Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!news From: "Mario Wynands" Newsgroups: scee.yaroze.freetalk.english Subject: Re: Licensed Developer Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 13:01:31 +1200 Organization: Sidhe Interactive Lines: 130 Message-ID: <7flrdo$k6r1@chuka.playstation.co.uk> References: <36F896FE.D1C01655@home.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: p35-max2.wlg.ihug.co.nz X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 J. Pretorius wrote in message news:36F896FE.D1C01655@home.net... > Does anybody know what the requirements are for becomming a licensed Playstation > developer? Hi James, I don't want you to think this is a definitive answer because we only had to apply once and each case is probably evaluated on its individual merits, but Sidhe Interactive basically had the following attributes on application that I believe were key to getting our license * A legally registered, debt free company * A talented development team * An extensive design document for a Playstation game concept Things that would probably help getting a license would include * Evidence of financial backing, cash flow projections, financial reports * An interactive demo of your first planned PSX game (Yaroze or PC) > Its obvious that Sony, Sega and Nintendo are quite restrictive as to > whom they license their development tools to. I was looking at the SCEA web site > and they don't even want to hear from potential developers unless you give them > detailed information about your company including management biographies. Any organisation looking to make an 'investment' in you will want this sort of information like banks, the government, or venture capitalists. If you can't supply them with that then you have to ask yourself if you can cut it in the game development world. You have to remember this is business. > I don't understand the logic behind restricting who can develop for a system. It > can't be for quality control reasons: there are dozens of titles published by > big name companies that are so poor they border on fraud. Besides, Sony/Nintendo > have the final say as to whether or not a title meets their quality standards > and may be released. Sony doesn't monitor the content of titles, only the technical side (like making sure games don't crash or screw up memory cards etc). In terms of the Playstation development gameplay and content are left to the discretion of the publisher. Nintendo is a different story. I have heard they are very involved in the development process (I don't know because I don't have first hand knowledge). I would assume Sony and other vendors are restrictive because they want to sign developers who a. have teams large enough to produce expansive, high quality, market grabbing titles b. have enough financial clout to get titles to market > I've heard people say that becomming a succesful games > company requires millions in capital and therefore it's not viable to allow > small companies to develop. To some extent this is true. Small developers have an uphill battle because you (generally) rely on other peoples money to fund your projects. Having to compete against game development powerhouses like Square isn't easy either - they get to snap up a lot of quality personnel AND the consumers dollar. However, there is still a place for the small developer, especially developing niche or gameplay centric titles and developing for lower manpower requirement platforms such as the Gameboy. Sony (perhaps a lot more than other vendors) does recognise this which is why smaller companies such as ourselves still get a break now and again. Success can be had, as long as you are willing to put in several years of hard work. > Thankfully this is not yet true, but even > if it were, why would Sony or Nintendo care if a company failed while attempting > to create a game? As mentioned by some of the other posters, handing out a license is an investment. If a licensed developer went under it affects the reputation of Sony and the Playstation brand. And of course, it means support was wasted on the unsuccessful developer where it could have been applied elsewhere. That being said, Sony seems willing to take a risk now and again in terms of the developers they sign. I suspect this is another aspect of why the Playstation is the current market leader. > Are the video game manufacturers/developers purposely trying > to make it difficult for small companies to enter the market in an effort to > preserve their market share? It is not something they are doing on purpose - it is just good business. If you have a choice between giving a license to a large, established company or a small startup it makes business sense to back the larger company that will have the reputation and financial backing to bring products to market. > Hmmm, perhaps someone from Sony could provide some > insight, please.. I haven't seen anyone from Sony reply to this, but I would be interested in Sony's view on this as well. If you have the drive then I say go for it James. Make sure you spend some time planning (both in terms of company development and games) and then approach Sony. The worst they can say is no... Regards Mario Wynands Sidhe Interactive mario@sidhe.co.nz www.sidhe.co.nz