|
[Gamasutra is
partnering with GameProducer.net, a
game production resource, for a series of Q&As named "Producers of the
Round Table". The Round Table is a place for producers who work in game
industry to present their opinions in response to questions. The most recent
article in the series dealt with "getting coders and artists to
communicate".
In this installment,
which deals with programmer and artist communication, participants include Robbie
Edwards, senior producer at Red Storm Entertainment, Ben Gunstone, production
director at Stainless Games, Justin D'Onofrio, producer at Freeverse, and Frank
Rogan, producer at Gas Powered Games.]
How do you deal with structuring your team in terms of different
disciplines reporting to leads?
Robbie Edwards: Underneath the
producer, we have leads for design, art and engineering for their respective
departments within the team. We then break down the departments further into
disciplines that are small groups of similarly skilled developers lead by a
single workgroup coordinator. For the most part, these workgroups consist
solely of one department, but in a few cases, they are cross departmental.
Ben Gunstone: On
all of our games we have a lead artist and a lead coder. Ideally we also have a
design lead as well but with the smaller download titles that design lead is
normally spread across multiple projects. From there it is completely flat.
Our teams are
smaller, though, than normal retail products, normally looking at two to three
artists and two to four coders per game, so there isn't room for any more
levels of hierarchy.
Our leads also spend most of their time doing their
scheduled tasks and don't need to spend much time on team-management - mainly
as the teams are so small that communication is so much easier. It's also
helped by the fact that we always position team members together in the office.
They are also supported by me and our assistant producer.
Justin D'Onofrio: While
our current project calls for a smaller team, we still have a hierarchy in
place. On the coding side, we have a network lead programmer, who reports to
the project lead programmer. There's an assistant programmer who reports to
both of these folks. On the art side, we have a 3D modeler, who reports to the
creative lead (also the 2D artist). Both leads, and an assistant producer, report
to me as producer.
That's in the
office itself. Remotely, we have an audio engineer. He's considered the audio
lead, and has as many of his own folks at his west coast studio reporting to
him as needed. Also on the west coast, we work with an art studio, where an art
technician reports to an art manager, who then reports to both myself and our
creative lead.
Frank Rogan: We have leads
for the traditional disciplines - engineering, design, art, animation, etc. -
and those leads serve as both the discipline leads as well as in an advisory
capacity with the producer for the project itself. It's a pretty traditional
model.
|
Game development too often is run in a byzantine, bureaucratic manner.
These two companies are not always compatible in terms of practices, philosophies and goals. I'd like to see some articles about how the differences between creative entertainment production and software development complicate management of game productions.
(It looks beautiful! The net code is awesome! But it has guys with plasma guns and battle armour, bunny-hopping around shooting Space Zombies... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz)
Weakness on the software side of a game company can cripple everything else the company does, so I can't really agree with you that software engineering is only related to games in an "outside manner." Without the software these games don't exist.