Unofficial Tex Murphy

I think further commentary about the arrangement between Atlus and Big Finish, if possible, would be a good thing. I don't anticipate backers will be able to help much, in terms of bugs, unless the beta covers the entire thing.

I think youre wrong there. With a game as non-linear as Tesla its going to be very difficult for their QA team to service. They're going to need all the help they can get.

I don't think Sega's involvement will help or hurt either way. Meh.

here is an unofficial statement from big finish

The agreement with Big Finish Games will be respected
There are no expected changes regarding the release of the game in any way

KMFDMvsEnya wrote:I actually asked, I believe was, Kevin at the Salt Lake CC on the nature of the Atlus partnership and whether it could result in a similar fallout as what occurred with Microsoft.

He reassured me that this would not be the case, Atlus is serving solely as a publisher/distributor they did not buyout BFG nor have any hold on their various IPs.

He outlined some of the benefits of the partnership such as assistance to getting directly onto Steam rather than through Greenlight. Greater distribution into foreign markets along with translations. Increased exposure and create a long time presence in the market with several levers.

The core game has been funded and will be released, regardless of the Sega buyout of Atlus.

Best regards,
KvE

Salt Lake CC was days before the buyout so naturally they sounded more optimistic then. Ask them now and they might have a different answer. Your last sentence (on the game's release) was sort of misleading as it was clearly your personal opinion only and not what they told you at Salt Lake.

kevin_y wrote:

KMFDMvsEnya wrote:I actually asked, I believe was, Kevin at the Salt Lake CC on the nature of the Atlus partnership and whether it could result in a similar fallout as what occurred with Microsoft.

He reassured me that this would not be the case, Atlus is serving solely as a publisher/distributor they did not buyout BFG nor have any hold on their various IPs.

He outlined some of the benefits of the partnership such as assistance to getting directly onto Steam rather than through Greenlight. Greater distribution into foreign markets along with translations. Increased exposure and create a long time presence in the market with several levers.

The core game has been funded and will be released, regardless of the Sega buyout of Atlus.

Best regards,
KvE

Salt Lake CC was days before the buyout so naturally they sounded more optimistic then. Ask them now and they might have a different answer. Your last sentence (on the game's release) was sort of misleading as it was clearly your personal opinion only and not what they told you at Salt Lake.

No, he's correct. Regardless of what happens to Atlus, Big Finish retains the rights to the game, and have already secured the funding thanks to Kickstarter and private investors. It's completely different than if Atlus was paying BFG to develop it rather than just agreeing to publish and promote it in exchange for a cut after the fact.

A couple people successfully clothed themselves in anti-publisher hysteria with great success on Kickstarter, and now a large portion of the Kickstarter community seems to misunderstand how the business works. Tesla Effect has already been paid for, so there's no reason to sell out the rights to the game in order to get funding. A publishing agreement is very different because it doesn't require a publisher to invest much of anything (other than applying some of the resources they already have like QA and PR), and they're willing to do that in exchange for a cut of the game's profits.

If Atlus' agreement with BFG is dissolved as a result of the buyout (although it doesn't appear this is the case), they can just find another publisher or publish it themselves. They didn't sell out the game. The game got made and funded, and the rights remain with the creators, all thanks to Kickstarter. That hasn't changed just because they're partnering with a publisher for distro and marketing.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:Well my experience in the industry tells me there is because I've yet to see such a deal go smoothly.

Then you either have no experience in the industry, or you don't know what "such a deal" is. This sort of thing happens all the time and it's fine. Indie games get developed and then parter with big companies to publish. Look at Volgarr the Viking for a recent example. Or Wasteland 2 for an upcoming one. EA's deal to publish Half Life 2/Orange Box is another prominent example.

In these cases the publisher has nothing to do with the production, finance, or scheduling of a game's development. They work in conjunction with the developer to choose a time that is prime for the game to succeed and base their marketing around that, but they have no ability to force the developer to release it early. They don't own the game, or the rights, or the developer, because they didn't pay for the game's development.

Tesla Effect is still a 100% independent production, even if it isn't independently published.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:I see it more being like the arrangement they had with Intel. Intel were responsible for the reason Overseer came out rushed and bug riddled. Sega has a habit of doing similar things. I don't want to see their management style incorporated into this game because I can certainly see the same thing happening- though I'll try my best to prevent it when given the opportunity.

Intel was the reason Overseer was less ambitious (linear, remade story, initially less interactive), but it's NOT the reason that game shipped buggy. The Intel deal fell through, and Access decided on their own to take more time and expand the game and flesh it out. They chose when it was done and when to ship it, and Intel ultimately had nothing to do with it in the end. It's Access' fault they didn't spend more time squashing bugs and polishing the game, not Intel's.

But again, there are strings that come attached when you take people's money, which is why BFG didn't take Atlus' money, and that's why they get to maintain their freedom. We know for a fact that they have not expanded the budget for the game beyond what BFG themselves can sustain.

