Skip to Content
 

Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

35 replies [Last post]
GeminiWeb
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2008

Okay, I decided that I'd like to see if I could interested any publishers in my GDW'd High Council of Evensford.

A while back (while still playtesting) I e-mailed Rio Grande, requesting submission guidelines and were told (very promptly though) that they already had a full schedule. (However, I didn't really make any specific references to the game, perhaps naively expecting to include those in the formal submission).

Then I sent an e-mail to Mayfair (providign more details about the game) and never heard anything.

More recently, I filled in the submisison form at Days of Wonder and were told (within their specified 3 weeks) that they were 'totally swamped' and would have to pass on my offer.

Looking back, I don't think I have 'sold' the game well enough to date and will work on that (and yes, I have the Game Inventors Handbook), but any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Also, any suggestions for possible publishers? There are a few good german companies around, but I in no way fluent in german ...

Thanks
Bill

lar
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

You might want to check out Fundex games (the maker of Phase 10). Their website is:

http://www.fundexgames.com/

They are a smaller company located in Indianapolis IN. They have a form you can download on the website to submit ideas.

Keep trying and good luck!

Lar

GeminiWeb
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

Thanks lar,

I'll think about them although, looking at the site, they might be better for some of my ideas aimed at childrens game (they don't seem to have much in the Eurogames type) ...

Also ... from the Uberplay website (with my bolding):

Quote:
Uberplay Entertainment is always on the lookout for the next breakout game! We have focused our company to only printing a limited amount of games per year so that we can focus on creating the marketing, PR, advertising and unique distribution channels necessary for us to have broad success with our games.

Right now we are not accepting any new game submissions, but once we do, we will post more information on this page.

Anonymous
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

You might want to try http://cactusmarketing.com .

(It's been a while since I've touched base with them, though...not sure what they're looking for these days, but they'll send you a current list in the submission packet).

Good luck!

Joe_Huber
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

GeminiWeb wrote:
Okay, I decided that I'd like to see if I could interested any publishers in my GDW'd High Council of Evensford.

A while back (while still playtesting) I e-mailed Rio Grande, requesting submission guidelines and were told (very promptly though) that they already had a full schedule. (However, I didn't really make any specific references to the game, perhaps naively expecting to include those in the formal submission).

While Rio Grande is the primary publisher on some games, it's a rather small number; Jay's real business is in producing English editions of German games. While I wouldn't rule out Rio Grande, I think other publishers offer better chances...

Quote:
Then I sent an e-mail to Mayfair (providign more details about the game) and never heard anything.

I've received replies from Mayfair, but they tend to be slow. How long have you been waiting?

Quote:
Looking back, I don't think I have 'sold' the game well enough to date and will work on that (and yes, I have the Game Inventors Handbook), but any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Only something very simple -

Most games won't ever be published. The more games you've designed and are attempting to sell, the better the chances that one of them will be picked up.

I believe that the majority of those that are published go through multiple publishers before landing with the one that chooses to publish the game. The ability to hear "no" and keep going better your chances of eventually hearing "yes".

Quote:
Also, any suggestions for possible publishers? There are a few good german companies around, but I in no way fluent in german ...

You don't need to be. The submission people for all of the reasonably-sized German publishers speak English.

Joe

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Re: Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

Joe_Huber wrote:

Only something very simple -

Most games won't ever be published. The more games you've designed and are attempting to sell, the better the chances that one of them will be picked up.

I believe that the majority of those that are published go through multiple publishers before landing with the one that chooses to publish the game. The ability to hear "no" and keep going better your chances of eventually hearing "yes".

I am sure this is quite sound advice. It seems, though, that in GW's case, the issue isn't even with his game so much as that companies won't even look at his game in the first place because they're not accepting submissions at all. I would think that would be an even more frustrating outcome than "we looked at your game, and it stinks", because there's no finality; you're in a kind of limbo state.

