Posts Tagged ‘igda’
IGDA Elections – Darius Kazemi
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
(So, as the disclaimer above notes, I’m good friends with Darius and support his candidacy. I’m going to try to be as hard on him as I’m being on everyone else, but I know I’m not unbiased. If other people want to do a profile on him, I’d welcome it, and be happy to link to anything that looks even-handed.)
UPDATE – Mr. Kazemi has updated his campaign blog with answers.
Like David Edery, Mr. Kazemi comes out of the blocks with his statement strongly focused – in his case, it’s local chapters. His statement goes a bit farther than the others I’ve read advocating local chapters, in that it envisions how this could be useful to topics like Quality of Life. He also, at the end of his statement, advocates that we all do our candidate research and cast our votes wisely.
Questions for Mr. Kazemi:
- Why run now?
- You say that the biggest issue facing us as developers is establishing our status as professionals, and that fixing this is a long-term thing. What can the IGDA be doing in the short term to address things you note as symptomatic of this – like Quality of Life?
- If not covered by the above, what do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
- You note that you are up on the cutting edge communication technologies, and can help the IGDA with this. What, if anything, do you see as poor about the IGDA’s communications practices right now, and how specifically would you improve them?
- Can you please talk about the big issues the IGDA itself faces as an organization right now? What do you think is the most pressing one, and how would you work to resolve it?
- Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
UPDATE – Mr. Kazemi has updated his campaign blog with answers.
IGDA Elections – Sean Kane
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Kane came by and answered the questions that I’d posed, answers below.
Mr. Kane is a Manhattan lawyer who handles game and intellectual property related cases and speaks at a lot of conferences on legal matters, especially as they pertain to virtual worlds.
(I tried to dig into his lawyerly record a bit, but with no luck – if anyone else is able to do that and report back, that’d be excellent.)
His stated goal in getting elected is to promote, “professionalism and growth in the industry, as well as a sense of community and information sharing among members“. In regards to the biggest problem he sees developers facing these days, he feels it is a lack of respect.
Amongst his virtues, he mentions his being a small businessman, his handling of all sorts of game industry related legal matters, and his insider status in the American Bar Association as useful in influencing its stance on various game-related items.
Questions for Mr. Kane:
Why run now?
I have been involved in the IGDA now for several years. For the first few years I was trying to learn as much as I could about the organization and how it operates. Unfortunately, this was somewhat difficult since it seems that the IGDA previously was a not a very formalized organization. From what I saw the individual chapters seemed to work almost autonomously with little input from the governing body of the organization. Recently the IGDA has begun to change the way it operates by attempting to create a more formalized structure and have its individual chapters all comply with central guidelines and mandates. Given my strong organizational skills I thought it was a great time to position myself and seek a leadership position. I feel that I can assist the IGDA as it strives to formalize the organization into a body of professionals with a central focus and mission. Moreover, my legal skills will be invaluable in assisting the organization in clearing the legal hurdles it will surely face as a centrally organized enterprise. For these and other reasons I thought that now was the right time to run for a board position with the IGDA.
Can you talk to us at all about the kinds of clients / cases you tend to work on? I’m not sure what you can and can’t say, given client confidentiality, but knowing that most of your work was for homeless indie developers or well-heeled publishers would certainly say something about your point of view.
You are correct in assuming that I cannot speak with specifics about any of my clients. That said, I can speak about the type of clients that I work with. I have clients that range from small iPhone developers, to social network game companies all the way to the creators of AAA titles. I have worked with both publishers and developers so I am aware of the issues that both face. As a lawyer I am often asked to view issues for more than one perspective and I plan to use this skill as a IGDA board members. To answer your underlying question, I am not beholden to any particular sector for my business so I can be impartial in my representation of the IGDA’s interests.
A case could be made that, while the biggest issue we face as an industry is respect, individual game developers are more often dealing with pocketbook and quality of life issues. How do you feel the IGDA is currently dealing with each of these things? What would you like to improve, and how?
I do not really feel that the IGDA is dealing with pocketbook or quality of life issues to any great extent at the moment. While a lot has been said about quality of life recently, for the reasons stated in response to your question below, the IGDA is limited in the power it has to change these things. The most the IGDA can do at this point is make suggestions on how things should be but the organization has no real authority to change things. It is really the members of the IGDA that have the power to affect change by working together to make it happen. If I were on the board I would seek to discover what the rank and file IGDA member’s biggest concerns are and work to find ways to address them.
Can you please talk about the big issues the IGDA itself faces as an organization right now? What do you think is the most pressing one, and how would you work to resolve it?
I feel that as an organization the IGDA’s biggest issues is to decide what it wants to be when it grows up. The IGDA can merely be a resource for its members providing industry information and a place for members to meet. Or it can also seek to be the liaison between the development community and the public at large. The large membership base of the IGDA potentially puts it in the position to be the speaking arm of the development community. The IGDA can demonstrate to the public at large what development is and how it affects everyone’s lives in some form or another. If the IGDA wishes to address this issue it must be organized and lobby for its members concerns. This may include working with such organizations like the ESA and the EMA to advance the industry as a whole. While we have our own unique concerns that those other organizations do not share it does not mean that we should not be speaking with them on issues we all do share.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
Quality of Life is one of the most important issues that face the membership of the IGDA, but it is also one of the most difficult to resolve. As the membership knows whether you are creating iPhone games, facebook games or AAA console titles you are always under a deadline to finish. In fact many of the publisher contracts contain both a carrot and a stick for developers. They may provide a completion bonus, as well as having a penalty for late delivery. These factors put the publishers and developers in a difficult position. If the IGDA is to work to ensure that its members have a reasonable quality of life it must be empowered by the members themselves. Of itself the IGDA does not have any real power to change the way the industry behaves. If it is to really have some power to affect change in the industry it must have the support of its large member base to engage in a form of collective bargaining with publishers and developers. Moreover, the IGDA could put out quality of life best practices and lobby publishers and developers to accept them and self police the industry. That said, if the IGDA’s base does not care enough to participate in ensuring that their own quality of life issues are addressed the governing body of the organization will be hamstrung to act by itself.
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
Studio sponsorship can be a neutral thing depending on what the studios expect in return. If studios are expecting that the IGDA should scrap any guidelines on how developers should be treated then that is obviously a bad thing. However, if the studios are funding the IGDA because they believe in the industry and want the IGDA to work to make the industry as great as it can be then it is not a bad thing. Since I do not have any information about what every sponsoring studio wants from the IGDA I can not fully respond to your question. That said, there are other ways to fund the IGDA as an organization. The IGDA could look to their members to pay more in annual dues. The IGDA could plan more events to raise funds and seek out available grants. I would really need to know the full financial position of the IGDA to suggest other options.
I hope the foregoing answers your questions.
IGDA Elections – Chuck Hoover
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Hoover stopped by and answered the questions below.
Mr. Hoover’s statement has some generalities to it, but also some intriguing specifics. His goal, he states, is to help make the IGDA something we can all be proud of. He puts forth three ways he wants to do that:
- Developer credits should be tied to our IGDA accounts to make them a more persistent and important part of our careers.
- Creating more knowledge sharing events, following the example of the IGDA Leadership Forum.
- The IGDA could issue ‘IGDA Approved’ certifications to studios that meet its quality of life standards.
In the Q&A, when asked the biggest problem facing devs he responds with a range of items (“lack of stability at major studios, quality of life concerns, digital piracy, and the rapidly changing economic landscape”). He then says the IGDA needs to continue with “meaningful support of its members and local chapters”. Good sentiments, but again, lacking specifics.
No firm commitment on time, but what comes across as a credible (to me) assertation that he’ll do what needs doing.
Questions for Mr. Hoover:
Why run now?
From the moment I joined this industry, I was excited about the possibilities of all that the IGDA could offer. I came to realize that the gap between what I thought a professional organization could be, and where we were as the IGDA, was pretty large.
At this point in my career, I feel like I have the drive, desire, and time to join the board and help improve the IGDA.
How would tying developer credits to IGDA accounts be better than, say, making sure your MobyGames entry is up to date?
One of my stated goals is to make the IGDA an organization we are all proud of. That goal can be attacked from multiple angles. First, is to increase the relevance of the IGDA’s initiatives, from studio sponsorship to actually supporting local chapters and their events. We have national events, such as the global game jam, but it’s ultimately an event that has a very loose structure for its participants. We are an organization chock-full of game designers; shouldn’t we do a better job of designing our game jams to include more of a reward structure for the extraordinary games that come out of them?
The second angle is to make the IGDA membership more attractive to developers and students. Many of us pay our forty eight dollars every year, but how often do we utilize the IGDA to maximize that payment we made? Making the website a place where people want to spend time is an example of this, as is tying our developer credits to our IGDA accounts makes our membership intrinsically more meaningful.
Can you give us more details on your proposal on other knowledge-sharing events like the Leadership forum? What subjects would you want to do? Would these be local or national events (I’m calling the Leadership forum national for this purpose)?
As game developers, we have a plethora of conferences every year (many more than most industries) and because of this, it’s difficult to create a conference that speaks to a new audience. However, I do think there is space for more knowledge sharing events like the IGDA Leadership Forum, one of the most successful IGDA events.
I feel there are three major aspects of this event that can be further explored in other forums:
- Focus. The Leadership forum is an extremely focused conference. It’s clear who the target audience is and it’s not trying to be all things to all people.
- Global attendees. It’s more than a local or national event, it’s global. This means that it can attract developers with a wide range of backgrounds for a more diverse experience. Knowledge is typically shared amongst studios on a regional level, but when you can gain perspectives from developers around the world, these events can reach a new plateau.
- Cross Discipline. The leadership forum focuses on developers of all disciplines who are interested in leadership, how to become better at it, and to learn from those who are already leaders. These broader topics create opportunities for meaningful dialogue between all the difference’s disciplines that we work with on a daily basis.
Why not take the trail blazed by the Leadership Forum and create our conferences not based around the job titles we hold, but rather the challenges we face as an industry.
My limited understanding of the Quality of Life SIG’s work is that they have already been working on a proposal for IGDA certification on QoL. What is your understanding of their work on this, and what issues need to be resolved to make it happen?
That is my understanding as well and I think it’s an excellent proposal. This is a perfect example of how the IGDA can be more integrated into the industry. From my background in Architecture, I’ve witnessed the proliferation of The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System. This certification took that industry by storm, because it seized onto something people cared about and defined metrics for it that were quantifiable.
We know that we as developers are just as passionate about our work life balance as we are about making games. What we need to do now, is make sure that the metrics this system is based on are measurable, that the certification carries real weight, and that we get this correct right out of the gate… all in the aim of making an “IGDA certified studio” something meaningful.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
It’s clear that the IGDA is poised to take the leadership position on these discussions. We have taken strides towards this, but until something like the certification process is put into play, and I’m concerned that the IGDA’s role will become limited to discussions and white papers. The IGDA studio certification would be a great start and in my opinion should become the core of the quality of life initiative.
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
I absolutely don’t think the IGDA’s dependency on studio sponsorship for funding is a negative; I actually feel the opposite is true. Both studios and we developers have a responsibility to our industry to keep the IGDA alive and well. What I do see as a negative however, is the lack of reciprocation from the IGDA back to the studios.
Just as many of us still feel like we need clearer value for our membership, studios deserve that same value for their sponsorship. If we can add a value proposition to studios sponsorship, we can increases the IGDA’s visibly; we can in turn use that visibility to increases membership.
After all, this has been done before. The USGBC’s membership increased 4 fold in the first 2 years after the inception of their LEED certification. If we can emulate their strategy and capture even a part of that success, then I see no reasons to transition away from sponsorships. People will pay for the IGDA and we will be able to find funding. The part we need to worry about, is making sure our organization is worth it, and is something we can be proud of.
IGDA Elections – Chris Hood
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Hood stopped by and gave us some answers in the comments. I’ve placed them below.
As I’ve now seen with a number of other statements, Mr. Hood puts forth a number of high-level goals he’d like to accomplish, but doesn’t really get into how he’d accomplish them. Mr. Hood takes direct credit for reenergizing the IGDA in SoCal (“…I recently reenergized the IGDA in Southern California.”), but doesn’t lay out exactly what his role was in this.
Questions for Mr. Hood:
- Why run now?
- What exactly has your role been with the LA IGDA and its reboot?
- You lay out five high-level goals that you’d like to accomplish. Some of these, the IGDA is already doing (“Offer a way for professionals to find career opportunities and grow their experience”, “Supply a voice and increase visibility for the game industry to the national media.”) Can you tell us what you think the IGDA is and is not already doing well?
- Also, for your five goals, can you lay out specific things you would like to do to accomplish these goals?
- In response to the question of what you see as the biggest challenge facing game developers today, you responded, “money and work, public relations, quality of life for developers and growth of our industry.” Of these four things, which do you think is the most important? What specific steps would you like to see addressing that issue?
- What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
- Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
From Mr. Hood:
“First, thanks Scott for putting this together. I think one of the keys to this election process is to get our candidates out in front of the members more, and with a recommendation I made to Joshua Caulfield, you’ll soon see a few more opportunities for the candidates and members to interact with questions and answers. I believe one of the concerns you have with the candidates statements is simply a lack of time and word count. I’m confident we’d all love to go into a great amount of detail about how goals and how we’d like to accomplish them, unfortunately, with a limit of 400 words, it’s quite difficult to outline everything. So again, with opportunities like this, we can share more and hopefully dive deeper into the concerns our members actually have. I’ll answer your questions in as much detail as I can below, but I would also invite anyone who is interested in contacting me personally to do so. I’m available for email or phone at any time.
In response to IGDA efforts in Southern California.
Over the last 2 years, the activity of the IGDA local chapters in Southern California have been greatly declining. In fact, over the last 2 years in Orange County alone, there was only one meeting. After coordinating chapter meetings in the DC Metro and Virginia area in 2008, I relocated to Southern California in 2009 and was disappointed to not see any activity. My stance was simple, it was unacceptable for our area not to be connecting on a regular basis. With no local network, I put an outline together for monthly IGDA meetings and in August 2009, IGDA Orange County relaunched with 50 people. Since then, under my coordination and leadership, the Orange County chapter now averages 150 members a month. We have had 7 straight monthly meetings and have seen signficant membership growth. With the success of the Orange County chapter, in December 2009, I began coordinating the efforts for the Los Angeles chapter to reboot and get back on track. In January 2010, uner my leadership and with the assistance of a passionate steering committee, the IGDA Los Angeles chapter restarted with a meeting that attracted 100 local professionals and students. My goal is to continue developing our local chapters not only in Southern California, but to find ways of strengthening and building our local video game communities everywhere.
