Lay Off the Layoffs

There is a culture which permeates all game development, both AAA and Indie: the culture of the Launch Layoff. You know how it goes. Your game launches one day, the next day you're out of a job. This has been happening for years, and it's time for it to stop.

It used to be that we would see a powerhouse indie studio rise up from the ashes of a fallen AAA studio, but the days of "for every one of us who falls, two more will take our place" are fading. Yes, there are a lot of indie studios still, but it seems many people have become complacent in the cycle of Get Job -> Make Game -> Lose Job.

This is not the fault of the employees. It is the fault of the entire industry for making us believe that Layoff Culture is and needs to be the norm. There are a few key steps that companies could take to prevent this from happening. Whether or not they will is up to them.

1. Smaller Games: Not every game needs to be Skyrim or Grand Theft Auto. Games are getting huge, so huge they're almost worth more than the current $60 price tag, and raising their prices will be the only way to keep producing games of this caliber. Developers need to be willing to work on smaller projects, much like indies do, that can make their money back at more reasonable prices or, if remaining at $60, will be successful enough to allow the hardworking team to keep their jobs.
2. Smaller Teams: The days of skeleton crews for Pre and Post Production need to be over. A team of 100+ employees is too big, and obviously (for a powerhouse studio) 5 people is too small. Keep it reasonable, 10-20 people. Contract out whatever work you can and keep your overheard low. Aim to come in under budget so your team can keep their jobs when the game's done!
3. Begin Preproduction Earlier: It's true that there are some jobs that aren't needed in the preproduction phase, and it's easiest just to layoff the current modelers, sound designers, etc. when your company enters the preproduction phase and hire new ones on when the game's been greenlit by the publisher. My solution: begin preproduction of the next project earlier so that the post-production of one game and major production of the next begin at the same time. Yes, this is expensive, especially for big teams, and for small teams the focus needs to be on the current project. Small teams, however, have no need to just sit around and lollygag in a preproduction phase. So, this brings me to my next suggestion:
4. Eliminate Preproduction Entirely: Very few forms of art have a "preproduction phase." The only two I can think of are movies and games. Movies need them because they need their sets scouted and/or built beforehand, they need to find their cast, they need the script written, etc. Games are much more iterative and can be built in real-time. Concept artists, animators, and modelers can work simultaneously to have a character designed and brought to life in a matter of hours instead of weeks if working separately. AGILE techniques can be used to bring a game to life in realtime instead spending months writing up a design doc that details every little bit of production, only to have that doc get trashed down the line because it can't keep up with what's actually happening in the game's development. Games don't need a huge preproduction phase, they need a quick and dirty proof of concept, a prototype that shows core gameplay, and that's it. The less time spent in preproduction, the more money a studio has to come up with new ideas for potential publisher pitches.
5. Publishers Need to Take Risks: The only reason new IPs are tough to come by is because publishers want sequels. Franchises mean money thanks to name recognition. Give developers the chance to stretch and experiment after a game's launch and there will be many great surprises in the video game industry. This, however, also means publishers need to greenlight potential flops, and that is okay. It's not a venture if it's not a risk, and the best way to learn - for publishers, developers, and everyone else - is to fail.
6. Crowdsource Your Idea: If you're not under publisher control, there's no reason to wait for publisher money anymore. I've talked in-depth about how the publisher model is not dead, and also how not all Kickstarter games will be successful, but while it's still a viable option there should be nothing stopping your team from saying, "Are the people interested in this game?" and actually asking them that very question. Why predict when you can survey, and why just get a bunch of "Yes" answers when you can get actual dollars? Don't think that Kickstarter is the only option either. If you run a company with a well-recognized name and plenty of media coverage, you can crowdsource your games on your own website.

What this all comes down to is NO MORE SITTING AROUND! You want to make games for a living? Make games and don't STOP making games! The money thing will take care of itself in time. Take a page from the indie playbook and just dive right in.

On Naming Your Games Weird Things

This is DOOM. It is one word, it is short, it is memorable. It is a title that is instantly recognizable. Please, for the love of God, when you are naming your game, follow the same rule of simplicity. Even if it's more than one word, say "God of War" or "Super Meat Boy" stick with words that people know and can immediately form an image in their mind of what the game will be without even seeing it.

"But my game has to have this weird name or my creative vision is compromised!"

Guess what? EVERYBODY judges a book by its cover, and everybody judges a game by its name. Do not allow the narrow scope of your creative vision to potentially hurt any press or sales your game will get in the end.

Take, for instance, Slam Bolt Scrappers. A great game, but not a title that easily defines what the game is. At a Boston Post Mortem, the Fire Hose Team described the troubles they had involving the game's name, mainly that they were getting hits on their site from other Google searches, including "Slam Bot Scrappers" or "Slam Bolt Scrapers." In some cases, these can be as simple as typos, but in others, it can be as bad as people not actually knowing what the name of your game is.

For instance, there was an article recently that referred to my company's game as "Children of Lantana," when the game's name is "Children of Liberty," and the company's name is "Lantana Games." Granted, this is just a slip of the keys, and in the end does not affect our Google results, so this could have been a lot worse.

All I ask is that you take a step back and think about the title of your game from a buyer's perspective. Ask yourself, and your friends, these questions:

1. Can you pronounce the game's title?
2. Can you spell the game's title?
3. What do you think of when you hear this title?

If the answer to any of these questions is, "I Don't Know," especially the third one, you've done something wrong. A title needs to conjure up images of... something, anything! Even if it's wrong, it needs to get the buyer's brain churning. Take "Lord of the Rings," for instance. Even if you had never read the books, just from hearing the title, you would know there is some kind of watchful figure who had something to do with having a godlike power over some rings, and from that we can infer those rings must be very, very powerful. Now then, if you had never heard of "Slam Bolt Scrappers" what would you think the game is about?

I've been guilty of this on a couple occasions. I once made a Poker/Tetris combo game named "Avalanche," a word that has nothing to do with cards. My first game after college, "The Longest Night," didn't describe the fact that you'd be running a homeless shelter, but it gave the sense that you would be in for, well, a long night, possibly with some tedium.

Please keep simplicity in mind in your titles. You will find that you gain a lot more traction a lot quicker if you appeal to the lowest common denominator. It may not seem ideal. In fact, it may feel like selling out, but when it comes down to it, would you rather people play and enjoy your game, or see its really weird title and keep walking?