That said, my advice, coming from a designer who hasn't published, or even submitted yet, is to try something else. Broaden your search a bit; look at other companies. It's no surprise that you found dead ends with Rio Grande, Uberplay, and Days of Wonder; I would think that everyone wants to publish with those companies, because their products are so good. There must be other publishers out there who might be less of a designer-magnet, and perhaps they're accepting. Look around a bit! And incidentally, the wisdom I've heard seems to be to try to target your product to a company into whose line your game would be a good fit.

You might also try to submit the game in the Hippodice competition; that company is judged by industry pros, and doing well could give you an inside track to publication.

Bill's concern, though, seems to me to raise an interesting issue; the supply of game designs seems to have far exceeded the demand for them from companies. That would suggest that starting a new company could be a good thing, since one would have no shortage of designs to choose from. BUT, the viability of a company hangs on its ability to sell the games to the public. So it seems like an interesting time for designers. My hope is that demand for games from the public will ramp up fast enough that good games by "undiscovered" designers can still get into the market, and that it doesn't become a situation where companies will only publish a game if your name ends with Moon, Knizia, Faidutti, or Kramer.

-Jeff

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Re: Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

jwarrend wrote:

Bill's concern, though, seems to me to raise an interesting issue; the supply of game designs seems to have far exceeded the demand for them from companies. That would suggest that starting a new company could be a good thing, since one would have no shortage of designs to choose from. BUT, the viability of a company hangs on its ability to sell the games to the public. So it seems like an interesting time for designers. My hope is that demand for games from the public will ramp up fast enough that good games by "undiscovered" designers can still get into the market, and that it doesn't become a situation where companies will only publish a game if your name ends with Moon, Knizia, Faidutti, or Kramer.

-Jeff

I sometimes wonder if I/we didn't take on this interest about 8 to 10 years too late. The very same popularity that got a lot of us interested in game design is dooming our designs because of market saturation. Unfortunatley, until designer games go 'mainstream' (read: Walmart, Toys R' us, Target, etc.) I'm afraid we may find the competition very, very tough.

-Darke

Joe_Huber
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

jwarrend wrote:
I am sure this is quite sound advice. It seems, though, that in GW's case, the issue isn't even with his game so much as that companies won't even look at his game in the first place because they're not accepting submissions at all. I would think that would be an even more frustrating outcome than "we looked at your game, and it stinks", because there's no finality; you're in a kind of limbo state.

Well, you are and you aren't. A rejection's a rejection's a rejection; they just come in different stages, and potentially allow more room for later re-submission. Even publishers who aren't accepting submission are probably scanning for something that blows them away...

With some publishers, I've always been asked to see a prototype when I've sent in the rules and/or an overview. With others, I haven't - Out Of The Box only found one game (of three) close enough to be worth considering, and I'm 0/2 with Amigo.

The advice remains the same - keep plugging away. One of the earliest games I designed is Cola Wars. It took until late last year before any publisher agreed to give it a look. Of course, no one's decided to publish it and it's not with any publisher right now, so there's no "happy ending" - but there rarely is anyway.

Joe

GeminiWeb
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

First of all, thanks everyone for all your comments. I appreciate your comments very much.

I should also mention, which I haven't but will, that while money is nice, I'm more looking for 'hey, someone else thinks my game is worth publihing' (if, of course, thats true).

Joe_Huber wrote:

Quote:
Quote:
Then I sent an e-mail to Mayfair (providing more details about the game) and never heard anything.

I've received replies from Mayfair, but they tend to be slow. How long have you been waiting?

About mid-May. I didn't formally submit the game though, but gave a quick (1 paragraph) overview and asks for any submission guidelines they might have.

Joe_Huber wrote:

Quote:
I believe that the majority of those that are published go through multiple publishers before landing with the one that chooses to publish the game. The ability to hear "no" and keep going better your chances of eventually hearing "yes".

Agreed. I think I'm also suffering a bit from a limited knowledge of the available publishers. Also, as you say later, I also need to think about how I can improve interest in my 'introduction' e-mail.

jwarrend wrote:

Quote:
It seems, though, that in GW's case, the issue isn't even with his game so much as that companies won't even look at his game in the first place because they're not accepting submissions at all. I would think that would be an even more frustrating outcome than "we looked at your game, and it stinks", because there's no finality; you're in a kind of limbo state.

Exactly right! (It worries me sometimes that jwarrend seems to be thinking my thoughts so closely sometimes ...). In fact, I can accept it if people think my game stinks because in a bizarre sort of way, that's all part of the feedback I want in going through this process.

jwarrend wrote:

Quote:
You might also try to submit the game in the Hippodice competition; that company is judged by industry pros, and doing well could give you an inside track to publication.

Good advice. Maybe I don't need a publisher to tell my game stinks after all! ;)

Anonymous
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

I’m no pro but I have plenty of experience with the letters N and O and a little less experience with "still under consideration" here are some tips i have gathered over my year of aggressive game submitting.

Aim high first
Face it, unless your a big name you can kiss your dreams of getting in with a "big " publisher good buy, but you need experience with how to sell your board game and the big companies have this processes steamed lined, look on their web pages and (normally in the "corporate" or "company" section) find their submissions guidelines, typically the first thing they want to know about your game are the things you are likely to find on the side a game's box, player ages, player #s, play time, and the like. Once you have a good sales description of your game you can start pitching to smaller companies that will be impressed with your refined introduction.

Be Concise
I get the feeling that most people talk about how much their game will sell or how fantastic it is. You are submitting to business men, be as concise to them as you are when writing your rule books. The less you make them read the quicker they will get back to you.

Get PDF's
I had some major fumbles in my first submissions just because of my file type when companies asked for rules. Be simple use your favorite program to make rules and then use a converter program to package it as a PDF. Have your rules ready to be sent by the time you send off your first e-mail, I once was able to correspond with a company three times in one day because I had my files ready.

Never stop making new games
The more darts you throw at the board, the more likely you will hit a bulles eye

Never stop submitting
That game you never really thought was good might just be the one to get picked. So never stop looking for companies to show your game to. No just mean that you just need to try again.

So that’s my spiel.

GeminiWeb
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

Happy now ....

After my initial failed attempts to attract the interest of a publisher to even ask for a prototype or look at the rules, I regrouped with my friends at BGDF and drew upon their strength.

I sent another e-mail out. The company asked for the rules, saying the game sounded interesting! So I sent them the rules and 2 days later, I had a request for a prototype! I have now achieved my goal of making a game that sound interesting enough for a publisher to ask for a prototype (after having read the rules!).

Surely it doesn't get any better than this!

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

GeminiWeb wrote:

I sent another e-mail out. The company asked for the rules, saying the game sounded interesting!

Which company did you write this time?

- Seth

GeminiWeb
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

sedjtroll wrote:

Quote:
Which company did you write this time?

Face2Face games ... http://www.face2facegames.com/

Phalanx Games also showed some interest but were too busy until after Essen (and invited me to write back if I was still interested then)

Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

GeminiWeb wrote:
Surely it doesn't get any better than this!

Not true. They could publish the game. That would be better. The game could become a sensation. That would be better.

Still, congratulations! You've jumped over one big hurdle. Whether they take the game or not, it validates what you're doing. It means you're on the right track. Keep after it. And keep us posted on the progress.

Steve

Anonymous
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

GeminiWeb wrote:
I sent another e-mail out. The company asked for the rules, saying the game sounded interesting! So I sent them the rules and 2 days later, I had a request for a prototype! I have now achieved my goal of making a game that sound interesting enough for a publisher to ask for a prototype (after having read the rules!).

Congratulations!! You are living proof that determination and perseverance pay off!

