What are the pros and cons of making your own IP or working with someone else's IP?

The original DOOM game developers mention that they could at the time have taken their engine/technology and written a game for the Alien universe.

You could speculate that the Alien 3 movie may have saved DOOM.

At the time DOOM was the first of it's time and therefore the market it was launched into was new and cutting edge.

If you compare that to now, would you be better of for instance launching a game that is your own IP or with some existing IP e.g. Movie/Book IP.

I'm presuming with pre-existing IP you have a ready made fan/troll base who are more likely to be interested in the game, as opposed to needing to generate support from the outset.

So interested to hear about peoples experiences with their own IP and working with others IP?

IP - Intellectual Property (Copyright, Trade Mark, Ownership).

 

Define "better off".

If your goal is to produce and release a game, then NO, you can't do it without a license, and you are unlikely to get one. The question is little to do with benefits, and more to do with ability. Developing a game (you intend to release), based on existing IP, without securing the rights beforehand is an exercise in futility.

Known IP can be a leg up terms of marketing, but it can also be a challenge, as it also comes with expectations from the those who would be interested in it based on that alone. It also comes with oversight and control from the stake holders / owners. You give up a lot control.

If you are doing it for fun, without any intention of release, it doesn't really matter either way. Though if it is something you are going to put a lot of time into, and has the potential to turn into something you may want to release, best to avoid using IP that isn't yours from the start, so you don't have to redo a bunch of work later.

 

zombiegorilla inb4 thread lock by zombiegorilla.

 

Good point, maybe I should have asked what are the pro's and cons of developing your own vs pre-existing IP.

Pros: In some regards you are reducing your creative workload so you have an existing world, characters, stories.

Cons: On the other you are in a creative straight jacket regarding what those characters can do, even how the game design will represent those characters and settings.

Also there could be major game design flaws in the Universe, e.g.:

• Dungeons & Dragons a Dragon is almost the equivalent of a Flamer Tank and no one would attack a tank with swords/arrows/spears.
• A Lightsaber with real world physics and a Noob player would probably create a gory scene of flying limbs some of which belonged to the players character.
• The accuracy ability of storm troopers so that a main character can stand in a hallway oblivious to the blaster bolts missing them at short range.

 

None of those are major design flaws. All of those things can be accommodated by design.

 

We do it all the time in Dungeons & Dragons Online.

 

No reason to. As long as it stays on topic, it is a perfectly acceptable topic.

 

Why?

Just examples really what I'm getting at is that a good or great IP for a book/movie may not transition well or easily to a good/great computer game.

e.g. Star Wars or Dungeons and Dragons (or any sword based game) might not work very well in VR, with the first few swings a Jedi/Knight might have decapitated most of their companions.

There have certainly been a number of Movie IP Games that have been complete flops.

Or there are entire genres of Books and Movies that hardly appear as computer games, Comedies, Romance, Murder Mystery, Drama.

Put it another way what IP would you love to make a game based on and what IP do you think is great but would be terrible as a game?

Would love to work on : Alien vs Predator vs Space Marine RTS (? StarCraft IP?)
Would hate to work on : When Harry Met Sally.

 

Indeed. If you are working within a fiction, that fictional universe has rules, and your design has to accommodate.

In the SW examples, noobs don't get lightsabers, and SW doesn't have real world physics. Gore is almost non-existent. (with the odd exception of ep III, which is generally ignored). Stormtroopers hit non-heroes all the time, they even shot the Princess in the opening of ANH. Clone troopers shot and killed Jedi. Story wise, you just don't put them in a situation where they are head to head with a hero, or the context of the game is such that they aren't "real".

 

Dungeons & Dragons Online is based on the Eberron campaign setting. Magic is pervasive to the point that it is mundane with things like magical lanterns lighting the streets, the continent-spanning "lightning rail" trains, etc. Dragons are still dangerous encounters but not to the degree they are in other settings. Certainly not with magic-powered sapient robots.

It's an overpowered setting which makes it a perfect fit for an MMORPG.

 

http://www.ilmxlab.com/

That is true most of the time. Though, many times they are done on the cheap, and the IP will propel them to profitability (though not critical acclaim). Night at the Museum games for example, did well though not highly rated or blockbuster hits, they were successful.

 

That depends on your definition of a "great game."

That's because they're very largely cheap cash-in titles. Exceptions exist, but by and large these games are made to capitalise on existing trends and brand recognition.

This has less to do with them not making good games and more to do with the fact that we've conditioned a huge portion of games to rely on violence as a method of all conflict resolution and as the primary means of interaction. However, some games eschew this to great effect, such as Undertale or the recently related Night in the Woods, not to mention the countless visual novels out there.

 

Most of the time I shy away from playing / purchasing games based on existing I.P.'s, especially movie I.P's as most of the time they are quite useless.

The majority of games I have best enjoyed over the years have been unique I.P's.

