GAME JOBS
Contents
Y Control: Joe Ybarra On Cheyenne Mountain's Massive Plans
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Sledgehammer Games / Activision
Level Designer (Temporary)
 
High Moon / Activision
Senior Environment Artist
 
LeapFrog
Associate Producer
 
EA - Austin
Producer
 
Zindagi Games
Senior/Lead Online Multiplayer
 
Off Base Productions
Senior Front End Software Engineer
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Tenets of Videodreams, Part 3: Musicality
 
Post Mortem: Minecraft Oakland
 
Free to Play: A Call for Games Lacking Challenge [1]
 
Cracking the Touchscreen Code [3]
 
10 Business Law and Tax Law Steps to Improve the Chance of Crowdfunding Success
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief:
Kris Graft
Blog Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Mike Rose, Kris Ligman
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
Education:
Gillian Crowley
 
Contact Gamasutra
 
Report a Problem
 
Submit News
 
Comment Guidelines
 
Blogging Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  Y Control: Joe Ybarra On Cheyenne Mountain's Massive Plans
by Brandon Sheffield [Business/Marketing, Design, Production, Interview, PC, Hollywood, North America]
11 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
March 24, 2008 Article Start Previous Page 3 of 6 Next
 

I was actually talking to Min Kim -- did you see the Visual Fight Club thing that happened?

JY: No, I did not.



It was just him versus Kelly Flock, and they were talking about subscription model versus free-to-play model, but when I was talking to Min earlier today, he said that a lot of people seem to have really the wrong idea about what the free-to-play model is. The game is really a service, not a product. It's like, you're facilitating contact, and the game has to be built from the ground up for item sales. You can't just make a game and then put item sales into it afterward and expect that it's going to be functional. So is that something that you've been building in from the beginning, or is it more recent?

JY: Well in the case of our second product, which is what we're discussing -- our free-to-play product -- yeah, it's been architected from the ground up to support that activity. And without getting into the content of what this game is -- if I able to explain it to you, it would be obvious that, yeah, this is a really good proposition, or content model, for this type of transaction-based environment. Because some games lend themselves better than others do, and what we think is that in our second product, we've got something that is absolutely perfect for this kind of business model.

And, like you said, all online products, regardless of what they are -- MMOs, or peer-to-peer, or whatever -- have a service component to it, and, as you articulated, it really is a service. We look at Stargate Worlds as the example of that; it's that we're not building a product, we're building a real service organization to our customers. Especially if you're in the subscription-based model, you've got to be more added value to your customer than just shipping up a box and connect up to your service. We've know that from the very beginning. And that's a lot of the effort that I'm personally working on now, at Cheyenne, is building that infrastructure.

Are you mostly focused on getting existing licenses, and putting those appropriately into the game space, or will you develop completely original content?

JY: Actually, by accident more than by planning, it's about half and half. Yeah. And I say that it's an accident only because it's just, basically, a product of opportunity. We get the opportunity, like the Stargate property, to do something that we believe we can do something really good with, then we'll do that. But fundamentally, as a developer, it's in our interest to develop original IP. So we really want to focus in on that as well.

Do you think that you're going to have to partner with a publisher at all, in the case of either of these? I don't know if anything has been announced, but it seems like, with your scale, and digital distribution, it might not be necessary.

JY: Well, it's our intent to basically be the operator of the product, in that we run the service, we do the customer support, and all of the infrastructure that's necessary to do that. So a publishing partner, for us, is somebody that will help us with retail distribution, since Stargate will be a boxed product to go along with the service.

And then the other aspect, that goes back to what you're alluding to with a publisher partnership, is the global scale. You know, we can service a certain portion of the world, but we just can't be everywhere at the same time, because we just don't have the expertise or the scale yet. So, that being said, we're hoping to find partners that will help us in other territories, other than North America. And we'll just see how that works. That's another task that I've been working on now, for some time.

When do you think that digital distribution is going to be the dominant model?

JY: That's a good question. I think there still needs to be several precursors that actually have to be enabled before it becomes dominant. I mean, it's already obviously being practiced.

One of the big ones is high bandwidth connections. Because a lot of the product -- especially something like Stargate, which has really high production values -- the size of this, the footprint of this product is gigantic. So if we're going to distribute this across the internet, we've got to figure out a way to get it into the customer's hands in a reasonable time frame. So I think that's one issue.

I think another issue is the actual visibility and marketing aspect of it; because when you turn on your computer, and want to start figuring out different ways of getting content, how do you find it? There's just so much material out there, that I think there's more evolution that will take place in that area as well. So this is just, basically, how do you get brand? How do you get people to come to destination locations and get content? How do those things compete with each other? So I think that's another problem.

Another hurdle is: How do you address the cultural differences from nation to nation? Because people that purchase products in, say, the Asian territory, will behave differently than Americans, who in turn behave differently than Europeans. So you've got this mixed bag of: how do you address all those market choices?

Yeah, and there are serious logistical issues there, too. Like, in Japan, credit card use is not very common. And on the up-side, in Korea, the internet speeds are completely not regulated, so you can have blazing high speed connections there. So it's really quite -- yeah, it wouldn't be simple.

JY: No it wouldn't. No it would not. (laughter)

 
Article Start Previous Page 3 of 6 Next
 
Top Stories

image
Gearbox's Randy Pitchford on games and gun violence
image
How Kinect's brute force strategy could make Xbox One a success
image
Microsoft's official stance on used games for Xbox One
image
Keeping the simulation dream alive
Comments

Anonymous
profile image
This product is most likely going to suffer the same fate as Tabula Rasa and Hellgate London. Stargate is a tired license with little global value beyond 40 year old American males. Ybarra's vision is flawed and behind the times to say the least.

Anonymous
profile image
I disagreed. Tabula Rasa and Hellgate London are products without an existing fan base to draw from. Stargate, as a franchise, is widely successful. The TV show, Stargate: SG1, was the longest running sci-fi series in US history (10 years). It has a global fan base, not just "40 year old American males." IF SGW fails, it will fail because the game is poorly done. With the caliber of people on that team I highly doubt that will be its fate.

Anonymous
profile image
Oh cool, a Cheyanne Mountain employee! Good luck guys. You are going to need it.

Anonymous
profile image
LMAO. Hardly an employee. But certainly not a closed-minded, failed wannabe game god like yourself. I always love when some bitter "40 year old American male" on Gama begins the comments with his insightful view (all negative) of the project discussed in a story. That same burned out, broken dreamed crybaby always foresees nothing but bad for the studio, its employees, and the game's community. Oh, and then that envious toad responds to any positive posts as "it's an employee." No, Sherlock. There are actual gamers/game devs who read this site and don't spew BS hate on every other game studio under an ANON tag.

Anonymous
profile image
I don't believe that this license is going to do much, if anything at all. It is tired and played out. Just like Star Trek, but worse.



It is extremely rare for a new studio to have it's first game be great (especially great enough to take on WOW or EVE or...). The odds are low on this one.

Anonymous
profile image
Yeah, at least Star Trek is getting a makeover before it's mmo will make it to market. Not even MacGuyver will save this one.

Anonymous
profile image
We shouldn't overrate licenses.



Star Wars Galaxies anyone?

Anonymous
profile image
This is a good license to build a great MMO with. But a good license does not a good MMO make. If the game is good, using this license will definitely help give it a jump-start.

Anonymous
profile image
The investors are going to lose their millions on this one.

Anonymous
profile image
wow. vitriol and more vitriol. it's like a lotta people never really mature into adults. just stuck emotionally as adolescents. at least wait and see what happens before piling on. easy to throw barbs and heap derision while hiding like a bunch of lil b'tchs. I'm building a new game and I hope everyone succeeds in theirs and all of the investors win. it will bring only more $$ to grease all of our wheels.

Anonymous
profile image
I had to post anonymously on this one, but time and time again, I've posted where ever I could that using Unreal as the basis for an MMO is reciepe for unseen problems and possibly disaster....



You see in order to get the Unreal "look" you have to maintain small "hallway" looking levels OR downgrade your graphical look OR go completly stylistic. At that point you really don't need to be using Unreal.



Unreal's material editor, it's material instructions and its "look" are tied together. You would need a high level filter to give the world a completly different feel and rewrite graphical instructions to get a new look aswell.



From my experience, level design wise, using the terrain editor it optimally maxes out at around 300m x 300m before you have to get streaming involved. Streaming and AI are whole other issue on the console I can only imagine what its going to be like online.



Another prime example and major hurdle these are going to be faced with is the issue of Itemization. Unreal uses "packages" and "archetypes" to manage its assets, however it does not support massive amounts of Items in any manageable method. Therefore the team is going to have to built a database that can manage, change, update and interface with Unreal's package system. The system will have to work backwards as well, updatea a package it updates the database.



Last but not least, making any object in Unreal and putting through their pipeline takes a long time...I don't see how they're going to build "Worlds" when just to get 8 hours of Console FPS gameplay can take 2 years. I can only imagine how long its going to take to make mmo "Worlds."



I for one, getting a stomache turning sensation everytime I hear that a new company is creating an MMO that is going to kill WOW, they really have to be kidding themselves. Blizzard is probably going to come out with StarCraft and its all over again.



Investors save your money and produce smaller scale games.

That's my 2 cents


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Tech