Pay Splits

I recently made a post in my userpage asking for an artist, but offering 25%-35% of profit. I understand that art is a good part of a flash game, but there wouldn't be as much to do in this game, as I've done

How do people feel about uneven pay splits when making flash games. Maybe I'm being an ass but I really feel that my part of it would be harder.

Pay Splits ***

I recently made a post in my userpage asking for an artist, but offering 25%-35% of profit. I understand that art is a good part of a flash game, but there wouldn't be as much to do in this game, as I've done some of the art myself

How do people feel about uneven pay splits when making flash games. Maybe I'm being an ass but I really feel that my part of it would be harder.

Sorry, I made a mistake and cut a part off.

At 9/10/08 10:18 PM, Skeik-Sprite wrote: How do people feel about uneven pay splits when making flash games. Maybe I'm being an ass but I really feel that my part of it would be harder.

I think that's completely fair, although artists may disagree of course. The good thing to do is split 50/50, but put it this way.. if there was an interactive movie and you coded the interaction, movie controls, menu, etc, would you expect 50% of anything? Hell no, you'd be happy with 10-20%. With a full game, I can understand an equal split, but if you believe there isn't that much that needs animating and drawing, then yeah.. offer what you feel is fair.

Pay Split

I personally think the perfect split is (Coder)60/40(Animator) because really, you can't get angry with that. The coder does have more work but that doesn't necessarily mean an animator doesn't put many hours into making the perfect sprite for the game. So yeah, 60/40.

At 9/10/08 09:45 PM, liaaaam wrote:

At 9/10/08 09:32 PM, Coaly wrote: Um, my name is in the castle crashers credits, so pretty much nuff said, amirite?

Not really O_o

I'm just joking with you anyway... you aren't just any noob.

Uneven Pay Splits

I think that it's ok to have an uneven split, if the work is very apparently uneven. Like if someone is going to spend 30 hours on a game or already spent that long and someone else spent like 10 hours on the game, then having 60/40 or 30/70 is understandable.

being an artsy type ill naturally disagree.... i think even in having a monster idea.. just having someone art for you opens up and adds new ideas to the project.. we're not just clones made to draw ... we have ideas and creative feedback on making the game better.

i think discussing payouts should be something done late in the project when its easier to see who did or didnt do much work... i think its insulting for artists to downplay the work of programmers just as its insulting for programmers to downplay the work of the art ...

:)

i like going 50-50 no matter what. i just think its fair.

At 9/10/08 10:36 PM, Luis wrote: being an artsy type ill naturally disagree.... i think even in having a monster idea.. just having someone art for you opens up and adds new ideas to the project.. we're not just clones made to draw ... we have ideas and creative feedback on making the game better.

i think discussing payouts should be something done late in the project when its easier to see who did or didnt do much work... i think its insulting for artists to downplay the work of programmers just as its insulting for programmers to downplay the work of the art ...

)

I back you 100000000000%

or some other high number

I can see how getting the payout late in game development could help. That way if the graphic artist made some really intricate backgrounds and really smooth character movement, but the game (for whatever reason) didn't require much coding then you could push it in artists favor.

I know you just said almost exactly that just saying.

Drawing

When you guys do drawings for an animation or whatever, do you guys ever use the line tool and just stretch and bend it, because I've tried it and it's really time consuming.

At 9/10/08 10:41 PM, Blackfang wrote: i like going 50-50 no matter what. i just think its fair.

its not ALWAYS fair... i just think that its a decision thats not totally clear at the very beginning... like it might SEEM like there may not be much art or programming needed but as the project evolves that may and often does change...

like for the sketchbook tour last year, i was like ok ill do the heavy lifting ill just need some light actionscript .. probably no need for a split.. and as the project evolved i came to realize ok there was heavy lifting on both fronts and so at that point it was easier to make a 'quote' out of it..

At 9/10/08 10:36 PM, Luis wrote: Communist rant

You are a pro though, you have a tonne of experience and you're a brilliant animator + artist.. you definitely deserve at least 40%

At 9/10/08 10:47 PM, liaaaam wrote: You are a pro though, you have a tonne of experience and you're a brilliant animator + artist.. you definitely deserve at least 40%

haha ... im too ranty today. im gonna go make somethin for 20% as punishment.

At 9/10/08 10:51 PM, Luis wrote: haha ... im too ranty today. im gonna go make somethin for 20% as punishment.

Huh? O_o ah.. It's 4am why am I awake? The last 7 days I've woken up at 2:30pm, I've just got over a chest infection, not the best week lul :D

Night <3

At 9/10/08 10:52 PM, liaaaam wrote: I've just got over a chest infection

There's a visine for that..

At 9/11/08 12:12 AM, ImpendingRiot wrote: Pay Splitter

A coder whom I won't name once told me they felt they deserved money because they put in a lot of hours...fixing bugs.

50/50 is the way to go unless the project is obviously 1-sided (For Paths 2 I took a greater share cause I did code, level design, idea, music, etc and kenney just drew over my old art, pretty 1 sided there)

I was like... you coded poorly, so you want more money for putting in time?

No offense, but debugging is usually the most time consuming part of coding, so there's no reason to call his code poor cause there were bugs in it's rough form.

At 9/11/08 12:33 AM, ImpendingRiot wrote:

It was post production and I was the one finding the bugs. He was getting mad because by me asking him to fix stuff it was more work.

I agree with you there, If there is a bug, the coder should fix it even if its a lot of work. Now im not saying "oh that makes the animator all lazy," I'm making a game atm with DawnOfDusk, and if he ever says "hey this looks kinda odd" i'll damn well fix it, as he will fix a bug. Its the same thing basically.

By the way i'm uber tired and i don't feel like re-reading, sorry if that didn't make sense and/or bad grammar :P

At 9/11/08 12:12 AM, ImpendingRiot wrote: Code is the product, art is the marketing.

Couldn't have put it better.

Kinda new to the reg lounge, so I'll just use headings like the rest of you have, so as not to look as... n00bish.

Pay splits
Kinda depends on the situation I'd have to say. I guess I'm with most of you when you say 50/50, but it is subject to change.
I mean what if it's, say, a really click and point RPG, and the animator needs to do backgrounds, fighters, menus, enemies & items, and on top of that design what the whole thing will look like; the menu layouts, character's design, enemy design etc.
While the AS guy does some basic AS, and thats it.
The outcome would be about animator-70%, AS-30% or something along those lines.

But it could be totally different. I mean, it could be a complex physics shooting game.
The animator animates a shooting turret, creates a few bullets, bombs and backgrounds, and thats it.
But the AS guy has to do LOADS of complex script, taking into account all physics and bugs.
That would then be animator-30%, AS-70%.

It just depends who has to do what.
But I only know really basic AS, I'm more of an animating guy myself.

what about puzzle games? I know they're really simple to draw but what if I can't make it look as good as an artist could? you think 90%-10% is a fair split? all he would have to do is draw a BG or too and some buttons.

Gi-go wrote:
Evolution is crap, it was just the speculation of a scientist. All that Darwin's "evidence" has been dismissed by modern technology as physical defects. Most modern scientists say that they know evolution is false, but they just cant believe in some type of God.

If you ask me, it takes more faith to believe in evolution over God.

wait what? most modern scientists say that they know evolution is false ?????? from what I recall, the compiled list of biologists with a PhD in america who believed in evolution contained like 80 people, and later 80% of them confirmed that either they do believe in evolution, or they weren't biologists at all. that is of course, unless you qualify people like kent hovind as "modern scientists", lol.

can you explain how exactly it requires more faith to acknowledge evolution is real rather than believe in god? faith is believing something with no empirical evidence or indications. where exactly can i see that god exists? also, if you manage to prove that god exists, which is pretty much impossible, how can you know that it's the christian god as described by some hobo's 2000 years ago and not allah / buddah / zeus etc, or even some random "creator" that was never witnessed by anyone?

At 9/11/08 06:46 AM, Toast wrote:

Gi-go wrote:
Evolution is crap, it was just the speculation of a scientist. All that Darwin's "evidence" has been dismissed by modern technology as physical defects. Most modern scientists say that they know evolution is false, but they just cant believe in some type of God.

If you ask me, it takes more faith to believe in evolution over God.

wait what? most modern scientists say that they know evolution is false ?????? from what I recall, the compiled list of biologists with a PhD in america who believed in evolution contained like 80 people, and later 80% of them confirmed that either they do believe in evolution, or they weren't biologists at all. that is of course, unless you qualify people like kent hovind as "modern scientists", lol.

can you explain how exactly it requires more faith to acknowledge evolution is real rather than believe in god? faith is believing something with no empirical evidence or indications. where exactly can i see that god exists? also, if you manage to prove that god exists, which is pretty much impossible, how can you know that it's the christian god as described by some hobo's 2000 years ago and not allah / buddah / zeus etc, or even some random "creator" that was never witnessed by anyone?

If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I don't buy into that defeatist kind of attitude :) This isn't something silly like celebrity gossip or trivia. This is the ultimate nature of reality. It's important.

Everyone has the right to know the truth about what a weird and brilliant place the universe is, even if they've been conditioned to stick their heads in the sand at the slightest mention of evidence. Don't abandon hope so quickly :P

and I've not even mentioned dangerous extremism...

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I don't buy into that defeatist kind of attitude :) This isn't something silly like celebrity gossip or trivia. This is the ultimate nature of reality. It's important.

Everyone has the right to know the truth about what a weird and brilliant place the universe is, even if they've been conditioned to stick their heads in the sand at the slightest mention of evidence. Don't abandon hope so quickly :P

and I've not even mentioned dangerous extremism...

Pay Splits

I think generally 50/50 is the best way to go, but it does depend on the project. If I was starting a new game from scratch and found a coder to work on it and we were working on this game together all the way through, 50/50 is pretty much the only fair way to do it. If the coder is getting paid less than you (or visa versa) They might not be so inclined to try their hardest and put 100% effort in the game.

I like the way ImpendingRiot put it, splitting 50/50 is saying you are equally in it together.

On the other side, sometimes a 50/50 split just wouldnt be fair. For example, Depredation asked me to do some art work for his audiosurf game thingy. The game is mostly actionscript and had all been put together, I just needed to design 4 different ships, a load of achievement trophies and touch up some of the other movieclips. It wasnt a massive job and was clear that he had put a lot more work in it than I did, 50/50 just wouldnt have been fair for me to ask.

At 9/11/08 08:15 AM, Paranoia wrote:

Jesus, I've got to see what's up with my internets >.<

Can someone clean that extra post up? :/

Grats
renanee (misspelld sory =]_grats for being modded
P.S
liam if you didn't live i am pretty sure that you would have been modded long ago..
coaly
why are you on the credits of castle crashers ?
pay split
most cases 50/50 unless one person does way more ?

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I agree with this 100% , its like trying to flush out water from a sinking ship with a teaspoon.

Also good morning everyone!!!!

At 9/11/08 09:44 AM, Luis wrote:

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I agree with this 100% , its like trying to flush out water from a sinking ship with a teaspoon.

Also good morning everyone!!!!

its good after noon here. anyway just to say that im doing a computer graphics and computing course, so i am programming and doing digital art, a bit of both, we are learning how to program in delphi which is not as good as flash but the college mostly all the cs3 suite, nice so im not with flash 8 and have to convert my files, hows you computer courses going?

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I think that in some parts is correct and in some other parts it's kind of incorrect. At least, the way I see it. If you're born in a religious family, and go to church and all that every sunday, then you see it as completely normal, and therefore don't "intefere" with other people or try to convert them or something. However, if you're born, say, catholic, and someone convinces you to turn into say... protestant? well, then that's where the problem starts. At least the people I know that defend their religion way too much have changed their own religion from something to something else.

I was born catholic, study in a catholic school, which means yes, I did have to study religion and church's doctrine. But whatever, I consider myself more of an atheist/non-believer (at times). Even though I'm catholic, most of the time it all just sounds like complete crap. :P

At 9/11/08 09:44 AM, Luis wrote:

At 9/11/08 07:27 AM, CybexALT wrote: If there's one thing I've learned in my time on the world, it's not to argue with religious people. Either they haven't really thought their beliefs through that well, and they're just too stubborn to accept a more like theory, or they have thought the beliefs through loads, in which case they're already brainwashed beyond return.

I agree with this 100% , its like trying to flush out water from a sinking ship with a teaspoon.

Also good morning everyone!!!!

good morning luis !!!

Cybex, I agree with you too but I just can't help it lol. I think it's a terrible thing that religion is still so common around the world in the 21st century. gotta give credits to the nutheads who invented those religions though. it's amazing how primitive beliefs survive for dozens of centuries through the advancement of technology and reason.

And Paranoia, I would agree with you that it's an important subject if there was actually anything to argue. I'm not the kind of guy who will defend his beliefs until death, I believe in what I measure to be most accurate in terms of truth with as much objectivity as I can have. If you prove to me that christianity is truth and i should go lick god's butt and apologise ill do it.

I honestly think that someone should somehow take drastic measures to stop children from being "brainwashed". you can't really blame a guy who was born in a christian family and all his life he was told that god is real and he must worship him in order to go to heaven, and he should never diss jesus cause then he wouldn't be his friend. religious schools are the worst, because children learn that evolution is false without being given any reasons that make sense.

seriously, ive been debating religion for ages and i dont feel like starting a debate in the flash reg lounge, but i think it's pretty obvious that evolution is real to anyone who actually wants to pay attention to evidence and reason. I'm sorry to say but it's a very stupid thing to say that the fossiles that scientists consider as proof of evolution are actually fossiles of physically retarded creatures lmao.

At 9/11/08 10:36 AM, KevnSevn wrote: Hi guys. I thought I'd like to join the flash regs lounge...

sure thing. the reg lounge isn't something you "join", the only thing you're expected to do here is rant about your life every day. we also don't want to start a new discussion about who is a reg and who is not, so pretty much everyone can post here.

except bobricci, kevinmeurs777, and ninja chicken

Paranoia
Again with the identical double posts so u can get to 10k faster? Seriously, I thought you've matured.

WoW videos
As you guys probably noticed, I'm not being very successful and finishing flash games to get ads money. So I just had an idea: since I'm good at wow I could make pvp videos and maybe find a way to get money with them. There are very popular sites like warcraftmovies that showcase WoW videos. I don't know how many views I would get, but some people get 100k's + downloads, so it's probably a nice amount of views cause most people don't download those vids. Anyway, there are e-sport companies that sponsor the best players, but since I probably won't get sponsored by them, you think I could still have some ads or a link to my site?