 

Just for clarification, by "release" you mean sharing the end product with anyone other than yourself even without charging or accepting donations, correct? For example, if a certain someone were to remake Super Empire Strikes Back in Unity (if not just to fix the infuriatingly disruptive frame rate issues that plagued the initial release) and then invites a friend over to show him/her what it looks like, that would be grounds for immediate de-resolution?

Not trying to poke the bear here or start a fight, I just feel like that is something a lot of "hobbyists" get wrong about American IP laws. There are several SW fan games that are being developed under this premise.

 

They are in for big surprise if they "believe" that. (Note thier is this legal blurb). Even just using the logo is trademark violation.

"Fan" games, like fan-art, isn't a legal defense or even category. You can't use someone else's ip without running the risk of legal ramifications.

 

Well, for a while LucasArts did allow (and even hold awards for) fan movies. Does Disney still hold that tradition?

Also, that Lightblade VR game (which actually costs money) isn't using the Star Wars IP, but they do seem to be using sounds ripped directly from Jedi Outcast for their saber sounds. Not sure if the laws surrounding VR games are different, but it baffles me that this game is still on Steam and racking in money.

 

Why would they be?

 

Laws don't always run parallel to reason, so I couldn't tell you "why" they would be. It just seemed strange that there wasn't more of a legal fuss about it.

 

They absolutely still do. It's a big part of the fandom. http://www.starwars.com/star-wars-fan-film-awards

Lack of action, (or more accurately, action not being taken yet) is not permission. It is likely either they are not aware, or just haven't gotten to it yet. Their legal department is large, but not infinite, actions are prioritized.

 

Never meant to imply otherwise : /

 

I wasn't suggesting you did. But often you see folks with infringing products drawing that conclusion, that since they haven't been contacted by lawyers yet, it must be ok.

 

Pay me no mind, SSRI withdrawal tends to make me see everything as a direct and personal insult. You could literally just text me "thanks." and later find me weeping in a corner .

Either way. The overall theme here seems to be, don't risk a lawsuit, make something original.

 

Ugh, I've been there. Good luck with everything until it passes.

 

Ditto. Best wishes.

 

I don't believe licensing a big IP is worthwhile for an indie development team, but there is probably a treasure trove of old stories and properties that have fallen into public domain.

Since you mention DOOM, you should read Masters of Doom (an awesome book). One of the things they talk about was how they developed Wolfenstein 3D and that (at the time) the IP had recently went into public domain. So they were able to build a game out of it without paying anyone. This kind of blew me away thinking of the possibilities.

Though, like many people, I have my own ideas but taking a good story or characters from history and adding your own spin is an interesting proposition as well. Look at how successful something like Metro 2033 was, and that was based on a book (though officially licensed). You can imagine there are tons of old stories that could probably make good games. Or something like American McGee's Alice, where you take a known property and totally spin in uniquely. Also really successful and the book was public domain so no license fee.

 

Agree with your entire post!
I also think big IP is not for small indie teams, though I think there is a lot of smaller IP available to teams or individuals looking to partner with IP holders. A couple examples that I think are interesting are the Iron Maiden mobile game, and Snarf Quest based on Larry Elmore (awesome artist!) personal IP.
Though the final outcome of these games can not be provided as proof of success with existing IP, they can be used to show there is very good - available smaller IPs that could be considered for game development, and with the hopeful help from the IP holder, could be successful if the final content was good. duh!

Beyond commercial success it would be very entertaining for a developer to have the opportunity to work on existing IPs that provide a lot of creative boost. Who wouldn't want to work on an Eddie Maiden game or work along side Larry Elmore?

IMO - that could be considered successful to any indie developer regardless of the commercial success of the game.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.roadhousegames.lotb&hl=en
http://ironmaidenlegacy.com/
Who the heck is nodding frog ltd?
Note: mothership for nodding frog went under in 2016.
http://www.roadhouseinteractive.com/roadhouse-closes-its-doors/

http://www.snarfquesttales.com/
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2054625525/snarfquest-tales
Note: Snarf Quest Tales is Made in Unity and CellBloc is 2 dudes.
https://forum.unity3d.com/threads/snarfquest-tales.324040/#post-2101650

 

It's usually the concept that is copied in IP successes and not the IP: Tom & Jerry compared to Tweety & Sylvester and many others for example. You can't really argue there is much difference between the two and any worries about IP laws are completely obliterated.

Who buys IP are rich people and businesses using that IP to take advantage of some fans tendency to hoard everything related to that IP regardless of quality. However, those sorts of fans are usually a diminishing market and it's not always clear how many of the customer base of an IP puts the meaning 'fanatic' into the word fan. Usually far fewer than everybody or the marketers of that IP think.

 

Another consideration is offer outsourcing services or become a contractor/employee. Then you can code or do art for [their IP], get paid for it on a monthly basis.

It was really nice. Then you get on the credits list of big games.