Unfortunately, this is not an April Fools Joke.

As mentioned in my previous entry, Governor Jennifer Granholm recently held a press conference to support a bill introduced in the Michigan Senate to restrict video game sales to minors. While the sentiment is worthy, the proposed legislation is abhorrent, as is the characterization of game developers as “those who would poison the minds of our young people” (as reported by Gamasutra).

The bill in question is Senate Bill 0249 (SB249), introduced by Hansen Clarke (et al) on February 24, notably without any known consultation with the existing game industry in Michigan. It is actually quite brief, amending the Michigan penal code by adding a section to Chapter XX (Children) as follows:

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
SEC. 143A.
(1) A PERSON SHALL NOT SELL OR RENT A RESTRICTED VIDEO GAME TO A PERSON WHO IS LESS THAN 17 YEARS OF AGE. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, “RESTRICTED VIDEO GAME” MEANS A VIDEO GAME RATED AO (ADULTS ONLY) OR M (MATURE) BY THE ENTERTAINMENT SOFTWARE RATING BOARD.
(2) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION IS GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT FOR NOT MORE THAN 1 YEAR OR A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN $5,000.00, OR BOTH.

I have neither the time nor the finger strength to detail all of the problems with this legislation in a single post, but I will make just a few quick points.

The first part of the bill specifies that a “restricted video game” is determined by a rating given by the ESRB, which is a private enterprise that (appropriately) charges publishers to rate video games. As currently written, a game developer could write and sell the most vile, disgusting title ever seen and as long as the publisher does not spend the money to have the game rated, it is legal to sell to minors. (I almost said “perfectly legal”, but a game that goes too far could potentially be subject to less specific morality laws.)

The logical conclusion is that there would be an attempt, either in debate or in future legislation, to close this loophole, which could really only be done by mandating game ratings. First Amendment concerns aside, this would require all game developers to spend significant money to have their games rated, which would put an unfair burden on independent developers yet have no noticeable impact on those publishers at which this legislation is directed.

The second part of the bill sets the penalties to be imposed on the “criminals” who would violate the law. It also transfers parental responsibility from those individuals who have the duty to monitor what their children play onto the primarily young people who work the registers at retail and rental stores.

It is important to note that the MPAA ratings used for movies in the United States is a voluntary system which works well, and there are no legal age restrictions on movies in Michigan. In other words (to put things into perspective), a theater operator who allows a seven-year-old child into a violent R-rated movie like Natural Born Killers or Kill Bill is not guilty of any crime, but a college student working at a store could be sent to jail for a year for renting Halo 2 to a 16-year-old.

To be clear, voluntary game ratings, as the ESRB and others are intended to work, are a good thing. They give responsible parents the information they need to begin to monitor the games their children play. However, they are supposed to be a tool, not a crutch. Attempts to legally restrict game sales, no matter how well-intentioned, are a bad idea.

Instead of faulty legislation, our government should be encouraging retailers and rental companies to impose or maintain policies based on voluntary game ratings. Better still, they should be encouraging parents to become more involved with their children, rather than just unfairly presenting video games as a scapegoat for all of society’s ills.

Despite the advance of technology that makes our world seem smaller, it is still important to take action locally.

On Sunday, March 20th, I had the privilege of addressing the Southern Michigan Chapter of the IGDA (International Game Developers Association) on the topic of independent game development and shareware marketing. I spoke about the differences between the retail and online software channels, and I also presented some information about the ASP Indie Games SIG. (A brief summary of the meeting is at http://www.igda.org/smichigan/Reports/Mar05/index.html.)

My talk followed a review of the 2005 Game Developers Conference, so it was almost a rebuttal of certain points of the GDC. Specifically, there was a call for a different distribution channel for games, without any recognition by the “mainstream” game industry that there already is a well-established online channel for software distribution. I started my speech by reading the absurd claims by one “expert” that such a channel did not exist before 5 years ago. Recommended reading on the topic is Thomas Warfield’s A Shareware Life, and specifically “Comedy at the Game Developers Conference“.