Throughout rebuilding the local IGDA chapters in Southern California, my philosophy has always been “it just needs to happen.” We just need to get things done and do it. No one else was stepping up to the plate, so I just made the chapter meetings happen and I would like to continue making things happen for the IGDA. The IGDA is going through a lot of change right now, and I’m excited to be a part of it. I feel my background and experience would be helpful in the IGDA’s efforts moving forward over the next three years and I’m ready to help in the process. Joshua Caulfield is doing a great job in my opinion, and I’d love to work more closely with him and the other Board members to continue growing the IGDA.”
IGDA Elections – Michelle Hinn
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
NOTE: Due to emergency surgery and subsequent hospitalization, Michelle was unable to answer the IGDA Q&A or answer the questions raised on this page. I wish her the best with a speedy & complete recovery.
Ms. Hinn has an excellent statement that is, sadly, not backed up by any Q&A. Her career bio paints her as a crusader for accessibility in gaming, a topic that is often completely glossed over or forgotten in many of the games our industry creates. The lack of Q&A, though, is easily overshadowed by Ms. Hinn’s recent resignation from the board of a non-profit.
A bit of digging on the internet uncovered the fact that Ms. Hinn recently resigned from the board of the Able Gamers Foundation ahead of a vote to remove her. The press release for AbleGamers notes that the vote was being called, “for alleged misconduct, conflict of intrest [sic], using AbleGamers limited resources for presonal [sic] gain, and knowing misleading [sic] the board on issues vital to AbleGamers Foundations core mission of forwarding Game Accessibility.” It further notes that the board has accepted her resignation and is considering legal action.
Regardless of the merits of this issue (which I cannot ascertain in the time I have to work on this), this sort of thing must be addressed.
Questions for Ms. Hinn:
- Why run for the board now?
- Can you explain the Able Gamers situation?
- Given the controversy outlined above, how do you justify your running for the board with those issues unresolved?
- When can we expect your Q&A to be posted to the IGDA site?
- What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
- What are you bringing to the table here that makes you a better candidate than the other nominees?
- Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
IGDA Elections – John Hight
Monday, February 15th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Hight answered my questions below.
Mr. Hight’s entry here will be short, because there isn’t much to go on. His statement reads like a lightweight biography and has no posted Q&A, so there is almost nothing to go on for specifics. I finished the entry knowing that he has a great deal of experience with game creation, but knowing nothing about the specific issues he thinks developers or the IGDA face. Most of the candidate statement can be summed up by one of the closing lines, “If elected I would lend my voice and my experience to shaping our industry and helping my fellow developers succeed.” Sure, but how and to what effect?
Questions for Mr. Hight:
Why run now?
I’ve been interested in running in the past but never had the time to commit. I’m finishing a long-term project, God of War 3, and I will have more time to contribute.
When can we expect your Q&A to be posted to the IGDA site?
I will submit my answers tomorrow. I assume IGDA will post them shortly thereafter. These last 2 weeks have been pretty hectic for me as we final a big project.
Can you please list out specifics for what you think the IGDA is doing well right now, what it is doing poorly, and what you’d like to help change?
Right: Raising Quality of Life Issues, Lobbying for Anti-Censorship, Sponsoring information exchange via seminars/meetings/white papers.
Needs work: Speaking with a unified voice, Gaining publisher acceptance for issues, e.g. QOL and Credits, Establishing criteria in education/training for various game development professions.
What can I do in these areas?
– Unified voice: I would work collaboratively with my fellow directors for consistent and focused efforts.
– Publisher relations: I’ve held high-level positions on the publishing side and I can help facilitate discussions/negotiations.
– Educational outreach: The future of our industry depends on having well-trained talent. My experience on the job and in the classroom can help guide IGDA efforts. I am personally very interested in this activity.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
IGDA should continue to champion in this. Real progress can be made when the concerns for both employer and employee are addressed. I worked prolonged crunch on five projects myself. I know firsthand how painful it is to maintain relationships and families when this takes place. I also know that the consequences of missing a release window can be devastating for companies and ultimately their staff. I am hopeful that an open dialog with clear goals for success can help create a balanced work life for developers and more reliable forecasting for publishers.
What are you bringing to the table here that makes you a better candidate than the other nominees?
I’ve programmed games, designed games, and even made art for games. My experience includes starting new teams, inheriting existing teams, working as a publisher, working as a small developer, and working as a large developer. I play a lot of games from major retail releases to small indie efforts. I have respect for developers, passion for product, and 20 years of experience. This industry has been great to me and I would like to give back. I am confident that my knowledge and drive will be useful to the IGDA.
