.com
"In ihren Reihen zu stehen heisst unter Feinden zu kaempfen" - Abigor
Tom Sloper
Jason Shankel
> Hear, hear! Eloquently said, Jason.
>
> Tom
That's what I like about the usenet...it's one of the few places where ideas
*do* have value. To bad it's not monetary value :)
Link
> Do you really think Stephen King got to where is now because of his ideas?
> Lol!
Rainer laughs!!! Ben makes my day.
- Mike
Kasey Chang (use EXCITE.COM instead!)
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:33:55 -0800,
> "Kasey Chang \(use EXCITE.COM instead!\)" <ksc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> ]
> ]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
> ]news:3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net...
> ]> After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information,
> ]> so
> ]> here goes:
> ]
> ]> What options do you have with that design?
> ]
> ]You'll have to AT LEAST program a prototype. Use what you know.
> ]HTML slide/show is fine, if it illustrates your concept. Or use a
> ]Quake
> ]mod if it's an action game, or whatever game that supports your
> ]genre
> ]and comes with a full editor. Remember, Starcraft started as a
> ]Warcraft
> ]2
> ]mod (not exactly, but the first concept demo WAS done as such).
> Now we're talking. Rather than trying to dissuade a person like the
> other posters, you offer useful information, even if the odds do seem
> fairly limiting. I congratulate you for that.
The odds are NEGLIGIBLE. You have a better chance of submitting
a script to Hollywood and getting it made into a blockbuster than you
have with the game industry.
> ]> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
> ]Absolutely not. No game companies will DARE read your design
> ]for fear of lawsuits. They'll get one of their interns (who has
> ]absolutely NO power whatsover) to open it. If he finds a game idea,
it'll be
> ]stuffed back into an envelope, with a statement that says they did
NOT read
> ]it, and returned.
> So for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions.. perhaps in the
> form of a game company that is naive in that respect), the ones that
> are aware of lawsuit potential only get new game ideas from inside
> designers?
99.9999% of the game studios will NOT look at design documents
unless it comes from the inside. Just the lawyer fees will kill a
development studio's entire game budget. They can't afford the risk.
The remainder is either stupid or crazy.
Face it, you would NOT be in the game producer/designer business
UNLESS you have a CLOSETFUL of ideas you want to make, and
game companies have dozens more on file ready to be pursued. Do
you really want to read any one else's ideas?
Remember Paramount? Art Buckwald sued them for millions of
dollars and won when he submitted an idea about an African king
come to the US to look for a queen, and it got rejected. A few months
later, Eddie Murphy convinced Paramount to make the movie based
on virtually the SAME topic.
> ]> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns
> ]into a best-selling game by someone else?
> ]Not a penny, unless you
> Yes, it's the "unless you"'s I'm looking into .. the part of the whole
> scenario, no matter how remote, that has a hint of it working out..
You're NOT listening/reading.
THE GAMES INDUSTRY DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY GAME DESIGNS
"ON SPEC", i.e. UNSOLICITED.
> ]have a prototype and convince the brass that it's
> ]worth developing. And for that, you'll need your own development
> ]studio.
> See? Was that so hard. So it's clearly no longer "not a penny" in this
> case, so my question still stands:
> How much can you expect to make off the idea ASSUMING IT TURNS INTO A
> BEST-SELLING GAME by someone else?
It'll NEVER happen, so the net amount is still zero.
How does game development studio get formed? Something like this:
Let's say you approach Publisher X. They agree to fund your project.
They give you a certain amount of money, and you sign a contract
that says you'll reach "alpha" by date 1, beta by date 2, ready to gold
by
date 3, upon accepting all that money. You'll get more money upon those
dates provided you've shown proper progress.
You can now hire all the programmers and artists you'll need, get
equipment,
rent time on "render farms" for any CGI movie sequences, studio time for
voice/acting, and so on and so forth.
If you run out of money ahead of time, you COULD go back and ask for
more,
but they'll demand evidence that you're actually DOING something. If
it's like
only a month or two late, they'll fork over a bit more dough to keep
your payroll
going, or they'll tell you "cut this piece out", then it's up to your
negotiation.
If you're the producer/director, then you may get a bit of gross/profit
depending
on the publishing deal you negotiated in that contract.
Publishers will NOT fund a project unless they KNOW you can produce,
so you need a track record. That means EXPERIENCE in the industry.
You can self-fund the project, mortgage your house, your car, etc. to
get
things started, but with the sophistication of games nowadays, you will
have
to line up a publisher sooner or later.
> Yes, I understand your experience in the industry has been quite
> limiting. Being that you know what you're talking about, why don't you
> let me know how much you can expect to make of an idea assuming it
> turns into a best-selling game, assuming you have a prototype and
> convince the brass that it's worth developing?
Since no publisher will buy ideas, and no development studio will buy
ideas, the net sum is ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, NOTHING. Get the point?
To repeat...
THE GAMES INDUSTRY DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY GAME DESIGNS
"ON SPEC", i.e. UNSOLICITED.
So no matter how brilliant is your idea, you HAVE to turn it into
reality
yourself, or it'll never get made.
Any questions?
--KC
Geoff Howland
wrote:
>Sounds like you have two types of designers then. Those that flesh out
>details of a design someone else already created, and those that come
>up with designs from scratch.
Other teams often come up with the scratch part of the design, like
marketing.
This is the game _industry_, which means its about making and selling
games. Which means the games need to make money.
Designers can initiate the process, but ultimately its whoever decides
if it will make money (which is not a designer job) that approves the
title.
>Maybe. Maybe not. If I was the owner of a game company that made, say,
>RTS games, someone came to me with a well detailed plan of how to take
>it to the next level, if it sounded good enough, bet your ass I'd come
>up with some sort of contract with this person, who would get some cut
>of the final product -- perhaps not even a very big cut
Except that almost every company (or people in them who are making
them rather) knows the pitfalls if theyve been doing it for very long.
They all played the end result. They all read the reviews. They all
heard players bitching.
The hard part is MAKING IT HAPPEN, not knowing what needs to be done.
Extending code you already have to provide new functionality without
brekaing everything. Spending the time to get it right when you're
over budget from just getting it working.
That doesnt even include the "but they keep buying it as it is, what
happens if we change it and they stop buying?" issues.
>You're basing your claim on 20 titles. That's wonderful. Thanks for
>the useful statistical sampling of the industry.
So dont use the top 20. Use the 3000-5000 games that were made this
year. Which of them were made from bought ideas like youre asking?
How about none. If it doesnt come from a known license (Bugs Bunny,
etc) and doesnt have a team to develop it with a track record, its not
getting made.
If you think you can do this, then go talk to some venture capitalists
and see how big of suckers people with money are.
[Hint: even with all the obviously crazy money throwing into the
Internet-Companies-with-no-products-or-services-they-charge-for and
other obviously bad business ventures, you will find that people who
are looking to invest money that YOU talk to are never as dumb as they
sounded to have invested in those things.]
>My whole point is not that this is easy, or should happen every day,
>or anything simple. The point is that even though the odds might be
>quite bad, no need for others to try and trash others for seemingly
>feeling like they have a decent chance in spite of the odds. And the
>attitude of game makes (as described by the select few know it alls so
>far of course) would lead one to believe they are a clueless bunch,
>and it's a shock anything useful, let alone fun, ever gets made.
Better chances playing the lottery. And the pay offs are bigger too
;)
Keep dreaming and being a dick though. Itll get you a lot farther
than learning how to actually do the work yourself and looking for
people you can gain insight off of.
-Geoff Howland
http://www.lupinegames.com/
Erik Max Francis
> That would be a great example. Unfortunately, Tony (and the other
> psoters with similar "the world is full of shit" attitudes) will never
> learn from this and kill continue to operate in a world of severe
> lack. You almost have to feel sorry for them.
We'll see where you are in five years, then.
--
Erik Max Francis / m...@alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
__ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/ \ Heaven and Hell / Is on Earth
\__/ Salt-n-Pepa
blackgirl international / http://www.blackgirl.org/
The Internet resource for black women.
Erik Max Francis
> [First, if you're looking for more to bash over, looks like you've
> found it. Get over griping over which quoting characters people should
> use-- that's so out of date]
Try reading the Usenet etiquette FAQs. Rephrasing what someone says and
substituting your objection doesn't work very well.
> [Second, if you believe RTSs are out of date, then it's obvious you
> would never be someone that just might take the genre to the next
> level. ...
He didn't say RTSs were out of date, he said _griping_ about them was.
Any idiot can gripe about how RTSs fall short of some idealized goal.
Any idiot who's not completely braindead can outline some elements that
would "take the genre to the next level." What actually takes skill is
_doing_ it.
> You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in simpler
> terms:
>
> Great idea with implementation: worth a hell of a lot
> implementation WITHOUT that great idea: Worth so little by comparison
> Great idea: now potentially worth a lot, when considered how it makes
> all the difference between "implementation WITHOUT that great idea"
> and "Great idea with implementation".
This is a bizarre statement, and a perfect example of why everyone's
taking turns bashing you soundly. You are an admitted outsider, who has
a game idea and wants to sell it and make a million. You are posting
here, where everyone (professional insider and amateur alike) are
telling you that that is not how games get made and your chances are
very slim.
What possible basis do you have for thinking that an unsolicited game
design document has value and has any reasonable chance of getting
"bought" and turned into a real game? If you don't have any reason to
think that but your misguided (but sincere) hope, then why are you
telling people who are warning you that you're playing Don Quixote that
they're wrong?
You're an outsider. Everyone is telling you that a design document is
as near to worthless as it gets. Why would you think they're wrong?
The fact that you're acting like you have any idea what you're talking
about is why people are taking turns with you.
Tom Sloper
>Aw, don't worry about it, Tom. As "I wanna sell my idea" threads go, this
>one has been pretty much par for the course.
I said before that one of Ben's statements reminded me of Homer Simpson. I
thought of yet another Homer Simpson quote. Homer is at the kitchen table
and Santa's Little Helper comes in dragging a huge Sunday newspaper. Homer
says, "good doggie." Homer opens the newspaper, reads bad news on the front
page, and points at the dog. "Bad dog! Very bad dog!" (Something like
that.)
Ben and Homer have a lot in common!
James Peter Cowderoy wrote:
>Anyway, if I couldn't take as good as I give I'd be in trouble ;-)
Yes, battle scars do tend to thicken the skin pretty good... (^_~)
Tom
Tom Sloper
http://www.sloperama.com
Eric Marcoullier
(Geoff Howland) wrote:
> Keep dreaming and being a dick though. Itll get you a lot farther
> than learning how to actually do the work yourself and looking for
> people you can gain insight off of.
In my best Homer Simpson voice (for Tom):
Mmmm... brilliant
---------------------------------------------------
Eric Marcoullier -- er...@marcoullier.com
http://www.marcoullier.com -- 781.354.4433
Founder and Product Manager of the Following Sites:
IGN, Next Gen Online, Game Players Online, BuzzSite
Currently trying to secure a Game Producer Position
---------------------------------------------------
Noah Falstein
Jason Shankel wrote:
>
> That doesn't mean that you should give up on getting your game published.
> It means that you should understand what the best routes to getting
> published are. Basically, your two options are to implement it yourself or
> to go to work for an established company and promote your idea from within.
>
> No one is going to buy your design and implement it for you. If you think
> that any "best sellers" get produced this way, check out www.pcdata.com. Of
> the top 20 PC titles, exactly 0 were implemented under your proposed rubric.
Jason is quite right. Let me add a few more points of actual data. I was the
main person to review outside submissions at LucasArts (late 80's) 3DO (around
93-94) and Dreamworks Interactive (95-96). How many outside ideas did we
develop? 0. In all three companies the policy was to return unsolicited
submissions unopened if possible, and two of the companies had secretaries who
were not in the development process open envelopes to check if there was doubt.
Of the people who inquired first with letters, we would occasionally agree to
look, usually if they had some experience in the industry to begin with. The
only times any of those companies actually did something with an outside idea
was at Dreamworks where we did publish a couple of games by The Neverhood, but
they came to us as a team with a great track record (Earthworm Jim) and
resources to do everything - just needed money and a distribution outlet.
For the last four years I've worked as a freelance designer and producer.
People do hire me to work on their designs - but only because I have over 20
years of experience in the industry including some big hits. Being a game
designer is great, I wouldn't discourage anyone who wants to do it as a career.
But expecting to send an idea to a company and have them risk millions of
dollars to turn it into a game is about as good a way to make a living as buying
lottery tickets. Not impossible, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
If you're serious about designing games, do it. Write up designs, learn as much
as you can. Get a job in a game company. If you can't get hired as a designer,
then try getting in as a tester. If you don't have the willpower to play a game
over and over and the communications skills to write up what's wrong with it,
you probably don't have much of a future as a designer either. But if you stick
with it, it can be great. I've brainstormed with Spielberg and Lucas,
separately and together. I've traveled all around the world to talk to people
about their games. I live where I want to live and work mostly in coffeeshops
and my home office, setting my own hours. It's wonderful. But it's not easy.
Noah Falstein
The Inspiracy
www.theinspiracy.com
To reply remove NOSPAM
Peter James Cowderoy
Tom Sloper wrote:
>
> James Peter Cowderoy wrote:
>
I take it the above's deliberate? ;-)
> >Anyway, if I couldn't take as good as I give I'd be in trouble ;-)
>
> Yes, battle scars do tend to thicken the skin pretty good... (^_~)
>
It's just a flesh wound!
Gerry Quinn
>Tony Gowland wrote:
>>
>> > Name me one.
>>
>> Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never happen today.
>>
>Didn't that involve the setting up of Team 17 and several succesful
>games on the Amiga first?
>
I think one guy did a prototype in his bedroom, and brought it to them.
Gerry Quinn
--
http://bindweed.com
Puzzles, Strategy Games, Kaleidoscope Screensaver
Download evaluation versions free - no time limits
New puzzle challenge: "Dragon Scales"
Wim Libaers
Peter James Cowderoy <psy...@nottingham.ac.uk> schreef in berichtnieuws
3A8DA74B...@nottingham.ac.uk...
[...]
> No, they simply don't have the chance to implement them. You want some
> evidence? Take a look at the two best selling series (remember,
> publishers, the guys developers need money from, are interested in
> sales). Take a look at the changes involved. OK, Dune II to C&C could be
> viewed as sort-of-large. The *craft games and the C&C series show very
> little real evolution at all. This stuff sells, whereas publishers
> haven't a clue what you're talking about when you start mentioning
> hierarchical command structures with formations at each level of the
> hierarchy, for example.
There's another factor. Having new features = having features that aren't
tested in the market = RISK. A new developer without experience = RISK.
Combine the two = VERY BIG RISK. Big publishers just don't want that.
Have a look here.
http://www.x-plane.com/
http://www.esimgames.com/
These projects had most of the work done by one person. They are also
extensible by users, so a lot of extras are available for free. For this to
work, your game must have some community-forming potential. They also are
quite "hardcore" (very realistic). There are other examples of small
companies that succeed. If it's as good as you think it is, you should
probably try it yourself. If you don't want to do it, no-one else will do
for you.
--
Wim Libaers
Remove DONTSPAM from my reply address to send me mail. (Email address
changed recently)
Wim Libaers
Ben <sorryn...@noemail.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
3a8d8c3c....@news.earthlink.net...
[...]
> I don't really think I do. I love RTS games, and after exhausting Age
> of Empires II and Starcraft, I've gotten an acute sense of what's
> wrong with them, and have designed a radically different command
> structure to take the game to the next level. I'd love for someone to
> write it, but unlike most other suggestions I've made in game
> creator's forums, I don't want my ideas simply lifted, used, and
> gaining no credit whatsoever. I've gotten to the point where I feel I
> can make better versions of some of the ideas I see in most games I
> play. This belief has been fueled over the years by the few times my
> suggestions in forums seem to start showing up in future games
> (although they still managed to screw it up in some cases).
[...]
Were those ideas things that really required detailed analysis, and work to
get them right, or were they of the instantaneous "hey this could be better
if..." kind? If the latter, you probably aren't the only one who knows about
it. In fact, many games postmortems (have a look on http://www.gamasutra.com
have a list of things that could have been better if they had the
opportunity. Odds are, some of the bad things you've seen and improved upon,
also are known by the developers and will probably make it into a sequel
It's also possible that they really don't want to innovate because that
might alienate some of their previous customers, and in that case the odds
of them accepting you are even lower.
Sparky
> >Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
I used to work at a game company (then again, maybe it was just a bad
dream), where "game ideas" would often come whizzing over the
transom...only to end up on my desk since no one else wanted to handle
them (or could decipher them). I also got all the random copies of Star
Trek fan magazines because my manager thought this was hilarious [1].
Needless to say, we had no interest in outside game ideas. Or any game
ideas, for that matter. But besides that, there were two major problems
with all of these "ideas":
1) Submitters, so convinced of their own immortal genius, didn't bother
to research their "brilliant new idea". 99% of the ideas were old (I'm
talkin' Sinclair, Odyssey, Babbage's Difference Engine old) ideas. No
clever new twists or updates, either. Just old.
2) Poor presentation. Either a stack of unspellchecked, dot-matrix
printed pages big enough to choke a wombat, or one paragraph scrawled in
handwriting like Egyptian hieroglyphics. Now that I think of it, maybe
those WERE hieroglyphics, and my throwing them away resulted in The
Mummy's Curse that has followed me all these years (all the pasta I make
is tragically over- or under-cooked).
My all-time favorite "design" was for a puzzle game (at least I think
that's what it was) written in blue ink on a NAPKIN. Yep, the flimsy
fast-food sort, too. And they wrote on BOTH SIDES of said napkin.
Upside-down and backwards. Not surprisingly, trying to read this made
for a better game than the actual "game". The best interpretation I
could manage: "It's like Tetris, but with dodecahedrons, and you play in
the 5th dimension."
Slightly intrigued, I dug through those aforementioned Star Trek fan
magazines to see if there were any blueprints [2] for building a
5th-dimension transmitter, but no luck. So what was I to do with this
napkin/game idea, which was rapidly staining my desk and fingers like
the Shroud of Turin (er, Tetris?)
Yeah, I threw it away.
Okay, if I *had* received a well-presented, coherent, novel idea, we
STILL couldn't have done jack with it. We didn't accept game "ideas" or
"designs", and I still don't know of any company that does.
Develop your own prototype. If you can, build the game yourself. Then
shop it around. And if you're gonna write your design on a napkin, for
Pong's sake, use ONE SIDE ONLY.
Sparky
[1] He'd run into my office and exclaim "Ha ha! Look, SHE'S got the NERD
magazines!" like it was some adolescent game of "Dork Hot Potato".
[2] There were, however, instructions for making a lovely Tribble throw
pillow.
Tony Figueroa
Good points though. I think it's a tough situation, and it's probably not a
wise idea to kid yourself, thinking you have the next blockbuster.
Unfortunately, I think that (as Sparky explained with his examples) the mass
of low-quality, unrefined ideas floating about has left the veterans rather
jaded and doubtful, convinced that the next idea (like so many before it) is
going to be poor. Therefore, possibly great ideas are overlooked because
they're stuck inbetween a batch of ideas by 13 year olds which mainly
consist of "I want to make a [insert popular title here] kinda game, but
with [modified feature] !!!".
Try plugging in random words into that template, it works:
"I want to make a Sims kinda game, but with cowboys !!!"
Perhaps I could use some sleep...
Sparky
Figueroa" <s-n...@home.com> wrote:
> Unfortunately, I think that (as Sparky explained with his examples)
As it was once written (Old Testament, you can find it a few pages after
the rather dramatic "Four Guinea Pigs of The Apocalypse" [1] bit):
"ASSUME ye not, for that is the path that leadeth to severe beatings
about the head with an old copy of 'Bard's Tale' for the AtariST."
I'm a "her". :)
Sparky
[1] "...And lo, the first pig was black as night. The second ascended
white as snow, and the third was verily of flame. But the fourth was
fond of hiding inside a cardboard toilet paper tube, and thus we cannot
well describe him."
Geoff Howland
wrote:
>LOL!
>
>Good points though. I think it's a tough situation, and it's probably not a
>wise idea to kid yourself, thinking you have the next blockbuster.
>Unfortunately, I think that (as Sparky explained with his examples) the mass
>of low-quality, unrefined ideas floating about has left the veterans rather
>jaded and doubtful, convinced that the next idea (like so many before it) is
>going to be poor. Therefore, possibly great ideas are overlooked because
>they're stuck inbetween a batch of ideas by 13 year olds which mainly
>consist of "I want to make a [insert popular title here] kinda game, but
>with [modified feature] !!!".
I think more important here is that "great ideas" themselves are
worthless. Not that ideas are usually crap, but great ones would be
worth something.
You have a brilliant idea for a game.
- Will audiences be intrigued to play this new idea? If its very
different, it wont appeal to their past experiences, so they may even
try it out.
- If its based on older things, so its not as different, will it be
seen as different enough to try than just another clone? Every game
claims to be innovative and groundbreaking.
- Brilliant/innovation idea does not mean it can be executed. Most
games are not necessarily flawed because the concept doesnt work, its
because the implementation of a simple idea went wrong. The
implementation itself is what costs the money. Not the second it
takes to come up with an idea and few days flushing it out.
This is assuming there even ARE any 'brilliant' ideas for games left.
Almost everything has been done at least once. Find a topic that
hasnt been covered. There are new ways to IMPLEMENT those concepts,
but how could you call an idea brilliant if its been done before?
If all any idea does is try to repair implementation problems and
augment the theory, really, its not brilliant, its simply
incrementally improved. And incremental improvement is best left to
the people doing the work in the first place, as they are most
intimately involved in all the things that didnt get done, didnt work,
or were complained about.
To the original poster: Quite obviously you are just waiting for
someone to tell you that youre right. If you believe in yourself so
much you wouldnt bother asking, youd just pull out the web pages and
start calling. Well, if you really believe then DO that. Youve got a
lot of good advice from people who have dealt with this many times,
and you either take it or you dont. Im sure if you ask EVERYONE in
the industry someone will support you, but by then you could have
knocked on every publisher/developer door and found out for yourself
the reality of your presumption.
To Spark: Im very jealous, you have a Black Knight 2000 pin. I
worship that game. :)
-Geoff Howland
http://www.lupinegames.com/
Tony Gowland
>
> ]> Name me one.
> ]
> ]Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never
> ]happen today.
>
> ass to see past his own shit.
But not too far to be able to read the "from" header in a newsgroup post,
which you clearly can't do. The thing is, Andy had written most of the game
himself by the time he took it to Team 17, whereas you just have a design.
--
Tony Gowland
"Bad luck."
Tony Gowland
He wrote pretty much the whole thing in AMOS for an Amiga Format competition,
which he didn't win. Then he took it to Team 17 at a trade show, and within
about five minutes they signed it up.
--
Tony Gowland
"Then they re-wrote it in a proper language."
Gerry Quinn
>> I think one guy did a prototype in his bedroom, and brought it to them.
>
>He wrote pretty much the whole thing in AMOS for an Amiga Format competition,
>which he didn't win. Then he took it to Team 17 at a trade show, and within
>about five minutes they signed it up.
>
I thought it was Blitz Basic. (Aspiring programmers may note that it
has at last come to the PC...)
Tony Gowland
> has at last come to the PC...)
That was what Edge said a couple of months back, but I could have sworn it was
done before Blitz came out. And the Amiga Format competition started (if
memory serves) just after they gave away Amos on their coverdisk. I mean, a
magazine's not allowed to have a competition in it where you're forced to buy
something (Blitz basic, in this case) first, are they?
Although I really can't remember for sure.
--
Tony Gowland
"I'm sure there are ways of finding out."
Gerry Quinn
>> I thought it was Blitz Basic. (Aspiring programmers may note that it
>> has at last come to the PC...)
>
>That was what Edge said a couple of months back, but I could have sworn it was
>done before Blitz came out. And the Amiga Format competition started (if
>memory serves) just after they gave away Amos on their coverdisk. I mean, a
>magazine's not allowed to have a competition in it where you're forced to buy
>something (Blitz basic, in this case) first, are they?
>
>Although I really can't remember for sure.
>
I don't think the mag had a rule.
I'm fairly sure it was Blitz - however the original demo probably got a
rewrite before release.
Unknown
Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote:
]"sorryn...@noemail.com" wrote:
]
]> That would be a great example. Unfortunately, Tony (and the other
]> psoters with similar "the world is full of shit" attitudes) will
never
]> learn from this and kill continue to operate in a world of severe
]> lack. You almost have to feel sorry for them.
]
]We'll see where you are in five years, then.
Whether or not my idea will be in a game? Who knows. Whether or not my
attitude will be in a toilet, and I'll go around shitting on anyone
else that is optimistic? I can guarantee you that won't be the case.
Sad for those who do feel that way about their own life and lack of
possibilities.
Unknown
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
]> "Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote:
]>
]> ]> Name me one.
]> ]
]> ]Andy whatshisface that made Worms. Although it'd probably never
]> ]happen today.
]>
]> Don't tell Tony about it.. he's got his head shoved too far up his
own
]> ass to see past his own shit.
]
]But not too far to be able to read the "from" header in a newsgroup
post,
]which you clearly can't do.
It's called Sarcasm, fool. I'm not surprised that went right over your
head. Give up responding .. you've only clueless things to say,
covered with an extremely pessimistic attitude.
*PLONK*
Unknown
"Tom Sloper" <tom...@sloperama.com> wrote:
]Ben of the fake email address wrote:
]
]>You're an
]>idiot. Stay in your little negative world of nothing being
possible,
]>and save your bullshit for someone that would be swayed as if you
have
]>a clue. You don't.
]
]I hereby wish I could withdraw the helpful response I just posted,
at least
]insofar as this person is concerned.
]
]I hope that a /nice/ wannabee benefits from my words.
]
]Tom Sloper
You mean a /nice/ wannabee that will get flooded by negative crap by
your peers? Yes, Tom, your advice was decent and I thank you for it.
But to get trounced by these other negative fools when you're just
seeking information is a bit ridiculous.
Tony Gowland
> head. Give up responding .. you've only clueless things to say,
> covered with an extremely pessimistic attitude.
Yeah, but I have a job as a game designer. So who's laughing now, eh? Ner ner
ner ner nerrrr!
> *PLONK*
The last resort of someone who's lost an argument.
--
Tony Gowland
"Crazy foo'."
"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:3a92705...@news.earthlink.net...
Unknown
]
]
]"sorryn...@noemail.com" wrote:
]>
]> This part of your post pretty much nicely sums up how useless
anything
]> you say is:
]>
]> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 16:28:44 +0000,
]> Peter James Cowderoy <psy...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
]>
]> ]> To those that are not as completely jaded with the concept:
]> ]> I've taken the current RTS theme, and made some critical
interface
]> ]> modifications that take it to the next level.
]> ]
]> ]Whoopee. I have a nice little checklist of similar modifications
]> ]myself,
]> ]and I'm sure several thousand other people do. Anyone reasonably
]> ]intelligent who's spent any time playing the genre can pull such
a
]> ]list
]> ]straight out of their arse.
]>
]> And by some chance, everyone that's made RTS games out there are
]> utterly clueless to these ideas,
]
]No, they simply don't have the chance to implement them. You want
some
]evidence? Take a look at the two best selling series (remember,
]publishers, the guys developers need money from, are interested in
]sales). Take a look at the changes involved. OK, Dune II to C&C
could be
]viewed as sort-of-large. The *craft games and the C&C series show
very
]little real evolution at all. This stuff sells, whereas publishers
]haven't a clue what you're talking about when you start mentioning
]hierarchical command structures with formations at each level of the
]hierarchy, for example.
]
]>and hence we are forever doomed to
]> play crappy versions of RTS game, while everyone else around them
is
]> "pulling such lists straight out of their arse" with ease.
]
]Yup. Because the guys with the ideas generally aren't the ones with
the
]money to create worthwhile content to stick in the games.
That's in complete contradiction with what you said earlier:
"Whoopee. I have a nice little checklist of similar modifications
myself, and I'm sure several thousand other people do. Anyone
reasonably intelligent who's spent any time playing the genre can pull
such a list straight out of their arse."
So I thought *everyone* was reasonably intelligent to pull ideas out
of their arse?!! Hmmmmmm.... Interesting switch.
So *now* you're saying "the guys with the money to create .." are
*not* the ones that "are reasonably intelligent ... who can pull such
a list straight from their arse". Well that's exactly what I'm saying.
They can't figure out every great new game idea or modification, and
that's where ideas such as mine come in. Perhaps you're catching on
now.. maybe you're just in a better mood today.
]Note that the
]two most succesful RTS series also have good music, and generally
]fair-to-good artwork matched with plenty of FMV.
]
]> Stay in your little negative world of nothing being possible,
]
]Oh, I see plenty of possibilities - I'm just not silly enough to
assume
]that everything's possible.
You call it silly. Others call it optimism. Good thing Stephan King
didn't give up after the 100th rejection, of his first book. To have
persevered after the 20th reject would have been "silly" to you, but
optimistic to him. You would have still been painting houses, while
he's now a multi-millionaire.
]Believe it or not, being told what doesn't
]work helps you figure out what might.
I agree. As long as the person doing the telling knows for a *fact*
what they're talking about. Of course, they never know for a *fact*,
so one need not take their advice as gospel, but rather as information
on some of the things one can expect. You seem to take advice
(including your own) as gospel. I don't, even though I do appreciate
your *opinion*. It's a good thing Stephan King felt that way as well,
or he would have given up, being convinced of the "fact" that he had
no talent, as told him by various publishers that rejected his first
book.
]I'll also go so far as to say that
]when you're looking at unorthodox ways of getting things done,
you're
]unlikely to get away with doing it the same route as the last
unorthodox
]success. Rollercoaster Tycoon was great, but it was also very very
]lucky.
I'm sorry you feel that way. You've just placed yet another
restriction on your own life. Clearly when it happens again, *you*
won't be the one to do it. I might not be either, but it sure as hell
won't be you, given your attitude.
Am I making sense to you yet? From the first post this thread has gone
beyond "give me information" and instead has become a rant-fest of a
bunch of "old men" who have become jaded because they've given up on
their own dreams and aspirations. As if that wasn't enough, then you
come to this newsgroup and dump on others who seem to posess optimism
about their own ideas. Just offer information next time and move on.
Don't try to convince others on your opinion of how hopeless things
are and try to imply they're stupid for wasting their time .. just
point out difficulties you see in your opinion and move on.
Unknown
"Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
]Ben <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8d88ca....@news.earthlink.net...
]> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:13:08 GMT,
]> "Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
]> Sounds like you have two types of designers then. Those that flesh
out
]> details of a design someone else already created, and those that
come
]> up with designs from scratch.
]>
]
]It's not necessarily two kinds of designers, but two kinds of
designs. Some
]products are original, designed from scratch. Others are sequels or
]knock-offs. Often, a studio will have one or two advanced project
teams,
]where the designers and artists involved come up with new ideas and
try to
]develop complete designs from those ideas. Most successful studios
also
]have teams devoted to mods, expansion packs and sequels, where the
ideas are
]pretty much set and even much of the design work is done. These
teams focus
]on leveraging success and mitigating the shortcomings of
pre-existing
]products.
]
]> ]No one is going to buy your design and implement it for you.
]>
]> Maybe. Maybe not.
]It's pretty much definitely not.
Which means there's a chance. So again, it's maybe, maybe not.
]> If I was the owner of a game company that made, say,
]> RTS games, someone came to me with a well detailed plan of how to
take
]> it to the next level, if it sounded good enough, bet your ass I'd
come
]> up with some sort of contract with this person, who would get some
cut
]> of the final product -- perhaps not even a very big cut. But to
ignore
]> such opportunities, as a game develper, means I'd clearly have my
head
]> up my own ass (which I suppose would explain why so many games
have
]> such bonehead features, if they don't just suck outright).
]>
]
]Publishers are not in the market for ideas. They have them to
spare.
Oh here we go again. And yet, they still seem to make many bonehead
ideas, and stupid features in games (modern day games with no "save
whenever you want features" still?! LOL!). Let alone ideas for
improvements to a genre, such as the one I've come up with, and I've
heard others mention as well. Yes, they are just brimming with ideas.
They just hide it from the world because we're not ready for it yet.
]They're in the market for talent, people who can take an idea and
actually
]produce a completed product. Maybe that makes the world an unfair
place.
]Maybe that makes the rest of us a bunch of cynical, talentless
boobs.
Not at all. Your *attitudes* are what makes you a bunch of "cynical,
talentless boobs.".
]But your bitterness and $8.50 will buy you a ticket to the movies
and you'll
]still be no closer to selling your idea.
Who's bitter? I'm merely amazed at how jaded most of you seem to be.
Someone posts an optimistic article, and my god the negativity oozed
out of the walls in here.
]>
]> ]If you think
]> ]that any "best sellers" get produced this way, check out
]> www.pcdata.com. Of
]> ]the top 20 PC titles, exactly 0 were implemented under your
proposed
]> rubric.
]>
]> You're basing your claim on 20 titles. That's wonderful. Thanks
for
]> the useful statistical sampling of the industry.
]>
]
]You're the one who invoked "best sellers". For "best sellers", 20
titles
]isn't a statistical sampling, it's the whole damn population.
Really? 20 titles over the past 10 years or more? Wow. Whatever you
say.
]My point was that *none* of the best selling titles in the past few
years
]have been based on purchased ideas. They've all been developed by
teams
]that produced the idea, design AND implementation.
You absolutely *sure* about that? I've seen others posts in the last
few days that beg to differ. Read the thread for starters. But you go
on saying "*none* of the best selling titles.... ".
]
]>
]> My whole point is not that this is easy, or should happen every
day,
]> or anything simple. The point is that even though the odds might
be
]> quite bad, no need for others to try and trash others for
seemingly
]> feeling like they have a decent chance in spite of the odds. And
the
]> attitude of game makes (as described by the select few know it
alls so
]> far of course) would lead one to believe they are a clueless
bunch,
]> and it's a shock anything useful, let alone fun, ever gets made.
]
]
]If you think you have a chance, despite the odds, then by all means,
pursue
]your dream. Understand, I'm not trashing your idea, or even your
desire to
]have your game published. Quite the contrary, we need more
passionate
]people in this industry.
You're not kidding. If the people that responded to this thread are
any hint at the attitudes of those in the industry, then it's
downright *desperate* for passionate people.
]What I, and the others, have been telling you is
]that you have almost no chance of selling just the idea, or even the
]completed design, to a studio without an implementation.
Fine. And is it so difficult to just say "You better consider making
some sort of implementation .. that will give you the best chance of
your idea going somewhere, although even then the odds are stacked
against you"? Or was it easier to just tear into a poster and make
them feel like "give it up fool... if you think they will look at your
idea, you're kidding yourself..".
]Does that mean no chance whatsoever? Of course not. There is a
finite,
]non-zero chance. But you also have a chance of winning the lottery
or being
]struck by lightning. I daresay you have more chance of winning the
lottery.
]After all, *someone* has to win the lottery.
There you go again. Do you feel better now? Does your own ideas being
rejected now feel less painful when you explain the odds to yourself
in such a manner?
]
]You have to ask yourself, what's more important? Getting your game
made, or
]changing the way the game industry traffics in ideas? If it's the
former,
]then I suggest you consider other options besides just marketing the
]concept. If it's the latter, well, tilt away Don Quixote.
Feel better now?
]
]Also understand that, if some of us are a little terse on this
subject, it
]comes from *years* of experience in the industry
Sounds like it comes from years of heartache and rejection .. merely
experience would have have resulted in such negative crap being spewed
forth, which you continue to do.
]having this exact debate
]with yet another generation of would-be game designers who don't
want to put
]in the work that's required to produce a successful title but want
to reap a
]reward simply for having their egos stroked.
]
]Game development is hard work, from design to production to coding
and art.
]Ideas are nothing compared to the amount of work that goes into
completing a
]game.
Really? I beg to differ. I see games that look fantastic and which
suck beyond belief. HUGE amounts of production, coding and art went
into it, but it's a worthless creation. Then you have some games that
are way behind the times in graphics and production, and yet become
high selling pieces. If you think ideas are *nothing* compared to the
work that goes into making the idea a reality, then you will continue
to be the benefactor of crappy games.
On the contrary: games without a great idea are not even worth making.
The market is flooded with implementations of games that are crap.
Even Deer Hunter, which looked like crap, sold well because it was a
great idea at the time. But you go on believing that "ideas are
nothing".
]If you're not willing to be part of the team that actually develops
]the product, you have no right to expect a piece of the profits.
Without great game ideas, most of you continue to make games that are
subject to be ignored or are merely "ok" at best. Sometimes the idea
will be great, and the game will do better. For this reason, it seems
clear to me those with the ideas are more than entitled to a piece of
the profits. It's a team effort, which includes the idea makers, but
your extreme limitation seems to be that designs have nothing to do
with how a game performs. Wow. That thought alone is amazing. And you
work for Maxis?!!
]
]
]--
]Jason Shankel
]Maxis/EA
]s h a n k e l "at" p o b o x . c o m
]Play rich, creamery OpenTrek at www.pobox.com/~shankel/opentrek.html
]I am Jack's throbbing spam filter
]
]
]
Unknown
Noah Falstein <n...@theinspiracy.NOSPAM.com> wrote:
]Jason is quite right. Let me add a few more points of actual data.
]
Now this is one of the few well written, informative, responses I've
seen. Most of the others could learn from this. He didn't feel the
need to beat anyone else down. He just stated what his observations
are, indicated the difficulties as he saw it, and still mentions that
you can go for it if you want to.
This must be rocket science for most of you except the few posters
I've seen like this one. Thanks for the reply Noah. I appreciate your
neutral, unjaded honesty.
Unknown
"Wim Libaers" <wim.DONTSP...@pandora.be> wrote:
]
]Ben <sorryn...@noemail.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
]
]
My god!! Another decent poster! Thank you for being civil from the
start, Wim. It feels like you are not jaded as well, and it's a breath
of fresh air.
Actually, my ideas are of the former: it's more than just small
changes to make specific features better. It's a radical change to how
you interact with the game overall. But I think it takes the feel of
the RTS game in a fantastic direction. I pitched the idea to friends
as if a gaming company was doing it (and that I had nothing to do with
it). They were excited beyond my belief, and wanted to know who was
doing it and when it would be done. Only then did I tell them it was
my idea and no one was working on it (I wanted an objective opinion,
not one that was tainted one way or the other because it was *my*
idea). Now seeing how other people in here have reacted about just
"some guy's" game idea, it makes me laugh.
I appreciate your excellent response, Wim.
Unknown
"Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8d8e48....@news.earthlink.net...
]> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:10:43 GMT,
]> "Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
]> ]Your analogy is flawed because Stephen King submitted a
completed
]> book.
]> ]What do you think would have happened if he submitted a mere
]> outline?
]> ]Nobody would have even read it, and rightly so. This is because
]> *real
]> ]authors*, the kind that can actually complete a book, already
have
]> millions
]> ]of ideas of their own, any one of which could be turned into a
]> bestseller by
]> ]the right team.
]>
]> Oh really? And yet these great ideas are all overlooked, and less
]> ambitios ideas in RTS games are all we're seeing at the moment.
Ok, ..
]> uh I get it.
]
]Do you really think Stephen King got to where is now because of his
ideas?
]Lol!
It's an analogy, fool. Get a clue and answer the question.
]
]> ]In the end, only implementation matters. Take Unreal
Tournament.
]> There is
]> ]not a single novel idea in the game: everything was taken from
]> previous
]> ]first person shooters. Yet the implementation was great, so UT
]> managed to
]> ]beat most of their competition and become a bestseller.
]>
]> Yes, the implementation.. the interface.. HOW the game is supposed
to
]> work. They took the FPS concept, and said "it would be kick ass if
it
]> did x, y and z!!". *THEN* they wrote it (why would they BOTHER
writing
]> it if they didn't have the unique differences in their version of
this
]> FPS game design??! If they wrote it before even being aware of
such
]> things, then they're even dumber than I thought)
]
]There really aren't any significant "new" ideas in UT. The game is
still a
]bestseller. How dumb is that?
Significantly different? No. But different enough to merit popularity
enough to make it a good seller. Not all changes need to be
significant, genius.
]
]> If anyone else had these ideas, we'd see a game like this. We
don't.
]
]Wrong! When a designer gets to work on a new RTS, he looks at his
list of
]ideas and picks which ones to implement.
Wrong! That's not what I'm saying. Go reread my post, not only to
figure out what I'm actually saying, but to answer that which you
conveniently ignored. Until then, I won't bother wasting my time with
you.
Unknown
nat...@visi.com (Nathan Mates) wrote:
]In article <3a8d924c....@news.earthlink.net>,
]sorryn...@noemail.com <Ben> wrote:
]>> You didn't understand the point. Let me break it down in
simpler
]>> terms:
]
]>> Idea on its own: not worth a penny
]>> Idea with implementation: worth more.
]
]>Great idea with implementation: worth a hell of a lot
]>implementation WITHOUT that great idea: Worth so little by
comparison
]>Great idea: now potentially worth a lot, when considered how it
makes
]>all the difference between "implementation WITHOUT that great idea"
]>and "Great idea with implementation".
]
] Not every implementation is guaranteed to go any further. [You
make
]this mistake further down in considering books; snipped below.]
Quite
]frankly, an idea may suck.
[snip]
But if an idea is worth nothing, who cares if it sucks?!!!! Can you
say hypocrite?! First you act like the idea is almost a worthless part
of the equation. Now you point out it's great effect on a game by
pointing out what I was already saying about how much an idea
influences a game: THE IDEA MIGHT SUCK. Welcome to reality about the
worth of an idea on how much worth an end game will have.
Why don't you pick one story and stick with it? On second thought,
don't bother. It's obvious where you're coming from.
Unknown
"Kasey Chang \(use EXCITE.COM instead!\)" <ksc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
]
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]news:3a8d4bbe...@news.earthlink.net...
]> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 19:33:55 -0800,
]> "Kasey Chang \(use EXCITE.COM instead!\)" <ksc...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
]>
]> ]
]> ]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
]> ]news:3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net...
]> ]> After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this
information,
]> ]> so
]> ]> here goes:
]> ]
]> ]> What options do you have with that design?
]> ]
]> ]You'll have to AT LEAST program a prototype. Use what you know.
]> ]HTML slide/show is fine, if it illustrates your concept. Or use
a
]> ]Quake
]> ]mod if it's an action game, or whatever game that supports your
]> ]genre
]> ]and comes with a full editor. Remember, Starcraft started as a
]> ]Warcraft
]> ]2
]> ]mod (not exactly, but the first concept demo WAS done as such).
]
]> Now we're talking. Rather than trying to dissuade a person like
the
]> other posters, you offer useful information, even if the odds do
seem
]> fairly limiting. I congratulate you for that.
]
]The odds are NEGLIGIBLE. You have a better chance of submitting
]a script to Hollywood and getting it made into a blockbuster than
you
]have with the game industry.
]
]> ]> Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
]
]> ]Absolutely not. No game companies will DARE read your design
]> ]for fear of lawsuits. They'll get one of their interns (who has
]> ]absolutely NO power whatsover) to open it. If he finds a game
idea,
]it'll be
]> ]stuffed back into an envelope, with a statement that says they
did
]NOT read
]> ]it, and returned.
]
]> So for the most part (I'm sure there are exceptions.. perhaps in
the
]> form of a game company that is naive in that respect), the ones
that
]> are aware of lawsuit potential only get new game ideas from inside
]> designers?
]
]99.9999% of the game studios will NOT look at design documents
]unless it comes from the inside.
]Just the lawyer fees will kill a
]development studio's entire game budget. They can't afford the risk.
]The remainder is either stupid or crazy.
]
]Face it, you would NOT be in the game producer/designer business
]UNLESS you have a CLOSETFUL of ideas you want to make, and
]game companies have dozens more on file ready to be pursued. Do
]you really want to read any one else's ideas?
]
]Remember Paramount? Art Buckwald sued them for millions of
]dollars and won when he submitted an idea about an African king
]come to the US to look for a queen, and it got rejected. A few
months
]later, Eddie Murphy convinced Paramount to make the movie based
]on virtually the SAME topic.
]
]> ]> How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns
]> ]into a best-selling game by someone else?
]
]> ]Not a penny, unless you
]
]> Yes, it's the "unless you"'s I'm looking into .. the part of the
whole
]> scenario, no matter how remote, that has a hint of it working
out..
]
]You're NOT listening/reading.
]
]THE GAMES INDUSTRY DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY GAME DESIGNS
]"ON SPEC", i.e. UNSOLICITED.
]
]> ]have a prototype and convince the brass that it's
]> ]worth developing. And for that, you'll need your own development
]> ]studio.
]
]> See? Was that so hard. So it's clearly no longer "not a penny" in
this
]> case, so my question still stands:
]
]> How much can you expect to make off the idea ASSUMING IT TURNS
INTO A
]> BEST-SELLING GAME by someone else?
]
]It'll NEVER happen, so the net amount is still zero.
]
]How does game development studio get formed? Something like this:
]
]Let's say you approach Publisher X. They agree to fund your project.
]They give you a certain amount of money, and you sign a contract
]that says you'll reach "alpha" by date 1, beta by date 2, ready to
gold
]by
]date 3, upon accepting all that money. You'll get more money upon
those
]dates provided you've shown proper progress.
]
]You can now hire all the programmers and artists you'll need, get
]equipment,
]rent time on "render farms" for any CGI movie sequences, studio time
for
]voice/acting, and so on and so forth.
]
]If you run out of money ahead of time, you COULD go back and ask for
]more,
]but they'll demand evidence that you're actually DOING something. If
]it's like
]only a month or two late, they'll fork over a bit more dough to keep
]your payroll
]going, or they'll tell you "cut this piece out", then it's up to
your
]negotiation.
]
]If you're the producer/director, then you may get a bit of
gross/profit
]depending
]on the publishing deal you negotiated in that contract.
]
]Publishers will NOT fund a project unless they KNOW you can produce,
]so you need a track record. That means EXPERIENCE in the industry.
]
]You can self-fund the project, mortgage your house, your car, etc.
to
]get
]things started, but with the sophistication of games nowadays, you
will
]have
]to line up a publisher sooner or later.
]
]> Yes, I understand your experience in the industry has been quite
]> limiting. Being that you know what you're talking about, why don't
you
]> let me know how much you can expect to make of an idea assuming it
]> turns into a best-selling game, assuming you have a prototype and
]> convince the brass that it's worth developing?
]
]Since no publisher will buy ideas, and no development studio will
buy
]ideas, the net sum is ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, NOTHING. Get the point?
]
]To repeat...
]
]THE GAMES INDUSTRY DOES NOT ACCEPT ANY GAME DESIGNS
]"ON SPEC", i.e. UNSOLICITED.
]
]So no matter how brilliant is your idea, you HAVE to turn it into
]reality
]yourself, or it'll never get made.
]
]Any questions?
]
]--KC
]
]
]
]
]
Ok.. well written.
My experience comes from the following:
In my game playing experience over the years, I've often come up with
ideas for modifications of current games (I don't believe I've come up
with a brand new game idea, only modifications). I'd sometimes go so
far as to post those ideas in game creator's forums to say "hey, why
don't you do this?". Often the game creator's don't respond. No one
else had posted such ideas. Often others do say they really like the
idea, and again repeat my question to the game creators in the same
thread .. no response. But I've seen a couple of ideas actually show
up in future versions of said games, with no mention whatsoever.
So now I've come up with my biggest modification yet: a radical change
to an already established best selling genre: RTS. It's a change that
can be applied to a specific game (but is easily applied to any
classic RTS game). Rather than post the idea to watch it clearly be
used because they agree it makes the game better, but would never
offer credit (let alone money), I've decided to see what possibilities
I have to pitch the idea formally, and to possibly get credit/monetary
compensation for such a great modification.
This is not a new idea, this is a modification to a current genre that
clearly is something a lot of people want (the genre, that is).
I could do the programming. I could make a version that would *look*
like crap (because I'm not a graphic artist), and would sound like
crap (I'm not a sound effects or music artist). But given there are
already games out there that look the way this game would, but would
behave differently in a way that is easy to describe, in every detail,
I don't see this stumbling block of "we need to see it in action"
being that big a deal. Being helpful? Sure. Being critical or forget
it in this particular case? I don't see it.
Your take?
And thank you for not getting caught up in the crappy attitudes that
have pervaded this thread from the very first responses. I appreciate
your neutral candor.
Erik Max Francis
People are telling you that you have virtually no chance (meaning, yes,
it's possible, but so unlikely that you'd best expend your efforts in
other means) of getting an unsolicited game design document turned into
an actual game by sending it to game companies. These are amateurs and
professionals alike, who work in the industry, and (probably admittedly)
know a lot more about it than you.
But as an outsider with no knowledge of the game programming industry,
you seem to think they're wrong. Would you like to tell us why? If
it's just wishful thinking, then that doesn't change the realities of
the situation: You're not going to get your game published.
--
Erik Max Francis / m...@alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
__ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/ \ Some mistakes we must carry with us.
\__/ Speaker-to-Animals
Physics reference / http://www.alcyone.com/max/reference/physics/
A physics reference.
Tony Figueroa
"Erik Max Francis" <m...@alcyone.com> wrote in message
news:3A92A946...@alcyone.com...
> "sorryn...@noemail.com" wrote:
>
> > Erik Max Francis <m...@alcyone.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We'll see where you are in five years, then.
> >
> > Whether or not my idea will be in a game? Who knows. Whether or not my
> > attitude will be in a toilet, and I'll go around shitting on anyone
> > else that is optimistic? I can guarantee you that won't be the case.
> > Sad for those who do feel that way about their own life and lack of
> > possibilities.
>
> People are telling you that you have virtually no chance (meaning, yes,
> it's possible, but so unlikely that you'd best expend your efforts in
> other means) of getting an unsolicited game design document turned into
> an actual game by sending it to game companies. These are amateurs and
> professionals alike, who work in the industry, and (probably admittedly)
> know a lot more about it than you.
>
> But as an outsider with no knowledge of the game programming industry,
> you seem to think they're wrong. Would you like to tell us why? If
> it's just wishful thinking, then that doesn't change the realities of
> the situation: You're not going to get your game published.
It's far too early in the morning... >_<
Ben,
I think the point the veterans around here are trying to make, is to be
realistic. A huge number of people post here about how they have a great
idea... but few if any ever bring those ideas to fruition. There are an
infinite number of pitfalls and hardships to encounter. Be aware that, if
you've never tread down this path before, it's going to be a painful
experience if you don't know what you're getting into.
The biggest scenario they're warning you about is your idea being rejected.
It's a common thing, because ideas themselves tend not to be worth much --
anyone can come up with an idea, so they're not a rare and valuable thing.
The best case against said scenario is to have a well-developed,
well-polished, and rare (or refreshing) idea. Better yet would be an
implementation of that idea -- people like to experience and not hear of
something. Completeness tends to be good ammunition against failure.
Do us all a favor -- prove us wrong and make your game! And get rich! And
inspire us all once more. ^_^
Jason Shankel
> attitude will be in a toilet, and I'll go around shitting on anyone
> else that is optimistic? I can guarantee you that won't be the case.
> Sad for those who do feel that way about their own life and lack of
> possibilities.
There's optimism and then there's naivete. I can't speak for the others,
but for myself, the last thing I want to do is dissuade you from pursuing
game development. Quite the contrary, my goal is to give you an accurate
view of the lay of the land so that you won't become disillusioned with game
development. As Noah said in another part of this thread, it can be a
rewarding career. But if you want to reap those rewards you have to be
realistic when it comes to sowing your seeds.
Carl G.
Reading some of your replies, I would like to make a few more suggestions:
1. If you do contact a game company, try to avoid scatological or derogatory
terminology. Learn to listen to what they are trying to say. While you may
not intend it, using crude language to express yourself will make you seem
unprofessional and juvenile.
2. Don't be afraid that people may steal your ideas. I have found that the
more ideas that people give away, the more creative they become. Don't be
afraid that your "great idea" has to be kept secret because you feel that it
may be your last, or best, idea. Open up your creative potential by being
generous with your ideas. Yes, someone may end up using your idea for free,
but by that time you will have had ten more "great ideas", and be ten steps
ahead of them. An illustration: I believe that one reason that the United
States has excelled is because it emphasized the free exchange of ideas and
a freedom from fear. A nation that lived in secrecy and fear would not have
attained the status that the United States has today.
3. I believe that you feel that you have ideas that would improve computer
games. Many posters have expressed their learned opinions on how difficult
it is to sell ideas to a company. Accept the fact that selling your *idea*
won't make you any money, but selling your *talents* can make you some
money. If you can't sell your idea, but still want to improve computer
games, then either get a job inside the industry and work your way up, or
start your own company.
4. Learn. If you don't have an university degree, get one (I found a degree
in mathematical physics very useful). While at the university, take some
art, design, and music courses to help strengthen your skills. Read books
like _Software Development A Legal Guide_ to help understand the legal
issues involved in software development. Learn HTML (if you haven't
already) and create your own web-site. Most of all, learn how to respect the
counsel of others and to extract the "nuggets of wisdom" that may be hidden
amongst their words.
Carl Ginnow
Ben wrote in message <3a8c3d14...@news.earthlink.net>...
>After browsing this newsgroup, I could not find this information, so
>here goes:
>
>Let's say you come up with the *complete design for a game that could
>potentially be a best seller. However, you are not capable of coming
>even close to making the game alone .. you are simply the one that
>detailed, very effectively (having great knowledge of what is and is
>not possible in a computer game), and to great detail how the game
>will work. I am a programmer, but would poorly making graphics and
>sounds (compared to what's out there today).
>
>What options do you have with that design?
>Do you contact a game company and show them your ideas?
>Do you need to get your idea copyrighted first?
>How much can you expect to make off the idea assuming it turns into a
>best-selling game by someone else?
>Anywhere I can find out more info (as detailed as posssible)? Books /
>web sites / references .. anything.
>
>Thank you very much for any info.
>
Jason Shankel
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:59:52 GMT,
> "Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
> ]> Maybe. Maybe not.
> ]It's pretty much definitely not.
>
> Which means there's a chance. So again, it's maybe, maybe not.
>
Yes, for the record, there is a finite, non-zero chance that you will submit
a game idea to a company, they will implement it for you and give you a fat
royalty check.
There is also a finite, non-zero chance that the atoms in George W. Bush's
body will spontaneously reorganize themselves into a 180-pound bust of Elvis
crafted from cigarette butts and spent shotgun shells.
The question is, are you just interested in hearing that there's some small
probability that you'll succeed at just selling an idea? Or are you
interested in learning about what it takes to become a successful game
designer?
> Oh here we go again. And yet, they still seem to make many bonehead ideas
Two points:
A. For reasons others have mentioned, not every great idea can be
implemented in every product.
B. No two people are going to agree 100% of the time on what constitutes a
great idea. Chances are, the developers who make these "bonehead" games of
which you speak like their games, they like their ideas and they think
they're being creative and brilliant. Such people will not recognize your
brilliance when you present it to them.
The bottom line is that chances are your brilliant ideas have either already
been considered and rejected for practical reasons or because they don't fit
with the developers' creative vision.
At any rate, publishers are certainly not going to be interested in hearing
from anyone who comes in with "your boneheaded games suck, I have ideas to
make them better, pay me".
>
> ]What I, and the others, have been telling you is
> ]that you have almost no chance of selling just the idea, or even the
> ]completed design, to a studio without an implementation.
>
> Fine. And is it so difficult to just say "You better consider making
> some sort of implementation .. that will give you the best chance of
> your idea going somewhere, although even then the odds are stacked
> against you"? Or was it easier to just tear into a poster and make
> them feel like "give it up fool... if you think they will look at your
> idea, you're kidding yourself..".
>
For the record, I am not trying to get you to "give it up". Again, quite
the contrary. Yes, you should consider making an implementation. You
should also consider developing a complete product plan that involves either
putting a team together yourself or assembling a team within a pre-existing
company.
Even then, you'll have a hard row to hoe. But, at the very least, you'll be
taken seriously.
> There you go again. Do you feel better now? Does your own ideas being
> rejected now feel less painful when you explain the odds to yourself
> in such a manner?
What? Look, I'm not trying to vent here. I'm just trying to tell you how
things *are*. Personally, I've had very little disappointment in the games
industry, largely because I've never tried shopping ideas around without an
implementation plan. Yes, I've been turned down for jobs. Yes, I've had
ideas rejected. I've also had ideas accepted. I've worked on good
products. I've worked on shitty products. I've worked with good teams and
broken teams. I've shipped products. I've had projects canceled. That's
how things are. There's good and bad and, on balance, it's worth it.
If you don't want to hear that shopping ideas around sans implementation is
likely to result in a lot of slammed doors, fine. But I do resent the
implication that I'm using you as some kind of whipping boy. Far from it.
My sincerest hope is for you to meet with success and all I'm trying to do
is provide whatever advice I can to increase the likelihood of that.
>
> ]If you're not willing to be part of the team that actually develops
> ]the product, you have no right to expect a piece of the profits.
>
> Without great game ideas, most of you continue to make games that are
> subject to be ignored or are merely "ok" at best. Sometimes the idea
> will be great, and the game will do better. For this reason, it seems
> clear to me those with the ideas are more than entitled to a piece of
> the profits. It's a team effort, which includes the idea makers, but
> your extreme limitation seems to be that designs have nothing to do
> with how a game performs. Wow. That thought alone is amazing. And you
> work for Maxis?!!
>
You said it yourself. It's a team effort. Being on the team means being on
the team all the way, not just dropping in with a few notes and letting
everyone else do the hard work.
We have a term for people who provide ideas without implementation. They're
called "focus groups" and they're paid accordingly. Fifty bucks and a
sandwich.
And yes, I work for Maxis. But I'm a programmers, not a designer, so I'm a
little grumpier than the average bear ;)
Jason Shankel
> It's an analogy, fool. Get a clue and answer the question.
Yet you praise Noah and Wim for their civility?
Unknown
I was not thinking they were wrong. If that's what you got out of what
I posted, try rereading some more and get back to me (unless you
finally get what my point was, which probably won't require a
followup).
Unknown
"Tony Figueroa" <s-n...@home.com> wrote:
]
]"Erik Max Francis" <m...@alcyone.com> wrote in message
]
]
Very nice post.
I am not saying the posters are wrong. But reread the first responses
to my thread. They basically say "give it up .. dont bother .. throw
it out .. it's hopeless .. you dont have a chance in hell .. no one
will even look at it". When I was asking for ideas and opinions, I did
not asked to be bashed by the jaded people in the bunch. Objective
opinions would have been nice. The negative, jaded bashing was
ridiculous. I understand the chances are quite low. I understand it
may not happen at all. I understand that many game companies don't
like to look at outside ideas. But there was more than that going on
in those posts .. it bordered on "your an idiot if you think you'll
succeed where most have failed.." Who needs that crap? I don't. And
quite frankly, an attitude THAT pessimistic and jaded is quite sad. It
is that which I took the biggest issue with.
Then I started hearing details spin off of that which were clearly
crap like "they have great ideas coming out of their arses..", as if
they're the only ones that can come up with the best of ideas. Maybe
they're the only ones that can currently create a computer game, but
to assume they are also the *only* ones with the best ideas for games
is delusional at best.
Hopefully I've presented my viewpoint clearly.
Thanks for posting.
Unknown
"Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
]> Whether or not my idea will be in a game? Who knows. Whether or
not my
]> attitude will be in a toilet, and I'll go around shitting on
anyone
]> else that is optimistic? I can guarantee you that won't be the
case.
]> Sad for those who do feel that way about their own life and lack
of
]> possibilities.
]
]There's optimism and then there's naivete.
And there's also jaded bashing, which is what I was given a hearty
dose of from square one.
And what's optimism and naivete is subject to opinion in each case,
IMO.
]I can't speak for the others,
]but for myself, the last thing I want to do is dissuade you from
pursuing
]game development. Quite the contrary, my goal is to give you an
accurate
]view of the lay of the land so that you won't become disillusioned
with game
]development. As Noah said in another part of this thread, it can be
a
]rewarding career. But if you want to reap those rewards you have to
be
]realistic when it comes to sowing your seeds.
And that's fine. I'm not looking for a career. After having some of my
ideas used in other games (coincidence? who knows), I decided to take
a different route with my latest idea. I don't really want a job in
the gaming industry (I don't think I do, anyway). But I do think my
idea has great potential, and if it's used, for once I was looking to
see if there'd be a way to get compensated for it, rather than game
creators benefitted from it when they were clearly not capable of
coming up with some of those ideas themselves.
But yes, a view of the lay of the land is fine. To be told to "pack it
up.. no one could care less about your ideas" is another matter
entirely.
Thanks for posting.
Unknown
"Carl G." <cgi...@microprizes.com> wrote:
]Ben,
]
]Reading some of your replies, I would like to make a few more
suggestions:
]
]1. If you do contact a game company, try to avoid scatological or
derogatory
]terminology. Learn to listen to what they are trying to say. While
you may
]not intend it, using crude language to express yourself will make
you seem
]unprofessional and juvenile.
Well, I assume if it's not in their interest to hire me, they wouldn't
say "put your ideas in a drawer .. no one will be interested in
hearing them .. you'll never make a cent", or some other pathetic
dribble. So I doubt I'd have anything scatological or derogatory to
say to them in return.
]2. Don't be afraid that people may steal your ideas. I have found
that the
]more ideas that people give away, the more creative they become.
Don't be
]afraid that your "great idea" has to be kept secret because you feel
that it
]may be your last, or best, idea. Open up your creative potential by
being
]generous with your ideas. Yes, someone may end up using your idea
for free,
]but by that time you will have had ten more "great ideas", and be
ten steps
]ahead of them. An illustration: I believe that one reason that the
United
]States has excelled is because it emphasized the free exchange of
ideas and
]a freedom from fear. A nation that lived in secrecy and fear would
not have
]attained the status that the United States has today.
Hmmmmm. A damn powerful statement. I've seen a share of people
stealing things from others, and it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
But still, what you say is very compelling.
]
]3. I believe that you feel that you have ideas that would improve
computer
]games. Many posters have expressed their learned opinions on how
difficult
]it is to sell ideas to a company. Accept the fact that selling your
*idea*
]won't make you any money, but selling your *talents* can make you
some
]money. If you can't sell your idea, but still want to improve
computer
]games, then either get a job inside the industry and work your way
up, or
]start your own company.
Very good. Point taken.
]
]4. Learn. If you don't have an university degree, get one (I found
a degree
]in mathematical physics very useful). While at the university, take
some
]art, design, and music courses to help strengthen your skills. Read
books
]like _Software Development A Legal Guide_ to help understand the
legal
]issues involved in software development. Learn HTML (if you haven't
]already) and create your own web-site. Most of all, learn how to
respect the
]counsel of others and to extract the "nuggets of wisdom" that may be
hidden
]amongst their words.
I've extracted nuggets from these posts. But just thought I'd offer
some of them nuggest in return, wrapped in the same material the
nuggest were offered to me in. That can't be all *that* wrong, now can
it? But it seems like the offerers did not like the material it was
wrapped in after all .. funny how they don't mind offering it up to
others in that wrapping .. go figure.
]
]Carl Ginnow
Thanks for posting.
Link
First of all I found some email addresses from the "Star Wars" website. Then
I mailed off to them to get George Lucas's email address. Well they wouldn't
give it to me. So I tried phoning Lucas Arts and getting his number. No go.
So I sent off packages to their address with my idea -- and they sent them
all back unopened!
Now, my idea was soo good, people would have loved Episode II. By my
calculations, it would bring in at least $100,000,000.00 extra. Being a
generous kind of guy, I decided to ask for only $100,000.00 up front, and
then a measly 1% on every dollar over $100,000,000.00.
But they wouldn't listen! They were so dumb! SO dumb! It wasn't like I was
going to spread this idea all over usenet, have Lucas read it and say, "what
a good idea, I think I'll steal this, heh, heh". So now he's gone and
filmed Episode II without this idea, and I can tell you this movie is going
to bomb.
So you can see the film industry is fucked in the same way.
Oh, BTW, since they went and made Episode II already I may as well tell you
my idea: Get rid of Jar-Jar Binks.
- Mike
Unknown
"Link" <link...@hotmail.com> wrote:
]I once had an idea for Star Wars Episode II that I tried to sell to
Lucas.
]First of all I found some email addresses from the "Star Wars"
website. Then
LOL! Written by someone quite upset by my postings. Hopefully you'll
get over it someday. Made me laugh, though, so it wasn't a total
waste.
Arklan
carmack may have ideas to spare, but look at diakatana as an example.
sometimes, they are crap. there are reasons that new companies keep
sprouting up all over the world. lots of people have good ideas.
"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message
news:3a92d5f1...@news.earthlink.net...
Arklan
game desiner. can't we act like at least junior high?
"Tony Gowland" <to...@blahblahblah.com> wrote in message
news:lsuk6.22427$Dd3.5...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
Link
> LOL! Written by someone quite upset by my postings. Hopefully you'll
> get over it someday. Made me laugh, though, so it wasn't a total
> waste.
Not really upset so much as trying to have some fun. Your posts are
off-topic for this group BTW. If anything, they should be in .industry.
.design is for the open discussion of game ideas. But it seems to serve as a
catch-all group for flamerz, trolls, zealots, etc.
- Mike
Arklan
reorganizing is quite definitly impossible. especially by chance.
"Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote in message
news:w4Ak6.14728$1%2.83...@sjc-read.news.verio.net...
Arklan
have been written for 20 years now?
"Link" <link...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:AaBk6.161282$Pm2.3...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Jason Shankel
> ideas used in other games (coincidence? who knows), I decided to take
> a different route with my latest idea. I don't really want a job in
> the gaming industry (I don't think I do, anyway). But I do think my
> idea has great potential, and if it's used, for once I was looking to
> see if there'd be a way to get compensated for it, rather than game
> creators benefitted from it when they were clearly not capable of
> coming up with some of those ideas themselves.
>
> But yes, a view of the lay of the land is fine. To be told to "pack it
> up.. no one could care less about your ideas" is another matter
> entirely.
>
> Thanks for posting.
All right then. A few comments. And please, I am not bashing here, just
"lay of the land" time.
Game companies are certainly interested in customer feedback. Customer
feedback is an essential tool for developing successful titles, especially
successful franchise titles. Game companies are not, generally, going to be
interested in providing substantial compensation for this feedback, however
detailed it might be.
When you see a game and you say "Sweet Crucified Buddha! I can't believe
they didn't implement Feature X!", well, it's probably because Features Y, Z
and W took priority.
The reality is, whether you believe it or not, most game companies have more
ideas than they know what to do with. Good ideas. Every product,
especially every franchise product, keeps active wish lists derived from
employees, customers, janitors, the CEO's kids and so forth. For every good
idea that makes it into a given product, dozens are left out because of
little things like budget, schedule, feasibility, integration with design
&c.
Ideas are like oxygen. Essential, abundant and cheap.
<sarcasm_mode>
Ideas are also a lot like bowel movements. Everyone seems to be endlessly
fascinated with their own and not too interested in other people's.