RookieDesign
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

In the same kind of idea, sligthly different topic.

Do anybody know if the Board Game designer forum is being visited (even silently) by producers ?

The Games Designer Workshop seems to be a good place to scout new good designer.

I guess they're too busy.

Just a tought

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

RookieDesign wrote:
...Do anybody know if the Board Game designer forum is being visited (even silently) by producers ?

The Games Designer Workshop seems to be a good place to scout new good designer.

I guess they're too busy.

...

Not sure if BGDF is being taken seriously right at this point and time by the bigger companies. Maybe down the road something can be done to put BGDF on the radar. Not sure what that something is, but it would be great to get a few of the "top dogs" looking at our hard work and even the day to day ideas of many people on this site.

phpbbadmin
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2013
Well

I know of at least one person from a major US game company who visits here, and at least two other from smaller companies. I don't think it's so much a problem of getting us on the radar as it companies are already overrun with with an excess of game ideas. I.E. They don't have the time to go hunting for possible new games; they've got a line leading from their door and around the block! Since it's a publisher's market right now, they don't need to go scouring for any ideas. I've said it before and I'll say it again, until designer games go mainstream in the US, we will be fighting against each other tooth/nail for those precious publication slots.

-Darke

Zzzzz
Zzzzz's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/20/2008
Re: Well

Darkehorse wrote:
I know of at least one person from a major US game company who visits here, and at least two other from smaller companies. I don't think it's so much a problem of getting us on the radar as it companies are already overrun with with an excess of game ideas. I.E. They don't have the time to go hunting for possible new games; they've got a line leading from their door and around the block! Since it's a publisher's market right now, they don't need to go scouring for any ideas. I've said it before and I'll say it again, until designer games go mainstream in the US, we will be fighting against each other tooth/nail for those precious publication slots.

-Darke

Very true... I did not think about it from that angle.

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Re: Well

Darkehorse wrote:
I know of at least one person from a major US game company who visits here, and at least two other from smaller companies.

Can you tell us who they are so we know who we're talking to? :) I think I know at least one of them...

Quote:
until designer games go mainstream in the US, we will be fighting against each other tooth/nail for those precious publication slots.

Which is why more games need to at least try to catch the attention of the mainstream market... Frankly I'm suprised (and maybe disappointed) that Knizia's LotR's game didn't put a bigger dent in that market. It's too bad that game didn't license artwork from the movie, I think it might have done better that way in the mainstream.

Maybe what we need to see is more 'stepping stone' games, simple strategy games with uncomplicated mechanics and completely saturated with theme. Something that would appeal to the average joe at first glance, but offers more choices than "Sorry!" and "LIFE" and more time/effort economy than "Monopoly" and "Axis and Allies".

What do you think? Who here has worked on (or IS working on) such a game?

Scurra- do you think All For One is too complicated to fill this void? It probably is, even though the theme might be a good one to actually interest mainstream buyers.

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Re: Well

sedjtroll wrote:
Maybe what we need to see is more 'stepping stone' games, simple strategy games with uncomplicated mechanics and completely saturated with theme. Something that would appeal to the average joe...

Heh, "Stepping Stone Games" could be a good name for a company specializing in these kinds of games- dedicated to bridging the gap and bringing 'evolved' gaming to the masses.

:)

RookieDesign
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: Well

sedjtroll wrote:
What do you think? Who here has worked on (or IS working on) such a game?

I'm working on a very simple play mechanic with a lot of theme. To be honest I like to play the game I design, but I was never flabergasted by it. That's why I sending it to the GDW, trying to find ideas to spice it up.

I voluntarly simplify my rules so it can appel to the largest possible crown. I also design thinking about production cost. Unfortunatly, I had to compromised a bit to make the game more sellable.

I haven't contacted anybody yet. I more planning on trying a couple of board game competition later on this year. I think I will have a better reception from the producer if I win such competition.

