Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/01/21/13:20:27
>>If your 10% (for example) is $50,000, then the publisher has
>> made $450,000. Ouch. :)
>
>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!!
10% is kind of low. It's very low if you deliver a nearly completed game.
More typical rates are in the teens, probably not much higher from a
quality publisher for a new developer.
If the publisher gives your title a good marketing campaign, supports it
with decent customer service, creates the boxes, manuals, etc., I think
they've earned their 75% to 85%. True, if it's a big hit, they'll make a
lot more money than you, but they're risking a lot more.
Yes, if you create it it's your game and you reasonably feel like you
should get the majority of the revenue. You can do that by sharewaring it,
but you'll get far, far less money that way for a quality game than if you
can attract a quality retail publisher.
By the way, I think arrangements in the industry are pretty fair for the
developer. One thing to keep in mind is publishers, as a group, are not
getting rich these days. Most did not do well this Christmas season. I
think a typical return on investment for a publisher is in the 10% range
for the past couple years. Since you can do better in the stock market, it
makes me think publishers are not screwing developers in order to get rich.
You could argue that publishers as a whole are just incompetent, but with
all the perceived potential of the entertainment industry, if that were so,
it would have attracted competent people who want to make a killing.
Things are a lot harder and a lot more complicated than I once thought. I
used to think it was a natural part of evolution for any developer to turn
into a publisher. Now, I'd rather stay a developer.
Mike Kulas
Volition, Inc./Parallax Software
mike AT volition-inc DOT com
- Raw text -