A Tale of Two Producers

It's the oldest story in the world. You're partway done with your game. Your boss decides it's not good enough and wants big changes, but he doesn't want the project to slip...or at least, not slip much. (Okay, maybe it's not the oldest story in the world.) The first thing you'll say is, "Well, I've talked it over with the team, and we've decided we can make those changes, but it'll take this much time." At which point the boss says, "That's no good. We have to hit the same date." And now you have a choice:
- You can say, "I can't break the laws of physics, Captain! We're just going to have to hold the course and ship what we've got, disappointing as it is."
- Or you can say, "Yes sir, we'll do our best," knowing that several months down the road it's going to be plain to everybody that You're Not Going To Make It.
Ah - the stuff of drama. Two choices, both of which suck.
I know two producers, who will remain nameless, who faced this situation last year, at different companies.
One of my producer friends went with option A. The other producer friend went with option B.
I bet you're thinking this is going to be a story with a moral.
Wrong. They both got fired, or "left to pursue other interests", to use the parlance of our times. It's been a while since I wrote that "a hobbit can contend with the will of Sauron" article for Gama, and since then I've seen some shit, and now I'd recommend that if it looks like Sauron is going to crush you, back off. Go with option B. But send out your resume, because when the project fails you're still going to get fired, and it's better to try to find a new employer now rather than then.

Comments

[Tom Henderson]

I've seen the exact same thing with external projects only instead of a producer getting fired it's usually the whole project getting canceled. SO I guess in that case everybody should get their resume ready.

I will say that SOMETIMES there is a third option: bringing in more resources. Of course this isn't always possible, it depends entirely on how far in you are and what the changes are demanded.

[Steve]

This is where the detailed schedule becomes your friend. Where you can show that additional work requires either additional time or additional resources. If the bosses can't see that, then it raises the question of whether they should be bosses.

However, if you look at it from the other side, perhaps they were at risk of being fired anyway for not delivering a good game in the agreed time and the additional suggestions are the bosses' way of offering a lifeline to the producers to pull the game around. So maybe they are actually very good and fair bosses after all. :)

[Noel Llopis]

Or you can apply agile methodologies. If your boss (assuming he's the true customer for the project) wants something else, you have a light process in place for prioritizing those changes and tackling them next if they're the highest priority.

It is not unreasonable to change your mind as you see how the game plays or you see some initial results. It is unreasonable to expect that changes are going to have no consequences, and it's unreasonable to ask for major changes at the very end. That's why it's so important to start getting feedback from the very beginning from the people with the ultimate responsibility for the game (usually the lead designer, but publisher/boss input is important too).

But yes, he needs to keep in mind the old triangle: features, time, resources, pick two. If he doesn't understand that, nod your way through and send off your resume ASAP.

[Borf]

I read your blog and costik's blog. I tend to read costik's first because he has a shorter URL to type, and he links to that league of extraordinary gamedevelopers thing, which in turn leads to your site. That's how I come here.

All this filler is basically only there to make it seem like I'm here saying something profound, so you'll read my comment. That's enough filler. Okay. Here's what I'm really trying to say to you. I could have done this a bit more subtle, but it's too late for that now. Here it is: Write more stuff!

There. That was my message. Now get to it. Write, write, write!

[YC]

hmm...how can the boss says something like that unless he/she was never interested in the progress of the development in the first place.

In either case, it's never a good boss to work with anyway... >:)

[Rich Bisso]

I agree, Jamie. If they REALLY, REALLY want you to do something, do it. It is, after all, their money. If it's a bad enough decision that it might stick with you because of the credit, there's always Alan Smithee.

Although... Alan Smithee on a two-three-four year project not only blows, it blows HARD. Actually, I wonder if there has been an Alan Smithee in our industry yet...

[russell]

I've never, ever, worked on a project where the design was constrained from day one to be engineered appropriately for the scale of production.

Ask someone to design a feature and they want to Do A Good Job, and this Leads to features that are 'the best', or 'innovative', or 'pushing the envelope'.

I suspect that this is the root of all evil - well, game development evil in any case - and I'm thinking of telling designers to produce two types of features from now on: 1) 'basic as hell', and 2) 'a little less basic than basic as hell'

I have two words and one number to say on the matter...bang, buck, and 4.

If it gets to the 'two producers' stage (and it does usualy, doesn't it 8) then the Business isn't taking due care regarding spending its development budget appropriatly, and the Heads will knee-jerk sporadically throughout development.

[tom]

Alan Smithee:

http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId=69846/

Voice talent on NHL Hitz, it says there, and producer at Capcom Digital Studios on Ghosts'n'Goblins for Gameboy Colour.