Stop & Think!

Hi all! First off, let me admit that I have not read all 45 pages of postings. It's just too much. Let me also say that many of you are probably not going to like what I'm going to say. But hey, discussion is a good thing! What I have read in past posts is a lot of Hasbro bashing and many singing the praises of the Extreme Games/eGames side. I really think that "big guys vs. little guys" is only one issue here and many GameDev readers are being swept up into taking a position on something that they don't completely understand. Reading someone's posting stating that (s)he was going to boycott games published by Hasbro (and tell his/her friends to do the same) demonstrates just how strongly some feel about this case and how seriously they are taking the situation - which isn't outright a bad thing. But if we are going to take this situation seriously, then we have to think about it seriously as well. Here's my take on the issue: I could be wrong, but it isn't my sentiment that Hasbro is the big bad demon that everyone seems to be making them out to be. Hasbro is a company that publishes a great number of excellent games from a variety of development houses. They could very well be wrong in pursuing their current case but we, as developers, should not feel that they are out to get us nor that the other plaintiffs are innocent lambs just because they're small. Remember that Hasbro is an enthusiastic publisher of Chris Sawyer, probably the most successful independent developer in history. Those who automatically assume that Extreme and eGames are the good guys championing the developer cause in this case may not be taking into accout several things. The first is that they are also publishers. Although they have been great supporters of many independent developers, the fact that they are extremely put off by the Hasbro suit indicates that they may have an unusually high reliance on "design imitated" games. Although it's never good to see another player drop out of the games industry, developers should remember that in today's games market (rife with piracy, niche markets, and legitimate competition) many publishers don't make it. With any company that has a small cash flow it is sometimes an expensive lawsuit that becomes the straw that breaks the camel's back (remember Aureal). Rest assurred, however, that even if Extreme and eGames exit the market here, that does not mean that we won't be able to get published. Extreme and eGames are not the only publishers aiming for the "$20 and under" games market that is most often served by independent developers and small development groups. The second is that their games aren't great. This actually ties in with the first issue. Since many of their games are budgetware and of unreputed originality and play value, many buyers pass them up. eGames financial troubles may have more to do with their inability to sell games than Hasbro's attempts to prevent the distribution of their games. Let's face it: most gamers would scoff at many of the arcadish derivatives that have been released by Extreme, and, most of the packages offered by eGames are not appealing next to Rollercoaster Tycoon, Homeworld, or Freespace 2. How many of these games have even been reviewed? It's one thing for a publisher to be supportive of good and innovative games and sell them at a reasonable price. It's another thing for some wannabe game developer to wrap a cheezy arcade game in spiffy DirectX, get it published by one of the above mentioned companies, and milk an unsuspecting consumer of $15-$20 - especially when many older, but better games can be purchased at a similar price. Many gamers, I'm sure, like the idea of independent developers being able to enter the market. What they don't want, is to be ripped off. Finally, it is rash, at best, to make the claim that our artistic and creative freedoms will be cruelly curtailed if Hasbro is successful. Will we have to stop making design copies of games? Yes - if we plan on profiting from them. We may have to be a little more innovative and a little more original in coming up with our designs. We might even (gasp!) find it helpful to form development teams. But our freedom to come up with ideas, implement them, and share them with the world will not be lost. If Extreme and eGames do lose the suit it will certainly be regrettable for them and there may be a period where there is a publishing vacuum. But for us, there will be other potential publishers to eventually fill the void. And don't forget that Tim Wisseman's VGA Planets has become a tremendous success without any third party distribution. Remember that when designing games, it's not just our own interests, but also the interests the game buyers/players that are being met. From what I've seen, even if the lawsuit leads up to something like the folding up of the two companies, those interests will remain protected. In truth, there are many games that just aren't fun, or aren't worth the money paid to play them. There is no reason why anyone should continue to charge money for these games. But those developers who create games that are fun, innovative, and challenging will continue to bring on the smiles. This isn't to say that either Hasbro or Extreme is right. Just that developers should be careful not to be manipulated into taking a stand on something that may not be as it seems. Regards to all, Peter Chung Edited by - Peregrine on 8/15/00 2:18:03 PM