From Hellgatewiki.com

An archived Hellgate: London feature. See the Hellgate Archives for more.

Interview: Bill Roper on existing as an independent studio, AAA titles, and running his own business.
Date: February 17, 2004
Source: Gamespot.com

Gamespot Interview

GameSpot: Why choose to be an independent studio in these tough days and trying times--for any business enterprise--but especially one devoted to game design? What's behind your strategy?

Bill Roper: For us, the choice was in response to circumstance. As you know, we were looking for a higher level of involvement concerning the potential sale of the Vivendi Universal Games unit, and felt we had to go as far as tendering our resignations to try and open a direct line of communication with the decision makers in France. When they decided not to afford us that opportunity and chose instead to accept our resignations, we saw it as a chance for a new start. We are game developers by desire, as much as anything, so it only made sense that we would hit the ground running as best we could and start up a new studio.

In terms of where we see ourselves going, we intend to set up a computer games development studio composed of the very best individuals in the industry. We are dedicated to making products that set new standards in gaming through the fostering of a focused development group and by creating an immersive and compelling gameplay experience with single and multiplayer gamers in mind. We want to take what we’ve learned over the past 10 years in the industry and use that as a foundation for the next 10.

GS: What makes you believe you can succeed; can maintain cash flow; and can maintain an advantage in the area of technology--in an environment that almost begs for selling out to a monolithic publisher?

BR: That all depends on how you view what being an independent studio really means. There is no reason that you can’t maintain the desired level of control and creative vision while still working closely with a publishing partner. There are a lot of ways in which an independent developer can use technology already created by the publisher, such as engine-based tools, if you are licensing existing 3D technology, installers, billing systems, and so forth. This also holds true for personnel-intensive areas, such customer service, technical support, and QA testing. And there is also a lot to be said for the exchange of experience and design thoughts. Having other developers to bounce ideas off of and get feedback from can be an invaluable asset, especially if they have an expertise in an area where your company is not as experienced. The best case scenario for any independent studio is to find a publisher that shares your vision, is willing to support it, and offers expertise and assets in areas [where] you need them.

GS: Many industry vets say the advance-against-return formula is dead (from the POV of the developer). Reason: Costs to create competitive products are too great. What's your opinion?

BR: The costs for creating what we all think of as “AAA titles” are certainly large, and you have to be thinking in terms of selling at least 500,000 copies for the advance-against-royalty structure to make sense. The sliders that developers can push in their favor, in this regard, are finding ways to spend less on the game (so you have less to pay back) and trying to have a more favorable payback schedule, often expressed in a higher royalty rate from the publisher. The biggest factors that publishers look at are total project cost, how many units they have to sell to make back the investment, and the possibility of the game being a top-seller. Obviously, some of these factors are easier to determine (budget) than others (gamer tastes), and this is where a solid track record from the independent developer can be exceptionally important. I also think this is why a lot of the publishers look to grow internal teams that they can compensate and bill in different ways than external studios. Advance-against-royalty is a model that we may see change over the next few years, perhaps going more toward joint ventures or cofunding with more successful independent developers, but as of today, its how the majority of third-party games see funding.

GS: What are the three biggest challenges and the three most obvious benefits of being an independent shop?

BR: Challenges: Establishing all-new working relationships with a publisher, PR, marketing and sales teams; meeting the expectations of the fans of our previous games (and our own) for our new game; [and] balancing all the responsibilities and time requirements of starting up a new company with actually working on the game. Benefits: A small, focused team with a singular vision of purpose (we’re making one game); the excitement and challenge of creating a new company; [and] more ownership of your project and direct benefit from its success.

GS: Is an eventual purchase by an outside company part of your long-term strategy? Are you actively doing anything to prepare for that future?

BR: We have worked hard to try and keep our options open for the future. We have no idea now if we will want to sell our company in five or 10 years--or ever, for that matter. What we do want to do is be able to make that decision in [the most] unfettered environment as possible. Everyone at Flagship loves playing and making games, so if we ever decide to sell our company as an eventual business decision, we want that to happen when we want it to.