From: seah@ee.rochester.edu (David Seah)
Subject: Re: Royalties/Profits
Organization: Univ of Rochester, College of Engineering and Applied Science
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:25:57 GMT

Warning!  Opinions (not industry facts) follow:

In article <1992Dec21.210345.20236@rose.com> colin.buckley@rose.com (colin buckley) writes:
>Date Entered: 12-21-92 15:54
>My partner/artist and I recently finished a game and got into an argrument
>over the split of the profits.
>[...]
>My Graphic artist wanted 50% for the basic concept and the graphic
>work.

If this was your equal partner, then 50% is not unreasonable.   I would
expect him to also accept 50% of the responsibility of distribution and
support, though.  

>Sob story below related to the above, read at own risk...
>[Game completed, Shock at 50% demanded, 1/2 week of work and original
> concept.  Compared to 3 weeks of programming and minor graphics work
> plus menial conversion labor, sound, etc.  Oh, the troubles of game
> programmers!  The artist doesn't get it.]

Ask yourself if you are paying for time or for the product.  If the graphics
he has done for you is of the quality you want, by all means give him the
50%.  Frankly, if your game has crappy graphics, you're sunk.  Despite
all the cool things you have done, it really is the visual impact that
will make the first impression.  The lasting impression will be formed
by the game play, which is your responsibility.  If you have both, your
game has a far better chance at succeeding that one with only half the
equation.  In my estimation as a once active programmer and now active
computer artist, both the graphics and the coding are equally important.
These have to be integrated together seemlessly, and it requires effort
on the part of both artist and programmer.

It may seem unfair that the artist/partner wants 50% for his work.  In
the long run, though, you have the better deal.  You can reuse your code
in future games...this is not a contribution by the artist.  You can probably
use the same game engine three or four times, recouping your development 
effort.  The artist can't really reuse his work at risk of damaging his
reputation (at least I wouldn't).  Good art is worth paying for.  If you
can get away with giving him a percentage of the take, that's a deal.
He could have charged you anywhere from $10 to $15 dollars an hour based
on an estimation of the difficulty of the work, time requirements, etc
etc.  And that's DIRT CHEAP for this kind of work, especially if the artist
is good.  If he's not, then dump him and use someone else who can deliver
value to you on the next game.  If you use the same game engine, you can
whip it off pretty fast.

If he's a friend of yours, though, you might be in trouble :-)  Spell out
your expectations next time before you start.  If your partner wants
50%, he has to earn it in a manner that you BOTH agree on.

>We're offering source as the game is marketed as shareware, and if I wasn't
>expecting more registrations for the source which I get all profits
>for, he definately has the better deal.

Again, you can't go off of just time.  He has a skill that you lack...you
have to contract out for it.  You have a skill that he obviously doesn't 
have (it's annoying how many artists don't appreciate the work that goes
into programming).  Be thankful that you didn't have to shell out $50 for
every screen up front.  If you have both performed your jobs well, you have
a good chance of making a few bucks.
-- 
Dave Seah ^..^   | Graduate MSEE, University of Rochester, New York           |
                 | Apple II Graphics & Sound Forum Consultant, America Online |

[Internet] seah@ee.rochester.edu, AFCDaveS@aol.com   [America Online] AFC DaveS
Newsgroups: rec.games.programmer