Digest Reply - industry adoption question

[Dowd, Tom]

Perhaps I am off base here, but...

I think what Celtx is looking for with their questions about backing is assurance (and/or support) that the greater industry is actually going to use the tool, and not just a few companies here and there. How many game engines actively in use support the metadata that this new tool would output? How many game companies are willing to put the effort ($$) into altering their game engines to support the metadata from the tool?

It is not just a question of building a useful tool, but getting that tool supported actively by industry, which invloves convincing each development company... each team even in some cases... that this is the most effective approach.

Getting the IGDA to say "Yes, we like this!" is one thing, it is a different matter to get development houses and game engine makers to buy in as well.

Do people forsee this as being a bottom-up effort? Each writer/designer advocates integration of this new tool into their local pipeline, or do we see a broader effort to convince the industry that this tool (or something like it) is the Max/Maya/Sound Forge/Etc equivilant for writers?

TomD

------------------------------------------------------
Tom Dowd
Faculty
Columbia College Chicago
Interactive Arts and Media/Game Design Major
623 South Wabash Avenue, 400-B
Chicago IL, 60605
EM: td...@colum.edu
PH: 312.344.7114
FX: 312.344.8021

[Corvus Elrod]

Tom,

I think that's a good point and I considered the use of the term
"backing" in their email reply to be of some concern as well. When
coupled with the comment that this was hardly a grass roots project,
it almost sounds like a show stopper to me. A pessemistic (and I
always prepare for the worst while hoping for the best) interpretation
of their email could read, "we'll make it but you all have to find the
development money."

What we need to convince them of is that if they design the platform
correctly, it'll cost the big studios more money to NOT use it. We'll
also need to start proselytizing the tool among the industry as well.
Mentioning it to every studio we contract with, talking to our
in-house programmers and producers about integrating it into the
pipeline, GDC sessions on Designing the Perfect Game Writing Platform,
etc. All steps we'd need to take.

In other words, I don't think we can find capital to fund the project,
but we can certainly provide a lot of free marketing.

--
Corvus Elrod, Zakelro Story Studio
http://www.zakelro.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/corvus

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

Hey Tom,

Thanks for speaking up! We need educators on board too! Having taking my first film and MIDI sequencing courses at Columbia, I understand the need for high caliber institutions to have standard tools, and that is part of this effort.

All game engines use metadata, without it a line is just an empty string. Having worked with various engines I'm confident we are spec'ing out a tool that will work with any professional game engine. The idea is to create a tool that serves various individuals/studios/teams in their subjective needs as gamemakers when it comes to writing.

Yes, this is a bottom up effort, though I have commitment from tools groups (engineeers) in the industry, and let me say they are very excited to iron out the mess they have to deal with. Writing gets a bad wrap for multiple reasons in games, one is the mess most programmers are forced to deal with due to a lack of robust writing tools.

Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table! We need professional educators like yourself to be onboard, so please join us on the journey to a standard Universal Open Source Game Writing Tool!

Stephen E. Dinehart
Co-lead
WSIG Tools Initative
http://www.narrativedesinger.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/stephendinehart

[Jeff]

This is a key question. To be frank, many of the people on the
initiative (and in the SIG) are independent / freelance. So while I
can say without question that I will use the tool, and therefore that
the Ubisoft or Atari games I work on will use the tool, and that
several third party development studios will at least see the tool, I
cannot guarantee that it will become the 'standard' for any of these
entities.

On the other hand, as there is an utter lack of any sort of standard,
and all current tools tend to be home-grown (with the associated
development and support issues), we can state with a certainty that
the project is tempting, promising, interesting, and assorted other
"ings".

It all boils down to getting in black and white what Celtx expects as
the quid pro quo, and whether they view as sufficient the support,
time, and industry promotion that we can bring to the table.

Jeff

[Coray Seifert]

We should also tell them about the 20,000 member game developers that we'll communicate this initiative to, via our newsletter, quarterlies, internal SIG communication, and other new communication features via MyAmpi.

We might also be able to trade free sponsorship in the quarterly or other publications for Celtx's work.

