next »

[Eclipse]

Haha, maybe learning to do my own art is the key. But one would have to have pretty huge balls to pull that off. (respeck)

   
 


well that's the only solution i've found really, i'm doing all the graphics for my game at the moment and even if i like how it's slowly turning, it's still a pain in the arse...

[aeiowu]

Yeah, I re-read it every year - imo it's the most high-profile and revelatory story about dysfunction within a game company ever.  And it's very relevant for indie developers looking to collaborate (especially if you read Masters of Doom, too).

So no, I'm not going to get over it until a more epic story comes about!

Totally agree. Mike and I reference Masters of Doom all the time when we're going through struggles. It helps us cope and find some kind of perspective in certain situations.
--

As for finding people: it's hard. It took me 5 years of vetting through dozens of fellow students before I found _one_ programmer that I worked well with. Even then it's not sunshine and rainbows, believe me. Shit gets ugly.

It seems cliche to me now, but I see a partnership as a marriage. For me, I have a hard time finding women I can fall in love with, i've only had two serious girlfriends. So... I guess you could say I'm picky. Even then those didn't last more than 2 years a piece. So with a dev-partner, finding someone->finding the right person->then having the stamina to stay with them through all the arguments, fights, etc. is really really really tough. To top it off... there's no make-up sex since we're both straight!   
Sometimes I think our lives would be a bit easier if we both liked dudes...

I think the reason nobody really has any good answers for this very-common problem is because it's always specific. Specific to what kind of person you both are, your sense of humor, how you handle conflict, the way you chew your food. Everything! Matching thousands of personality traits with someone else _perfectly_ is impossible, especially since we're always changing and adapting.

The best thing you can do? Date. Jam with people. Have casual development (read sex) all over the place. Learn from bad experiences, what you liked, what you didn't. But once you're in it to win it, COMMUNICATE! I bet if you bought a book on marriage counseling you'd see the same sappy advice: "Every conflict is the result of a breakdown in communication." Ok, i'm done.

[Alec]

^ Yeah, I think a big part of collaborating is being able to deal with the ugly moments in a way that allows things to continue - rather than getting hung up on them.

[Alec]

Regarding finding an artist to work with for an entire game, just make sure they've done it before.  Most straight-up freelance artists I know would not be ready for the type of work and the schedule it takes to do art for a game.  They're used to maybe spending a week or two on an illustration and that's that... take a break!  The idea of working every day for months on game art would be pretty alien and stressful to them.  (e.g. That ION Storm artist who painted a 1300x960 pixel texture map for a tiny arrow head in Daikatana.)

Multidisciplinary dudes like Adam who can do it all and understand the process so well on all ends are a rare breed, indeed (hopefully less rare as time goes on?), and most independent developers can't afford an artist of that caliber.  In any case, expectations are always the killer.  I'd always start out a potential collaboration on something small and see how it goes from there.

There are cases where its valuable to tap an artist who hasn't done games before specifically because they are fresh to it. (unique style, different perspective, etc)

In those cases its worth having some way to demonstrate exactly what work is involved in creating art assets for the project so you can get on common ground quicker.

Still, its dangerous to assume that when people say they can and will do something that they're actually aware of what they're doing - even if you've explained it in great detail.

[Lyx]

The best thing you can do? Date. Jam with people. Have casual development (read sex) all over the place. Learn from bad experiences, what you liked, what you didn't. But once you're in it to win it, COMMUNICATE! I bet if you bought a book on marriage counseling you'd see the same sappy advice: "Every conflict is the result of a breakdown in communication." Ok, i'm done.

Thats a rather naive and inefficient advice - then again, getting married may be a bad advice in the first place :-P

Conflicts of interest are normal, unless you have robots working on something (and even then, conflicts may arise , because people have different intentions. While its true that open and clear communication is important, and that its the only way to resolve conflicts, some conflicts cannot be resolved without someone doing something which he/she doesnt really want (thus, the conflict isn't resolved, but just "subdued"). Such unresolvable conflicts can only be ended by both parties not colaborating in that aspect. To put it simple: Some stuff just doesn't work together, no matter how hard you try.

Thats why its important to have a clear idea about the path forward in the first place, instead of having problematic surprises later. That way, such "incompabilities" can be avoided from the beginning on.

Most importantly: Mindsets matter! Small ability deficits can fixed by learning, new situations can be adapted to - but different mindsets stick with you for a long time.

