Don't get me wrong, but...

[IncreduloDriver]

Originally posted by ravagon
Of course his Supreme Excellency Emporer Vel (I didn't call him Sir! ) may refute any/all of this at any time for all I know. Thats just my understanding at present...

I hope he doesn't, because as I understand your understanding, everything looks pretty sweet (understandably).

[TCO]

Originally posted by IncreduloDriver

You would'nt have to recoup ALL the money, but you'd have to recoup a whole heck of a lot, because investors aren't investing to break even, they want MORE, and they'd have to get more than simply investing in real estate by themselves would produce. So, you'd have to sell a lot of copies.

I think we all agree that there are no synergies (probably dissynergies) between real estate speculation and game development. Vel says that bascially the link tying the two together is his superior ability at each.

Still don't buy your point about the much MORE return needed from the real estate. Theoretically the investor should be impartial to investing in the venture jointly or investing in two seperate ventures. (Unless you say there are dissynergies, i.e. focus.) You might argue that the discount rate changes by bundling the two, but it just changes to be a weighted average of the discount rate for the two projects.

example:

$100 million in real estate needed to provide sufficient cash flow for game development. 1 year time horizon. Investor demands $105 million at end of 1 year (for real estate investments in general.) (5% discount rate)

Game development costs 5 million dollars (time zero money). investor demands 6 million dollars at end of 1 year (20%) discount rate.

If it is a joint project (with the game living off RE cash flows) than the investor just demands a weighted average of the discount rates on his $100 million. That weighted average is determined by taking 95 million of real estate discount factor and 5 million of game risk factor and averaging them. Answer, 6%. So as long as the game returns 6 million, you're fine. And that was your expecation for that part of the project.

*95 million is determined by subtracting the 5 million of present value that you know is going into development expenses.

[Mark_Everson]

Originally posted by IncreduloDriver
I really would like to help, but I'm a CS major with an uncanny ability to write code and no artistic talent whatsoever. Sorry to let you down, you're probably filled to the brim with programmers But, if a coder leaves or dies or gets sick or something, I'd be happy to pick up a little slack sometime.

Hi IncreduloDriver, I Had to comment on this one. They may be filled to the brim with "volunteer" programmers. If their experience is anything like we've had with Clash, 90% of those will accomplish Absolutely Nothing. Of the remaining fraction, about half will produce a very modest amount of code, maybe several hundred lines, and then fade away. Of probably more than 100 volunteer programmers we've had, exactly five, three of which we still have on the team, produced more than about 500 lines of code. Put in the context of a game that will need ~250k lines, I think you can see where the problem is.

So if you are interested and motivated, please Do volunteer for one of the Alt Civs games. Maybe Vel's group of programmers is going to work out much better than the average net game project bunch since it appears a cluster is RL friends. But IMO a project can Never have "enough" programmers . Or at least is never likely to. If they think they have enough, and you code in Java I'll gladly give you a shot working on Clash and see how you can sling code.

[RonHiler]

Sigh. I just read over my post, and I really wish I hadn't posted it now. I do have some knowledge of the industry both personal and second-hand, and it was meant to be a friendly advice/tips post, but it came off sounding patronizing and preachy. I apologize for that, that was not the intent. TCoCB team, do read the article in the link, that's required reading. Ignore the rest of it.

I will use the "it was late, and I was tired" defense I should learn not to post under such circumstances, it's when I get myself into trouble.

But, since I did post it, I guess I should defend it. As to what you replied Incred....

We agree on all points except two, one of which I'm about to retract So no point in bringing up any of those. For the two points....

Originally posted by IncreduloDriver
As I stated earlier in the thread, an open beta is fine. (Kindly read the whole thread and everybody's posts to avoid misunderstanding comments, as you have done in this case)

I was respondig to your post, not all the ones below it. I skimmed then, but I don't necessarily always have time to go over them in great detail. I have my own project to program. Deal. It was your post that caught my attention (for whatever reason) and it was your post that I was responding to.

I don't have any knowledge of what Vel is planning to release as a final open beta, so I can't speak to that. You do have a point in that you can hurt yourself if the final beta is *too* perfect, I would imagine, but that seems unlikely to me. A perfect program minus the Romans is not a Beta, it is a Gold minus Romans In a complex game, Betas aren't going to be perfect (in my definition of the word Beta) any more than pre-Alphas are.

Of course, if TCoCB goes published, Vel and his team won't have control over this anyway. Testing (the scope, when its done, what is tested, and who get to do it) is pretty much the domain of the publisher, AIUI. So it becomes a mute point at that stage.

If they go independent, they can do whatever they want. They have *plenty* of time to figure out what they're going to do before then. There's about a zillion things that need to be figured out before they get anywhere near that point. The final beta content is the least of their worries right now

Anyway, I think we've disagreed on a matter of semantics. What you consider a Beta is different from what I consider a Beta. I guess it all depends on what *Vel* considers a Beta as to which of us has the right of it

Again, you need to read my post *before* you comment on it. You'll need hundreds of millions of dollars to *generate the returns* necessary to fund the development.

Ah, you're right. I misread your post. My bad. I'm the bad guy here. I dunno why I didn't catch that, brain misfire. Again, I will play the "it was late, I was tired" card. I retract my statement.

You're probably right, I have no idea how much it would cost to get together enough property to fund a game, hundreds of millions could be totally correct. I suspect by the time you have enough, you are now a fulltime property manager rather than a game developer

Alright, going back to my own project now....

Ron

[Velociryx]

Hey guys...seems that my less-frequent appearance has come at a bad time...this looks to be a pretty intriguing discussion!

Right now, it would be a safe assumption and good categorization that our effort has a whole lot in common with FreeCiv and/or any number of other 'net-based, volunteer-driven design projects.

That's just exactly on target.

Where we begin to differ is in the notion that we're not going to remain in that category for good.

We do it once....we do it well, and prove to people that we're just not a group of guys and gals who are full of hot air and not a lot else. We prove that we CAN design a game from the ground up, make it cool and addictive and compelling...maybe make a bit of a name for ourselves, and then we start doing it "for real" (ie - "for a paycheck", "commercially", "in the biz", and all those other colorful phrases)

And how, exactly, will we do that? How precisely will we take it from the realm of volunteerism to paycheck?

Don't know.

I've got some solid ideas on that, but in truth, I won't know till we get there, or at least closer, but because it is in my mind to get us there, I'm taking steps to organize us along those lines.

Some of the ideas are (some have already been decided on, some have been, or are being implemented as I type this, and still others are still being kicked around, all are on the table as possibilities, and in varying stages of finality).

* An ownership stake for the volunteers (ie volunteers = investors)

* Side product sales (yep, we're giving away a scaled down version of the game away, but that sorta creates its own market, doesn't it? I mean, if the Candle'Bre world winds up being as deep and compelling as we hope it will be, then there are all sorts of related products that we don't have to give away, which can bring in money for the project).

* My own personal investment, amounting to real estate acquisitions given over to the company in exchange for an equity stake....properties which will generate a steadily growing income stream FOR the company, which will be able to support an ever-increasing amount of the "load" where design and development costs are concerned.

* An open invitation/opportunity for any and all volunteers who are interested in seeing the commercial version of the game come to life, to invest what funds they can for a future equity stake.

* My two novels and the SMAX guide - given over entirely to the company (just as soon as there IS a company to give them to). Thus, I tie my own fate with that of our future....makes a good incentive for me personally...the success of my books will then play a direct role in the success of the company.

* We DO have some potential nibbles were VC money is concerned, and for the sake of speed, we're certainly not burning those bridges. If we need it...if the "right" opportunity to take this particular ball and run with it is there thanks to an infusion of VC money...we'll take it. That's very definately an option.

* Others as we think of them, and perhaps a few I forgot to mention.

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

Originally posted by RonHiler
Sigh. I just read over my post, and I really wish I hadn't posted it now. I do have some knowledge of the industry both personal and second-hand, and it was meant to be a friendly advice/tips post, but it came off sounding patronizing and preachy. I apologize for that, that was not the intent. TCoCB team, do read the article in the link, that's required reading. Ignore the rest of it.

You were plenty gentle and those are a great set of articles. Kudos, big guy!

[Velociryx]

PS-es all 'round:

Rav - you're hired! From the depth of your strategic exploration of the game, I now know for a fact you'll do AT LEAST as good a job as Prima! Outstanding!

Ron - Read that article, as well as the others on the two pages of articles there...LOTS of reading, but very informative. Was diggin it...

