Bullet Skater was picked up by Chillingo early on in development - it turned out to be a premature decision. There were negotiations for a few weeks, then I signed an agreement which included a $1000 advance, and a 70/30 profit share in my favor after the revenue split from apple. Soon after, the game was announced at GDC 2009, and a press release was sent out. By the time the game finally hit Golden Master in December, Chillingo had become even more successful, and was no longer willing to publish the game as is. To be honest, I don't blame them entirely. Bullet Skater has some rough edges - lets call it an old school App Store title. I did however find their cancellation to be very unprofessional (the advance money stayed with us however, which was nice). Hope you enjoyed this little story, James
$1000? That's it?! No wonder Chillingo had so many products under their banner. I know what business I'm getting into next.
dont mean to sound too cynical but seems like the publishers main job is to crack the whip and tell you to keep making your game better until they can make money off of it. Publisher made a lot more sense when they actually had to box and ship your game to retail now not so much.
Absolutely agree with you on that one! But it seems they've made their way into this industry and now people recognize them as a brand. I know people all over the place who thinks Chillingo made Cut the Rope and Clickgamer made Angry Birds, when in reality, indies and devs know they didn't. But the majority of the market don't. The only option we as indies have is to just go at it on our own, work as hard as we can and make the best game possible that people will play. And eventually it might be indies ruling the charts.
well, takes money, time, and cooperation, which are all often very difficult things to come by (plus marketing savvy, fortuitous timing, etc) I'll still vouch for publishers in that they know the lay of the land a lot better than your average dev, when it comes to business. If you are a more biz-minded dev (you have to be) then of course it's to your advantage to stick to handling things yourself. I still will argue that most developers aren't of that mind-set however, and not for any fault of their own.. this scene is still very new, and it attracts a certain type of character.
What's the deal with Angry Birds (Halloween) edition? I noticed it actually says Rovio as the developer .. Have they broke from Chillingo or have some sort of loop hole that allow them to release Angry Birds direct by changing the title?
That's true. I'm just learning marketing as I'm going and I can't draw up and build as much hype around a brand as much as they do. Of course they have degrees and experiences in that field while I'm going off what I read online. Definitely a learning experience and takes a lot of time and energy out of an individual who really just wants to make games
I wish it were that way but unfortunately it's not. I would much rather see indie teams joining up to combine forces than big publishers like Chillingo and EA.
Rovio owns Angry Birds. They only partnered with them to promote the first iPhone/iPad game, they are going to self-manage the IP from this point on.
one should check the reviews of the haloween edition. there you see what can happen if you go with a publisher. the actual developer has no face at all.. alot of customer think this is a direct ripp off and that they stole from chillingo.. and then there are thoose who moan that this is not an update to get the new theme and 45 levels for free.. they have to pay heavy 99cents
yeah there's a few complainers in there ("should have been a free update, or at least attach it to the main game for $ because I hate multiple icons") but even the majority of those whiners are still giving it 4 or 5 stars. There's no stopping Angry Birds!!!
Sounds like they're coming out with 1 1/2 times the revenue! ie/each person repurchases + 1/2 they made on the original publisher version. Can they just simply re-badge the game and skip the publisher like that? Isn't there some sort of contract/exclusivity/etc? Or once you make it with a publisher you can just drop their cut by releasing a slightly modified version? (if this is the case then why not go with a publisher and then just re-badge if you make it!)
it comes down to whatever the terms of the contract are, in each case. In recent interviews, Rovio has made it pretty clear that they own the IP and are not required to do any more dealings with that publisher beyond the two games they were already attached to (AB and AB for iPad). That leads me to believe that Chillingo was getting a fairly decent cut of the pie off the sales of those games. Now developer Rovio have this update where they get all the profit (minus Apple's 30% of course) and no one else to have to split it with. They risk pissing off their customer base a little (see whiners above) but overall it seems like a grand slam for them. It's a risk they can afford, for many reasons.
well at the end of the day its not really a risk.. they have now million of dollars at their hand. 6.5 mil units solds means 4.5 mil earned by chillingo.. depending on the cut they get, lets say 50:50 (probably more) they earned abit above 2 millions before tax. thats more than enough to cut you loose from any publisher. any deal publisher like chillingo will do will be covering a single title.. surely they tried to hold to rovio, but why should they. after the first hundred thousand units it should be clear that you don't need a publisher anymore. reaching millions. it will be the same with zeptolab, what reason would there be to stick with a publisher at such point? i can't see one..
This is great info. Its good to know that even if an indie does go with a publisher they can negotiate a lot in the contract. Re: cutting them loose. Might be a good option if you have a really good game, to go with them to get some recognition and earn enough $ to make your second game really polished without having to worry about $ and budgets too much.
I think that (bigger) pubs will be a little harsher in the dealmaking in the future, following all of this. Either they will want a bigger cut, or they will insist on multi-game deals/exclusivity/part or complete ownership of an IP given the &*@#^&*@ that has been going down. They'd be daft not to. They will take advantage of devs..
I'm a little late to this thread but I was also contacted by Chillingo a while back based on an alpha trailer I posted in these forums. They cut to the chase and asked for an adhoc build. I told them it really wasn't ready to be shown yet and asked for some ballpark numbers in the interim - I never heard back. Not a "here's an NDA so we can talk numbers" not an "ok, contact us when it hits beta" - nothing. That kinda soured my impression of them. Felt like a do as we ask or hit the road situation.
I doubt that. The app store is a different market than the classic retail market big publishers are used to work with. Why should a publisher sign a multi title contract based on a game that may or may not live up to their impression of success. This is a high risk for them too to be chained to a flop. They will not push money into a project that sees no income. On the other hand why should a developer give away their rights to the games ip? Current publishers on the app store don't fund your project. They dont give you a million to earn them 10 back. They invest a small amount off money using their "expertise" in public relations. This is not a a traditional market where one developes a proof of concept and contacts a publisher to get their project funded. Publishers are not needed in the app store. If ones game is good enough in the first time it will work on their own. If its not good , well then its not good, a publisher won't change much about it. One should realise the publisher on the app store are still newbies, they can't predict the new doodle jump nor are they actualy developing them. YOU ARE! Probably, so take your chance and good luck.
