Looking for opinions on team arrangements
polycounter lvl 6
I have written a game client, server, and world designer. I need people that want to help create the world. I am making no money off this yet. It is a top down view Diablo style playing game where the player can also switch to a 3rd person view if they want. The game is done and being played but it needs more content.
In order to get people interested in helping, what arrangements do people think are good?
I was thinking of keeping track of work done and then paying out once the game starts making money. So someone designs a dungeon and we agree it is worth $300. Then when the game starts making money a % of that is divided between all people or teams that made contributions.
Problem: Some people will not spend the time needed for good design work.
Replies
And if you want good design work, you're probably going to have to straight up pay for it. Good designers don't do quality work based on potential revenue promises.
http://messageboard.xenimus.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=6519
Reality: Some people will not spend the money needed for good design work.
If the game becomes successful then people could be hired full time or at least have a lot of contract work. I have put in 1000s of hours already for free.
So Kevin, do you have any real opinions on what a good business model would be? Or are you just here trolling?
I was also thinking of giving a % of the profits if there are any. The money people make is then directly linked to the quality of work they do. But I'm not going to do that until people have put in a certain amount of time and produced some good work to show they are worth it.
e.g.: maybe a dungeon designer's time is estimated to be worth 300$ a day. If a dungeon design takes 5 days of work, that's 1,500. Upon delivery, the designer is payed an upfront payment is 1/3 of that amount, so 500$. Assuming the game is released, once it hits a predefined 'break even' (lets assume 20k), then the designer is payed a 1,200 royalty, so now they have recieved a 'normal' rate of pay for the work. If the game 'does well' (lets assume 50k$), then the designer receives an additional 1,500, so they end up making twice the 'normal' rate of pay, in return for the substantial risk they took working on an Indie project. Royalties are capped from then on. If the game makes 10 million $, they don't get any extra money. This formula should be stated in a contract, so that you and the contractors know exactly what will happen, so nobody can excessively complain when things go bad or great on the project.
So, this approach means contractors get paid 1/3 of a professional rate, but they end up receiving twice the professional rate if the project does well. That's not a bad risk for them, if they are semi-desperate or really like the project or whatever.
By the way, if you are working on your own project, you didn't 'put in 1000s of hours for free'. You put in work, and you may never make any money, but you might make tons of money, if the project does well. You own the IP and all revenue from it. You are taking a risk and you get a reward if things go well. Someone working for you is in a totally different situation, and that's why most people are only interested in upfront payment. They know that 'random amazing Indie project xx' is probably not going to get released, and not make them a fortune, so they don't want to take a risk. The payment approach I mention above might be fair, but honestly, really good contractors probably won't be interested. Unless you have a proven track record of releasing really profitable projects, other people will avoid the risk of any royalty approaches.
To get really good results, pay professionals professional rates, upon delivery of the work. Of course, you can't do this if you can't afford to. That's the same situation I'm in currently, and a typical situation thru all of human history.