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Re: Well

sedjtroll wrote:

Which is why more games need to at least try to catch the attention of the mainstream market... Frankly I'm suprised (and maybe disappointed) that Knizia's LotR's game didn't put a bigger dent in that market. It's too bad that game didn't license artwork from the movie, I think it might have done better that way in the mainstream.

I agree that LotR should have done better, but I for one am incredibly glad they used John Howe's artwork rather than screenshots from the films. It's interesting; if I were Knizia, and given the choice of either have gorgeous illustrations and lower sales, or pictures of Viggo Mortensen and Sean Astin and huge sales, it's a no-brainer for me. I don't think designers actually get to make those choices, so it's something of a moot point, but I think the salient point is that while more commercial success would be great, there are some things I'd not be willing to give up just to have games become more successful...

Quote:

Maybe what we need to see is more 'stepping stone' games, simple strategy games with uncomplicated mechanics and completely saturated with theme. Something that would appeal to the average joe at first glance, but offers more choices than "Sorry!" and "LIFE" and more time/effort economy than "Monopoly" and "Axis and Allies".

I agree that "stepping stone" games would be great, but I fear they won't make much difference in the market. Monopoly and Life et al. sell so well because of their brand name, and fighting against that is a huuuuge uphill battle. It's not that equally suitable but "better" games haven't been developed; it's that, even if you put them on the shelves next to Monopoly, they won't move. I think the problem isn't really about the kinds of games being developed, so much as the desires of the typical buyer. The problem is getting people to take that first step; it's not, I don't think, the existence of that step in the first place.

That doesn't mean that I don't think developing "gateway" games wouldn't be a great idea; I think it's a terrific idea. Just that mainstream viability is going to have to involve more than the games themselves...

-Jeff

Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: Well

sedjtroll wrote:
What do you think? Who here has worked on (or IS working on) such a game?

I'm working on a detection game that combines some of the simplicity of Clue with mechanics that provide some interesting choices. I've got it themed more completely and more interestingly than Clue is themed. I specifically set out to bridge the gap between mass market game buyers and "gamers." So far I haven't bridged that gap successfully. The game, in its current form, stinks. I still think I can turn it around, though.

Of course, creating that game and getting a company to bite on it and getting the mass market to embrace it are three distinct phases.

Plodding along.

Steve

Anonymous
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

I would personally love to see a corssover interest from mass-marketed games to more designer games. Unfortunately it seems that most of the games in the big box stores are either old time standards or their spawn (think of the hundreds of --opolies) or an entertainment (movie/TV/singer) vehicle (which is more often than not a bunch of pictures from the source plasted onto a lame set of mechanics). Even the trendier places like Borders bookstores sell only the tie-in products and a handful of other mass-market standards.

I can't help but wonder if there is a way to transition buyers' interests more towards designer games. Would a stepping stone game (I agree that this would be a great name for a company!!) have to be too far towards the mass market end of the spectrum to attract the attention of the mass market? Would it serve to draw them closer to designer games or merely taunt a few dollars away from them (and end up on a shelf with Monopoly and Life)?

One of the first games I came up with is (I feel) a good candidate for a stepping stone game. It incorporates mechanics familiar to the mass market gamers (roll and move, buy and sell commodities, collect sets), but with more mature set collection and auction mechanics. I worked it towards a fun playable state, and never went on from there. My tastes have grown more towards the designer end of things. I only pull out the game to work on it here and there as a distraction or if my playtesters want something lighter for the week.

Of course I agree that it should be possible for more stepping stone games to gently draw mass market gamers towards the designer end, but the market is so entrenched in the familiar that it will take a LONG time to coax them away.

Verseboy
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Re: Well

jwarrend wrote:
It's not that equally suitable but "better" games haven't been developed; it's that, even if you put them on the shelves next to Monopoly, they won't move. I think the problem isn't really about the kinds of games being developed, so much as the desires of the typical buyer. The problem is getting people to take that first step; it's not, I don't think, the existence of that step in the first place.

I mostly agree with this statement, but I think more can be done. As I said above I'm working on a Clue-like game that is better than Clue. At various turns I've found myself toning down my instincts for what I would want in the game in order to try to create for my intended audience. The first topic in TiGD was Roll and Move. My perception is that it was generally thought to be a lower-level mechanic and that good games sought to eliminate it or radically improve it. I would contend with a game like Clue or Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit and on to infinity that Roll and Move is in peoples' comfort zone. People understand it. It's the way games are made. So in making my game, I have specifically left Roll and Move in. It makes it easier for people to decide my game isn't intimidating. Could I create a better detection game by eliminating the dice and finding another way to get around and ask questions? Sure, but I contend doing so would separate me a little more from my intended audience. What I want to do is have people make a positive connection: "Oh, it's like Clue." Then I hope they'll be willing to buy it and try it.

There are times to be true to a vision, and there are times to be a whore. Just look at Coppola or Altman or Sayles. Right now I'm in my Peggy Sue Got Married phase. Later I hope to be able to shift into my Godfather phase.

Steve

Anonymous
it's not the games...

I don't think that designer games have not hit US store shelves due to the games.

It's the marketing and the business model. The US used to have a few different game makers and they got gobbled up/consolidated. It's easier to make money on the same-old monopoly, so why bother putting new stuff out (from their perspective)?

When MB (or wizards of coast or Hasbro or whatever the heck the mega-conglomo-corps call themselves now) saw its party game business lagging I remember seeing commercials with the "Get together now" slogan pretty regularly. I'm not sure if it sold more copies of Scattagories and Pictionary type games but it did boost visability.

Meaning, if a company could get some designer games in front of people to think and ponder about ("Hey, that looks cool! I'm going to go to Toys R Us or Walmart to find it.") then the stores would stock it . But maybe it's a Catch-22, whereas stores won't put it on shelves without demand, and companies won't put the money to advertise/market without stores stocking it...

Maybe companies aren't going to be the ones who will lead the way, but an expanding user base? Kinda that 1 person gets 1 person to play, and they get another and another type of thing... And if everyone of us who does play designer games went into the big chain stores and asked about designer games ("Hey, I'm looking for Puerto Rico, this game, and I don't see it on your shelves.") that would at least plant the seed into the minds of those store managers there is a niche not being served. Hell, I'm sure Walmart would like to crush the little gaming shops that are scattered around... (then again, that's not such a good thing either, is it?)

Just some of my rambling thoughts...

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Re: Well

jwarrend wrote:

I agree that LotR should have done better, but I for one am incredibly glad they used John Howe's artwork rather than screenshots from the films... there are some things I'd not be willing to give up just to have games become more successful...

I'm not sure being "more successful" is what's at stake here. What I was talking about is more along the lines of getting people to try better games which they may well like but wouldn't think to try otherwise. In that respect, Knizia's LotR with pictures of Vigo Mortensen and Elija Wood could easily do a much better job of "hooking" a mainstream player-of-games. I'm differentiating from "buyer-of-games" here on purpose. Of course in the end people would have to buy a game before they can play it, so in a way it's the same thing. I guess my point is that if I were in charge of the artowrk for the LotR game, I would have used the movie pics- not because I wanted to make more money, but because I wanted more of the mainstream market to try a Knizia game (something differnt from the normal mainstream).

Because the game would be exactly the same, I don't feel at all like it's "selling out" to use pictures from the movie. I do agree that original artwork is nicer and classier, but can you reasonably expect people (remember we're talking about the mainstream here) to identify with original artwork in a game that's released coincident with the biggest cinematic undertaking ever? The game may as well not be about LotR at all- by specifically not tieing into a movie of that magnitude it's about the same as having a different theme alltogether.

