The Relationship with the Publisher:
How to Handle the Master Without Becoming the Slave

This session was intended for independent game developers, although publishers were allowed to take part.

I started off each session by letting folks know that while I have experience in the industry, I am not an expert - and that I don't believe there is an 'expert' independent game developer, since the landscape changes so quickly.

I then covered the guidelines for discussion:

Why this roundtable topic?

What this is not:

What this is:

I then ran through the five topic areas for discussion (listed below) that cover the developer-publisher relationship from conception to completion (or continuation). In the first roundtable session we covered the first two areas and touched on the third. I announced that the second session would be 'part two' for anyone who wanted to come again. The second session covered parts three through five. I compiled the questions that brought about the best information from all five topics and ran through all of them in the third session.

In addition, I collected names of lawyers with which developers have had satisfying experiences. I also collected business cards from anyone who would like that list e-mailed to them.

The sessions ranged from 30 to 40 people. The first session consisted of 1/3 publishers and 2/3 game developers. In the next two, there were only a few publisher representatives.

The questions that I asked, and the information that folks replied with, are listed under each of the following topics.


Promoting Your Game Concept (Initiating Interest)

Do you need a five page concept doc to land a contract, or a full working demo?

Some sort of working demo is usually required, unless you have either the track record or reputation to get away with less. However, in many cases, even if you do sell the concept only with a document, the publisher funds an initial project phase before the full project is given the green light. Many developers have found a way to get something running, even though it was not being funded. It seemed to be taken for granted as part of the business. What demos actually consist of varies wildly, from art concepts to prototypes to working engines. Very few developers were in the position of nearly completing a game before going to the publisher. Sometimes the producer was satisfied with a concept doc, but marketing or the higher level management needed to see something running, even if it was just a cinematic, before giving the green light.

Other than a working demo, what are the most important factors in landing a contract?

By far reputation is the key, both for the quality of the past titles and the reputation in the industry. Agents were considered to be good for getting in the door of places where the developer has not been able to do so on their own, or for managing minor details if they were close to the publisher when the developer was not. However, virtually all of the publisher representatives and the developers who had used agents stressed that agents were a negative factor if used any more extensively. This is a business that wants to be working face to face.


Negotiation of Contract

Do you negotiate yourself or hire a lawyer?

Nearly everyone has at least one person at the company who is competent (they believe) to negotiate contracts. However, everyone unanimously agreed that it was vital to have a lawyer who knows this business to confer with on the particulars. Good lawyers have seen many contracts, know what to fight for, and may even know what certain publishers are willing to give. However, do not rely on lawyers to do everything. Make certain that someone at the business fully understands the legal ramifications, because some contract points can be very dangerous for developers to accept. Publisher representatives, when asked about the stupidest things they have seen developers accept, indicated these: failure to have marketing funds earmarked in the contract for the game, signing multi-contract deals (usually) and not pushing to have the royalty rate increase after the publisher's breakeven point.

How long does it usually take to get a contract signed?

Three to six months seemed to be normal. There were isolated instanced that were up to a year, or as quickly as a week or two, but these were the exception. Most developers were not worried about the signing delay though, since it is common to get a letter of intent signed early - once the money and royalty rates have been determined. This means that payments are not held up (in theory) even though the contract is not complete. A few developers were unable to get funded until the contract was done, and had to walk away from the deal because it was taking too long and they couldn't afford it. One publisher admitted that they sometimes held up the contract process intentionally in order to have more time to see how things went with early development.

What usually holds up the signed of a contract?

There were many answers to this, including negotiating ancillary rights, escape clauses and insuring certain marketing funds for the project. One of the most common, however, was the lawyers not being available (on either side, but most often the publisher's).

Do you feel like you have any leverage when negotiating, or is it all in the hands of the publisher?

Unless the publisher was REALLY interested in the title, or multiple publishers were bidding on it, the developer usually feels like they don't have much leverage. However, some mentioned that when they pushed things a little bit, they discovered that they had more than they realized.


Working with Producers

Who handles communication with your producer?

Most companies are set up with an internal producer who is the direct link to the external producer. In many smaller companies that person has other duties, but nearly all agreed that their focus on the producer role needed to be their primary job. Nearly all arrangements were set up where the producers did virtually all of the inter-company communication, except in certain (approved) situations. Every developer (and publisher) stressed that the relationship with the producer was absolutely vital. They gave great attention to making certain that the relationship was solid enough such that any news could be said and then dealt with in a professional way. There were anecdotes about producers who actively told their developers (or actively implied to them) that they were not willing to listen to talks of slippage.