Finally, if push comes to shove, this is something that we could apply for a grant from the IGDA proper, once SIG funding comes online. That being said, it's not like it would be a huge number, I'm guessing, since this is very early on in the SIG funding life cycle.

What's the latest on these guys? Are they waiting for a prioritized list from us? Are they just considering whether or not they're going to take on the project? Can a brother get a status update? :)

- C

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

The status is the same as it was at the begging of the week. Celtx is looking to  hear back from us re their concerns. Which is why we started talking about formal IGDA support.  We have them on-board hook, line, and sinker, we just need a formal response outlining what we can do for them. The next phases naturally move into development, and that costs money; well at least for people that aren't volunteers lol.

It's not exactly a small order, Celtx's conerns are as follows:

• industry up-front buy-in and support
• IGDA sanctioning and support
• underwriting costs of development
• an agreeable development plan and timeline.  

I thought I'd let it brew here for a day or two, but the traction has been lost. We need to formulate a proper response, and follow up with call to Celtx.

- Stephen

Coray Seifert wrote:

[Roane Beard]

It seems to me that point two is the easy one (IGDA sanctioning and support.) We just have the SIG board ask the IGDA board for a blurb saying they support it. Done.

Points 1 and 3 are trickier. Perhaps point one can be addressed by getting similar blurbs from writing leads at established developers? As for point three, we probably need a plan for shopping the project around to line up funding.

As for coming up with an acceptable plan / timetable, we probably need to develop this prior to securing said funding. I can't imagine a lot of developers jumping up to throw down cash without a clear idea of what we're proposing to do and how we're proposing to do it.

So, as far as a proper response to Celtx goes, perhaps we should get the board blurb along with statements of interests from key people at developers and approach Celtx with a simple request to help us develop a workable plan that we can use to shop around for funding. There are members on the list who are likely to be interested in such a tool that are in a position to write a brief statement of interest, right?

Make sense to anyone? Yes? No? Anyone? Bueller?

-Roane

--
___________
Roane Beard
Staff Writer
Meteor Games

[corvus...@zakelro.com]

That sounds like a very sensible approach to me.

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

Agreed.

corvus...@zakelro.com wrote:

[Roane Beard]

So if everyone's in agreement, our next actions probably go something like this:

1. Ask one of the SIG executive committee (Wendy?) to bring the initiative to the IGDA board for a statement of support.

2. Post a request to the list for statements of support on behalf of the developers they work for, for those who are in a position to do so.

3. Contact Celtx with said statements in hand and discuss a plan for development.

Sound about right?

-Roane

[Ron Toland]

Sounds like a good plan to me.

I'll gladly email Wendy and post a message to the mailing list (taking
care of items #1 and #2).

Stephen, you want to contact Celtx about our plans? Do we need to get
together with them to discuss certain details (how much money they
need, how many studios they need "on board" before they can greenlight
it, etc.)?

Ron

On Jun 19, 4:39 pm, "Roane Beard" <roanebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So if everyone's in agreement, our next actions probably go something like
> this:
>
> 1. Ask one of the SIG executive committee (Wendy?) to bring the initiative
> to the IGDA board for a statement of support.
>
> 2. Post a request to the list for statements of support on behalf of the
> developers they work for, for those who are in a position to do so.
>
> 3. Contact Celtx with said statements in hand and discuss a plan for
> development.
>
> Sound about right?
>
> -Roane
>
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Stephen E. Dinehart <s...@flownaway.com>
> wrote:
>
> >  Agreed.
>

[Roane Beard]

So, uh, where are we on this?

[Coray Seifert]

An excellent question. Did we hear back from the IGDA Writers SIG? Is Celtx working on our project yet?

What are the roadblocks?

- C

[Ron Toland]

I emailed Wendy about approaching the IGDA board last week. She
replied she had no problem supporting us, so long as we were sure this
was the way to go.

I assured her we've done our homework and think partnering with Celtx
is the right way to go. Her only remaining question was about how
Celtx wants the "official" endorsement: email, signed partnership
agreement, or ?

I kicked this question over to Stephen--thinking he would have a
better idea of what they need--and haven't heard back from either him
or Wendy.

I'll nudge Wendy in an email and find out where things stand from her
end.

I slipped up on the email to the SIG at large. I'll get that out
today.

Ron

On Jun 26, 7:41 am, "Coray Seifert" <seife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> An excellent question. Did we hear back from the IGDA Writers SIG? Is Celtx
> working on our project yet?
>
> What are the roadblocks?
>
> - C
>

> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Roane Beard <roanebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So, uh, where are we on this?
>

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

My current roadblock is unemployment! lol
We are awaiting com from Celtx Re the next steps.

Coray Seifert wrote:

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

We still have core issues to address:

• underwriting costs of development
• agreeable development plan
• timeline

Ideas?

[Ron Toland]

I'm thinking we might want to have another conference call with Celtx
to get more details on what they need from us.

For example, if they need development funds up front, how much do they
need? If we work out the partnership with the IGDA, will the money get
funneled through that organization? How would the parnership in
general work: would they write up the dev plan based on our
requirements, or are they an XP organization that'll want to write up
user stories?

I always feel nervous talking "money" and "price," but I'd feel a
little better knowing more about what they expect, and what we need to
do to keep this rolling.

Ron

On Jun 26, 1:44 pm, "Stephen E. Dinehart" <s...@flownaway.com> wrote:
> We still have core issues to address:
>

>     * underwriting costs of development
>     * agreeable development plan
>     * timeline

>
> Ideas?
>
> Coray Seifert wrote:
> > An excellent question. Did we hear back from the IGDA Writers SIG? Is
> > Celtx working on our project yet?
>
> > What are the roadblocks?
>
> > - C
>

> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Roane Beard <roanebe...@gmail.com
> > <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >     So, uh, where are we on this?
>

> >     On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Ron Toland <rontol...@gmail.com

> >     <mailto:rontol...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >         Sounds like a good plan to me.
>
> >         I'll gladly email Wendy and post a message to the mailing list
> >         (taking
> >         care of items #1 and #2).
>
> >         Stephen, you want to contact Celtx about our plans?  Do we
> >         need to get
> >         together with them to discuss certain details (how much money they
> >         need, how many studios they need "on board" before they can
> >         greenlight
> >         it, etc.)?
>
> >         Ron
>
> >         On Jun 19, 4:39 pm, "Roane Beard" <roanebe...@gmail.com

> >         <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >         > So if everyone's in agreement, our next actions probably go
> >         something like
> >         > this:
>
> >         > 1. Ask one of the SIG executive committee (Wendy?) to bring
> >         the initiative
> >         > to the IGDA board for a statement of support.
>
> >         > 2. Post a request to the list for statements of support on
> >         behalf of the
> >         > developers they work for, for those who are in a position to
> >         do so.
>
> >         > 3. Contact Celtx with said statements in hand and discuss a
> >         plan for
> >         > development.
>
> >         > Sound about right?
>
> >         > -Roane
>
> >         > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Stephen E. Dinehart

> >         <s...@flownaway.com <mailto:s...@flownaway.com>>
> >         > wrote:
>
> >         > >  Agreed.
>
> >         > > corvus.el...@zakelro.com <mailto:corvus.el...@zakelro.com>

[Coray Seifert]

Right. It sounds like they are on hold on this project for now. Let's ping them, find out what their needs are (funding or otherwise) and then move forward.

Stephen, can you make contact with them or do you need someone else to jump in?

Cheers,

- C

[TomDowd]

I doubt they are on hold, but I would be surprised if they aren't
thinking long and hard about this project. Remember, it wasn't even on
their radar a few weeks ago, and represents a sizable committment of
time and effort. We're presuming what is being asked for is an easy
addition to their code base, but it may in fact not be depending on
how their data structures are set up.

If I were them, I would be stepping cautiously and watching us for
some solid proof that we are not just a pack of kids trying to put
together a show in the neighbor's garage. They are going to need
convincing, and not just a little bit, is my guess.

Tom Dowd
Columbia College Chicago

> > > >     Meteor Games- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Coray Seifert]

Where are we with getting them that commitment? We have written confirmation from the IGDA Writer's SIG right? Did we get a quote from them for what kind of funding they might need?

What else do we need? Any other roadblocks we can help push through?

- C

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

I'm hoping to hear back from Celtx this week to setup a conference call.
It is a holiday weekend in Canada though, and both Celtx and I are in Canada.

To address Tom's concern about appearing as "pack of kids trying to put
together a show in the neighbor's garage": I think they understand we are a professional organization. All my calls with Celtx has gone very well, and for the most part they seem very excited. That said, I imagine they will develop this without us. Frankly, as of right now we seem to be able to offer very little except verbal support, testers, and potential users. I think they are dreaming of a much more robust partnership.

In any case, I'll send out the writers call when I hear back from Celtx.

Cheers,
Stephen

Coray Seifert wrote:

[Coray Seifert]

Sweet, thanks for the update Stephen.

Could you please format the next update in your previous WGA-script format or at least as a haiku? Those were quite enjoyable ;)

- C

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

Glad you dig it. I like the Haiku, maybe a sonnet?

I believe we can make this happen, but it requires finessing as people are going to be using costly resources to create this amazing tool.

What would probably help is an "offer sheet" something to show Celtx what we can offer as a partner.

thoughts?

Coray Seifert wrote:

[Ron Toland]

It seems we can offer:

1) User testing
2) Requirements list straight from potential customers
3) A ready-made user base
4) Connections to Game Writing Educators, who will be teaching the
next generation(s) what software to use
5) Viral marketing/advertising via the IGDA and the SIG
6) Help create user documentation for the tool
7) Potential development revenues through fundraising

#6 seems like the white elephant in the room to me, which is why I'd
like a conference call with Celtx to figure out at least the order of
magnitude of funding they'd need up front. I don't know how their
business model works, so I don't know if they need a lot up front but
nothing later on, or if they need just a trickle to start and would
count on customer service fees on the back end.

From what we hear from Wendy, Coray, and the SIG, it sounds like we
can deliver #1-5 no problem, in whatever form they need it. We just
need to hear what they need.

Ron

> >>     <mailto:td...@colum.edu>> wrote:
>
> >>         I doubt they are on hold, but I would be surprised if they aren't
> >>         thinking long and hard about this project. Remember, it
> >>         wasn't even on
> >>         their radar a few weeks ago, and represents a sizable
> >>         committment of
> >>         time and effort. We're presuming what is being asked for is
> >>         an easy
> >>         addition to their code base, but it may in fact not be
> >>         depending on
> >>         how their data structures are set up.
>
> >>         If I were them, I would be stepping cautiously and watching
> >>         us for
> >>         some solid proof that we are not just a pack of kids trying
> >>         to put
> >>         together a show in the neighbor's garage. They are going to need
> >>         convincing, and not just a little bit, is my guess.
>
> >>         Tom Dowd
> >>         Columbia College Chicago
>
> >>         On Jun 27, 2:35 pm, "Coray Seifert" <seife...@gmail.com

> >>         <mailto:seife...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>         > Right. It sounds like they are on hold on this project for
> >>         now. Let's ping
> >>         > them, find out what their needs are (funding or otherwise)
> >>         and then move
> >>         > forward.
>
> >>         > Stephen, can you make contact with them or do you need
> >>         someone else to jump
> >>         > in?
>
> >>         > Cheers,
>
> >>         > - C
>
> >>         > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Ron Toland

> >>         <rontol...@gmail.com <mailto:rontol...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >>         > > I'm thinking we might want to have another conference
> >>         call with Celtx
> >>         > > to get more details on what they need from us.
>
> >>         > > For example, if they need development funds up front, how
> >>         much do they
> >>         > > need? If we work out the partnership with the IGDA, will
> >>         the money get
> >>         > > funneled through that organization?  How would the
> >>         parnership in
> >>         > > general work: would they write up the dev plan based on our
> >>         > > requirements, or are they an XP organization that'll want
> >>         to write up
> >>         > > user stories?
>
> >>         > > I always feel nervous talking "money" and "price," but
> >>         I'd feel a
> >>         > > little better knowing more about what they expect, and
> >>         what we need to
> >>         > > do to keep this rolling.
>
> >>         > > Ron
>
> >>         > > On Jun 26, 1:44 pm, "Stephen E. Dinehart"

> >>         <s...@flownaway.com <mailto:s...@flownaway.com>> wrote:
> >>         > > > We still have core issues to address:
>
> >>         > > >     * underwriting costs of development
> >>         > > >     * agreeable development plan
> >>         > > >     * timeline
>
> >>         > > > Ideas?
>
> >>         > > > Coray Seifert wrote:
> >>         > > > > An excellent question. Did we hear back from the IGDA
> >>         Writers SIG? Is
> >>         > > > > Celtx working on our project yet?
>
> >>         > > > > What are the roadblocks?
>
> >>         > > > > - C
>
> >>         > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Roane Beard
> >>         <roanebe...@gmail.com <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>

> >>         > > > > <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com

> >>         <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> >>         > > > >     So, uh, where are we on this?
>
> >>         > > > >     On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Ron Toland
> >>         <rontol...@gmail.com <mailto:rontol...@gmail.com>

> >>         > > > >     <mailto:rontol...@gmail.com

> >>         <mailto:rontol...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> >>         > > > >         Sounds like a good plan to me.
>
> >>         > > > >         I'll gladly email Wendy and post a message to
> >>         the mailing list
> >>         > > > >         (taking
> >>         > > > >         care of items #1 and #2).
>
> >>         > > > >         Stephen, you want to contact Celtx about our
> >>         plans?  Do we
> >>         > > > >         need to get
> >>         > > > >         together with them to discuss certain details
> >>         (how much money
> >>         > > they
> >>         > > > >         need, how many studios they need "on board"
> >>         before they can
> >>         > > > >         greenlight
> >>         > > > >         it, etc.)?
>
> >>         > > > >         Ron
>
> >>         > > > >         On Jun 19, 4:39 pm, "Roane Beard"
> >>         <roanebe...@gmail.com <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>

> >>         > > > >         <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com

> >>         <mailto:roanebe...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>         > > > >         > So if everyone's in agreement, our next
> >>         actions probably go
> >>         > > > >         something like
> >>         > > > >         > this:
>
> >>         > > > >         > 1. Ask one of the SIG executive committee
> >>         (Wendy?) to bring
> >>         > > > >         the initiative
> >>         > > > >         > to the IGDA board for a statement of support.
>
> >>         > > > >         > 2. Post a request to the list for
> >>         statements of support on
> >>         > > > >         behalf of the
> >>         > > > >         > developers they work for, for those who are
> >>         in a position to
> >>         > > > >         do so.
>
> >>         > > > >         > 3. Contact Celtx with said statements in
> >>         hand and discuss a
> >>         > > > >         plan for
> >>         > > > >         > development.
>
> >>         > > > >         > Sound about right?
>
> >>         > > > >         > -Roane
>
> >>         > > > >         > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Stephen
> >>         E. Dinehart
> >>         > > > >         <s...@flownaway.com

> >>         <mailto:s...@flownaway.com> <mailto:s...@flownaway.com

> >>         <mailto:s...@flownaway.com>>>
> >>         > > > >         > wrote:
>
> >>         > > > >         > >  Agreed.
>
> >>         > > > >         > > corvus.el...@zakelro.com
> >>         <mailto:corvus.el...@zakelro.com>

> >>         <mailto:corvus.el...@zakelro.com

[Stephen E. Dinehart]

This is great. We need to snowball all this into a clear document that we can hand off to Celtx. The format I created form the Design Doc should work well.

Ron Toland wrote:

[Coray Seifert]

There's also the perk of being recognized as the ONLY script writing software endorsed by the ONLY real game development association.

Plus our 16,000+ membership base who will hear about the product should be mentioned...I think it may be closer to 20k by now.

- C