Quote:
I think the problem isn't really about the kinds of games being developed, so much as the desires of the typical buyer. The problem is getting people to take that first step; it's not, I don't think, the existence of that step in the first place.

I totally agree, which is why I ask the question... is there anything we can do about that?

LotR was a great opportunity- everyone and their mother (literally) went to see these movies. Many hadn't read the books and some hadn't even heard of the Fantasy genre before that. Knizia's game probably isn't too complex or "difficult" for a mainstream audience either. It was a good candidate to get mainstream, potential gamers to try something a little more German. I think the main reason it didn't was because it didn't jump on the chance - in the mainstream LotR = Vigo, Elija, and Orlando.

Another good opportunity right now might be Harry Potter. I'm certain there are Harry Potter games on the market already, but I haven't heard much about them. I'm also pretty sure their not the kinds of games people like us would want to play. It might be a little late to capitalize on the Potter movies, but maybe with one of the next releases (there's going to be about 4 more, aren't there?) a German strategy game could hit the mainstream shelves disguised in a Harry Potter cloak. But I think that would only work if it embraced the movie- the stimulus of interest in the game in the first place- and license pictures of those actors.

In general and in principle I agree with you... all things being equal, original artwork is better than pictures of actors. But when reaching out to the mainstream and trying to capture their attention, all things are not equal. When the 3 biggest blockbusters ever are in theaters, all things are not equal. When "the mainstream" (a unit I'm referring to sort of abstractly and in third person) is interested in something as a whole, all things are not equal.

- Seth

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

An example of what I'm talking about.

Except that I think it may be a little too complex for a mainstream audience, Scurra's game (that I've been working on with him) All For One might be a good candidate for this kind of thing.

On the one hand, I think original artwork would be the best for this game, especially since there hasn't really been a major blockbuster movie to identify the Three Musketeers with. On the other hand, there WAS a Disney movie about 10 years ago, which is probably the most identifiable Three Musketeers movie (of the dozens that have been made). So perhaps artwork from that movie would be appropriate.

If a new version of the Three Musketeers were about to hit the theaters, with big names and blockbuster hype, I would probably suggest that licensing that would be the best way to go, even if my personal opinion would be to use original artwork.

- Seth

RookieDesign
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

I'm just will state some of my personal observation of the last few years.

For the last four years I subscribed to Game Developper magasine. This mag was oriented toward the computer game industry. (I know it's a board game forum but hear me anyway). The industry trend that you can see develop is quite simple. It's all about money. The gaming studio would prefer to develop sequel (Thief 3, Grand Thief Auto: Vice City, Diablo II, all sports game updated every year, just to mentioned few of them) or develop derived product. (Chicken run computer game, Harry Potter Quiddish game, Lord of the Rings). It's all about risk taking.

The same is true for the board game industry. Why invest 20k on designing a new product from a newcomer like people on this forum, when I can redraw the monopoly game (Vegas, Nasa, Harley Davidson style) and make tons of money.

Look at the Toy'R Us. What do you see on the shelves. I see only Hasbro games. It's brain washing. Why some mother would be interested to buy European game for his son. When all the people know is the same Monopoly game. Toy'R Us won't offer game if the sit on the shelves. What's the most likely to be sold. Monopoly (35$) or my game Homini Terra (55$ planned) ? It's a question of risk and money.

Why can't you find old Parker Brother game like Inventors with this nice dice roller with a bell? Where are all the nice game from Avalon Hill. It's simple reduce the offer of marginal product and this will increase your mainstream product.

It's not about how good a product is. It's about how much it can bring in your bank account. It's about providing a service to the public. It's about how much can I get from them.

It's a sad and dark view, but at least it's out of me.

Thanks for reading.
Take care.

Anonymous
Getting publishers to request a prototype ...

Great post!

Seth has split the "Reaching the Mainstream" aspect of this discussion into a separate thread found here. Maybe you could repost this under that thread?

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut