GamePro Arcade

Second Verse, Similar to the First

Next up to take the Arcade Game Developer Questionnaire is Scott March, President of SpiderMonk Entertainment. SpiderMonk has created a number of mobile games and recently released their first XBLA game, Roogoo.

Hey, wait a minute! Isn't Roogoo a sponsor of GamePro Arcade? Yes, but this is purely coincidental, I swear.

GamePro: When you make the decision to create a game for XBLA how do you choose what kind of game to make? Is it based on a classic game in your catalog, a game that you think would be fun but isn't quite big enough to be a full console game, or is it from the creativity of your staff?

Scott March: All game developers including anyone you meet that plays games wants to make his own game. This is the simple truth. How many times have you said, "Hey, I want to make this game with the dig-a-mu-do here and the splat-a-tat there". We all have! Come on, it's the truth. Just the other day the FedEx dude walked into my office to drop off a package, and was "Hey man... I got a great game idea; you need to do this and that and that with this." I looked up and thought to myself, yeah & you me and everyone else& with the sound of similar games and 200 others just like it. The problem is most games or concepts can already be found. Most are re-packaged with a different coat of paint. So when you are making a game, everyone and their second brothers cousins step-sister has an idea for a game- it's just which one do you make and what are the risks. SpiderMonk came about with the intention and focus for passion and creativity. Making something new is extremely risky, but can be extremely rewarding if it's good. There are many pros and cons. When making something that's already proven you just need a new coat of paint because it's already proven. The part of becoming successful at it is how much better did your coat of paint look: did it have camouflage, how does it compare to its predecessors, how pretty the new coat of paint looks, and how fun is it to drive? Everyone has input on a game idea & it's taking that idea and making it better. I guess it comes down to someone that has a good filter that can pick what those ideas are and how they are implemented. At the end of the day someone has to have vision for a product.

GP: What's the first step when working on getting an XBLA title approved? Do you have to have a game already in beta form so that Microsoft can try it out or can you come to them with just a concept? How does the pitch work?

SM: I think it works differently for everyone. Some pitch new ideas, some pitch old games that are already around, and some make new playables or concepts for Microsoft to play and evaluate. The team members over at MS have an amazing amount of knowledge and experience with a mixture of diverse backgrounds that pick and choose from these games. They're hit with a ton of game concepts all the time. I think the game design document or idea is the first step with XBLA and that's true with any game developer.

GP: Once you have the green light from MS, how long does it take to complete the game and then have it to appear on Arcade?

SM: This totally depends on the game and level of complexity. I'm sure most original live arcade titles are in development for at least a year. Games that are ports to XBLA are probably 4-7 months. New original concepts on the high-end may be 2 years. You have to remember these teams probably range from 3-10 people.

GP: What does the timeline from idea to publishing look like and how is it different from a console game?

SM: I think they are similar, minus man power, development budget, and staff.

GP: What are the differences between creating an XBLA game and a console game (staff size, time, expense, download vs. disc)?

SM: Development is very similar minus the number of team members, budgets, and sometimes time depending on scope of the project. You're just talking about way too many variables to break down as far as a development cycle for a game. I have been on both sides for some time, and development is still very similar between the two. Larger console titles just take more people, time, and management. The heavier the plan the harder it is to lift if it's going down. The flip side is the heavier the plan, the farther it can go, and the more passengers or bombs it can carry.

Example: If you have an engine that is already working that supports next-gen features to take advantage of the Xbox 360 then you're already ahead. If you have to create this engine from scratch, then its going to take you much longer. Does your engine support character animation? Does it support normal mapping? Are you using multi-threading to take advantage of the 360 hardware? Sure, you can cut many corners on an XBLA title that a next-gen triple-A title will not be able to cut. You can abuse certain aspects of the 360 because youre just not pushing the hardware like a triple-A game will. My thoughts are why not try and implement some of the same features on XBLA? Some developers will license an engine that will give them a jump start, but will cost more money up front. The experience level of your team is also important. If they're not console developers with experience, run! I think digital download is the future, and I can't wait for all types of games, both large and small, to be a button-press away.

GP: What makes for a great XBLA title? What kind of experience do you want gamers to have?

SM: What makes a great XBLA title? That's up to the end user. I think the word FUN comes to mind. There are games that lack this from time to time. One man's trash is another man's treasure, so it's really a personal opinion for many players. I wish more XBLA titles would try something new. The only problem with this is "new" means risk. It's time, money, and prototyping. The problem with new is also the user. They may have a hard time with new, or getting used to what that new may be. I think XBLA at least gives a few developers a chance to try new. When something new and original comes out, more people need to support it.

Take for example NEW. Main stream America likes McDonalds, Starbucks, Old Navy, Wal-Mart, and Barnes and Nobles. You can find one on every corner across the US. What happens when Blue Bonkers shows up? Blue Bonkers may not last long. "What is Blue Bonkers?" I feel like getting my coffee and Big Mac today and can drive 10min any direction to get it. I don't think anyone will be stopping in at Blue Bonkers. Wait & what's Blue Bonkers? Exactly. The only advantage with game content is people like new IP and innovation. The great thing about new games is word of mouth and people looking for something new. XBLA does the one thing that is great & it incubates and fosters some of this. Sure, there is a bunch of old arcade games and ports, but you still get to try them and most of them you are familiar with. XBLA lets you try before you buy. I think if Blue Bonkers let you take a bite of its hamburger or handed out free coffee to a first-time guest then they may have more customers. Unfortunately there is no way to track this kind of thing, yet XBLA can.

GP: Achievement Points are an important part of any 360 game but seem to be given out pretty randomly. With only 200 points in an XBLA title, how do you decide how to dispense the points and what guidelines are you given?

SM: Achievements are also a great part of XBLA. We like to mix this up. We give away some easy, some medium, and some ridiculously hard achievements. Obviously points reflect the level of difficulty. Microsoft was the first to build a real game community around multiplayer scores and friends for online. The first time I heard of XBLA I was knocking on their door. They had no idea who I was and where I came from (out of a hole). I just knew it was the future of game development and wanted to be a part of it---Community, Games, Everyone, Everywhere - Check please.

GP: How is price point determined and what is the difference is between a 400, 800 or 1600 point title?

SM: Primarily the price point reflects the scope of the project. A 400 point game, ($5.00 USD), would most likely be a port of a classic game or a smaller card game / board game that people are familiar with. Whereas a 1,600 point game, ($20.00 USD), would involve the player in many more hours of gameplay - 10 or more hours. They may often include more complexity in social interaction, multiplayer modes, or singleplayer story-telling. An innovative title may warrant a higher price point. Other price points fall in between these.

GP: How do the profits of a game get distributed? If a game is $10, what percentage do you guys get and where does the rest of it go?

SM: A little here a little there. I think I signed an NDA somewhere about this. Hopefully enough to recoup our cost and make you a new game!

GP: Microsoft recently announced that some of its poorer selling XBLA titles are going to be delisted. As a company that makes XBLA titles how do you feel about this policy?

SM: It's their channel. I think whatever they do is what they feel is best for their business. Maybe a separate location called, retired, with a 2.00 to 4.00 price tag? Ultimately this mindset leads to a higher quality game deck, which benefits both developers and gamers.

Want even more insider info from XBLA developers? Check out GamePro Arcade's interview with Load Inc.'s Denis Bourdain.

• << prev
• next >>