Self publishing - the concept seems to be easy enough. However, so many have tried and failed in the past. It seems to me that with the announcement of the community games - live could turn out to open some serious doors for small/indie developers. At least, that's how I'm looking at it. It appears to be a great way to develop a game on your own terms and get it to market. Even if it doesn't have an actual box or is otherwise in some tangible form or whatnot, the potential for this as a springboard to bigger & better things now seems all the more real for us developers. If we're careful.

My concern as a developer, within this seeming-to-be year of "second generation xna pioneers" is not whether we get the product finished and out to those who want to play it but rather it lies within the stability of the games being developed and the business model MS is putting together. XNA games being developed with the intent of being sold must be stable. Bigger companies set aside time for Q&A testing which is either performed internally or under contract with a strict NDA in place. If member X wants to play and test member Y's game (that is to be sold online) what precautions are there to protect the IP of member Y's game? This sort of touches on the issues of the business model MS is putting together for the future here.

All IP stuff aside, what does matter in the end is that we're all delivering a product that's fun & stable. I don't think any of us want this thing to turn out as a potential XNA sore as some developers will be taking this seriously, just as I do. Wuith all this been said, how do we separate out games that were made over a period of time, with the intent to sell online from the games that were perhaps not made with the same expectations? I'm sure that some XBox Arcade developers are concerned that some of our games will "cloud" things up for their products as well - since I'm under the impression they're all being sold in the same location this holiday season. It does appear that a new era of small/indie development is coming 'round - or recirculating things from the past - this could be very cool for everyone involved - as long as we be careful and take the time to plan, build and test our products and still respect the process of developing an IP into a game in which is to be sold to a consumer. Regardless of brand or label.

Alternate State Entertainment:

If member X wants to play and test member Y's game (that is to be sold online) what precautions are there to protect the IP of member Y's game?

Reviewers are tracked and logged. If someone reviews and rejects your game, then submits a similar game of his own, I'm pretty sure someone would notice. As far as what would happen, I have never known Microsoft to be lax in their response to unethical behavior.

Alternate State Entertainment:

how do we separate out games that were made over a period of time, with the intent to sell online from the games that were perhaps not made with the same expectations?

Why would we? If the game is bad, nobody will buy it. Let the market decide. It is virtually impossible to tell the difference between a truly stupid game and a truly brilliant game.

Alternate State Entertainment:

I'm under the impression they're all being sold in the same location this holiday season.

The CG space is going to be separate from XBLA on the dashboard.

The biggest challenge is going to be to get people to try out (and then buy!) your game, as opposed to all other games. It will be a bit like trying to get people to come to your blog instead of all the other blogs out there. You'll have to have something truly good for it to be noticed enough to cut through the noise -- and, even if you do, you'll probably need to do a whole lot of marketing anyway.

If a situation arose like you describe where someone were to "rip" an entire game or idea - no. In that case, I'm sure some serious steps would be taken in that case. However that's not entirely what I'm talking about. A case that's probably more likely would be where someone is testing/reviewing a game and see's some feature or ability and tries to execute the same feature or ability in their game with or without some changing of execution. To some, they'd see nothing wrong in trying to take something that they see while reviewing a game and try to execute it (or something like it) in their own production. This is more what I'm talking about. There isn't anything (but a person with a good honest conscience) really preventing this from happening. It would be like the wild-west of IP rights.

CDarklock:

Why would we? If the game is bad, nobody will buy it. Let the market decide. It is virtually impossible to tell the difference between a truly stupid game and a truly brilliant game.

Why? I think if I worked for months on a project to make sure it was everything I wanted it to be, I'd want to feel comfortable knowing it was NOT being listed on the bottom of the screen next to game #454029496 - which btw, could easily be the 1000'th game written and published in a week by 2 guys and a cases of beer. Albeit a bit exaggerated - this could easily be the scenario without having some careful, thought out precautions put in place. A large amount of who is listed and how - will be determined by the market (i.e. Best 10 sellers etc..) but what about the thousands of games or developers that are dying or desparate to get something in the marketplace?

And before you ask "how could a game like I describe get passed the review & listing stage in the first place...." it could happen as easily as folks who know enough people to pass a game regardless of quality could squeak by. I recall reading an post a few weeks back, someone actually describing how easy it was for people to review & publish games. They wrote that several games were being "passed" that for him, didn't even run.

 All I'm saying, is that we must be careful in how we conduct ourselves as a community. This could either be a very great thing, opening up a lot of doors for people or it could implode just as easily if certain things aren't thought out before hand. We all want to make fun games and perhaps make a buck at it too - we also want to establish some credibility for this community too. I'd think anways.

It would be like the wild-west of IP rights.

It would be no more a wild west of IP rights than what you already have. Society does not stop working just because XNA Community Games opens up.

And, all in all, it's a good execution that matters (and is hard to do) -- ideas are a dime a dozen, and it's usually not the case that someone who knows how to make a game will "steal" someone else's idea rather than work on his own. All of us already have dozens of game ideas already, and not enough time to execute them...

And, yes, your game will be right next to "A Picture of My Arm Pit" for 800 gamer points. There's nothing you can do about that. However, hopefully the community games will end up with user ratings for things like quality and fun factor, so games that are good will be easy to separate from games that are bad for users who don't browse alphabetically.

