Letters To The Editor: Submit A Letter
View All Letters 
| 03.02.2007Free Agency
Bravo to Michael John.
It would be nice if you ran the somewhat more raw piece I wrote which basically espouses the same thing: http://grassrootsgamemaster.blogspot.com/2007/02/gamecock-and-other-fads.html (Though I use the term "outsourcing" to include free agency - but that is a semantic argument; and I will admit the term "free agency" is a much more powerful one, one more specific to the concept.)
Michael John has to remember to include this one thing: the notion that breaking the industry up into its more essential pieces provides stability, not instability. Yes, if you have a vision for a new game, free agency gives you the freedom and creative peace of mind to try to pursue it. But if you want less risk and so don't want to be a free agent, you can focus instead on providing development services to the game projects that are initiated by the free agents. (And no one says you can't contribute creatively.)
Now, because you are focused only on providing services to these free agent-based projects you can move rapidly from project to project, client to client. This will actually give you MORE stability than if you were inside a traditional studio, where your fortunes were always tied to the success or failure of your most recent titles.
Another notion is the importance of casting! Casting casting casting! In all departments - creative talent, management, technology, et cetera. Free agency is all about getting the ingredients right for the game - not shoe-horning the game to fit into a traditional studio (which is pretty much static in terms of talent and technology). The most important decisions are the early ones, and that's what casting is about.-Grassroots Gamemaster
|
|
|
|
|
Letters to the Editor