[aeiowu]

Thats a rather naive and inefficient advice - then again, getting married may be a bad advice in the first place :-P

Conflicts of interest are normal, unless you have robots working on something (and even then, conflicts may arise , because people have different intentions. While its true that open and clear communication is important, and that its the only way to resolve conflicts, some conflicts cannot be resolved without someone doing something which he/she doesnt really want (thus, the conflict isn't resolved, but just "subdued"). Such unresolvable conflicts can only be ended by both parties not colaborating in that aspect. To put it simple: Some stuff just doesn't work together, no matter how hard you try.

Thats why its important to have a clear idea about the path forward in the first place, instead of having problematic surprises later. That way, such "incompabilities" can be avoided from the beginning on.

Most importantly: Mindsets matter! Small ability deficits can fixed by learning, new situations can be adapted to - but different mindsets stick with you for a long time.

Why is that naive and inefficient? I'm not saying conflict is bad or avoidable in any way. I'm just pointing out what spawns it.

Mindsets are _very_ important, but I find those can be sussed out by working with someone for a short time with some experience. You've gotta know what you're looking for.

"It's debateable whether it's easier to find someone that has the right attitude but needs to be taught a certain trade or find someone who's great at what they do and doesn't have the right attitude."

While the Super Combo does exist, it's rare, and I think the point he's making is that attitude is just as important (if not more) as skill.

[AdamAtomic]

skills can be taught

[Lyx]

@aeiowu:

I think we're misunderstanding each other a bit, because we understand "conflict" a bit different. What you mean with conflict, is what i'd call an "active conflict". When stuff gets ugly, then thats just the surfacing of the conflict... the discrepancy often was there already beforehand, but just wasn't that relevant until that point. So, we dont actually disagree that much with each other - when you'd say "lack of communication spawns conflicts", i'd say "lack of communication turns passive conflicts into active ones" (and perhaps even amplifies them, if someone gets more and more frustrated for staying silent instead of talking about it openly).

[Derek]

Thats why its important to have a clear idea about the path forward in the first place, instead of having problematic surprises later. That way, such "incompabilities" can be avoided from the beginning on.

Ha, this seems a lot more naive to me, actually...

I understand what you're saying, but I've never been able to map out a game's development like that at the outset, and my experience coupled with stories I've read and heard from other people has led me to believe that most games change drastically at least a few times during production.  Also, it's impossible to know how a team is going to feel several months into development (probably a lot more tired and cranky!).  I think the "active conflicts" are inevitable and unavoidable, and you'll rarely have the luxury to simply not collaborate on an aspect of the game where you differ.

There are cases where its valuable to tap an artist who hasn't done games before specifically because they are fresh to it. (unique style, different perspective, etc)

In those cases its worth having some way to demonstrate exactly what work is involved in creating art assets for the project so you can get on common ground quicker.

Still, its dangerous to assume that when people say they can and will do something that they're actually aware of what they're doing - even if you've explained it in great detail.

Yeah, that's true.  I would love to see more of that "freshness" in the game industry.  If you look through the portfolio of an art farm like Massive Black, you start to understand why all (Western) mainstream games and movies look kinda similar... the art is awesome on a technical level, but oh so bland.  I'm not even talking about how everything is a hot chick/muscleman with shaved head and hoodie/biomechanical horror - you can do tits n' monsters with panache, and it's fine by me (e.g. Bisley, Corben, Moebius, etc.).  I just mean that the shit all looks the same!

That said, you know these fuckers will get you your art on time and not blank out on you.  But you'll get boring art.  So I agree, a unique artist who acts professionally is the way to go.  There must be a good way to vet someone for those qualities.  (Maybe we can ask Jon how he worked things out with David Hellman.)

"It's debateable whether it's easier to find someone that has the right attitude but needs to be taught a certain trade or find someone who's great at what they do and doesn't have the right attitude."

While the Super Combo does exist, it's rare, and I think the point he's making is that attitude is just as important (if not more) as skill.

I like that quote!

[Lyx]

Thats why its important to have a clear idea about the path forward in the first place, instead of having problematic surprises later. That way, such "incompabilities" can be avoided from the beginning on.

Ha, this seems a lot more naive to me, actually...

I understand what you're saying, but I've never been able to map out a game's development like that at the outset, and my experience coupled with stories I've read and heard from other people has led me to believe that most games change drastically at least a few times during production.  Also, it's impossible to know how a team is going to feel several months into development (probably a lot more tired and cranky!).  I think the "active conflicts" are inevitable and unavoidable, and you'll rarely have the luxury to simply not collaborate on an aspect of the game where you differ.

What you are pointing out was not covered by what you quoted. Of course i was not talking about preplaning every single minor detail. However, overall things as well as the mindset-stuff is something which one can know beforehand, if one has already a mostly complete "concept", and is "now" simply looking for colaborateurs to put the finishing touches on the concept, and then implement it. If one isn't doing ones own first larger project, one does already have a few "tried and tested" mates with which one can go through most of the project concept phase... so that when hiring, the overall path as well as mindsets are already clear. What then can go wrong is:

- the concept overally turns out to be flawed. Bummer. Start from zero.
- Minor disagreements in concept details appear. Those can usually be fixed via compromises, without hurting the project as a whole too much.
- Disagreements in teamwork during implementation happen. Those typically aren't disagreements about the project, but disagreements about the style how one works and interacts with others.
- Persons turn out to have overestimated their abilities. Well, in that case, make minor modifications to the team lineup while the project is already underway. Thats something which needs to be expected.

Did i miss anything? Well, those are the situations i have experienced in the past with non-game related software projects. In all those cases, the above strategy didn't fail me: plan the overall path beforehand with existing teammates. Recruit, pay attention to mindsets, play with open cards from the beginning on, finalize concept, start implementing, communicate, if necessary replace teammembers en-route. It may very well be that this approach has flaws which i dont know yet, because i haven't encountered them yet.

P.S.: One important detail may be, that i do have the luxury to exclusively work with people which have matching mindsets. I understand that for many people, this isn't possible - however, if the team doesn't coherently fit together already at the beginning, then yes, of course conflicts will follow.

[Derek]

I wasn't talking about pre-planning details, either.  I meant broad, sweeping changes in fundamental aspects of the game's design that are impossible to pre-plan.  Usually you need at least some type of basic prototype with art and code in it to prove that the concept is even viable.

Like, the entire thread is about art and artists... I want to make sure that when you say "non-game-related software projects" you're at least talking about something where artwork (music, etc.) is an integral part of the development.

But yes, I agree that it's important to try to be on the same page when you start and be flexible in the middle.  That certainly goes for anything one would work on.

[Triplefox]

Just wanted to chime in with some of my own recent experiences. I was tapped as a potential game design contractor for an early-stage startup. Having known everyone involved beforehand, I was ready to climb aboard temporarily and at least see what kind of work I'd be doing. I did a little bit of work here and there for a few weeks as they organized the business side of things, and the terms they were planning sounded quite good and included sweat equity, but in the end I realized that I was just waking up every day and saying "Do I want to work on my stuff, or their stuff?" and the answer became obvious that I was not interested in the startup at all, so I announced my departure yesterday.

The founders were happy to have me go, because as they put it, they knew it was more important to focus on the most motivating work, and it would not benefit anyone if I was on board and torn between the two projects. Fortunately, I hadn't signed a binding document yet, so it was easy to step out.

For my own work, I've already decided that I will do as much as possible by myself and learn whatever is necessary. If I ever do outsource anything, it'll probably be very small or mechanical work, things which are time-consuming but straightforward.

[Alec]

I think generally its good to have a 'living' outline - one that is loose and open to evolving.

Not every detail has to be laid out, because its likely to not work or end up changing. (as long as you can visualize how it will work in your head)

The projects I've worked on that have become successes are the ones with the least design documentation.

In terms of collaboration, I like leaving things open enough so that the partner can add their own creativity into the mix. In my current case I have a project that is very personally important to me, and I have a very clear idea of how I want it to feel - but it could be put across in a number of different visual styles that would all work well. So I'm open to considering a lot of different options.

The way I'm trying to vet artists now is by having them do some prototype work with me so we can see how it goes. In some cases this is paid, in some cases not. (depending on what situation the artist is in)

That way we can actually see how it goes without having to give up tons of $$ or a big % of the IP right off the bat.

[Craig Stern]

Derek, you really think this is boring?



Sorry--I don't mean to get things off track. I just happen to find this picture very interesting and dramatic. Unless you mean that the style is sort of been-there-done-that?

[AdamAtomic]

one counter-example does not refute an accusation of broad generic production   el coro and andrew jones have independently produced some very cool stuff, but I don't think that necessarily typifies the bulk of MB's production!