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
It’s a good thing – as long as it doesn’t skew the focus away from addressing the issues of developers. We can’t take on the big issues without the financial support of both studios and developers.
IGDA Elections – Eric Francksen
Sunday, February 14th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Francksen came by and answered the questions I was asking – they’re below.
Mr. Francksen is the president of the Wisconsin chapter of the IGDA. His statement is well written, and he comes across as very committed, but the whole thing lacks specifics.
It begins with, “The IGDA currently has many strong programs to help its members reach out to colleagues all over the world.” What are these programs, and how are they effective? One of the things I’ve heard repeatedly is that the IGDA doesn’t do a great job of reaching out and working with non-USA chapters, so I’d like more detail here.
He later says, “As a Board member, I intend to help focus our mutual efforts towards strengthening both our local and remote communities with specific initiatives geared at taking advantage of the IGDA’s corporate resources to help support the needs of local chapters.” Again – specifics, please. Which efforts? What specific initiatives? Also – how would these be funded? From reading the 2008 Annual Report, the IGDA lost around $90,000 in 2008. I can’t imagine 2009 was any better, given the economy.
In the Q&A, he cites Quality of Life as the biggest obstacle in front of the dev community, but says he intends to help “collaborate, as a community, and help establish best practices which we can bring back to our workplaces in order to help reduce burnout.” Are we not at a point already where we know those practices, and it’s more about getting the bad apple companies to care about them?
Questions for Mr. Francksen:
Before getting into these questions, I’d like to address a comment you made in the second paragraph. You bring up a very good point regarding the IGDA’s outreach to non-USA chapters. I am not only concerned about accessibility for these groups but other IGDA members who can’t afford the money or time to make it to conferences or chapter meetings. This is why I intend to support web-based networking resources, such as the webinars, which have the ability to tighten our entire community with limited cost to the organization.
Can you describe some of the international IGDA programs you find effective, and tell us why you find them so?
If the IGDA’s goal is to help better our industry through communication and awareness, we can take a look at several effective programs. In particular, we can discuss the summits which pool together professionals from across the globe, the leadership forum which allows our decision-makers to be better prepared to face industry needs and changes, and of course the chapters and SIGs. All of these initiatives directly serve the IGDA’s goal of strengthening the game development community and bettering our crafts.
Can you give us some details on the “specific initiatives” you want to strengthen if elected?
If elected, my focus would be to see initiatives which reach the greatest number of members strengthened. Specifically, I see room for growth within our online resources. For years the Wisconsin chapter has posted videos of their meetings online and I’m sure other chapters have done the same. One improvement I envision is the creation of an online resource where we can organize meeting videos on our group websites and in one general location where they can be accessed by subject, chapter, or date so that all of our members can benefit from the speakers at our local meetings. We are all required to post our meeting minutes to our websites to share with the community. Adding video, not as a requirement, but as an option would be a great use of our resources. Another initiative, which I mentioned in my Q & A, would be to broaden the use of our webinars to host round table discussions as well as the guest speakers we already host. These ‘borderless’ initiatives can be used to network local and remote chapter communities with one another no matter where they are located, geographically.
What “corporate resources” do you wish to use for local chapters? Can you elaborate on this with details?
What I refer to when I talk about “corporate resources” are less financial and more social. The IGDA Board of Directors has a unique opportunity to represent us, as a community, to other groups which may help strengthen our chapters and groups. Jane Pincard, an IGDA member who is also running for a Board position, mentioned the MacArthur Foundation as a good example of the sort of organization the Board can network with on behalf of the IGDA and its members. Another example would be the Project Management Institute, which has many software developers as members. A partnership with the PMI could help our producers network with other software project managers and discuss how to better their craft from a perspective outside of games, thus enriching both communities. As an individual chapter coordinator, I have been able to negotiate sponsorships and resources for my chapter with groups such as ATI/ AMD. As a Board member, I intend to continue this work at the corporate level in hopes that sponsorships and corporate relationships can further help benefit local chapter members, worldwide.
Putting aside the question of establishing best practices, can you discuss how you would want to try to get bad apple studios to pay attention to them?
Simply put, I hope to increase communication on the subject. In the ‘bad apple’ studios I have seen or heard of, it should come as no surprise that I have also noticed major communication problems. In situations like these, when important issues such as quality of life or role identity are not safe topics, it can be the role of the IGDA to offer a forum where thoughts from all sides can come together and be discussed. Whether this is done on a case by case basis or as a running discussion would have to be addressed by the community, but the idea of the IGDA as a mediating group for these issues would be one means of safely re-opening communications. We do, however, have an opportunity to reward affiliated studios with recognition for outstanding business ethics. For example, we could offer ethics certification to studios who apply for it. The studio could then be reviewed and, if IGDA standards are met, could then be awarded this recognition. Likewise, a studio’s recognition could also be challenged if issues were to arise. Thus, the IGDA can help support studios which excel at upholding the values of the IGDA.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
I have a great appreciation for the work that the Quality of Life SIG continues to do to support sustainable business practices. I do know that the IGDA receives some criticism for not having any muscle to back up its beliefs, such as some sort of excommunication power. I, on the other hand, support the IGDA’s commitment to inclusiveness. Remaining open to studios and professionals who may violate quality of life standards is a greater good than chastising them. In this way, I hope to see the IGDA help mediate and resolve these issues in a non-hostile manner.
What are you bringing to the table here that makes you a better candidate than the other nominees?
We have some great candidates running for the Board and I would be privileged to serve with any of them, so let me rephrase your question by answering what makes me unique, as a candidate. Although I’ve worked in production and QA positions for the past several years, it is my experience as a chapter founder and president that will make me a strong addition to the Board. I have seen and experienced, firsthand, the needs and benefits of local chapters. If we are to reach out to the world on behalf of our members, it is critical that the Board have an understanding of just what their members would like to see from the organization. I have a great deal of experience and passion for supporting this sort of grass roots leadership and I look forward to the opportunity to express this as a Board member.
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
I believe the studio affiliation program is a good resource for studios, their members, and the IGDA. I do not think it is inappropriate for studios to sponsor the IGDA if they find benefit within the organization for themselves and their employees. To answer your question regarding the dependence, I think it’s standard for the beneficiaries of an organization to pay the dues of that organization and, because there are services within the IGDA which need to be financially maintained, I do not find this to be a bad thing.
IGDA Elections – David Edery
Sunday, February 14th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
Mr. Edery’s statement is easily the best I’ve ready so far in the series (I’m not reading ahead, so everything up to the “D”‘s.) It comes across like a real political platform – it’s easy to see that thought has gone into it.
He comes right out of the gates and tells us why he’s running – he feels the IGDA is a mess. He says that he wants to bring people back into the fold by giving them lots of specific benefits for their $48 a year – including remote access for all IGDA members to the Leadership forum content (a cursory search of 2009 Leadership forum videos on the Googles leads to precisely nothing), expanding the Webinar series, and introducing a legal program similar to the current medical insurance program.
Mr. Edery’s background is on the business-side, and this comes across – partially because of his tone and partially because he hammers these credentials. He was the Worldwide Games Portfolio Manager for Xbox Live Arcade until last year, and since then has his own games consulting company. The picture painted by his LinkedIn profile, his blog Game Tycoon, and his candidate statement (linked above with his name) are of an intent and intelligent biz dev guy who wants the IGDA to succeed, and feels that the road it has been traveling the last couple years leads straight to irrelevance.
He deals straight-up with the time question, saying that he’s done research with the current board and is ready to commit the same time as they have found is needed, plus extra in order to get his priorities accomplished. He also notes that, since it’s his own company he’s working for, he has a lot of control over his schedule.
Questions for Mr. Edery:
From your blog’s profile, you live in the Seattle area. The Seattle IGDA chapter has been a ghost for a long while, only recently getting back off the ground. Do you attend meetings with the local chapter, and what do you think the Seattle chapter should do to continue becoming more vital?
RE: the Seattle SIG, I’ve been discussing its resurrection with Tom Buscaglia (who also happens to live in the area) and have already agreed to join the advisory board. We’ve discussed a variety of ways to make the SIG more vital, including networking events featuring “local celebrities” and frankly, some opportunities to have fun.
Ms. Burkett feels that the best way to revitalize the IGDA is to revive local chapters; your stance is that we should instead make membership more attractive by offering more tangible bennies. Will this not just lead to more disinterested, disconnected members? Where do the local chapters fit into your strategy for the IGDA?
RE: member benefits — there’s no inherent reason why better benefits would equal “disinterested, disconnected members.” Better benefits = more reason to join, pure and simple. What we do to engage the membership is an important, but separate, question.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
RE: QoL — the IGDA needs to promote case studies and research which clearly demonstrate the strengths of a healthy work environment. The IGDA should also showcase studios that are truly positive examples. (In other words, focus on the carrot; there’s already a “stick” in the form of negative publicity caused by upset spouses, former employees, etc.)
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
RE: studio sponsorships — I shared some thoughts on this very subject a while back. (http://www.edery.org/2009/04/the-future-of-the-igda). Bottom line is that there’s no simple answer to this question. The IGDA is already struggling like so many other not-for-profit organizations during this recession. Transitioning away from studio sponsorships won’t be possible until the IGDA is confident that enough people will pay for membership on their own. Which leads me back to increasing the value of membership…
IGDA Elections – Dino Dini
Thursday, February 11th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
UPDATE – Mr. Dini responded to my questions below on his blog.
Mr. Dini is an interesting fellow. His statement is very well put-together, but raises a couple questions.
Mr. Dini lays out his experience, his point of view, and what he’d like to accomplish. His main aim, he writes, is to foster a better sense of community within the IGDA.
