Publishers View of Developers
Presenter: Randy Dersham

Randy Dersham, formerly of Electronic Arts, presented the publisher's view of the love-hate relationship between publishers and developers. Publishers are often in competition with developers because the publishers have their own in-house teams developing games. But the outside game developer is still necessary for the publisher to "fill in the holes" of its SKU plan for the upcoming quarters. The publisher, with its SKU plan, has very specific projects in mind when it goes looking for a developer.

The publisher's primary concern, outside of fulfilling its SKU plan, is to take as little risk as possible. The goal of every contract is to minimize the risk the publisher faces. With that risk averse attitude, the publisher insists on having as much control over the developer as it can. This control is exercised through in-house producers. Finally, the publisher wants every outside project to have future potential, a franchise so to speak, whether in sequels or spinoffs. A game which doesn't show this kind of potential isn't interesting to a publisher. Similarly, the publisher wants a game with a strong, "emotional" demo. Without a strong demo, the publisher's sales force doesn't have confidence in the game and lowers sales projects.

On the negative side, the publisher is not interested in a team which has a history of missed milestones or costs overruns. Also, the publisher doesn't want the developer's team to change in mid-project. They don't want to see the developer's key personnel being moved from their project to another project.

Publishers consider a number of questions about prospective developers. What kind of developer are they? What game credits do they have? What kind of work history have they demonstrated? What was their last project? And how successful was it? Who are the developer's key employees? What is the developer's core technology? And so on.

The most powerful words the publisher can hear about any developer are: Proven successful. The developer needs to accumulate as many pieces and projects as possible where they have been "proven successful." This is all part of the publisher's risk management.

A developer can attract a publisher's interest by having "name" employees with proven industry track records. Also, if the developer has a key technology that solves a publisher's current problem. Similarly, if the developer owns a license that the publisher is interested in (though this has become harder to do in recent years). A history of a specialty that meets the publisher's needs is another way. Publishers prefer specialists to generalists. The number one source of new developer contracts, however, is when the developer can meet a deadline that the publisher can't.

In summary, publishers are risk averse, and look to "proven successful" developers to help them avoid that risk.

PR for Indies
Presenters: Jay Moore, James Hill

Even with the best gameplay in the world, if no one ever hears about the game, then any game will fail. Thus, marketing the game is very important, even for indies. PR is an important part of marketing anything.

The basis of public relations (PR) is a continuing "story" about a product, in this case an indie game, that provides exposure for the product. The first lesson of PR for the indie is to get out of his own head, into the heads of his players--and into the minds and agenda of the media for whom he is creating the story. The focus of the PR should be appropriate to the intended audience. Focus on what the game is. Look for a surprise, an interesting twist. And, if possible, give the story a human interest angle. PR should be persistant and constant--and consistent. The basic message of the PR story should not change over time. If the story changes, the message gets confused and lost.

The gamer press is hungry for something that is not yet another story about one of the top 50 games that have been predicted and previewed for the last couple of years. This provides an edge for indies working on relatively unknown games. On the other hand, getting access to the producers and decision makers of media outlets can be a real challenge for indies.

The indie must tell his story well. He should never send out any press material without proofing it first. If sending a demo to a media outlet, he should follow it up with a phone call and offer to lead the press person through the demo. This makes sure that all the good points of the game, the ones the indie definitely wants considered, are seen in the most positive light. And if there are any problems with the demo, the indie can steer the person around them or through them.

Online news sites are the easiest venues, but they also have the shortest shelf-life. Word-of-mouth is extraordinarily important for indies, but is generated slowly, requiring time to build up. As Jay Moore put it (several times), each of these is "just one more bullet." There is no silver bullet, no one thing that will guarantee that a game is successful. Rather, the indie must be continually working on marketing his game.

MMO Games: Fortune or Folly?
Presenter: Kelly Asay

Whether a Massively Multi-player Online (MMO) game is "fortune or folly?" depends on who you ask, why you want to make an MMO game in the first place, and your understanding of what you know you don't know.

"Fortune or folly?" is a matter of perspective. If you ask Sony or Microsoft, then then answer is simple. They have enormous resources available and they can enter the potentially profitable MMO arena and make it work. If they didn't make the attempt, that would be a mistake. But if you, as an indie, enter the MMO game market attempting to compete directly with a company like Sony or Microsoft, then the answer is definitely "Folly."

As an indie, you should analyze the market carefully, looking for a niche you can dominate. The market isn't saturated if you do your research and avoid the areas where the big companies have already taken over. Look for alliances with other companies, for access to resources as well as possible new avenues of revenue. Indies must be willing to use the tools available.

Rather than decide to create a multi-player game by default, because it's the hip thing at the moment, ask yourself, "Is my game really a multi-player game?" Multi-player games are played for one of three reasons: combat, competition, or community. If none of those fits your game, then maybe you should focus on single-player instead.

The economics of MMO games are interesting. While only a relatively few subscribers are necessary to generate a good revenue stream, expenses account for nearly 65% of revenue. The number one obstacle to finding an audience of subscribers is reaching them with your marketing.

How serious are you about making an MMO game? If you have the guts, do your homework and take the risk.