I'm really sick of this hysterical, uninformed nonsense. BFG doesn't have the PR or experience to market this game successfully. It WILL fail without support from a publisher. I think they did a great job of finding a way to do that while maintaining their independence and creative control, and we should all be glad for that. This isn't about punishing publishers, it's about what's best for this game.

Thank You!!

It's good to hear things haven't changed from BFG's point of view. I'm guessing the people who are part of Atlus that personally donated and backed Tesla Effect on Kickstarter are still remaining on staff after the buyout so BFG likely have direct communication with them to ask about such things. It's great they'll still get the support in publishing/beta testing/marketing etc. that they've been offered.

So all in all I just wonder about the future of Atlus in terms of what they'll publish heh. I don't really know much about this whole thing though, I've just liked many of the games they've brought over to the UK from Japan etc. and don't really follow them closely outside of that. So I'll just wait and see what comes out.

Then you either have no experience in the industry, or you don't know what "such a deal" is.

Watch your accusations, that comes across as a personal attack on my credibility. I have a lot of experience in this industry, you don't come out of 4 and a half years of working for THQ, EA and Microsoft without learning something. I addressed these concerns because they are a major risk. Big Finish didn't put forward a risk analysis when this deal was made so we really had no idea what was going on, most project managers usually create a risk analysis when making major changes to the project. My concern was justified and I was only doing this to get information out of Big Finish. I'm glad to see we finally have.

In these cases the publisher has nothing to do with the production, finance, or scheduling of a game's development. They work in conjunction with the developer to choose a time that is prime for the game to succeed and base their marketing around that, but they have no ability to force the developer to release it early. They don't own the game, or the rights, or the developer, because they didn't pay for the game's development.

This isn't entirely true. The publisher is still apart of the QA process on delivery, they are also responsible for negotiation of delivery dates with the developer. My concern was more to do with because a release date has not been negotiated yet, Sega may impose something unrealistic which they're notorious for doing. I'm glad to see however that the Atlus deal will be respected.

I'm really sick of this hysterical, uninformed nonsense. BFG doesn't have the PR or experience to market this game successfully.

I disagree to a small extent, they've done exceptionally well already. If they weren't targeting a retail release and were going completely digital they probably wouldn't need a publisher. I don't know it seems a bit old fashioned what they're doing, but I understand why they want to target retail, its a big market share so I don't blame them. As for Uniformed, Why do you think I brought the matter up. I want information.. I got it. So I'm happy.

Also on the subject of Overseer I recall that Intel made the requirement that a DVD port be worked on, and I recall this was the version that ended up with the most bugs due to time. This might've been where I got confused. I've played the CD version before and whilst its buggy, the DVD version tended to be worse for me.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:Watch your accusations, that comes across as a personal attack on my credibility.

My point is that your claim is overreaching your credibility. Working in game development does not mean you've worked the business end of the industry, and it seems like you still have some misconceptions there.

You say you've never seen a publishing deal go smoothly for an independently funded game? Really? When have you ever NOT see one go smoothly, then? And I'm talking strictly about independently financed games, mind you.

There are a lot of things that can go wrong when a developer is depending on publisher funding. But in the cases where they're not, these deals are seldom a serious issue.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:This isn't entirely true. The publisher is still apart of the QA process on delivery, they are also responsible for negotiation of delivery dates with the developer. My concern was more to do with because a release date has not been negotiated yet, Sega may impose something unrealistic which they're notorious for doing. I'm glad to see however that the Atlus deal will be respected.

These situations are more about financing than they are about scheduling. Delays cost money. Since Sega/Atlus isn't footing the bill, they're not going to force Big Finish to put the game out early.
If Big Finish is willing to pay for those delays themselves, no one is going to have a problem with it. You're comparing apples to oranges.

Half Life 2 came out like 2 years late. Did EA care? Of course not. Because they weren't paying for those delays. It's an entirely different sort of arrangement than the ones you're probably used to seeing.

Frogacuda wrote: My point is that your claim is overreaching your credibility. Working in game development does not mean you've worked the business end of the industry, and it seems like you still have some misconceptions there.

I've directly worked with management before, I have certification in project management, I studied at university management. My end goal was to end up as a production manager, but my career was cut short- when I finally did get re-employed after the GFC hit I had to start from the low levels again. This was extremely frustrating especially when I'm perfectly capable of being a production manager.

You say you've never seen a publishing deal go smoothly for an independently funded game? Really? When have you ever NOT see one go smoothly, then? And I'm talking strictly about independently financed games, mind you.

I was strictly speaking from the perspective of an Australian, our industry has been countlessly screwed over by AAA publishers and a big part of this tends to be upper management and ethics. The THQ collapse especially shines a lot of light on this, THQ was doing a lot of dodgy things on their end which I did witness with my time with them. I think another example of why Publishers shouldn't be trusted is the case with Introversion games, the game uplink entirely financed by themselves, distributors too can do unethical things and withdraw profits from the developer. Its all a bit messy that's precisely why I don't approve of them, I question the real value of working with a publisher especially in this economic climate. Unless your a AAA or require retail distribution I don't think its a worthwhile deal in the end.

And I'd argue Tex Murphy has had more success in the digital realm now evident by sales from GOG.com. I do question how successful an FMV title will be in retail because we haven't really seen it perform in a good decade. But yes I'm really interested to see where this goes and if it was worthwhile going with Atlus for the deal, in the end I think Atlus was at least a fantastic publisher and I hope we can expect that same level of service from them.

Again I'm still learning a lot about the industry and I do need to learn for the sake of my future career. I can really only tell you my experiences with the industry and you should acknowledge that at least I'm talking about it as being a good thing because I'd go as far to say most developers don't talk about it so openly.

If Big Finish is willing to pay for those delays themselves, no one is going to have a problem with it.

That's all fine, I just hope they do have the budget to do that.

And again please don't take these as attacks on BFG or Project Fedora. I put a lot of money into this kickstarter and I have complete faith in the developer. I just don't want to see Sega's reputation effect the success of this game.

All in all I just hope to see something positive come out of this discussion.

I suspect marketing forces played a role in Overseer not being 100%. Me, I could wait all day. The questions that should be asked are "Who does Big Finish consider to be TE's target audience? and "What is Big Finish's perception of what those people want?" That should give you insights on how this game will be released.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:I've directly worked with management before, I have certification in project management, I studied at university management. My end goal was to end up as a production manager, but my career was cut short- when I finally did get re-employed after the GFC hit I had to start from the low levels again. This was extremely frustrating especially when I'm perfectly capable of being a production manager.

Again, when you're working with publisher money the situation is very different.

And even then, there's an unfortunate tendency to never blame developers for not being able to get things done in the time and for the budget that they proposed. We're seeing already how Kickstarter projects still face this same problem, but with no one to bail them out if things go wrong, which leads to disasters like CLANG and Takedown: Red Sabre.

Without a publisher, Big Finish would still be up against a wall to finish the game before their money runs out. That's just the nature of the beast. At least with a publisher there's SOME hope you can get some more support.

You say you've never seen a publishing deal go smoothly for an independently funded game? Really? When have you ever NOT see one go smoothly, then? And I'm talking strictly about independently financed games, mind you.

I think another example of why Publishers shouldn't be trusted is the case with Introversion games, the game uplink entirely financed by themselves, distributors too can do unethical things and withdraw profits from the developer. Its all a bit messy that's precisely why I don't approve of them, I question the real value of working with a publisher especially in this economic climate. Unless your a AAA or require retail distribution I don't think its a worthwhile deal in the end.

The Uplink case is an extremely rare exception and not one that would ever happen with an established, reputable publisher. They also sued (and won) over it if I'm not mistaken.

That's all fine, I just hope they do have the budget to do that.

And that's always the concern. I think they have a much better shot at that with Atlus providing QA support than if they have to test it on their own, though.

And even then, there's an unfortunate tendency to never blame developers for not being able to get things done in the time and for the budget that they proposed. We're seeing already how Kickstarter projects still face this same problem, but with no one to bail them out if things go wrong, which leads to disasters like CLANG and Takedown: Red Sabre.

I definitely do agree with this point and the developer should be held accountable. Its definitely wrong to suggest that the publisher is always the cause of things that go wrong on a project. I've actually stated with the Creative Assembly disaster that it was CA's fault for what happened and that Sega did what was expected of them. However as I've stated I know people that have worked with Sega directly and stated to me that there are serious management issues in that organization. They have to share some of the blame when they produce a bad title. They're not entirely to blame for it though.

I'd prefer though that if its on the cards to seek a publisher that it be known the second the game hits kickstarter that they're looking for publisher funding or external investment. Its a new system understandable but people need to know the intent.

Without a publisher, Big Finish would still be up against a wall to finish the game before their money runs out. That's just the nature of the beast. At least with a publisher there's SOME hope you can get some more support.

Understandable, but as I said earlier I question the real benefits to working with a publisher. In the end they can still produce duds just as bad as what Kickstarter has done so far. It's more a case of these developers should've known better and been more honest about what they were doing.. also a lot more realistic. Proper project planning that was put forward at the very start would've solved all their issues. I feel there's a lack of transparency with kickstarter atm and I hope to rectify it eventually.

I feel BFG has been realistic with what they set out to do, and so far has been one of the better executed kickstarters.

mr_cyberpunk wrote:I'd prefer though that if its on the cards to seek a publisher that it be known the second the game hits kickstarter that they're looking for publisher funding or external investment. Its a new system understandable but people need to know the intent.

But Big Finish didn't get publisher funding. Tesla Effect is still independently financed. And they DID allude to possibly working with publishers during the campaign, however, but I guess not everyone reads every single word they put out.

I've read people who simply don't understand the situation and feel like if Atlus is publishing it then it's a betrayal of their premise that no publisher would ever finance this game and that they needed Kickstarter. But it's true, no publisher would finance it and no publisher has. Atlus is just going to promote it, QA it, get it on Steam and other channels, and help get it reviewed on the major sites. That's about the extent of it. It's only thanks to KS that the game can actually get made.