He doesn’t answer the hours question, but does say flatly that he’ll find the time to do what is needed.
(I’m not trying to focus hardcore on the hours thing. I’m just trying to call it when I see a question not answered, and this question seems to not get answered a lot.)
The biggest question raised by his post -and a little internet digging – concerns something he brings up a couple times: forum trolling. A number of Mr. Dini’s threads on the IGDA website’s forums go on a great length in arguments with other posters. I’m not saying he’s a troll, mind you – there’s a lot of food for thought and a ton of useful discussion in many of the posts – but by his own words, he has a problem with “[being] able to continue to say what [he thinks] without getting distracted or pulled into a troll fest hell.“
So, the question is this – Mr. Dini puts forward that he’s an excellent communicator, which can be seen clearly in his well-crafted statement and Q&A. But the thread linked above provides evidence of the opposite. Or perhaps, it’s the continuation of communication well after the point of diminishing returns has been reached. The question, then, would be to ask which Mr. Dini would show up to the IGDA board meetings.
Questions for Mr. Dini:
UPDATE – Mr. Dini responded to my questions below on his blog.
- How exactly do you plan to improve the sense of community and involvement among the membership? Can you give us some specific actions you would take?
- What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
- What are you bringing to the table here that makes you a better candidate than the other nominees?
- Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
IGDA Elections – Wendy Despain
Thursday, February 11th, 2010
If you’re coming to this post without having seen the lead-in, you can find that post here. It links to all the other assessments I’ve posted. You can also find my disclaimer there – I’m on the Boston IGDA chapter’s board and support the candidacy of Darius Kazemi.
Update: Ms. Despain came by and answered the questions I had posed – both questions and answers are below. She also calls me out, correctly, on morphing the question she was asked in the statement Q&A into something else.
As a note, while I’m writing this, Ms. Despain’s Q&A isn’t up on the IGDA site. She did submit it yesterday, though, and provided me with a copy of it via email. I’ve put up an .RTF version of it here on my site.
Ms. Despain’s statement is well-written – which makes sense, since she’s a professional writer. Her statement opens with her saying she wants to focus on the future and on work on bringing together the IGDA’s supporters and critics.
In regards to the biggest challenge facing game devs today, she has a couple things to say. The first is that we perhaps face a meta-challenge – namely, figuring out the answer to what our biggest challenge is. This is a good point – with an all-volunteer organization like the IGDA, focus is always going to be a potential issue. That said, I’d like to hear her top three or top five items.
One problem that she does raise, though, is the issue of cross-border regulations regarding games and hardware. But is this more important than, say, organizational credibility? One could make the argument that the big companies, with their giant profit motives and their lobbyists, will make this happen. Why should the IGDA spend its precious time on this? Does it seem probable that the big companies will solve this issue in a way that harms individual developers or small dev shops?
She does give us straight answers to how much time she’d spend on IGDA matters. There is no answer to a portion of the last question, though – how will you accomplish your goals? It would be good to know if she has a draft plan for getting the ball rolling on something as large as an international consensus about cross-border games.
Her bit in the last question regarding the IGDA creating “masterpieces” vs stuff held together by “duct tape and hope” could easily be a veiled reference to the IGDA website debacle, which has haunted the organization for years and cost piles of money. It is brought up only in passing – Ms. Despain is, at least in her Q&A, sticking to the idea that we keep moving forward.
I appreciate that I’m able to ask questions like this regarding Ms. Despain’s statement – she’s put specifics on the table, which in turn allows me to ask more specific questions back at her.
Quesitons for Ms. Despain:
Why are you running for the board?
I guess I skimmed over this too quickly in my candidacy statement. Happy to elaborate. I’ve been an active volunteer in the IGDA Writing SIG for many years and elected chair of that SIG for three years. When I joined the SIG, most game developers had no idea what a writer could do for games. Several of us were employed doing the job of writers in interactive entertainment, but none of us had that title. Some were labeled as designers, others like myself were labeled producers. When I tried to call myself a writer, I got very confused looks from game developers.
Today is different. Writers are a respected discipline, even though devs are still figuring out exactly the best way to use us – at least they’re using us, and appreciating our contributions. We’ve come such a long way. And I don’t know any other organization other than the IGDA Writing SIG whose sole focus was on improving the careers of game writers. I think it’s fair to give the SIG some credit for making a difference.
Now, I acknowledge that this is a difference that doesn’t directly impact very many devs. It’s niche. It’s hard to crow about it. I get that.
But here’s where I get back around to why I’m running for the board. I’ve made some great friends in the game industry. Not just writers, but programmers and designers and musicians. They’re all great people, struggling with problems unique to their disciplines. I’ve almost been feeling guilty that I’ve helped to make such a difference for writers, but not for all the other developers in games.
