|
I am offering draught proofing services however I charge roughly 8 million dollars an hour. You may go bankrupt paying me but my services are easily the best. I'm getting sick of seeing poo poo concept designs come in from big name concept artists just because they're "well known". They don't translate well into 3D 70% of the time and my company wont request changes because the loving artist probably charges too much. *fart* ceebee fucked around with this message at 11:14 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 11:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Welp, today's my last day as level designer at Starbreeze! Been here for over six years, and had a really good time. Gonna be nice to have some time off and a (slight) change of scenery though. Starting new job in February, so for the moment I am looking forward to six weeks of self-education and relax time. (Skyrim)
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 12:31
|
|
|
Didi you do any work on the new Syndicate game 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 12:39
|
|
|
I guess I did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 12:45
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:Hi goons. I'm looking for an artist for a project. 2D primarily, but 3D and animation skills highly welcome as well. You won't get paid salary, but you'll get credit and equity. Shoot me a PM or an email to swatjester aaaattt gmail doooooot com if that interests you. I thought so highly of you until now. For shame.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
Mega Shark posted:I thought so highly of you until now. For shame. Indie projects have to start somewhere, and that start typically involves no money. Either you know someone from work/elsewhere also willing to take a risk with you, or, you have to try and attract external folk into a similar arrangement. Typically speaking, this also trades away quality, because you're going for students / entry-level folk at that point. ... the trick being, of course, that said entry-level folks are also often very interested in this kind of arrangement, since it gets them a credit and is a less painful break-in than throwing themselves into the EA/etc meat grinder. The arrangement can work, but only if both parties go in with eyes wide to exactly what can happen, likelihood of failure, etc. Example: We're working with an Art intern from CU Boulder now, for instance. We weren't sure about the "intern" part, given the legal requirements of that specific title/arrangement, but thus far, it seems the department's requirements are something we can easily match. She even found us, not the other way around. Then I spent about an hour warning her of the dangers of taking an unpaid internship gig, explaining that we could offer her nothing but an offer letter if the game took off and some experience working under a senior artist that would show her some of the ropes, etc. She sat there, smiling, totally jazzed that we took the time to talk to her, and basically said she knew all of that, didn't care, and just really wanted to work with us. And she's a pretty solid jr artist. We're supposed to, what, turn her away? "No! You want to make art for us in exchange for credit and an 'in', and we could use a jr artist, and we're both happy with the arrangement, and we're totally jazzed at the prospect of working together, but we can't do this! Because!" A few people exploit jr artists (especially DeviantArt folks doing Flash art), and that really sucks, but the arrangement can absolutely work. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 18:30
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:I don't know if this was a joke response, but it's a sentiment that many do hold, so, seems like a good discussion: It wasn't a joke response, but I do still have a lot of respect for Diplomaticus. I've been on both ends of this kind of deal and many years later I've seen the harm. People and their skills are undervalued in these type of circumstances and many of these people are just trying to reach their dream. Because they are passionate and want in the industry, they'll take up deals that they otherwise might not. I don't think that Diplomaticus is a jerk, in face I respect what he writes here. However, we also know that even a tiny monetary compensation would be better than nothing. On the other side of it: How many games have we actually seen come to fruition because of this kind of deal and help either party in the end?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 18:40
|
|
|
Mega Shark posted:How many games have we actually seen come to fruition because of this kind of deal and help either party in the end? The odds and outcomes are very similar. The all-friends or mostly-friends group likely have an edge (by virtue of working better together or industry experience or both), and the mostly-not-friends group has an elevated chance of involving a shyster / requires more care. Neither's chances are terribly good, though, unless they have a lot of the right kind of industry experience. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 18:46
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:How many games do we see come to fruition because of a couple of friends working for free that help either party in the end? Specifically the scenario where someone needs a random artist (or programmer) and will give them credit, equity but no money. I don't have statistics but I'm sure we can all agree it's probably one of the least likely types of projects to make it to the end.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
Mega Shark posted:I don't have statistics but I'm sure we can all agree it's probably one of the least likely types of projects to make it to the end. Both are long, long, long odds. Both get better if you stuff experienced people in, though, which Diplomaticus may have (he hasn't specified if Random Artist is The artist, or if they just need another artist). Shalinor fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:03
|
|
|
(This is not really directed at you, Shalinor, but) if you're established in the industry and going the indie route, how do you not have the means to raise the capital to pay juniors for their work? If your team requirements are bigger than the founding members that are presumably keeping themelves fed, I'd be very wary of the long-term prospects of any company that can't raise the money to pay their staff, either because they don't have the skillset (which is a red flag) or the inclination to find somebody to fill that role (another red flag.) A handful of buddies making a game and living off their savings for six months to a year is a different prospect than "we have aspirations that require more bodies, but we don't know how to pay them unless this whole gamble pays off." If you break your arm or your car explodes or some other unexpected money sink comes along that jeopardises the release those extra bodies are hosed because they were probably already in debt to some financial institution or relative or something due to working for no pay and now they're out a credit or experience, or the release window is set back another three months or oh god this is giving me flashbacks to when this happened to me only I was still getting paid (but a lot less than I was on beforehand) and I already had experience but it loving sucked. And that was with a businessman who could raise money! But not many people can plan for a debilitating disease to hit someone out of nowhere and poof! Funding dries up. Edit: Business calls from the UK to LA are the loving worst goddamn. I guess any calls to the other side of the world are rubbish, but at least earlier in the year I was working with people in Hong Kong so it was the other way around. Akuma fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:05
|
|
|
I would agree, I went into the notion of the game I'm making that it was for fun. It's basically my friend is the programmer and I'm the artist. While I may not get money of this, at least I get to experience some of the workload an artist has to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
Entrepreneurs and people with such dreams are hardly known for their safe financial policies, especially early on. Sometimes poo poo's a gamble.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
Akuma posted:(This is not really directed at you, Shalinor, but) if you're established in the industry and going the indie route, how do you not have the means to raise the capital to pay juniors for their work? If your team requirements are bigger than the founding members that are presumably keeping themelves fed, I'd be very wary of the long-term prospects of any company that can't raise the money to pay their staff, either because they don't have the skillset (which is a red flag) or the inclination to find somebody to fill that role (another red flag.) -Crowd Funding (requires a relatively far along project that shows well) -VC (Tee hee / not even worth mentioning in this scope / maybe there was some years ago for social / maybe if you're massively experienced and know someone / what little there is is focused on largely companies in the mobile/IAP space / not where you'd want to focus a new studio) -Angel / "I know someone" (You have to know someone) -Contract / Work-For-Hire (odds are very good your studio will get sucked into a cycle of contract work begetting contract work tailing off into crunch and then collapse of studio) ... and maybe some others that aren't coming immediately to mind. Most successful studios you can think of making games you care about got there in one of three ways: 1.) They were founded by prior upper management that knew someone 2.) They started as a work-for-hire studio and got a very, very lucky break (and probably crunched massively to get that break / make, typically, a series of really great game on a poo poo budget) 3.) They started with a core team willing to live off savings #3 is, by far, the most directly achievable course, once you can assemble a team with the chops to pull it off. #3 then typically leads to a series of #1's. #2 is, as stated, risky, and typically involves 2-4 years of hell with an uncertain and largely uncontrollable outcome. You can get to #1 without a previous #3, but it most often requires someone with 15-20+ years in the industry. I'm #3. We're the cast-offs from a previous studio collapse, living off savings, going indie. We don't desperately need another artist, we never sent out a "we want people to work for us for free," we're just open to working with the art intern since she seems dead set on working for us. I also dig the idea of giving back to the community, and her options for internships right now are... grim, at best. We contract for audio, which is where most of our limited budget will likely end up. All I'm saying is that we don't know Diplomaticus's situation. There are rare instances in which it can work. Granted, the ol' "looking for an artist to work on a project for credit" chestnut is a bit much, but... no need to leap on him for it without further details. EDIT: Why do I always seem to take the devil's advocate position. EDIT2: And then add useless embellishments Shalinor fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
Vaguely related... An old co-worker of mine and another fellow founded a game company doing F2P www/iOS games and got funded through Y-Cominbator last year. They just released their game a week or two ago and were profitable very quickly. I wouldn't say the angel/VC avenue is dead - it's just not a terribly good proposition to go to an investor and say, "hey, we really want to make the next AAA game, hook us up?" They had a sound business plan, a good market opportunity that was somehow still underserved and then capitalized on it. They had a small number of junior artists on contract but their art style was simple and not difficult to churn out production-quality assets. They knew their constraints and worked within them to success. Hell my first game job at a company WITH a publisher occasionally missed paychecks early on and the last startup was only a month or three from running out of cash before we got acquired. One thing Shalinor didn't touch on above is in those different scenarios, there's a very different end-game. With investors (VC/angel), you're expected to have a payday a few years down the road, whereas in the others, you're only trying to sustain yourselves and the process. The former comes with board members and meetings, while the latter only has you hoping you can afford pizza for everyone next week.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
1) There is no money for salary, it's an indie team without enough savings to go around for payroll. I'm not making any money either, this is pro bono for me. 2) It's not that there is no financial compensation whatsoever. They get an equity stake, and will therefore make a portion of money when some actually starts being made. 3) The project is already well underway. This isn't "I have a great idea for a game...". I wouldn't have gotten involved if it was. Seriously, I don't get the kneejerk reaction. People have no problem when a mod team says "hey, I'm looking for a <X position>" and those teams aren't ever going to make money -- it's purely for the credit, and fun of making something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
You know, I always wonder, what's the best place to find that sort of stuff? I mean, there's a ton of dumb bestow-likes out there, but where do you find the serious ones? So far all I've come up with is the GameDevClassifieds subreddit and the TIGSource Forums, does anyone know anyone else? (Full Disclosure: I'm looking for a pixel artist to do backgrounds for our puzzle platformer without the ability to pay until release so I can't claim to be innocent of the practice either.) GetWellGamers fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:18
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:2) It's not that there is no financial compensation whatsoever. They get an equity stake, and will therefore make a portion of money when some actually starts being made. This means free. You wouldn't ask your tradesman to work for free, why do you ask desperate artists? If you want that art, pay them. If you have a day job, take it out of your own pocket. If you don't, take it out of your savings. If you don't have either of those, you're SOL.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:21
|
|
|
Backov posted:This means free. You wouldn't ask your tradesman to work for free, why do you ask desperate artists? If you want that art, pay them. If you have a day job, take it out of your own pocket. If you don't, take it out of your savings. If you don't have either of those, you're SOL. And if there's an artist who's looking for a side project for funsies? This argument is silly. The only time this kind of thing is sleazy is when there's a company with sufficient financial assets who tries to manipulate people into working for them for free anyway. If someone's doing a project on the side and they're looking for other people who would be interested, who cares? And if they say "Hey, in the event this makes any kind of money, we can split it!" who cares? If you don't roll that way, roll on outta here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:3) The project is already well underway. This isn't "I have a great idea for a game...". I wouldn't have gotten involved if it was. This is a point you should have made more clear in your original post. The fact that you left that out was why we were all so surprised, because we know you wouldn't be involved in something like that. The more likely a game is to get finished and make money, the less difference there is between equity and pay. Asking a team member to take equity in lieu of pay is just like asking for investment from any other source: it is incumbent on you to prove that the investment is a good one, and is likely to pay off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:27
|
|
|
Backov posted:This means free. No. It doesn't. By your definition, Counter-strike would have never been made. Star Warrior X posted:This is a point you should have made more clear in your original post. The fact that you left that out was why we were all so surprised, because we know you wouldn't be involved in something like that. The more likely a game is to get finished and make money, the less difference there is between equity and pay. That is indeed my fault. My internet connection is lovely at the moment and it cut out while I was trying to post, causing me to have to retype the whole thing. Leif. fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:No. It doesn't. By your definition, Counter-strike would have never been made. Sure, your team is the next counterstrike. To any artists considering this: Spend time on your portfolio instead. Working for free is dumb. Even starving indies can afford to pay you if your work is decent. This is speaking as senior game dev and a former indie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
Backov posted:Sure, your team is the next counterstrike. Who knows? You don't. I think it's a pretty drat good team, and there's a lot of potential. quote:To any artists considering this: Spend time on your portfolio instead. This is a pretty dick thing to say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
Unfinanced Entrepreneurs is an old series of articles but well worth the read, and sums up my opinions on everything: http://www.povonline.com/cols/COL209.htm http://www.povonline.com/cols/COL210.htm http://www.povonline.com/cols/COL224.htm I'm with Backov on this - anyone who has the resources to donate to this are best served working on their portfolio instead. This isn't a dick thing to say - this is the truth. The benefits of working on your own portfolio are immediate and definite and improve you as an artist, working on a freebie for someone else under their restrictions is not typically an area where you will grow or learn new skills, and the bulk of video game art is not something that is a portfolio piece or will get you a job - if you spend 40 hours making collision meshes and rigging some lovely animations but you want to be an environment artist, you are now 40 hours behind on making a showcase environment piece. It may be that working on this project puts someone in line with working on their portfolio - in which case everyone wins. But every moment an unemployed artist donates their free time (and it is a donation, it is not "a job" and there should be no expectations put onto the artist) to work on something that is not directly benefiting their portfolio and working towards the sort of position they are personally interested in, they're setting themselves back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:54
|
|
|
It's pretty simple really. Do you value your time and skills at greater than 0? If so, don't work for free. If you DO think that your time and skills are truly worthless, then work for no pay.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:55
|
|
|
Or if you, you know, just like doing something. Edit with less snark: I'm at the point now where I'm more likely to take up random side projects for fun and enjoyment over getting paid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
devilmouse posted:Or if you, you know, just like doing something. Well, then it's a side project. I do "free" photography all the time then, if I take a picture of my cat or friends or whatever. If I'm expected to go to a concert and produce useable pictures for publication, I'm expecting to get paid, not just to "help a brother out." I assume you're employed close to full time, enough to support yourself. If you're in games, and have the skillset to get employment, why would you work for someone for 0 pay? Internships are one thing, I'm all right with the internship thing as long as they're reasonable and not like "2-year internship for 0 pay" that some places run, where you're basically a junior artist with all the responsibilities and none of the pay. edit: I have no idea about Diplomaticus' awesome game idea, so this isn't specific advice on that case. Who knows, maybe it's the next Angry Birds (or whatever platform it's for). But is he getting paid? milquetoast child fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:03
|
|
|