I presented a handout that showed highlights from a member survey conducted by the Association of Shareware Professionals. I drew attention to the fact that, of those who responded, more than 30% made almost all of their income from shareware (question #3), more than a quarter made $50K or more per year on shareware alone (question #4), and that 9 out of 10 had four or fewer people (question #6). Given that the poll also suggests that a large number of respondents were just getting started, these are fairly impressive numbers.

After the introduction and brief discussion of the survey results, I went into a laundry list of differences between retail and shareware game channels, having experience with both. I broke the list into the differences as experienced in development, publishing, distribution (and retailing), and by the consumer. I tried to balance the discussion, which generally comes down to creative control, quality of life, and a larger share of profits (with shareware) versus more funding, larger number of units sold, and greater recognition (in retail).

Before the end of the meeting, the chapter discussed its plans for promoting game development within the State of Michigan. Unfortunately, as if to make such a prospect much harder, our Governor, Jennifer Granholm, happened to make a public statement the following week in favor of recently introduced legislation that is opposed by the IGDA (a position that I strongly support). If nothing else, these events have really energized the chapter to get involved in advocacy for the local game industry, so we will be taking some steps toward that goal in the very near future.

In the context of content delivery, information can be communicated via either “push mode” or “pull mode”.

Push mode is when the publisher “pushes” the information directly to the consumer, and includes such methods as newsletters and direct mail. The publisher controls the content and the timing of the message, and conversely, the consumer has little or no control. It is convenient for the publisher, and it is also convenient for the consumer IF the information is desired. However, it is often inconvenient or, in many cases, downright annoying (“junk”).

Pull mode is when the publisher makes information available to the consumer, who then “pulls” the information from a known resource. This method includes web sites and newsgroups, as well as more traditional media such as print periodicals. It is convenient for the consumer, who controls when to obtain the information and, to a greater extent, which information to obtain or ignore. While publishing is just as easy, it is more difficult for a publisher to get and keep the attention of the consumer.

Both push and pull modes, using the above context, refer to information flowing from publisher to consumer, either the former doing the pushing or the latter doing the pulling. This is a convenient distinction to make when discussing a single service or protocol, but it does not apply so easily to the evolving concept of online communities. In this context, participants are (or at least can be) both publisher and consumer, which is a much more natural social structure. It is “give and take” instead of “master and pupil”.

Looking at this from the perspective of an individual in a community setting, it makes more sense to redefine “pushing” as providing information (i.e., publishing) and “pulling” as consuming information. Except when in a dialogue (or monologue), one is outnumbered. In other words, there are always more people pushing information than the single individual trying to assimilate all the data, which leads to the possibility of information overload.

In just over a decade of using the Internet and the prior decade using BBS forums, plus traditional research and learning throughout my life, I have realized that I have more ideas and plans than anyone could complete in a lifetime, yet I continue to spend valuable time on “pull” activities that are progressively less effective. Most of what I read online, after filtering/ignoring the junk, is information I already have but, ironically, have not found time to properly utilize. More and more, I find the benefits of such activities to be either inspiration to actually do something or just the hope of finding that diamond in the rough.

As an attempt to find a solution to this problem, I am embarking on an experiment with my own version of push mode. For the next six weeks, I will forego all general data research activities in favor of publishing more of my own work, plus utilizing information and implementing ideas I already have. I will still participate in forums where I have an integral role (such as the Action Solitaire beta forum) and in email dialogues, but I am going to greatly reduce the incoming flow of non-specific information. My goal is more tangible results and fewer unrealized ideas.

We shall see…

Pretty Good MahJongg 2.1 received 5 stars (out of 5) in a recent review by CNET.

The review and rating appear in our product listing at Download.com. The review is short and sweet, concluding, “Mah-jongg addicts are unlikely to find a more extensive package than Pretty Good MahJongg.“

When one is too close to a title to be objective, as I am with PGMJ, it is nice to get independent validation that the game is as good as one believes. Often when one finishes development on a project, one is so tired of the game that one needs a long break from it. I have had projects that I have hardly touched since my work on them was finished, but in this case, I still play and enjoy the game almost daily. Of course, with 55 different solitaire and puzzle games, plus 182 different tile layouts (at last count), there is lots of variety.

The web site for Pretty Good MahJongg is http://www.goodmj.com.

When things are happening quickly, it is difficult to take the time to write about them.

Over the last month, I have been really busy. Pretty Good MahJongg 2.1 was launched on January 18th. It now includes more tile layouts, the ability to dynamically use (formatted) bitmaps for custom tilesets, and the Pretty Good MahJongg Screen Saver. I am currently working on Action Solitaire 1.1 for release in the near future, and it will have a number of new solitaire games to play against the clock for points.

Our annual community service project, the Pack 224 Pinewood Derby (for which we wrote automated timing software) was run on January 20th, and this was a transition year as I turned the actual operations over to new volunteers, with some expected teething pains. I have been unable to fully turn over the leadership reins in the ASP, though, and I am now helping to build traffic and community in the brand new ASP Indie Games SIG. One post, an examination of the unfortunate direction of current DirectX development entitled “Where DirectX Lost Its Way“, is published in the current [February 2005] issue of ASPects.

January also marks the start of the ice racing season for the Michigan Ice Racing Association. For fun, we race automobiles wheel-to-wheel on frozen lakes around the area. I ran a silver 1989 Mazda 323 (#23) in Class A the first two weekends. Unfortunately, my car got just a little bent out of shape (literally) when I was passing to retake the lead in a race. I followed up the disappointing end to my racing season by getting a bad cold (unrelated) which kept me out of service for the better part of a week.

February marks the 10th anniversary of our first development contract, coming shortly after the decision to make a full-time commitment to the company. (I have not been employed anywhere else since that time.) This first contracted product was Z’art Photo Painter, a program/service which creates a custom paint-by-number canvas from a scanned photograph. The product was featured on television, appearing on QVC and Inside Edition.

It has been stated that a software title takes 10 years to become successful… [cue foreshadowing theme music]

Happy New Year!

Until a week ago, I was Chairman of the Board of the Association of Shareware Professionals. Before my term expired (terminated, so to speak), the final act of the 2004 Board of Directors was to pass my motion to create the ASP Indie Games SIG (Special Interest Group). This SIG was created for the purpose of “advancing the cause of computer games that are developed and published independently”.

Last Tuesday afternoon, the private newsgroup for the SIG went live and there were more than 100 posts in the first four days. This is an enormous step toward building a strong community, which was one of the early goals for the SIG. Over the next couple of months, we will be working toward developing a charter and enhancing participation.

This is an excellent opportunity for anybody reading this blog to get involved at the beginning of the ASP Indie Games SIG and help us shape and direct it. If you are already a member of the ASP, all you need to do is subscribe to the asp.sig.games newsgroup and join the conversation. There have been a number of prominent game developers participating to this point, and I expect that that will be many more as the word spreads.

If you have not yet joined the ASP, this is a wonderful time to do so. Membership is only $100 for the year, and this provides access to the private ASP newsgroups, including the SIG newsgroup, many member-only discounts, the monthly (printed) ASPects newsletter, and the ASPects CD, containing all previous issues in PDF format, dating back more than 15 years. To join the ASP now, go to http://www.asp-shareware.org/join/join.asp.

I anticipate and fully expect that the ASP Indie Games SIG will become a strong voice in the game development community, and coupled with the invaluable business, marketing, and technical information to be gleaned from the rest of the ASP, it will be the place for game development entrepreneurs.

Like most things, “crunch mode” is not all bad, nor is it completely good (certainly not). Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly of this cultural institution within the game industry.

First of all, we need a definition. Crunch mode is that time in a development project, and I dare say almost any game project, when the team members (especially programmers) are expected to put in significantly longer hours to meet a deadline. This is often toward the end of a project, but it also regularly happens leading up to important events (such as E3) or contractual milestones. To put a number on it, anything more than 60 hours per week would be crunching, though 80 or more hours per week are common. I know of at least one game developer who did 128 hours in a week, which is not a record anyone should try to break.