<\sarcasm_mode>
Anyway, have you thought about becoming a critic? No, I'm serious. Since
you're not likely to get much satisfaction out of the game companies, you
may want to consider integrating your "idea" into a balanced critique of the
product in question. You won't get paid by the company, but you might get
paid by a publication.
Brandon M. Bost
>
> Oh, BTW, since they went and made Episode II already I may as well tell you
> my idea: Get rid of Jar-Jar Binks.
>
> - Mike
Too late, movie's made, and Jar Jar's still in it. Hopefully, he'll fly off of
a cliff in it, but it seems not to me. ;-)
--
BMB
"P.S. If things around here aren't working, it's because I'm
laughing so hard." - Durandal, an AI in the stages of Rampancy
Brandon M. Bost
> Link wrote:
>
> >
> > Oh, BTW, since they went and made Episode II already I may as well tell you
> > my idea: Get rid of Jar-Jar Binks.
> >
> > - Mike
>
> Too late, movie's made, and Jar Jar's still in it. Hopefully, he'll fly off of
> a cliff in it, but it seems not to me. ;-)
>
Aw man, I screwed up again :-( I meant that to say ", but it seems not to be". My
typing skills have been severely impaired because of....uh.....well, my typing
skills just suck. ;-)
Tony Gowland
> game desiner. can't we act like at least junior high?
You missed the ponot there, didn't you? He'd already given up rational argumen
by killfiling me, so I thought I'd respond in kind.
--
Tony Gowland
"And besides, my dad's bigger than his dad."
Gerry Quinn
>
>I've extracted nuggets from these posts. But just thought I'd offer
>some of them nuggest in return, wrapped in the same material the
>nuggest were offered to me in. That can't be all *that* wrong, now can
>it? But it seems like the offerers did not like the material it was
>wrapped in after all .. funny how they don't mind offering it up to
>others in that wrapping .. go figure.
Fair enough ;-)
I think there is a school of thought that says if you really want to
be in this industry, you might as well start developing a hide of steel
right away!
Seriously, though, there are lots and lots of people who have or think
they have a revolutionary new idea. Most of them don't. And those that
do had better realise that the world isn't waiting on their doorstep for
it.
As the saying goes: "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. if
they're good enough, you'll have to force them down their throats."
Gerry Quinn
--
http://bindweed.com
Puzzles, Strategy Games, Kaleidoscope Screensaver
Download evaluation versions free - no time limits
New puzzle challenge: "Dragon Scales"
Krystman
"Arklan" <Ark...@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:aKCk6.8410$Yl1.3...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> uh, just for the record, what you suggest about the atoms of bushes body
> reorganizing is quite definitly impossible. especially by chance.
The chance is higher then the chance Ben has if he wants to get money for
his Idea. It looks like it's even higher then the chance that he will
realize, he's a naive dreamer if we continue this Thread...
ceeu
Krystman
Krystman
"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3a927a16...@news.earthlink.net...
> He just stated what his observations
> are, indicated the difficulties as he saw it, and still mentions that
> you can go for it if you want to.
And you still want to go for it?
ceeu
Krystman
Unknown
"Arklan" <Ark...@aol.com> wrote:
]i agree completely with ben on this. those in power such as romero
and
]carmack may have ideas to spare, but look at diakatana as an
example.
]sometimes, they are crap. there are reasons that new companies keep
]sprouting up all over the world. lots of people have good ideas.
Good point. It's a shame the only way a good idea will make it into a
game, so it seems, is if you make it yourself. I don't have the desire
to become a game maker as a career, which probably also goes for many
others that might have a fantastic idea for the next incarnation of a
game, let alone a new game.
Krystman
"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3a927c72...@news.earthlink.net...
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 23:29:18 GMT,
> "Rainer Deyke" <ro...@rainerdeyke.com> wrote:
> It's an analogy, fool. Get a clue and answer the question.
I think People would thread you more civilizized if you stop abusing them...
> ]There really aren't any significant "new" ideas in UT. The game is
> still a
> ]bestseller. How dumb is that?
>
> Significantly different? No. But different enough to merit popularity
> enough to make it a good seller. Not all changes need to be
> significant, genius.
Take a closer look. UT has absolutley NO new Ideas. It's EXACTLY
Unreal - single player mode + better GFX + debugged mulitplayer
> ]> If anyone else had these ideas, we'd see a game like this. We
> don't.
> ]
> ]Wrong! When a designer gets to work on a new RTS, he looks at his
> list of
> ]ideas and picks which ones to implement.
> Wrong! That's not what I'm saying. Go reread my post, not only to
> figure out what I'm actually saying, but to answer that which you
> conveniently ignored.
He didn't ignore you. You said
"When people who make games would have enough ideas, games would be cooler.
They don't so games suck."
He answered
"People who make games have the ideas but prefer not to implement all at one
time them because its too risky. There is also no need because games with no
new ideas are still beeing sold well. That's why all new games have no new
ideas and therefore it looks like game developers were running out of
ideas."
But if he realy understood it worng, please quote YOUR Passage so we can all
see that we got you wrong and we can finish this thread..
ceeu
Krystman
Unknown
"Jason Shankel" <see...@bottom.for.address> wrote:
]> And that's fine. I'm not looking for a career. After having some
I've already seen this happen. Good point.
]
]When you see a game and you say "Sweet Crucified Buddha! I can't
believe
]they didn't implement Feature X!", well, it's probably because
Features Y, Z
]and W took priority.
]
]The reality is, whether you believe it or not, most game companies
have more
]ideas than they know what to do with. Good ideas.
But I don't think they may necessarily always have the best ideas,
agreed? Good ideas? Sure. Sometimes a great idea as well? Sure.
*Always* have the best ideas? I disagree.
But there are people out there that do have the best ideas at times.
And if those people are not in the gaming industry, and for some
reason arean't really looking for a career within it, then it's a
shame those ideas are lost.
It is for this reason I think game companies should consider looking
at said outside ideas, but that's my opinion anyway. Sure there'd be a
lot of crap to wade through, but if you have to wade through a
haystack to find a diamond, I'd sure as hell do it.
And once finding those great ideas that, in their opinion as well, are
also great ideas, then compensation for the person who gave them the
idea, moreso if it was fleshed out to incredible detail (both before
and after its acceptance) does not seem out of the question, IMO.
]Every product,
]especially every franchise product, keeps active wish lists derived
from
]employees, customers, janitors, the CEO's kids and so forth. For
every good
]idea that makes it into a given product, dozens are left out because
of
]little things like budget, schedule, feasibility, integration with
design
]&c.
]
]Ideas are like oxygen. Essential, abundant and cheap.
Here's where I disagree with you. You're labeling all ideas (so it
seems anyway) as if they're all created equal. I've seen outsiders
come up with ideas that companies included in future releases. Clearly
they didn't think of those ideas, correct? Yet they must have been
better, because the game creators themselves felt the need to
implement them.
This is exactly my point. Of course, perhaps 99% of the outside ideas
are no better, or many times worse. But there's obviously a percentage
of ideas out there that are better than what the companies have
thought of, better enough that even those companies decide "yeah,
let's do that!" and they add it to their games, and it is those ideas
I'm referring to. So even though game creators have tons of ideas,
outsiders have some that are even better at times. That is something
the game creators do not have at the time, and need to consider
attaining. If not, then they are clearly acting on ideas that, though
they may be good, certainly aren't as good as those other ideas people
have.
]
]<sarcasm_mode>
]Ideas are also a lot like bowel movements. Everyone seems to be
endlessly
]fascinated with their own and not too interested in other people's.
]<\sarcasm_mode>
Like I said in another post of mine -- I pitched my ideas to others as
if a game company was creating it. They became very fascinated by them
and demanded to know who was creating it and when it was coming out.
That's when I broke the news to them and told them no one -- those
ideas were mine. So you sarcastic comment, though perhaps true to a
decent extent, only serves to bury the concept we're debating at the
moment: there ARE better ideas out there *at times* in outsiders
(people not in the game creating industry).
You're choosing to ignore such a potential goldmine? That's your
right. I believe it's a mistake.
]
]Anyway, have you thought about becoming a critic? No, I'm serious.
Since
]you're not likely to get much satisfaction out of the game
companies, you
]may want to consider integrating your "idea" into a balanced
critique of the
]product in question. You won't get paid by the company, but you
might get
]paid by a publication.
Well, I do tend to develop lots of ideas about most games I play. And
I do tend to have a decent sense of what seems good and bad about a
game. But to be forced to play a game to figure such things out might
take the fun out of it. ;^) If it's a game I played by choice, no
problem.
I'm not necessarily looking to find a new way to make money.
Instead I've got an idea. I'd love for an RTS game to work this way so
I could play it (don't really care who wrote it). Rather than just
have a game company sponge off my idea and make potentially a large
amount of money off of a (potentially) great idea for free, I'd
*prefer* to get compensated in some way (perhaps even if it's just
mention of being my design).
In this particular case, it's not just a small modification to a
feature. It's a radical change in how you control an RTS game. To a
few people I've shown this to (as if a game company was making this
new RTS type game), it seemed downright fascinating (we're talking
people over 30 here that I obviously trust to not take the idea). It'd
be a bit annoying to see, for example, Age Of Empires III come out,
utilizing this radical new concept down to the letter, and become as
good a seller (if not better) than I and II. I got my idea from
writing AI scripts for AOE II, combined with that was really, in a
generic sense, starting to take the fun out of the game in
multiplayer.
But anyway, thanks for the suggestion on becoming a game critic.
And thanks for posting.
Unknown
"Krystman" <kr...@ceeu.de> wrote:
]Hi!
You mean it would actually bother you if I did? If not, then I'm
misunderstanding why it's such a shocker to you to be worth even
asking.. what do you care?
Unknown
"Link" <link...@hotmail.com> wrote:
]"Ben" <sorryn...@noemail.com> wrote in message ...
Yes it does. Your posts being yet another perfect example.