dunkman posted:Do you value your time and skills at greater than 0? If so, don't work for free. I disagree. I value my time and skills at greater than zero. Yet as a lawyer, we are required to perform pro bono services in most states, despite having spent seven years minimum and potentially hundreds of thousands on our degrees and licenses. Does that then mean that our skills are worthless? (cue lawyer joke). If I was a plumber and fixed my friend's toilet for free, does that make my skills worthless? I also disagree that it is a zero-sum game between working on your portfolio and working on a project like this. Yes, there are constraints. Guess what, there will be constraints in your work at a AAA studio. In fact, part of your portfolio could well be showing how you were able to work under said constraints. And the argument "any minute you spend working on something not your portfolio is a minute wasted" assumes that people are mindless automatons. If that was the case, they would ACTUALLY be valueless in a sense, in terms of human capital. They'd simply be art machines. But people aren't, they have other lives, hobbies, things they like to do. Some even pay  to post on internet forums instead of working on their portfolios. And frankly, if there was a person who literally spent every waking hour of every waking day (excluding their day job) working on their portfolio, more power to them. They may have a kick-rear end portfolio and I wish them all the best. Hopefully, they'll have a good enough personality and enough outside hobbies to do well in their interview and be a good fit at the office too.-e- if "he" means me, as I said, no. Leif. fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:I disagree. Right, you're required to. Would you be out there, 2000 hours+ a year, working completely for free, when instead you could be pulling in your $xxx/hr salary as a lawyer? I would guess not. I think some pro-bono work is a good thing, so I'm not knocking that (and in fact, I do some myself, but usually on a limited basis for good reason, not just because a rando tells me it might be good). But I certainly wouldn't do it full time at the expense of getting a paying job. This isn't about "side projects." It's about working "full time" for someone else with either explicitly no benefit to you, at all, or the incredibly small chance of making some money. But what if you suddenly were unemployed, and a law firm asked you to handle their copyright infringement cases pro-bono, because it'd be good exposure? Oh, but if this case settles for big bucks, after we all take our share, you might get some...maybe. milquetoast child fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:16
|
|
|
dunkman posted:Right, you're required to. Would you be out there, 2000 hours+ a year, working completely for free, when instead you could be pulling in your $xxx/hr salary as a lawyer? Potentially, yes, if I liked what I was doing. quote:I would guess not. I think pro-bono work is a good thing, so I'm not knocking that. But what if you suddenly were unemployed, and a law firm asked you to handle their copyright infringement cases pro-bono, because it'd be good exposure? Oh, but if this case settles for big bucks, after we all take our share, you might get some...maybe. If I was taking the case pro-bono, I wouldn't be getting any money afterwards, it would go to the state Client Protection Fund. I would still consider taking the case, if I felt like it would be good experience. When I take on a new client, occasionally it entails me creating something that will be of continued use to me, whether it is a form or contract, or a certain type of letter, affadavit or motion. I'm still getting utility out of that. Also the vast majority of trial lawyers work essentially "for free", on a contingency-fee basis where they'll only receive money if they win for their client. If you consider that the client, like the artist, has the "thing" (art) that the firm, like the studio, wants, it's not all that different a scenario.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:32
|
|
|
My whole point was addressed earlier. If Diplomaticus had been able to post his whole spiel then I wouldn't have even responded. Without knowing the state of the game it looked like every other "sweat equity" project out there. Do I think there is zero value in working for free? I think anytime you're honing your skill you are doing yourself a favor. It's balancing whether said free activity is better for you personally versus just working on your portfolio. The other thing, re: Pro Bono, is that you are gainfully employed. If this game thing doesn't workout, you still pay your rent or mortgage at the end of the month. That artist may not have a job and therefore not getting compensated doesn't help keep him fed. That's a whole other thing though, so I don't think it's worth an entire tangential argument.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:41
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:Potentially, yes, if I liked what I was doing. I think the objection is more that if you're going to work on an indie game/open source project/whatever, it is much better to be the one dude who gets poo poo done. This is going to be one of the developers because by definition, the artist is going to be ancillary to the operation. If you, as an artist, work for free on a mod team/indie game/whatever, you need to be on a team with the dude who gets poo poo done, and it's hard to tell who that's going to be until you've worked with the person. Another problem is that those people generally tend to get hired by software companies and paid money - and as an artist, if you're on a team with a dev who doesn't work out, you're pretty screwed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:44
|
|
|
Man, this is getting way overblown. Somehow a bunch of friends working together with no pay on a personal project is okay, but if you try to bring in outside help under the same terms suddenly you're a tyrannical sweatshop manager? How about "If I don't want to do art for Diplomaticus for free then I won't, and I don't need a bunch of internet developers white knighting prospective artists that might consider the occasion"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:45
|
|
|
Mega Shark posted:so I don't think it's worth an entire tangential argument. Especially when it's compared to being a lawyer. Law of which is known for being a gigantic way of earning shitloads. Now I know that's not true but it still has that stigma. It also doesn't even compare to the instability of working in games compared to law. Art jobs in games are hard enough to get paid for as it is due to the onslaught of non savy artists being taken advantage of. That's why everyone's freaking out. I remember getting dozens of letters or emails just begging for free work. Which sucks rear end when you're expecting something big from submitting to studios.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 22:46
|
|
|
Work for free. It'll get you in the right frame of mind for when you're put through crunch for a year and then the company collapses without the money to pay redundancy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:00
|
|
|
Jan posted:How about "If I don't want to do art for Diplomaticus for free then I won't, and I don't need a bunch of internet developers white knighting prospective artists that might consider the occasion"? ... man, does that joke even hold water these days? Do kids even know what a newsletter is? EDIT: And, strangely related, FreakyZoid posted:Work for free. It'll get you in the right frame of mind for when you're put through crunch for a year and then the company collapses without the money to pay redundancy. I know it was for the entire company, not just us, but sending the people you just laid off some glasses for alcohol seems... oddly hilarious. Thoughtful? Shalinor fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:09
|
|
|
in regards to Diplo's project - it's cool to work on things you want to make. That's fine. The notion of "ITS GOOD FOR YOUR RESUME/PORTFOLIO/WORK EXPERIENCE" is total horseshit. It isn't. It won't be. Like I said, if you're OK donating your time, that's fine. Understand it's a donation, not a job. You don't donate to charities expecting some sort of benefit for yourself, and donating time to a fun project shouldn't be any different. Where it gets predatory is when "Fun Project" starts talking about all the amazing benefits you'll see from donating your time. "Equity" "Profit Sharing" "Resume Item" "Work Experience" "Portfolio Building" is all horseshit. It will always be horseshit. There are certain, specific instances where this isn't true, and they are things that the guys bringing the free work to the table will recognize without the guy wanting free work trying to sell them on it. e: to clarify, this is all general poo poo. I don't know anything about Diplo's project and everything else he's done has been above-board. But in general "no details, work for equity, it'll be good for a new guy trying to get experience" is about as obviously predatory as a panel fan with "free candy" on the side outside a playground. Sigma-X fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:I know it was for the entire company, not just us, but sending the people you just laid off some glasses for alcohol seems... oddly hilarious. Thoughtful? Well, they must've realised you can't go wrong with giving programmers alcohol-related paraphernalia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:19
|
|
|
Jan posted:Well, they must've realised you can't go wrong with giving programmers alcohol-related paraphernalia.  Would it be terribly crass to do wine in tumblers? EDIT: Sigma-X posted:The notion of "ITS GOOD FOR YOUR RESUME/PORTFOLIO/WORK EXPERIENCE" is total horseshit. Diplomaticus, don't bait people with equity. It's a poo poo offer, and sets off warning alarms. You want a partner, great, look for a partner, but usually equity leads to nasty schemes where someone sets up an excel spreadsheet and tracks everyone's hours, and that turns into equity if the project succeeds, and then you get more volunteers that dilute the previous contributions, and uuuuggggh. Offering equity to someone you've never worked with suggests that you believe that equity to have almost no value, since for all you know, said person will jet - and "equity after you prove yourself" offers aren't much better. When you're looking for people, just say - we've got a project, we're looking for an artist, we're pre-revenue and minimally funded. Stop there. Maybe you get a nibble, and maybe it turns out they'd be happy to just donate time. Maybe they'd be happy to partner with you, 50/50, or maybe they want that + $100/mo (which you could probably do). Etc. But avoid the "equity and work experience!" thing, that is indeed very... questionable. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:31 |
|
|
Sigma-X posted:The notion of "ITS GOOD FOR YOUR RESUME/PORTFOLIO/WORK EXPERIENCE" is total horseshit. The above really is one of those hot button minefield sentiments that any small indie would be better off avoiding really. EDIT: Shalinor nailed it 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 23:27
|
|
