Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 13:31:13 -0600
From: sa97cm30 AT acs DOT wooster DOT edu
Subject: Re: Publishing a game
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Message-ID: <854908948.22218@dejanews.com>
Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service
References: <5bqo19$58 AT news DOT cableinet DOT net> <32E1F436 DOT 453A AT netcomuk DOT co DOT uk> <32E28623 DOT 4841 AT cam DOT org> <5butbq$e86$1 AT news DOT sas DOT ab DOT ca> <32E425C1 DOT 3FFA AT cam DOT org>
Lines: 168
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

In article <32E425C1 DOT 3FFA AT cam DOT org>,
  tudor AT cam DOT org wrote:
> 
> jonklipp AT freenet DOT edmonton DOT ab DOT ca wrote:
> > Should be, but it ain't :)  It kinda sucks actually, the publishers
> > usually make lotsa money and the author doens't get that much.  Think
> > about this:  If your 10% (for example) is $50,000, then the publisher has
> > made $450,000.  Ouch. :)
> Do you know any ways to get ridd of this shit ?
> I'm not making any games yet :) but I would consider creating games as a
> hobby(i.e. 3D or real time strategies).
> I wouldn't like workin my butt on that game then takin a shitty 10% when
> the publisher gets 90% and 100% of the work is myne!!
> How do companies like lets say Origin stand this ??  
> 
> -- 
> tudor 'at' cam 'dot' org
> yoda69 'at' hotmail 'dot' com
> http://www.cam.org/~tudor
> 
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.1
> GCS d-(--) s(-):(+) a? C+ UL>++++ P L>+++++ E- W++ N o K---(----) w---
> O---- M-- V-? PS+++ PE Y PGP t+ 5-- X+++>++++ R tv b+ DI D+ G e->++
> h>++ r- y>+++++ 
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

I agree that the author's royalties for codewriting are generally 
terrible.  
You put in a tremendous amount of work coming up with a cool idea, 
designing it, programming it, debugging it, and then you have to share 
your 
money with some big software publisher who has very little to do with 
the 
creation of the game--yet they get the lion's share of the money from 
it.  

Why?  Because they *are* the lion.  It doesn't matter how cool your 
new 
game is if no one ever hears of it or can't find it anywhere to buy 
it. The 
publisher takes a risk in printing a few thousand copies of a game, 
selling 
them to distributors, and putting them into stores and advertising 
them in 
catalogues, magazines, and on tv.  If the public for some reason is 
not 
interested in your game--and this can often be the result of nothing 
more 
than lousy a portrayal of the game in advertising--your game won't 
sell, 
and it's game over.  The giants of the industry can hype their games 
well, 
which virtually guarantees that they'll do well in the market, but 
this 
hype costs money.  Then, if they can, they'll make sequels of the 
game, 
relying on the name of the original to serve as advertising 
endorsement of 
the new game.  Having an established fan base makes it easier to sell.

So what can you as an author do about it?    Not very much, and quite 
a 
bit.  If you're talking about indirect markets (ie printing up copies 
of a 
game, manual, etc, advertising for it, shipping the copies off to 
distributors who then sell them to retailers, who sell them to 
consumers) 
there's pretty much no way you can out-do the giant publishers unless 
you're already well-funded.  You also will have a hard time 
negotiating a 
bigger royalty percentage, not with hordes of people clamoring for 
attention to their own game, which might be just as good as your game 
or 
might be crap.  I'd be in favor of seeing the really good 
programmers/authors forming an union of some kind--they would then 
have at 
least SOME negotiating leverage that way.  Often, rather than doing 
that, 
it's been easier for the established veteran game designer to go out 
on his 
own and found his own company--which, again, requires a fair amount of 
initial outlay of personal resources.

Probably the best option for you if you want to stay independant is 
the 
internet.  Already, for the past few years companies have become 
increasingly aware of the internet's potential for cheap, direct 
advertising.  If you're hocking something information based, such as a 
computer program, you can even do sales directly.  Set up a webpage 
for 
your game, and allow people to download it over the net.  Post to the 
appropriate newsgroups and announce the game's availability (and don't 
forget to mention how cool it is).  Allow the game to be put up on FTP 
sites all over the world for public anonymous download, free--this 
allows 
you to expand your market.  All of this takes place through word of 
mouth.  
You won't see huge sales right away from it, but, if your game really 
has 
what people are looking for, you will gain a following, which will 
remain 
loyal if you offer good customer support for your product.  (One 
really 
neat thing to offer is the capability for the user to modify or 
customize 
the game through ad-ons and plug ins, a la Marathon's physics models 
and 
map-making--this virtually guarantees continued customer interest, 
especially if the games are networkable.)  By directly marketing your 
product to the consumer, you'll save tons of money that the publishers 
would take from you and put into advertising which is usually of 
questionable effectiveness.  Best of all, your advertising is 
extremely 
low-cost (most of it is free, the rest can be handled by the average 
working joe's paycheck).  You won't have to pay to produce your game 
either, just to develop it.  Instead of having truckloads of CD-ROMs, 
booklets, boxes, mail-in cards, cardboard displays, you have a 
dedicated 
computer in your house running a FTP server or a webpage, a copy of 
your 
game (and the documentation for it in electric format), and that's 
about 
it.  All you have to pay for is electricity.  There are only two real 
pitfalls of this kind of approach: 1) if you make a really big game, 
the 
download time for it can become unfeasible, and 2) collecting your 
income 
via shareware fees can be a headache.  Probably the safest way is to 
allow 
customers to download a test version of the game, or a disabled 
full-version, which they can evaluate, and then if they wish to play 
the 
full game they have to pay you.  Since your costs are low, you can 
undercut 
the big companies and sell your games at very attractive prices--and 
this 
just makes you look good.

Meanwhile, continue to produce new games.  Advertise your new products 
next 
to the established ones.  In a year or two, you should be fairly 
established and known in the internet community.  You may well receive 
offers to produce larger games from the big companies.  Take the jobs, 
if 
you feel like it, but make sure the terms of your contract allow you 
to do 
your own work on the side.

These ideas aren't anything new, but they're workable, and IMO being 
independant is better than working through a large company that takes 
the 
fruit of your labors.  If you could sell 50,000 copies of a game for 
$10 
per download, that's a half million dollars gross (assuming you can 
collect 
all the shareware fees).  With your marketing prices so low, with a 
few 
successes you should be set for life.  Development costs on the other 
hand, 
might not be so low, but if you're creative you'll find ways to cap 
them or 
avoid them.

----chris sanyk

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet