Should games come from boutiques like Firaxis or integrated shops like Microprose

TCO · April 21, 2002, 18:38

Recently spent some time with a veteran game coder who had worked at integrated and boutique shops. He had some real insights on the relationship of designer to publisher.

Seemed to think that for new versions of games it was better to do it "in house" rather than have a seperate design shop.

What do y'all think?

TCO · April 21, 2002, 18:57

Maybe Civ3 would have been a much better product if made in an integrated shop.

Skanky Burns · April 21, 2002, 21:35

What would be the major differences between the two?

Urban Ranger · April 22, 2002, 00:12

It don't matter. What matters is what the management does to the marketing department. Good management keeps the suits reined in; incompetent ones let them run loose over everybody else.

TCO · April 22, 2002, 00:58

with 2 shops, you have conflict regarding the shape of the game. (Publisher gets to make a call on what game will look like.) Can be a waste of energy. With integrated shop, it is all in house. Easier to cooperate. But integrated shops can be less creative.

ravagon · April 22, 2002, 01:19

Quote:

Originally posted by GP
with 2 shops, you have conflict regarding the shape of the game. (Publisher gets to make a call on what game will look like.) Can be a waste of energy. With integrated shop, it is all in house. Easier to cooperate. But integrated shops can be less creative.

With a separate developer/publisher though you get the second acting as a check/balance to the first - Nothing too unrealistic - this under the assumption that the publisher is predestined. It'll be interesting to see how Candle'bre turns out (plug plug

). I don't think Velocigames has a publisher yet ...

(?)

Moo3 of course has had its share of conflicts/wasted energy, possibly to the detriment of the final product but who's to say whether or not the original expectations were unrealistic or not?
IG does have a point in wanting to protect their (presumably fairly substantial) investment and couldn't have allowed the development process to continue indefinitely.
The only comparison we'll ever be able to make will be between what we get, and what we imagine it could've been (which of course will always be better than what we get), which isn't very realistic ...

Grrr · April 22, 2002, 01:29

Integrated, like Microprose.

TCO · April 22, 2002, 02:29

errr....I meant microsoft....or whatever.

the dude could probably tell you several full service shops. I can't...

Asher · April 22, 2002, 02:34

I don't think it really matters.

TCO · April 22, 2002, 04:02

Quote:

Originally posted by ravagon

With a separate developer/publisher though you get the second acting as a check/balance to the first - Nothing too unrealistic - this under the assumption that the publisher is predestined. It'll be interesting to see how Candle'bre turns out (plug plug

). I don't think Velocigames has a publisher yet ...

(?)

Moo3 of course has had its share of conflicts/wasted energy, possibly to the detriment of the final product but who's to say whether or not the original expectations were unrealistic or not?
IG does have a point in wanting to protect their (presumably fairly substantial) investment and couldn't have allowed the development process to continue indefinitely.
The only comparison we'll ever be able to make will be between what we get, and what we imagine it could've been (which of course will always be better than what we get), which isn't very realistic ...

I'm pretty much in agreement with you. I can see good and bad in the different relationships. It's basically just an argument about vertical integration.

The interesting insight to me from hanging out with this dude was that he said the publisher gets a fair amount of artistic license in the product. (i.e that developer shows it to publisher and publisher can ask/demand changes).

Velociryx · April 22, 2002, 11:29

Thanks for the plug, Rav!

I think the key difference between the two is that in integrated shops, there is (or more easily can be) less pressure by the publisher to get the game out by some arbitrary date.

The designer/publisher relationship when the two are independent of each other is automatically gonna be broken to one extreme or the other.

In the most common case, the designer has an idea that looks good on paper, and maybe even a roughed out demo to hype to a publisher. He does so, and the publisher buys it. Now the pubilsher is in the driver's seat, and calls all the relevant shots (the game WILL be out by Christmas, and I don't care if it's done or not!) --sounds pretty familiar, yes?

OTOH, if the designer waits till the game is just the way he wants it, and THEN goes looking for a publisher, he can pick and choose his deal....starting a bidding war for his game, and the publishers will be tripping over themselves to snatch it up, if the design is good.

Either way tho, there's a total imbalance of power in that relationship.

-=Vel=-

TCO · April 22, 2002, 15:53

Interesting insight, Vel.

it is definitely not a black or white issue. I think a lot of people like to blame IG more than they should. Firaxis is the designer and if Firaxis is slow, loses half of its project team, has bad ideas, management, execution, than Firaxis deserves some blame too. IG is essentially a commerical partner with little insight/control of artistic (to include all apsects of game) decisions. The most they can do is enforce their contract with Firaxis.

Velociryx · April 22, 2002, 17:26

Oh, I quite agree, GP! There can and have been numerous examples of poorly managed creative teams turning out just plain junk (not that I'm putting Firaxis in that category, btw), however: I think that once a publisher buys rights to a game (and, it's generally the case that publishers buy the rights to a game that has not yet been designed, and only when the money from that deal is in hand, do the designers race for the finish line), they have a huge "stick" to hold over the heads of the design crew at that point....and very often, they do just that, pressing to get the game out for the Christmas rush, for example, nevermind the fact that the design team has suffered setbacks.

I think that if more companies would take the reverse approach (design the game first, be happy with it...polish it to a super-high gloss, and THEN shop for a publisher), we wouldn't see a tenth of the buggy releases we do.

-=Vel=-
(of course, this would require the game companies to restructure themselves somewhat....a thing I'm doing with Velocigames from the outset....we'll see how that plays out!)