DragonWing GamesWelcome to DragonWing Games!
A new approach to the business of gamesDWG is positioned at the intersection between free, open source games, and the Internet economy. We aim to prove by demonstration that high quality games can be produced in an open, participatory way and sufficiently reward developers, while providing every piece of code and art under a completely liberal license to players! This site will provide basic justification for how this might be possible, begin to build a database of free/open source games, and share resources that will bring game designers, coders, artists and internet commerce together in the common purpose of making money while having fun!
How would profitable free/open source game development work?This section aims to address several fallacies that are currently common assumptions that might make you think DWG is attempting the impossible.
CheatingGames obscure their network protocols to prevent third-parties from creating clients that interoperate with the official servers. Games obscure their client programs to prevent gamers from modifying things that would give them an advantage over others. In a game that has source available you can't, and wouldn't want to obscure either the network protocol or the client's code. I like having options on what client I use, and I like being able to modify my client to improve it, and read its code to understand how it works. Obscuring the network protocol and the client code doesn't prevent cheating, but only provides a very temporary delay before cheat-creators can begin. The negative aspects of obscuring games strongly outweigh the benefits in cheat prevention, so other ways must be found to prevent cheating. For instance, strong cheat detection combined with good server administration. Or, more radically, simply change the definition of cheating so that it's no longer cheating. Create games that encourage client-side modification to the utmost degree. Game designers, you may not like this idea because it means your game is out of your hands. I've got news for you, it already is anyway. Regardless of how much you try to stop it, people will mod your game, they will make their own version, and they will play it. The game is in a computer, and by definition of a computer, the user has complete control over any information in it. By trying to make a game unmodifiable you are in denial about the power and fundamental purpose of computers. You're like the music industry before MP3 was popular, relying on some area remaining undeveloped technologically. If you create binary-only games today, what's to stop someone from coming out with the Ultimate Super Reverse Compiler tomorrow, that will deduce all the code back from your game and let the user modify it even more easily than your developer was able to create it in the first place? It's inevitable that reverse compiling technology will become more advanced, as all technology advances. This means that all games are going to be easily modifiable, anyway, so you might as well prepare for that day by joining DWG in making free games that encourage modification, now. I think the term is "disruptive change." Don't count on them not happening.
ServersGame operators keep servers completely closed and prevent anyone from running one, to ensure they get paid. To play you must connect to the official server, and to connect you must prove you bought the game (using a key distributed with it), or have a valid subscription. I enjoy having as many choices of server as possible. As a player becoming a developer, or as a developer respecting the players, I don't think players should be denied options as part of the business model of a game operator. Therefore, new business models for game operators must be considered and attempted until some succeed. If players have options, this will in turn benefit game operators. Yes, maybe the game operator will have less short-term profit, as other operators are also paid. But the game is going to last a lot longer because players will have diversity in their choices of server they play on, and if you can run a good server, gamers will play on it. PaymentWill anyone pay for a game that is completely free in every respect? No cost to download, no restriction on modifying it, making your own version, running your own server? Hell yes, I would, because that's the kind of game I want. It's by definition superior than the other kind. The problem most people have is with the concept of tips, or retroactive compensation. Go watch Pay It Forward, people. Have faith in your fellow humans. And when you do, you just might do some work in advance and ask for a tip when you're done. The great thing about tips is, people can choose how much your game is worth, and can give as many times as they want, and you might make more than if you picked a fixed price and sold a retail box. Oh yeah, and this means your game actually has to be good ;-) Since this kind of game is better for gamers, gamers must come out and support the concept, and say they would donate, give the developers some confidence, so that the kind of game they want can succeed.
Attracting developersGames are expensive to make. They take a long time and a lot of work, and require diverse talents. During development, bills need to be paid. Your typical closed-source, binary only game will cost multiple millions of dollars and at least 2 years to produce. Clearly, a different funding model is needed for a free game that has source released. Of course, without a central headquarters, stockholders, professional managers, accountants, lawyers and marketing staff, the overhead will be enormously less. We can leverage the benefits of the free model, which will not be available in a closed-source game. With an open project model, players can see the progress of the game on a daily basis. These players could fund the game on the same daily basis. Donations (call them pre-paid memberships) can be held in an account, reserved for developers with certain needed skills to perform certain tasks on a one-time basis, as many times as needed. The open log of such transactions (call it a reputation system) can be used to hold developers accountable, so if they don't continually produce good work they won't be paid any more. Or, perhaps the game's internals can be well-documented and organized so that its openness can leverage a greater number of people to effectivly contribute to each section of the game without conflict. After all, the size of a salaried team is limited by the funds on hand- what if other unpaid workers were allowed to contribute? This leads to the next point.
Organization over the InternetWith more people potentially working on a game at one time, the logistical problem arises of managing their interaction so they continue to make progress. I believe the Internet is evolving technologies to make this possible. Wikis, blogs, and other collaboration tools can work together. We can take advantage of the fact that there's no pressure to release the game at any particular time (after all, it's already in one continuous open beta), and stretch the development over more years than a traditional game company would be able to. The gamers aren't going to care what year the game was started, they only care what it's like right now. At some point, players will enjoy the game as it is. And, they won't be required to upgrade if they don't like the changes that are made next. I really hate it when game companies shove a patch down your throat.
SummaryI hope you are beginning to believe there's a chance that open development projects can be used to create open games and still reward the people involved, even maybe pay them. Game development is hard, and that's why we love it. If you build it, they will come, in other words, if you start doing what you love, making games that are open source and free, some way will come that can pay you for it. That's what this site is about, and I encourage you to check back later. You can e-mail me at the address below with your comments. P.S. Wow I can't believe I wrote that entire page without a single link. :) |
|