Alternate State Entertainment:

A case that's probably more likely would be where someone is testing/reviewing a game and see's some feature or ability and tries to execute the same feature or ability in their game with or without some changing of execution.

I think that's pretty much a foregone conclusion. If you do anything right in your game at all, someone out there who is doing it wrong will see your game doing it right - and try to fix their own. Indeed, I believe this is not just natural and normal, but necessary. I believe the industry would literally die if this practice stopped. For any given genre of game, there was a first game that ever fit into that genre, and without that one game we wouldn't have any of the rest - but it is extraordinarily rare that the first game in a genre is the best in that genre. How many FPS fans even remember Maze War or MIDI Maze? It's not even necessary to stay in the same genre - would we really have had Wizardry, Bard's Tale, Ultima, or Might and Magic without those early FPS incarnations?

Alternate State Entertainment:

I think if I worked for months on a project to make sure it was everything I wanted it to be, I'd want to feel comfortable knowing it was NOT being listed on the bottom of the screen next to game #454029496

How do you know you're not game #454029496?

There is always someone out there who thinks your game is garbage, and it might very well be one of those two guys in the basement with the cases of beer. Do you think he should be able to say your game doesn't belong on the bottom of the screen next to his?

How do we distinguish between his opinion, which doesn't matter, and your opinion - which does? What makes you so sure it shouldn't be the other way around?

Alternate State Entertainment:

And before you ask "how could a game like I describe get passed the review & listing stage in the first place...." it could happen as easily as folks who know enough people to pass a game regardless of quality could squeak by. I recall reading an post a few weeks back, someone actually describing how easy it was for people to review & publish games. They wrote that several games were being "passed" that for him, didn't even run.

The reviewing period will probably be longer. On the other side, to pass a game using only your friends is expensive for their pockets ($99 each). Also, peer review does not review quality. However garbage a game may be, if it is playable, and does not break any of the rejection conditions put in place (none of which deal with quality), you don't have a reason to reject it, and it will be next to yours. You'll just have to make sure you stand out by yourself.

And remember there are always trials the user will play before they buy stuff, and there will hopefully be a way for the users to review games based on their quality. And lastly, if you look at the current games catalog, you'll see there are lots of quality games, and few of them can be put in the same category with #454029496.

CDarklock:

How do you know you're not game #454029496?

There is always someone out there who thinks your game is garbage, and it might very well be one of those two guys in the basement with the cases of beer. Do you think he should be able to say your game doesn't belong on the bottom of the screen next to his?

 

Eventually, someone will be game #454029496 - BUT - you're only getting parts of the argument:

1) While it's great we can make and publish our own stuff - however, its a double edged sword - if it's TOO easy, game lists can easily mount faster than it perhaps should. Complicating things for some people

2) It's not about trying to exclude or place judgement of quality on a project because of someone's a percieved lack of effort or skill - not saying "well I spent months on mine so mine is better" - not the case or point at all.

3) It's about trying to find a way to sort the influx of games that will be coming (besides being based on point value) 

An example: When you go to the game store and you're searching for a quality game - you don't find every PC game in the store placed into the same small bin do you? No. They're sorted out based on some logical ordering method. What if, say, the first Quake game when released was thrown into this same bin - along with 100 other games that other publishers just put out because xmas is coming. The other games may be good, who knows - BUT - you don't. Those publishers aren't really concerned over quality but rather quantity. They release 100 and if they sell only 20% then they're thrilled. But now, that bin in the store is totally saturated with these types of games. Chances are - it's those games that will have to be weeded out first before you stumble upon that Quake game at the bottom of the bin.

 

Does this start making some sense now? I'm not trying to come across saying "if I spent X months, my game must be best and how dare it be placed next to these turds" - all I'm trying to do is put the thought into people's heads about how we could try to prevent good products being lost in the future wave of games to come out. It's about trying to anticipate possible Live Marketplace saturation and plan around it - because of the double edged sword community games is or could be. If Microsoft - since they are the one's in control - is mainly concerned about filling the marketplace with quantity - over quality, then I guess there's nothing we can do. However, supposedly, it's not MS, it's the community in charge - so maybe there's something we can do afterall. This isn't exactly the same thing as a group of guys uploading their latest half-life2 mod to the community - the dynamics are different.

I'd like to add the following:

 Microsoft is trying to sell this concept as a viable business model for indie/small developers. However, it won't be much of a business model if no one can find or see your game without having to weed through the possible thousands of weekend-games so to speak. Bonus for developers looking to get a title out and perhaps some money in.

Here's an interesting article, perhaps you folks have already read it but here it is anyways:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=19620

and another - it does touch on the arcade/community games subject : http://newretro.org/games/2008/07/09/the-king-xbox-live-arcade/

Food for thought.

-s

Alternate State Entertainment:

how we could try to prevent good products being lost in the future wave of games to come out

We hope there will be a rating system for the users to rate the games on the console. But we don't have any official words yet. We'll have to wait and see what Microsoft comes up with.

 If there won't be an official one, Ziggy is already working on an unofficial XBLCG rating system on his site.

 If you do have some great ideas on how to solve the "needle in the haystack" problem, go ahead and post it on Connect. The XNA team will look at it. If not, you'll have to wait and see Microsoft's solution, later this year.

Comparing to stores like Best Buy or Target, or even GameStop, is not a good idea. At Target and similar places, games are placed based on their slotting fees that the maker pays to the store. The more you pay, the better placement you get in the store. If