This series will try to tackle an oft-avoided question which should nag every game maker who isn't an avowed sociopath :
How to make a living of building and selling games without bankrupting yourself morally ?…and also, why bother ?
Moreover, it will make a case for Fair Game business policies, from funding to production, HR, marketing, community management, as applicable to the development of 'big indie games'.
FWIW: it was spawned by my mulling over the mid-to long-term consequences of crowdfunding as the new normal of funding such games.
*
You may not think lack of business ethics in gamebiz is a serious issue, and it's clearly not one specific to this industry : after all, many businesses are largely about manipulating idiots into buying terrible products they don't really need, and be happy about it for all of 30 seconds before they come back for more.
All true, but first, this blog is mostly concerned with videogaming (business wise), and second, there's a solid case to be made that videogames can be and often are (intentionally or not) not only commercial products, but also art, and more importantly, teaching tools and mind-altering experiences — something a fabric softener is less liable for, unless you take to drink it.
I'm not going to try and tell you here why it ought to be your policy to avoid abusing and exploiting fellow human beings — when in a position to affect their lives for better or worse — as it's largely a matter of self-image and aesthetic bias, and both sides of the issue can be argued equally convincingly on seemingly rational grounds.
Instead, I'll posit you, the reader, mostly agree with the premise that you don't mean to be a career asshole, and find more satisfaction when your craft proves to be a good deal for you and your customers both, than you'd get from shearing suckers raw and from peddling bottled toxic waste as pain relief medication.
Besides the moral qualms about making intentionally exploitative games, or pretending not to realize it, there is a crucial business argument for making games in such a way as to give a fair deal to both gamemakers and players, and that is customer (and employee) selection and loyalty — it will make for a big part of this series.
*
As usual, I'm looking at the question primarily from design and production angles, and with "deep" games in mind, mainly of the simulation flavor. Accordingly, some of the content here may not be relevant to your concerns if you're a graphic artist with a fetish for platformers or puzzle games.
Finally, since a lot of the following will revolve around putting product excellence and game design in the driver's seat while keeping the bottom line healthy, it doesn't apply to publicly traded or VC-owned studios, which have already lost control of their corporate policies to shareholders whose sole metrics are bottom line, acquisition or IPO realization potential.
*
- Part 1: why ? (Nov. 26)
- Part 2: what ? (Nov. 27)
- Part 3: how ? (Nov. 29)
- Part 4 - Mores, morals and morale. (Dec. 3)
- Conclusion. (tbd)
Ed Note: this series is on indefinite hiatus, because the topic is conflicting with other stuff I'm busier with atw, and also because it may be in serious need of a full redo, possibly. We'll see. Feel free to comment here or via email on the overall topic or individual points covered in the first four episodes, however, as I'm sure to have another go at this whole issue, sometime in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment