All production efforts have "time, money, quality and people" to manage, bit it games, films, whatever. Games Industry has a fear of "stars".
Theatre vs Games; Theatre is:
- On Time
- Budget Estimated from Script
- Director as visionary
- Producer as Moneyman
- Star driven
- Success based on sales and critical acclaim
Animation vs Games; Animation is:
- Budget Estimated from Script
- Director as visionary
- Producer as Moneyman
- Lead driven
- Deadlines change due to needs to Market
Games are:
- Budget Estimated from Game Design Document
- Visionary is ???
- Publisher as Moneyman
- Lead driven
- Deadlines change due to needs to Development
(some projects have hard deadlines; xmas, film licence, etc)
Audits / Due Diligence : Design / Budget / People <
> Quality / Money / Design> (stability vs focus)
ceo -> value of people -> decisions -> strategies -> shapes company culture -> team as a company within a company
design as a recipe -> naked team (stars on stage)
Witcher case study -> org chart "classic" game dev org chart tree -> no visionary <-
problems & solutions: design -> fits time and money; features and production values : consider cost benefit per feature / is it worth the money? Budget: Put ot best use.
Team: Does the team have a clear vision of the game? Are they appropriate?
| < 2008.01.27: "Er war so exaltiert / Because er hatte Flair" | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' > |