I’ve had some experience with working within the IGDA to make a difference in the game industry, and I’d like to leverage that experience out to other disciplines other than writers. If I’m elected to the board, I can have a wider influence, not just niche.
But I’m not trying to remake the game industry according to my single-minded vision. I’m not a programmer, for instance. I don’t know what they need the IGDA to help them with. But once we find out, then we can make a plan and execute on it. I guess it’s the producer in me coming out. Please don’t hold it against me. 
How specifically do you plan to facilitate cooperation across the IGDA, and to dig up and employ its hidden talent?
I have a few ideas about where to start. I’m willing to keep trying things until I understand what works. I just know that there are a lot of great people in the IGDA and they want to help, they just don’t know what to do or how. I’ve seen the eager posts from newcomers. I’m a huge fan of delegation. This organization does not have to rest solely on the shoulders of a few dedicated overachievers. We can spread the load, we just need to understand better how to work together.
Some concrete examples of what I would like to try (or in some cases, try more of):
- clear calls for volunteers for clearly delineated projects with clear project leadership
- speaking of leadership, that’s an area we can improve on – training existing chapter and SIG leaders and starting with good examples of leadership on the IGDA Board.
- i’d like to try some “town hall meetings” as well – where board members meet with members to talk things out. (virtually as well as at conferences)
If these things don’t work, I’ll do more research and brainstorming and consulting with smart people and we’ll come up with more things to try. I firmly believe this is a solvable problem.
Can you give us your top three to five items you see as challenges to for the IGDA? Priority order or not, either way is fine.
I’m going to be a bit of a nitpicker and point out that the question asked by the board was what’s the biggest problem facing *game developers* not the IGDA. I have different answers for these. Just warning you. 
But I’ll answer the question you asked.
The top three to five problems for the *IGDA* in my opinion are these:
- Credibility with our members
- Credibility with game devs in general
- Public relations and marketing of/for the IGDA and videogame devs
Can you explain why the IGDA should get involved with intra-country regulation of games? Isn’t this something that the big companies can sort out on their own?
If we leave this problem to the big companies, they’ll act in their best interests, which is fine. But the solution they work out for themselves may not be what’s best for games as an art form – or for small companies and true “indies”. And this problem definitely impacts them as well. For an overview of the problem as I see it, I’ll refer you to the article I wrote for the escapist and linked to in my other answers:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_170/5334-Legislating-The-Virtual-World.3
This is a problem even for people making facebook games after they finish their college homework. It just hasn’t bloomed into the full-fledged disaster it’s fixin’ to be.
What is your plan for getting the ball rolling with the regulation you talked about?
I don’t think the IGDA should be legislating, but I think we’re in a unique position to bring people together and help with educating legislators about games. Some governments are seeing problems ahead as their citizens are interacting across borders in online games and cultures are clashing.
Some lawmaking bodies around the world are overreacting to what they see as a threat and creating very restrictive legislation. Others are paralyzed by indecision, their neglect quietly setting themselves up for conflict.
So I think the IGDA should participate in the conversation and help educate game devs about the legislative issues and legislators about game industry issues.
I’d love to see some smart volunteers brought together in a committee, workgroup or whatever you want to call it to write whitepapers, provide assistance to other groups out there who are working on this problem, and frame the IGDA’s position on the problem.
What do you think the IGDA’s role in the industry-wide Quality of Life discussions should be?
I think the IGDA should be a place where the various parties can come together on safe ground and learn more about the problem, talk through their differences, and come to a resolution.
That said, I believe the IGDA should have a strong stance in on the side of developers, rather than management. Not that developers are of a single opinion, but if we can’t have the conversation here – where can we?
What are you bringing to the table here that makes you a better candidate than the other nominees?
Here’s the thing – five people are being elected this time, and voters can vote for as many people as they like, so it’s not as if everyone has to decide which one person they like better than everybody else. So I’m not going to try to convince people of that.
I do want to convince people that I’m in the top 5 of the candidates. Sure. But one benefit to having so many seats open on the board is that candidates don’t have to try to position themselves as being the be-all-end-all game developer. Voters can put in a slate of people with different strengths.
I’m good at communications, community management and getting things done. That’s what I have to offer the IGDA, and I hope they’ll see that as valuable enough to include when they sit down to vote for their ideal slate.
Do you think the IGDA’s dependence on studio sponsorships for money is a bad thing? If yes, what will you do to begin changing this? If no, why not?
Yes. It’s never a good idea to have all your eggs in one basket. I don’t think we should turn away studio sponsorships, but I think we should have multiple strong income streams.
If elected, I plan to do a lot of research and problem-solving and asking everyone I know for ideas. This is one area where I believe our new Executive Director, Joshua Caulfield can help us with his broad experience running associations. Money is awfully helpful when it comes to getting things done – even if we’re just buying a round of beers for a chapter meeting.
We need to find as many honorable revenue streams as we can get. I’m confident we can (and have already gotten a good start in some ways).