Perhaps surprisingly to some, there are good aspects to crunch mode. It can be a fundamental bonding experience for game developers, working together and putting in extra effort for a common cause. We support each other and struggle “in the trenches” striving towards a shared goal. Often, the expectations are cultural or internal, rather than imposed, and pushing oneself to succeed is a respected theme in this world. There is a natural tendency to push a little harder when a deadline is looming, or just when the finish line is in sight. Even when working on a one person project, I often find myself crunching despite having no pressure other than personal satisfaction and taking pleasure in my work.

Additionally, crunch mode happens because, for short periods of time, it works. If productivity is good, and team members are motivated, then extra time results in more development getting accomplished. When an entire team is putting in the longer hours in a coordinated fashion, there are also fewer impediments to progress due to the person with a critical function or knowledge being unavailable.

Some of the bad parts of crunch mode are fairly obvious, and many can be found reading between the lines to see the caveats to the positive aspects. Extended hours inevitably take a toll on productivity after a while, and the longer it continues, the worse it becomes. Crunch mode has an adverse effect on health, and the lack of sleep and recuperative time, as well as additional stress, compounds the problem. This can lead to mistakes that have to be corrected, resulting in negative productivity.

Perhaps the most serious long term impact of crunch mode is to relationships, both professional and personal. When there is friction among team members, this is exacerbated by the situation, and the resulting discord can have a very detrimental impact on the project. Outside the job, family and other social relationships necessarily suffer, and this is where crunch mode is most dangerous, jeopardizing the well-being of people beyond the actual developers. Nobody should suffer marital difficulties or limited time spent with an infant child for a game project; a game is simply not worth it.

It is fine if crunch mode happens as a natural result of enthusiasm and self-motivation. When it is required to meet a deadline, it is bad, as it indicates a lack of proper planning or other project management failures. That is, unfortunately, a reality sometimes. However, when management figures crunch mode into a schedule, ever, that is where it gets really ugly.

Crunch mode should never be taken into account when planning a game project. If this is ever a consideration, it is a clear sign that the project is on a path to failure. A recent anonymous blog entry, an another by a former employee, suggest that at least one major publisher is scheduling, and requiring, crunch mode for months at a time. If true, this constitutes abuse of their developers, and action definitely needs to be taken. The IGDA Board of Directors issued an open letter about quality of life issues, which is a step in the correct direction, if only symbolic.

Extended crunch mode is known as a “death march”, a fitting and appropriate moniker.

Later today, I will be giving an informal talk and Q&A session for Spartasoft, the computer game development group at Michigan State University.

This will be the second time I have spoken with students at Spartasoft, and this time I have been asked to use the development of Pretty Good MahJongg 2.0 as the basis for discussion. Two years ago, I spoke generally about my long career in the game industry, rambling on for quite a while. Nobody actually walked out, so I will take that as a positive review.

It was just a couple of weeks ago that I spoke to Wolverine Soft, the game development group at the University of Michigan, about the game industry. This talk was immediately prior to the meeting of the Southern Michigan Chapter of the IGDA (International Game Developers Association), and the meeting report described the talk as “extremely interesting”.

In 2003, Spartasoft had two finalists in the Student Showcase at the Independent Games Festival, out of only ten selected. At least a few of the Spartasoft members at the time have now gone on to careers in the retail game industry. During the IGDA meeting this month, the Wolverine Soft demonstrations were impressive, and at least one has been submitted for 2005 IGF consideration. Suffice it to say that there is a great deal of game development talent right here in Michigan.

The big news around here this week is that our latest project, Pretty Good MahJongg 2.0, shipped last Thursday.

Not surprisingly, this was a major update to Pretty Good MahJongg, a game successfully developed with Goodsol Development. The original version was a hit, and I expect that this version will do even better, especially given the scope of the new features. I will probably describe the development of PGMJ in more detail later, but in the meantime, you can read about its history in this post from A Shareware Life.

After months of development, including a long beta test, we finally released the game. It is a wonderful feeling to complete a game and be able to be proud of the quality of the final product. Since it is published online, using the shareware model, it is not quite the same as seeing a box on the store shelves, but there are not the weeks or months of waiting, either. Nevertheless, despite still being in the recovery phase, I find that I really enjoy playing the game.