Incred - Although our code group has been incredibly productive, if our project interests you, please shoot me an e-mail and tell me a bit more about you. I'll put you in touch with the fearless leader of the code group, and we'll see what happens. Or, head to Mark's excellent group....either way, he's right, no such thing as too much help in indie efforts....

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

Originally posted by Velociryx

Right now, it would be a safe assumption and good categorization that our effort has a whole lot in common with FreeCiv and/or any number of other 'net-based, volunteer-driven design projects.

Roger.

Where we begin to differ is in the notion that we're not going to remain in that category for good.

Roger.

Some of the ideas are (some have already been decided on, some have been, or are being implemented as I type this, and still others are still being kicked around, all are on the table as possibilities, and in varying stages of finality).

To be precise, your ideas are more intirem financing rather than how to transition from a free-civ to a commerical venture. Assuming that you have learned something and demonstrated the ability to make games commercially, your transition won't be too hard to think through.

* An ownership stake for the volunteers (ie volunteers = investors)

makes sense. Good motivator. And of course, you are selling learning and fun too...to your volunteers.

* Side product sales (yep, we're giving away a scaled down version of the game away, but that sorta creates its own market, doesn't it? I mean, if the Candle'Bre world winds up being as deep and compelling as we hope it will be, then there are all sorts of related products that we don't have to give away, which can bring in money for the project).

Probably a bit dreamy. And duplicative of the entry regarding books.

* My own personal investment, amounting to real estate acquisitions given over to the company in exchange for an equity stake....properties which will generate a steadily growing income stream FOR the company, which will be able to support an ever-increasing amount of the "load" where design and development costs are concerned.

This (of course) is a cross-subsidization scheme and is not value creating. (GP hopes if we just stay quiet on this that this will eventually die a natural death. )

* An open invitation/opportunity for any and all volunteers who are interested in seeing the commercial version of the game come to life, to invest what funds they can for a future equity stake.

Interesting. You could also add your own investment. Or hitting up relatives.

* My two novels and the SMAX guide - given over entirely to the company (just as soon as there IS a company to give them to). Thus, I tie my own fate with that of our future....makes a good incentive for me personally...the success of my books will then play a direct role in the success of the company.

Some limited synergy here. I would not feel the need to give over all the book revenues to the project. (since the synergies are not complete.) You might consider making a loan to the CBR entity...or getting extra equity base on this money.)

* We DO have some potential nibbles were VC money is concerned, and for the sake of speed, we're certainly not burning those bridges. If we need it...if the "right" opportunity to take this particular ball and run with it is there thanks to an infusion of VC money...we'll take it. That's very definately an option.

If you were a VC, would you invest in CBR? At this point? knowing what you know of the 495 failures? The VC's are more likely to be helpful once you are up and running and want to convert into a commercial shop. (And at that time, you'd retain MORE freedom by not dancing with the VCs but rather playing the normal game of working with publishers, but staying entrepenuer owned.)

* Others as we think of them, and perhaps a few I forgot to mention.

how about a simpler picture. You look at the entire demo version production as a training experience. Then take the volunteers who actually did any work (and whom you want to stay with) and form a company with them. The only sticky point is CBR content. If you are planning on making money off of any of the code in the demo version, it needs to be clear who owns that part. hmmm....intersting problem.

[TCO]

Originally posted by RonHiler

Ah, you're right. I misread your post. My bad. I'm the bad guy here. I dunno why I didn't catch that, brain misfire. Again, I will play the "it was late, I was tired" card. I retract my statement.

You're probably right, I have no idea how much it would cost to get together enough property to fund a game, hundreds of millions could be totally correct. I suspect by the time you have enough, you are now a fulltime property manager rather than a game developer

Alright, going back to my own project now....

Ron

Actually as I pointed out to Incred, it is a cross-subsidization scheme. This does not increase the hurdle rate for the game since the portfolio has appreciation of its own. The game only needs to produce equivelant to the developmetnt costs which were moved from RE over.

[Velociryx]

(Imagines himself sitting in the corner of a smoke-filled bar, knocking back a few drinks with GP)

Having read the articles you pointed out to me has mostly just solidified my feelings and gut instincts about the industry. It's sick. It's broken. It's ripe for change. The change will and is coming whether the industry at present really wants it to or not.

Unless the retailers and publishers can suddenly buy the entire 'net and make it go away, a profound change is coming.

The essential facts as I understand them are these:

* People makin' games are essentially in the same boat as people who write books. They're the ones who do all the work, but are generally on the bottom of the proverbial food chain when it comes time to sell their creation. In other words, these are the people voted most likely to get shafted out of gains made from THEIR creation. There are exceptions in both industries, but it's important to remember that they are (or certainly seem to be...all evidence points that direction) exceptions to the rule.

* The industry itself is poised on the edge of a period of flux. Flux is good for consumers, but generally bad for existing businesses in that flux increases both uncertainty and the liklihood of businesses going under.

* Given the current state of affairs (state of flux, designers and their teams getting generally screwed where rewards for their creativity are concerned), it seems to me that wise would be the design house that had other ways of making money to cover the costs of development. Doesn't really matter what....*anything* to spare them from having to go begging for table scraps from those who control the industry. This, on the thinking that that sort of control....the ability to design without bowing down to publishers (and to a certain degree, Retailers) is, IMO, an important advantage.

Given the current state of the industry, it seems that there most definately IS value added by the existence of such investments (whether they are termed as cross-subsidization or whathaveyou), and that value is expressed in the ability to continue to exist while putting on that final coat of polish.

I would contend that continued existence is a pretty valuable thing....

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

The publishing and the game industry and the retailers are both seen as non-value added by creators who don't understand how much work and money go into sales and marketing and distribution.
One of the articles pointed out that this is a popular misconception by creators.

If you think that you can make more money by putting out a hot title on the Internet rather than in stores, why don't the development houses already do that? Or at least the publishers? The internet is a good way to release your C title. It's not the end-all/be-all for developers though. people still shop in stores...

[TCO]

The other thing that you are missing is the simple supply and demand issue.

There are a lot more people interested in writing books or doing games than the market will support. This means that only the best survive. And in general it drives down the margin that creators can earn.

[TCO]

Vel,

Just concentrate on making a good game. Heck, concntrate on learning how to make a good game. All else has to follow from that.

At that point, I will pour beer down your gullet and talk sense into you.

[Mark_Everson]

Originally posted by GP
The publishing and the game industry and the retailers are both seen as non-value added by creators who don't understand how much work and money go into sales and marketing and distribution.
One of the articles pointed out that this is a popular misconception by creators.

There's also the risk that they undertake. For every smash hit that the creators are deprived of the fruits of their genius there are probably five flops where the publisher doesn't even make their money back.

As was said in some of the articles tho, the risk-aversion has an enormous effect on what games we do see. That's why the Clash and CB people were driven to do their thing, since we have absolutely no faith that the games we want to play will ever come out of the conventional games industry. I would have been Much happier to slap down $50 and have the kind of 4x game I want to play given to me. But it ain't gonna happen unless we do it ourselves...

[RonHiler]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Having read the articles you pointed out to me has mostly just solidified my feelings and gut instincts about the industry. It's sick. It's broken. It's ripe for change. The change will and is coming whether the industry at present really wants it to or not.

Unless the retailers and publishers can suddenly buy the entire 'net and make it go away, a profound change is coming.

I can't begin to tell you how much I agree with every statement in these two paragraphs

I would contend that continued existence is a pretty valuable thing....

Absolutely.

Originally posted by Mark_Everson
I would have been Much happier to slap down $50 and have the kind of 4x game I want to play given to me. But it ain't gonna happen unless we do it ourselves...

You said it, Mark

[ravagon]

Crikey, now mostly everybody seems to be in agreement. That seems ... a little odd. lol.

One lesson to be learned (I think Firaxis probably has this one down by now ) is that public speculation is not such a good thing...

To recap
- day ~ -30 - Vel speculates on possibly having to fund Velocigames' expenses. Vel apparently has a fair understanding of the real estate market so he considers this as a source of cash to get Velocigames off the ground.

- day ~ -25 - More widespread knowledge of this is apparent. Use of Velocigames Real Estate holdings to fund Velocigames "Candle'Bre" project is now set in stone so to speak.

- day ~ -20 - Velocigames Game Development is now a constant drain on Velocigames Real Estate with funds all flowing the one way.

- day ~ -10 - Velocigames Game Development teetering on the brink, barely kept alive by the continuous cash injection from Velocigames Real Estate.

- day ~ -5 - Velocigames Real Estate near collapse. Crisis over Share Market stock evaluation.

- day -1 (Yesterday) - Numbers in the region of Hundreds of mllions of dollars appear, as if from nowhere. Obviously ( ) the losses associated with Velocigames. Public scandal over asset distribution among the partners. Velocigames crisis now of biblical proportions.

- day 0 - ravagon has a second browser open - set to cnn's webpage. Continuously hits refresh in an effort to be the first to get the news about the indictment of one C. Hartpence in the Senate investigation over the Velocigames Real estate collapse.

- day +1 - Senate Democrats leak allegations about possible links to the White House.
Vel? Bud, it might be time to start practising that phrase - "I don't recall Senator". No time like the present ...

[TCO]

Ron, my problem with the "continued existence" remark is that it is not economic thinking. If the game development needs cross-subsidy, you could do this as easily by working a night job or just directly investing the money. The RE scheme doesn't have any real value add. If its so easy to make money in RE, Vel could do that regardless of wether he does games.

But I just don't buy learning 2 new trades at the same time. He should keep the energy in the game...not in RE speculation. nobody is going to lend him a bunch of money to start speculating in real estate. And if they do, they're going to be pissed when they fiund out that his funds and energy are diverted to the game. I guess he could get money from realatives, but even then he'd be better off banking it in a conservative investment and drawing it down to pay for the project, directly.

The RE thing almost sounds like he's planning on funding the game off of Atlantic City or Las Vegas winnings...

The other thing is this: If the game is a "labor of love" and Vel is funding it out of pocket, he should be honest about it to himslef. Not create some Enron-like piece of smoek and mirrors to hide it.

[Velociryx]

As always, outstanding discussion! Just the kind I like to see after an evening of spicy Mexican food and a little science fiction watching....

I think that too much is being made of the whole real estate angle, in truth. From the post above, it is but one of several possibilities being considered, and it's one I think is a good one.

From the sounds of GP's previous post, he's almost in agreement, in fact. After all, if I use my personal funds to invest in real estate, and then use the profits from that to fund a labor of love....is that not *exactly* (to a tee, actually) the recommendation in one of GP's posts?

I would contend that there's fundamentally no difference in the equation if I were to use my own money to buy some attractive real estate, and use the money to help fund the project than if I would use my own money to buy some attractive real estate, give it to Velocigames in exchange for an equity position, and let the company use the proceeds to help fund the labor of love.

Amounts to the same thing, slanted a slightly different way.

The money going into the real estate still comes from me, and the profits derived from it still go to help fund the game.

No real difference.

If it helps everyone sleep better at night, we could arbitrarily pick one or the other as a means of setting that up, but at the end of the day, the same money flows to the project. I'm just not sure I grasp what the difference between those two eerily similar approaches is, aside from a minor accounting difference (one that puts assets on my personal ledger, and one that transfers those assets to the company in exchange for stock).

I know that the 'net has a long way to go before it begins to rival traditional brick and mortar retail outlets, but GREAT strides have already been made, and the trend doesn't show any signs of reversing, or even slowing down.

I'd be willing to bet that the trend will, in fact, continue, until 'net based purchases are every bit as big a force as the more traditional "mall crawl" approach. It's just the direction that the technology is taking us.

Again, referring to the *outstanding* suite of articles I spent the better part of the day reading, treating the game and the process of designing the game as a "labor of love" is the only real way to go about it. There's just not many games out there that are stunning financial successes.

But, if people are gonna continue to do that which they love (makin' coolio games that they themselves like to play, for like-minded individuals--which is another paraphrase from yet another of the articles read today on the hallmarks of good designers), then my thinking is that they (and in this case, we) had better have a means of funding that labor of love, else they won't be doing it for very long (witness the seemingly neverending parade of failing, dying, or already dead design houses).

The fact is, doing it "the usual way" leads to a lot of bankruptcies in design houses. There's an overwhelming body of evidence out there that bears this out, made all the more overwhelming by the articles read today.

And yet this is the industry standard? If it is (and it certainly seems to be the case), then I most definitely don't wanna play by industry standard rules, as that really DOES sound like a recipe for eventual disaster.

That's not how I care to play the game, and since that's not how I care to play the game, then it behooves me to come up with some way to continue to do this thing that I'm finding that I love doing.

So....if it puts everyone's mind more at ease, then yes. I'm taking on not one, but TWO "night jobs" to help fund the project. One of them is in writing novels, and the other is in real estate acquisition, with profits from both being poured into a labor of love, and with every expectation that with diligence, stubborn determination, and an excellent team helping me bring the designs from my head to playable form, we will be able to reach a place where we can design games that people really enjoy playing, slowly build up a reputation among the gaming community for producing quality products that aren't rushed out the door, (cos we don't have to rely on the "traditional" way of doing things, so we are not bound by the "traditional" rules) and are doing it cos it's what we LOVE to do.

That sounds like a pretty winning long term strategy to me, AND, we overcome the supply and demand problem by actively engaging the community of gamers. By engaging the gaming community from the beginning, and at every step along the way, we not only ensure a market for the game, but we ensure that the game winds up in the form that the gaming community wants!

I've said before and will stress the point again. For me, it's not about making a mint of money. I'm not out to take over the world (well, I am, but that's part of another grand plan), or to make a killing in stock options.

What I am out to do is to create an environment where me and a small team of passionate, dedicated gamers can make our kinna games, marketed to an actively engaged community of gamers who have real, viable, continual input on the game we're making as we're making it, and build a reputation among that population of gamers for delivering quality products....not products bound by timetables, not products laden with shoddy manuals, strategy guides that state the obvious, or with a gazillion annoying bugs. Products crafted not simply made assembly-line style.

If it takes some form of subsidization to do that....to live that kinna life, then so be it.

IMO, there's a real need for that kind of company in the industry. No one seems willing to fill the spot, and I'd very much like it. If it means that I have to pour every dime I ever make, and sacrifice a personal fortune in order to get us to that point, I will.

For this artist, it's not about the money. Never has been.

I could care less about the money.

Money's easy to make.

Quality games....not so easy to make.

In that regard, pulling the plug on my own retirement investing (which I have already done to speed this process), and pouring every dime I have into a project I believe in is not dissimilar to paying for another kindn of "college tuition." This is an educational experience for me. I am learning how to make a good game.

Have I....have WE on the Candle'Bre team learned to do that?

The proof will be in the pudding, just as soon as we bring it out of the kitchen.

The key difference, as I see it, is that unlike GP (who is arguing his position from a classic business stance based on a drive to profitibility), I'm on a different road. All I care about is creating an infrastructure by any means I have available to support a small team's ability to develop games without hassels or pressures from groups who have no interest in the quality of the game, and are more driven by having something in a pretty box for the Christmas selling season.

That's a valid approach. It's a classic business approach.

It's not my approach.

All I need to do is make enough to pay the bills, and keep everybody (myself included) in a paycheck.

Then we can all continue to do what we love doing.

Profits from the game? ::shrug:: If people love our games and what we're doing, and we can keep on doing it through cross-subsidies or whathaveyou, I don't care if they never make a dime.

How's that for unconventional?

-=Vel=-

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Hey Vel,

Most of this topic I haven't read but just a small point or at least a matter for your considerations. Profits generated form RE whether handled by you or by the corp are in some way different. Tax implications need to be understood.

On the one hand RE speculation as it now stands if I 'member correctly for primary and secondary residences allow for up to $500,000 capital gains (I may be mistaken) each year. Not being familiar with corporate tax structure I couldn't even fathom a guess at what the tax rate would be if corporation claimed the profits. OTOH your company willmost likely run in the red for a bit of time (hopefully not too long) so the profits will most likely be offset by the costs of running Velocigames.

That being said tho' balancing where you wanna take your profits is kinna an art form from what I understand.

Og

[Velociryx]

Another bizzare theory that flies in the face of conventional wisdom:

I'm betting (literally, I'm betting every dime I can scrape together) that once this philosophy is embraced wholeheartedly, and once the infrastructure is in place to support the design team mentioned above, the games we produce will be profitable ones.

How's that?

Because once this philosophy has been embraced, the community of gamers will very quickly realize and be able to FEEL the difference it makes on the game itself.

Gone are the mad rushes to put it in a box for the Christmas season, regardless of it's quality at that point.

All that does is destroy the goodwill you've managed to garner WITH the gaming community you're selling to and p*ss them off. P*ss them off often enough, and they won't come back.

Do it the way I'm proposing, by taking all the time needed to get it right and involve the gaming community at every step, and they'll not only come back for more, they'll come back with their friends.

And, since they've had a real, tangible voice in creating the game....since they now have a part of themselves wrapped up and invested in it, of course they'll want to see the finished product, and they'll buy it knowing exactly what to expect, and further, knowing that they had a voice in the game's final form.

That, plus the side products derived from making deep, rich games, plus the massively multi-player aspect (not for CB...too small in scale, but for its sequel effort involving the rest of the CB world) with a small monthly fee....to be a part of an ongoing, vibrant, truly alive world....yes, I'm betting everything I have that that sort of philosophy will lead to the creation of profitable games.

And even if I'm wrong, we've still got the means to keep doing what we love to do....Everybody wins.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Good point, Og, and that's certainly a wrinkle that needs investigating....I'm glad you brought that up!

-=Vel=-

[ravagon]

Was going to raise the issue about the tax angle but somebody else seems to be on the job.

Originally posted by Velociryx
That, plus the side products derived from making deep, rich games, plus the massively multi-player aspect (not for CB...too small in scale, but for its sequel effort involving the rest of the CB world) with a small monthly fee....to be a part of an ongoing, vibrant, truly alive world....yes, I'm betting everything I have that that sort of philosophy will lead to the creation of profitable games.

Something like Everquest?
I hadn't heard about this before. Not wanting to be picky but are you sure you understand the implications involved here? It seems like a bit of an administrative/technical nightmare getting it all worked out. There's a massively multiplayer online WW2 game due out soon (or it might have been released already - I forget) but AFAIK thats about the only strategy game to do this as yet.
The others are all rpgs I think ...
Might it be better (admin-wise) to adopt something like Blizzards battlenet approach instead?

[TCO]

Vel, why not take the money you are going to speculate RE on and, instead, just plow that money directly into the project? Skip the whole RE step and just invest directly into your project?

I mean if you want to buy a condo and rent it out because you've quit the day job, and have time to fix the plumbing yourself, I suppose that's ok. Makes a lot more sense if the wife is bringing home some bucks so that you can use the condo as a tax shield...

[TCO]

Once you have a decent game, you can make the choice of wether to license it or self publish or just sell downloads. You can even play around with it and evolve towards the best strategy. It's just a business decision about which channel makes most sense. If you have a completed game, you have significantly higher amount of leverage with a publisher. the content is done. It's on time. He hasn't had the non-completion risk.

You could imagine a few secenarios.

1. You finish the game and no publisher is interested. Therefore you are forced to self-publish.

2. You end up with a closet hit...but the game isn't getting in fornt of enough people who might buy it. So you lilcense to a publisher who can get it on shelves and can even advertise.

In any case, its a judgement you don't need to make now. You can wait until you know more.

[Velociryx]

To Rav: More like an advanced version of Artifact than Everquest, which is essentially an MMP RPG. Not as many technical hurdles for us, but still a good many, it's true. But....that's not something for the immediate future in any case....just a thought in my head right now....

To GP: The short answer to the "why not just plow my own money straight into the project" question is that it represents a "quick fix."

Shoot Velocigames some money, and when that money is spent, it's gone.

I'm looking to invest the money I have to create a steady stream of income that can keep on feeding the beast (as a part of creating that cross-subsidization income stream to eventually support a design team for the reasons mentioned above).

-=Vel=-
(of to work with me, so I can continue to eat and stay in my apartment!)

[Spaced Cowboy]

Vel,

I'm a skeptic. Have you ever bought any RE before?

Here's the basic differences between a house and an apartment taken from my own personal experience.

Apartment 1000 sq. ft. = $800 rent, all electric = ~$125

Wow, I can get a $100,000 2000 sq. ft. house and my payments are only $750 a month....How can I go wrong?

Uhh... closing costs +$5000.

House insurance $100 a month
Property tax $200 a month
Hmm... twice the space .... twice the electric bill, $250 a month
What?.... I have to pay for water ... it falls from the sky? $50 a month
Here's the decision: buy a mower and stuff spend 2-4 hours a week doing your lawn (mowing, watering etc.) or pay someone to groom. Let's say $50 a month.
What? I need more furniture, well I guess there are some bare spots.... (Wow hard to put a price on this one).

Then there are the calamities.
Like when the foundation caved a bit...we were lucky...$2500
Man, everywhere I look in the yard, there are termites. $900 down $35 a month.
The fence is falling down $2250.
I could go on here.

Are you getting the picture? They make it seem easy, but owning real estate is hard.

All I ask is that you consider everything before you get in too deep. Hey, what was that movie with Hanks and Long? House trap??

R:PM

[Velociryx]

I hear you, RPM....and believe me, I know it's not all icing.

The equation is *somewhat* different for commercial real estate, but the point is valid. As with anything, there are pitfalls and expenses. That's okay tho....adaptation is something I'm gettin' better at all the time.

Worst case scenario....I try it. It bombs. At that point, it's mighty easy to redirect my efforts.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained though, true?

If we don't try *something* then we wind up falling into the standard way of doing things that has proved the deathknell for....how many design houses?

Too many, and I don't want to join them.

We gotta try something. If it doesn't work out, we can try something else. The one thing I don't wanna do is go begging to anybody to stay alive so we can keep doin' this.

-=Vel=-

[Spaced Cowboy]

Vel,

All I'm saying is that in order to put 100% effort into VelGames, you will need to have very little distractions. RE is a big distraction, and it could easily turn into a money sucking W####.

I really liked the idea that everyone was a part-timer and kept their day job. I also realize that this cannot be the case for a long term strategy. What I'm saying is that we are not, IMHO, ready to move to the next step. You ought to be able to run this thing for quite some time out of your apartment.

When and if the cash starts to flow, there will be changes. Hopefully, they will be small at first. Then maybe you can look into a RE venture to provide yourself and some full timers with office space, and rent out the rest.

And I'm not trying to be the bad guy here. When EDS was founded they took the same approach. They bought massive amounts of land and build their offices on it. Over time they sold off the excess, and the end result was that they were able to pay for the original. Of couse when they made the purchase they were already doing good business and had over-run their existing offices.

I'm not saying that I'm against the RE thing. I'm just against it initially. It seems premature.

R:PM

[Velociryx]

Not to worry, RPM...I know exactly what you're saying.

And at present, it IS premature. The need for any kind of money flowing in is premature right now and for a comfortable amount of time into the future.

I'm just...already thinking ahead, to a time down the road when money starts to become more of an issue....mentally chewing on different possibilities in my head (and more recently on the forums, as folks have been asking about that part of it), working out possible solutions to questions that haven't even been born yet.

In truth, I'd rather not devote too much attention to the question just now...sure, I've got this little subsection of my brain mulling over it, but, as you say, we're not to that point yet.

But, the topic seems almost as popular as discussions on the tactical combat resolution system, at least in terms of how often it gets brought up, and when it does get brought up, I comment more on it.

In truth, I find the tactical combat resolution topic a good deal more interesting, but....I'll go along with most anything I guess....

So I guess where we are at this moment is: I'm on it. I'm thinking about the money problems that don't exist yet, and coming up with possible solutions before we need 'em.

When we DO need 'em, I can haul those out and see what's what, cos I've already been makin' lists of possibilities in my head.

How's that?



-=Vel=-

[TCO]

Originally posted by Velociryx

To GP: The short answer to the "why not just plow my own money straight into the project" question is that it represents a "quick fix."

Shoot Velocigames some money, and when that money is spent, it's gone.

Just put the money in a money market (safe) investment. RE will not return significantly more money unless you take HUGE risks. Do you really want to do that? It also lacks liquidity.

Just use the money directly, Vel. So what if it eventually runs out. By then you have the game.

There's no magic multiplier out there to take seed capital and grow it via real estate. Heck if there were, every startup in the world would do it. (And no. You are not a genius. You are not the first to come up with this idea.) Heck every PERSON would be doing this.

Besides, you should AVOID all cash costs until you have a product in hand. At that point, you can think about what bets you want to make in terms of investing in advertising, in publishing, in submissions to publishers, E3 attendance, etc. Right now, you get none of these goodies. Just work on the game. Your investment is your time, sweat equity, and the possible upside is a commercial game.