How often does your producer visit?

This ranged from once every month, to once every quarter. The group was pretty split on which they preferred. The extremes were not liked, in the rare cases where the publisher was down the street and visited every week, or when they only came out one time during the course of the project. Visit lengths ranged from one to four days, and it was commonly mentioned how disruptive they were. Some developers insist that the visits occur the week after a milestone has been sent out, and thus not during a crunch time and when there is something recent to talk about. In general, people liked the visits, since they were a good time to deepen the relationship. Some said they went out of their way to show the producer a good time.

How do you draw lines with your producers?

Time and time again it was said that the lines of who is doing what on the project needed to be clearly outlined up front. When a producer decided to get too involved in the design process, folks wanted an agreement to fall back on to say, "Look, you hired us because we are game designers. We will take your feedback into account, but creating something fun is subjective - and it is what you are hiring us to do." Despite that, when pushed, folks all said that they really didn't have anywhere to fall back, unless the relationship was getting really bad. In general, they would need to do what was demanded, but it seriously hurt the relationship. Some experienced developers mentioned their frustration at dealing with "23 year old producers that were just promoted from testing" who were trying to "make their mark" on the industry and instead ended up insulting the design team and screwing up the project. Sometimes this meant the cancellation of the project. Developers and publishers commonly acknowledged that there is a serious lack of good producers in the industry. It is commonly agreed upon that it is a bad thing to have a project move between producers in mid-stream. The new producer often wants to put a new spin on it, or make some change to show how much better the project will be now that they are producing it. Some developers complained when this occurred to them. Only rarely were those complaints successful.

Do you have control over who your producer will be?

Many developers sold their game to a team at the publisher that included a producer, only to then have the project given to a different producer who didn't even like the title (or who wanted to change it right off the bat). Some developers, especially if they have worked with that publisher before, have been able to 'interview' available producers to pick theirs. When things have really gotten bad, a couple developers have complained to the upper management at the publisher (with a very reasoned, solid explanation of the problems) and their producer was fired. Generally, nothing can be done to change your producer, however, so treat the relationship as a number one priority.

What do you want a producer to do for you?

The number one thing is to be honest about what is happening at the publisher's house. If there is a chance that the project will be cancelled for any reason, or will be given a major change in direction, tell the developer right away. Just as the publisher's producer wants honesty from the developer, the developer wants the same in return. At all times, the producer should be the developer's representative with all the publisher's departments. The producer needs to be very responsive, and not change directions at the drop of a hat. The producer needs to be able to hear bad news and deal with it constructively.

What other contacts are important at the publishers?

It is vital that the two bosses of the two producers are also in touch. It is a big mistake for the developer to call the big boss at the publisher only when something has really gone wrong. Marketing must be made friends with, and kept in the loop from early on. If the producer isn't doing a good job of making sure that happens, the developer must do so.

Handling Unexpected Demands

What demands have been made on you that were not agreed on in the contract?

The list is very common: a fiscal or Christmas deadline is suddenly imposed, demos are asked for which were not planned, marketing materials are needed without warning, or (in the worst case), the publisher decided that the entire game's premise should be changed. When confronted with these, most folks indicated that the best thing to do is to sit down with the right folks at the publisher and clearly lay out what this will mean to the schedule, and what additional funding (if any) will be needed to do it. Obviously, demos need to be scheduled from the beginning of the project. Many developers are sick of doing demos early in the project, as they are much more of a waste of time, and they might even make the game look worse than the finished product (since often the cool effects are added late). Many insist on not doing playable demos until after Alpha. Marketing needs to be involved at the very beginning so they can point to the whole project schedule and indicate what types of things will be needed when. These can then be negotiated early rather than at the last minute. If the publisher is not set up to bring marketing in early, the developer should push for at least this initial help.

Making the Relationship Work

What are the most important things to do, other than creating a #1 hit, to make the publisher happy?

Quality work, professional attitude, honesty in all situations.

What are the most important things for a publisher to do to keep a developer happy?

Honesty, flexibility, responsiveness, desire to build a relationship, acting as a partner and not as a boss.

Back to GDC Archive

Copyright © 2000 CMP Media Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy