A possible way for indies to multiply their strength!
by Bryan Edds · in General Discussion · 10/27/2003 (11:55 pm) · 30 replies
I have come up with an idea that may allow all indies to organize themselves in a way that lets them increase their productivity 5-fold in the area of asset production. This is submitted for the GG community's inspection :)
The problem that many indies (including myself) have is developing the huge amount of assets necessary to make a marketable 3D video game. Now, there are ways to attain assets outside of creating them yourself or with your team, such as purchasing them online at places like turbosquid.com, but this method is still problematic. The problem with purchasing assets is 2-fold -
1) The assets available for purchase are often low-quality, of an inconsistent poly count (10,000 polygon sword? pretty, but unusable!), and the fact that many of the good assets have been used in many other games.
2) Indies don't really have the money they need to buy all the assets for their game in the first place, even if there were enough quality assets available. Being an indie means (for most of us) being perpetually broke, making asset purchasing impractical.
These things and many others make asset purchasing an unrealistic solution to many indies, including myself. Of course, using a team to create all the assets is lovely on paper, but is plagued with managerial overhead, especially with long-distance teams. Fortunately, I have thought of a simple, elegant system to address these problems. I looked at the fact that most indies don't have money to spend - and saw a way to make something other than money the medium of exchange... I also looked at how few quality assets were available, and thought of a way to counter this as well, all in one simple system -
I start a website with, say, 59 quality game assets available. Instead of selling the assets in an assets pack (since game developers have no money to buy them anyway), I allow the consumer to donate 1 of his assets in exchange for 4 assets from the database. This allows the consumer to turn his 1 asset into 5, thereby quadrupling his artistic productivity! And after the exchange, the donated asset becomes available on the database, bringing the total assets available to 60. Each time a person gets assets from my database (or, more precisely, a license to use the asset) another asset is added to the database, allowing the database to keep expanding!
Of course, the asset wouldn't simply be donated, but instead the consumer will license to me the ability to license his asset to other consumers. Assets stay the property of the donator, but I am enable to license the asset to anyone else (including myself if I donate to the database).
And, as follows, not all assets would be exhanged 4 to 1. In fact, each asset would have a value rating. The higher the quality and complexity, the higher the value rating. When a consumer offers to donate his asset, he will be offered 4x as many "value points" that his donation rates in value. Thus, he can use these "value points" to license as many assets as he wants whose total value does not exceed his "value points". If he is not happy with the "value points" we offer for his asset (sometimes we will offer none if the asset is of no value), then he can simply refuse to take the deal. So basically, the customer gets "value points" by donating assets, and can spend his "value points" by licensing assets.
So, each time an indie donates an asset, he gets back approximately 4 more, and even more assets become available for other indies. Ultimately, this could multiply the productivity of an artist by 5, and create a constant influx of art to ensure that a massive amount of quality assets will eventually available to all indies with passable artistic skills.
Of course, there are a bunch of other details, but I wanted to throw this one against the GG wall and see if it would stick. Any comments, crits, or insights are welcome :)
The problem that many indies (including myself) have is developing the huge amount of assets necessary to make a marketable 3D video game. Now, there are ways to attain assets outside of creating them yourself or with your team, such as purchasing them online at places like turbosquid.com, but this method is still problematic. The problem with purchasing assets is 2-fold -
1) The assets available for purchase are often low-quality, of an inconsistent poly count (10,000 polygon sword? pretty, but unusable!), and the fact that many of the good assets have been used in many other games.
2) Indies don't really have the money they need to buy all the assets for their game in the first place, even if there were enough quality assets available. Being an indie means (for most of us) being perpetually broke, making asset purchasing impractical.
These things and many others make asset purchasing an unrealistic solution to many indies, including myself. Of course, using a team to create all the assets is lovely on paper, but is plagued with managerial overhead, especially with long-distance teams. Fortunately, I have thought of a simple, elegant system to address these problems. I looked at the fact that most indies don't have money to spend - and saw a way to make something other than money the medium of exchange... I also looked at how few quality assets were available, and thought of a way to counter this as well, all in one simple system -
I start a website with, say, 59 quality game assets available. Instead of selling the assets in an assets pack (since game developers have no money to buy them anyway), I allow the consumer to donate 1 of his assets in exchange for 4 assets from the database. This allows the consumer to turn his 1 asset into 5, thereby quadrupling his artistic productivity! And after the exchange, the donated asset becomes available on the database, bringing the total assets available to 60. Each time a person gets assets from my database (or, more precisely, a license to use the asset) another asset is added to the database, allowing the database to keep expanding!
Of course, the asset wouldn't simply be donated, but instead the consumer will license to me the ability to license his asset to other consumers. Assets stay the property of the donator, but I am enable to license the asset to anyone else (including myself if I donate to the database).
And, as follows, not all assets would be exhanged 4 to 1. In fact, each asset would have a value rating. The higher the quality and complexity, the higher the value rating. When a consumer offers to donate his asset, he will be offered 4x as many "value points" that his donation rates in value. Thus, he can use these "value points" to license as many assets as he wants whose total value does not exceed his "value points". If he is not happy with the "value points" we offer for his asset (sometimes we will offer none if the asset is of no value), then he can simply refuse to take the deal. So basically, the customer gets "value points" by donating assets, and can spend his "value points" by licensing assets.
So, each time an indie donates an asset, he gets back approximately 4 more, and even more assets become available for other indies. Ultimately, this could multiply the productivity of an artist by 5, and create a constant influx of art to ensure that a massive amount of quality assets will eventually available to all indies with passable artistic skills.
Of course, there are a bunch of other details, but I wanted to throw this one against the GG wall and see if it would stick. Any comments, crits, or insights are welcome :)
#22
Well, yes and no. When you are talking about "signature" resources for your game, you are talking custom-built assets that will probably never be donated (nor never need to be donated).
But what I'm interested in is not major assets, but the bonehead stuff - tables, chairs, rocks, lamps, M-16s, etc. "Filler" material.
10/29/2003 (7:42 am)
@BryanWell, yes and no. When you are talking about "signature" resources for your game, you are talking custom-built assets that will probably never be donated (nor never need to be donated).
But what I'm interested in is not major assets, but the bonehead stuff - tables, chairs, rocks, lamps, M-16s, etc. "Filler" material.
#23
@Bryan and Jay, the GB assets can be good starting points to the unique assets of your game. You can use them as time savers.
@Jay, the Karl model I pick from GB is not exactly what will be in Rise of Power. It's more a basic Karl, complete and well built, for you to use to make your own character.
@Lucas, hey, I like the houses very much. You can submit them as assets for sure. Jump aboard, dude!
10/29/2003 (9:25 am)
I think an asset itself doesn't outdate so fast. In the future, the rules can be tweaked to satisfy these questions, if they ever become a real problem.@Bryan and Jay, the GB assets can be good starting points to the unique assets of your game. You can use them as time savers.
@Jay, the Karl model I pick from GB is not exactly what will be in Rise of Power. It's more a basic Karl, complete and well built, for you to use to make your own character.
@Lucas, hey, I like the houses very much. You can submit them as assets for sure. Jump aboard, dude!
#24
@Bryan, we hope to have plenty of basic filler stuff, sound effects and textures etc too. There should be something for everyone in GB. I bet as Game Beavers grows the members will vote in more engines and game types as well.
10/29/2003 (9:59 am)
@Lucas, those buildings look great! You bet lots of people could use them. And sons aof valor may only be temporaily defunct. The hope is that you could find enough resources and maybe even some new tallent to work on your project with you. Adib and I are working togther by trading stuff through game beavers. I needed some cool interiors and textures and he needed some models. Thats how the default characters and alot of adibs swank textures were put in.@Bryan, we hope to have plenty of basic filler stuff, sound effects and textures etc too. There should be something for everyone in GB. I bet as Game Beavers grows the members will vote in more engines and game types as well.
#25
But, I also think it might be a good idea for us both to set up our own systems. I would like to see which system could better satisfy the needs of indies, purely in the interests of helping indies. I'm not really going to compete with you, just going to supplement the market you may miss. But, I still really need some legal consultation, so I wonder if I could talk to your lawyer? It would great if you could help me on this, and I would be willing to help you in any way I can.
10/29/2003 (10:16 am)
@ Britton, I already e-mailed the admin for a moderator position - I think it'd be great to help out! 8)But, I also think it might be a good idea for us both to set up our own systems. I would like to see which system could better satisfy the needs of indies, purely in the interests of helping indies. I'm not really going to compete with you, just going to supplement the market you may miss. But, I still really need some legal consultation, so I wonder if I could talk to your lawyer? It would great if you could help me on this, and I would be willing to help you in any way I can.
#26
He has written several articles freely available on the web that are a must read for any game developer.
Articles
I'm using him as my attorney and consultant for the games I am working on at Amped Labs. www.ampedlabs.com
His website is here: www.game-attorney.com/
I think starting a seperate site is not a bad idea. Once you are up and running we can post links to eachother and the two sites will definately help indies get started. Speaking to Thomas is a must because you dont want the developers going to publish their games only to find out there are legal problems with using the assets from your site. Thomas really is a big help to the independent game movement.
10/29/2003 (10:40 am)
@Bryan, yes I recommend that you speak with the attorney. He is the one who pointed you to game beavers on the IGDA article you posted here.He has written several articles freely available on the web that are a must read for any game developer.
Articles
I'm using him as my attorney and consultant for the games I am working on at Amped Labs. www.ampedlabs.com
His website is here: www.game-attorney.com/
I think starting a seperate site is not a bad idea. Once you are up and running we can post links to eachother and the two sites will definately help indies get started. Speaking to Thomas is a must because you dont want the developers going to publish their games only to find out there are legal problems with using the assets from your site. Thomas really is a big help to the independent game movement.
#27
10/29/2003 (10:51 am)
Cool! :) Thank you so much for the help! Hopefully he'll have time for me too :)
#28
I'd like to get the database started, and see how it gets going. I'll probably take a look at GB's legal docs, and see what I can learn from them. Once I get going, I'll probably just pay Thomas to write out the rest of the legal agreement (better start saving now :).
10/29/2003 (2:10 pm)
Update - I just talked to Thomas (lawyer) on the phone. He seems like a good guy, and helped out a lot. Of course, he doesn't really have much time to help, but he helped anyway :)I'd like to get the database started, and see how it gets going. I'll probably take a look at GB's legal docs, and see what I can learn from them. Once I get going, I'll probably just pay Thomas to write out the rest of the legal agreement (better start saving now :).
#29
My point is, would there be coders who need kinda specific things or things not on GB, that I could make for them in exchange for a little code help. So if you need tables and chairs and have a picture or something that shows what you have in mind, I could make it, post it on GB. For code I might need, like the horse/vehicle code to match my horse on GB, we could post our needed things on GB like a wishlist. What do you guys think of that? BTW I am looking for some good horse vehicle to work in an fps. I guess if we wanted super custom things we could trade straight up on our own without GB, but I think a lot of things should go through GB since the legal issues are worked out.
12/20/2003 (10:42 am)
Trade stuff via Game Beavers! I want to push the wishlist idea a little further. I was thinking there's a lot of guys here who can code but can't animate in 3d. There's also ppl who can do 3d but don't code etc. My company has a good 3d art department (www.radioactivelabs.com we have pro guys who've worked pro at game companies like Acclaim, Inevitable, Origin, etc.) I'm a good 3d artist and designer. My point is, would there be coders who need kinda specific things or things not on GB, that I could make for them in exchange for a little code help. So if you need tables and chairs and have a picture or something that shows what you have in mind, I could make it, post it on GB. For code I might need, like the horse/vehicle code to match my horse on GB, we could post our needed things on GB like a wishlist. What do you guys think of that? BTW I am looking for some good horse vehicle to work in an fps. I guess if we wanted super custom things we could trade straight up on our own without GB, but I think a lot of things should go through GB since the legal issues are worked out.
#30
12/21/2003 (6:53 am)
Nice one, I'll keep an eyoe on it see if it develops into anythign worth my time and effort
Torque Owner Bryan Edds
Finally, one of the reasons I think that GB may not provide enough assets is because not only do we need a good, large amount of assets, we also need lots of new incoming assets so lots of people don't have to reuse assets that a bunch of other people already used. Old assets will be depricated and lose their value because of 1)poly counts not staying up to the constantly increasing technological standard and 2) the need to avoid overusing the same assets that were featured in other games. Variety in art is what can make a game much more marketable, and this is destroyed when a lot of the art has already been seen before in previous games. Redundancy is certainly necessary and desirable for this type of setup, but redundancy has to be minimized in order to retain the value of the service as a whole, as well as the products that use the service.