Comments on: Nobody Gives a Shit: Introspections of a start-up indie studio’s dealings with publishers. I am not really surprised by your experience with publishers, these company are now run by people from finance/accountancy and yes they are very risk adverse that's the reason why when a kind of game does well on the market you see a lot of clones appearing too on the market shortly after. I must say I agree with Omar if you take all the risks you get most of all the money and that's what indie is all about ( risk -> freedom + money ). If you are financed by publisher he will decide what you do because he pays and honestly I don't have left my job in a bank to have someone telling me what to do. I am not really surprised by your experience with publishers, these company are now run by people from finance/accountancy and yes they are very risk adverse that’s the reason why when a kind of game does well on the market you see a lot of clones appearing too on the market shortly after. I must say I agree with Omar if you take all the risks you get most of all the money and that’s what indie is all about ( risk -> freedom + money ). If you are financed by publisher he will decide what you do because he pays and honestly I don’t have left my job in a bank to have someone telling me what to do.

]]>
By: Christian A./2011/01/22/nobody-gives-a-shit-introspections-of-a-start-up-indie-studios-dealings-with-publishers/#comment-602 Christian A. Mon, 24 Jan 2011 15:48:50 +0000 @Omar re the "great risk come great rewards" is kind of my point about what indie devs usually consider an acceptable tradeoff, that may seem balanced, but it's really a balance favoring the publisher because there is no risk for them, and there is no sunk cost. Lets say that both you and the publisher think your game is hot, and they offer you an outstanding 70% royaltee rate. However, if the game isn't successful comercially, it still doesnt cost the publisher anything, while still costing you both in time and money.So really, you the developer only win in this situation if the game is an outstanding market success, where the publisher never looses (except for marketing costs). @Omar re the “great risk come great rewards” is kind of my point about what indie devs usually consider an acceptable tradeoff, that may seem balanced, but it’s really a balance favoring the publisher because there is no risk for them, and there is no sunk cost. Lets say that both you and the publisher think your game is hot, and they offer you an outstanding 70% royaltee rate. However, if the game isn’t successful comercially, it still doesnt cost the publisher anything, while still costing you both in time and money.So really, you the developer only win in this situation if the game is an outstanding market success, where the publisher never looses (except for marketing costs).

]]>
By: Omar/2011/01/22/nobody-gives-a-shit-introspections-of-a-start-up-indie-studios-dealings-with-publishers/#comment-600 Omar Sat, 22 Jan 2011 10:41:21 +0000 Thanks for the post! I'll know what to do if/when we decide that we may need a publisher someday! The demo is definitely the most important thing! Thanks for the post! I’ll know what to do if/when we decide that we may need a publisher someday! The demo is definitely the most important thing!

]]>