next »

[Shade Jackrabbit]

Well they do management and organization, but that's not all. (Hence why I said "I wouldn't say they really only do management and organization".)

If you want examples with fancy titles of what they do aside from management and organization:

Mariann does Web Development, Graphic Design, and Quality Assurance.
Linda does Editing.

In terms of working on the game, Quality Assurance is definitely working on the game. (Though not in a direct sense.) Editing is... well Spiderweb Software's games are usually dialogue/reading-heavy. I think it's pretty obvious how that's working on the game. You know, editing the dialogue and text and stuff? So that's it's readable? With proper capitalization and stuff? Sorta like you don't do to your posts? 

And once again to drive home the point you seemed to miss: This is on top of management and organization.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

well, it's just that, although i've proofread and playtested games (for my friend orchard-l) i wouldn't say i've worked on them if all i did was proofreading and playtesting (for instance, i proofread and playtested the game 'missing' on my site, but i don't say i worked on it). but yes, there are different forms of working on games, so if someone does want to say they worked on a game if all they did was test it and proofread it, that's fine, but i've a reluctance about saying that on my own part

[Shade Jackrabbit]

You've got a point there, (though I think anyone who works on one's game, no matter how little they did, deserves at least a small mention of having helped out), but I would still like to make a final argument...

also, if we're talking solely 1-man pc shareware operations, spiderwebsoftware is probably still king

This is the last argument I shall make, which is that: you said shareware operations, not shareware game development. There is more to an operation, such as a software company, than there is to game development. My original argument was mainly against that, and when it comes down to it whether or not they actually worked on the games doesn't matter, as they are still a large part of the operation as a whole. (For example the website or the CDs.)

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

yes, that's true, but i think spiderweb's at least a borderline case: it's still mostly one person, and there are others who help a bit. and it used to be one man for most of its history.

[Shade Jackrabbit]

yes, that's true, but i think spiderweb's at least a borderline case: it's still mostly one person, and there are others who help a bit. and it used to be one man for most of its history.

So you're saying websites are almost useless and pointless and contribute very little to the company? And that graphics on CDs are preferred over just Arial text? And also that proper spelling/grammar need to be kept in check? Oh wait.¹

Before you come back with another argument, here's what I'm thinking the next few posts will be:

[CORRECTION OF PRIOR STATEMENT+NEW POINT ABOUT HOW PAUL IS STILL RIGHT]
[COUNTER-POINT ABOUT HOW THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE]
[REMARK ABOUT VALUE OF WORK OF PEOPLE IN COMPANIES]
[ARGUMENT THAT PAUL IS BEING CALLOUS AND MEAN]
[SOMEONE POINTING OUT THAT PAUL HAS MORE EXPERIENCE THAN SHADE]²
[SHADE DECLARING THAT UNIMPORTANT EVEN THOUGH IT IS]
[SOMEONE REMARKING THAT THIS ISN'T WHAT THE TOPIC IS ABOUT]
[SOMEONE ELSE REMARKING THAT IT'S USUAL WHEN DEALING WITH PAUL]
[PAUL DEFENDS HIMSELF]
[FOUR MORE PAGES]
[NOBODY REMEMBERS WHAT THE TOPIC IS ABOUT]³

I'm getting bored. This topic was more fun when we were talking about anime.<sup>4

1</sup> _{See, I'm having real trouble giving your argument much weight because of your lack of proper capitalization. Also, you began a sentence with a lowercase "and" so I'm not sure if that's a new sentence or that period was supposed to be a comma. Gah.}
² _{SuperJoe may enter around here if we're lucky.}
³ _{This is getting really off-topic.}
⁴ _{Which was only somewhat on-topic anyways.}

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

oh, i'm not arguing, just saying things as i see them, i'm not trying to convince you

i'm not saying websites are useless or proofreading doesn't matter, just that for most of spiderweb's history he did those things himself

and i agree that it's a stupid argument, but aren't you the one carrying on about it? i'm more than happy to say that we just have different definitions of what working on games means, or what a one-man organization is. it isn't particularly important, so i'm not sure why you're disputing over such things

[Shade Jackrabbit]

Eh, it's just that I like to see credit due when credit is due. I don't think it's really fair to downplay the jobs of Mariann or Linda to a point where they seem unimportant. 

Anyways, let's just leave it at that. We both know why we each made our observations/argument, and we'll agree to disagree or whatever. Have a tea. 

Although I could point out the irony of you saying that arguing semantics is silly. And the irony of you often arguing semantics and yet still not using capitalization.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i didn't seek to downplay them, they do valuable services. but saying spiderweb is largely a one-person enterprise is something i suspect even they would agree with

and i didn't mean you were just arguing semantics, just that there is no solid way of determining what is and isn't a one-man operation. i mean, cliffski and hpapillon hire artists, they hire musicians, they have playtesters, they probably have people proofreading their games, and so on, but moi referred to them as one-person operations. it doesn't downplay the services of all those other people to say that, since those people really do about 90% of the stuff. so i think that if those are one-person operations according to moi, he'd probably also count spiderweb as a one-person operation, no?

[Shade Jackrabbit]

...so i think that if those are one-person operations according to moi, he'd probably also count spiderweb as a one-person operation, no?

I'll quote you:

(although they're one man in that one person gets all the profits, yeah)

I think that sums it all up. It's a company with three employees, and it looks like from the site that they are sharing profits. (In other words, not working freelance.) Therefor it doesn't count as a one-person operation by that standard.

Course I think we should let moi make his own opinion, this is just mine after piecing together what others have said.

[moi]

I think they might earn more than spiderweb software at the moment (from the little information I've gathered, but it might be erroneous)

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

@shade - yes, that's one way to distinguish them, maybe he meant it in that way. but we also don't really know how those two people helping jeff are paid though; they could be paid per service like freelancers too and just be listed as part of the company. as an example, i believe teegee (of getmagi.com) pays his musician a lump sum for each song, so the musician works much like a freelancer. but he also lists the musician as part of the staff on the site. i imagine jeff's crew do get some sort of regular salary though, or at least one of them (the other is his wife)

@moi - possible. i'm just going by jeff once saying he earns $100k a year through his games, whereas i remember cliffski has only said that his games have earned $100k total (over something like four years) but doesn't earn 6 figures a year; i suppose jeff's profits could have gone down since then though, or cliffski's up

[moi]

@shade - yes, that's one way to distinguish them, maybe he meant it in that way. but we also don't really know how those two people helping jeff are paid though; they could be paid per service like freelancers too and just be listed as part of the company. as an example, i believe teegee (of getmagi.com) pays his musician a lump sum for each song, so the musician works much like a freelancer. but he also lists the musician as part of the staff on the site. i imagine jeff's crew do get some sort of regular salary though, or at least one of them (the other is his wife)

@moi - possible. i'm just going by jeff once saying he earns $100k a year through his games, whereas i remember cliffski has only said that his games have earned $100k total (over something like four years) but doesn't earn 6 figures a year; i suppose jeff's profits could have gone down since then though, or cliffski's up

Clifsky was at 100k in 2007 and almost doubled that in 2008 I think

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

ah, if true he's improved a lot in recent years then. good for him. i've heard he spends a lot on advertising though -- several thousand per month on google ads or some absurd number like that