(Insert stupid Blog name here)

I have been to GDC a few times and unfortunately the prima-donna attitude is prevalent among those who have had any kind of commercial success in the games industry (the exception being the Japanese who are extremely modest). The fanboys are partially to blame for making them feel like rock-stars, but at the end of the day they are just programmers like many of us. Fortunately I don't see this happening around here, e.g. "I've sold nearly 200 carts - worship me!"

 

Chris

 

BTW: You must have been really annoyed by a certain person lately.

BTW: You must have been really annoyed by a certain person lately.

Can you tell who I've got on my "ignored" list? Or are you referring to the impetus for these last few comics?

I have been to GDC a few times and unfortunately the prima-donna attitude is prevalent among those who have had any kind of commercial success in the games industry (the exception being the Japanese who are extremely modest).

 

A person who wants to get paid for his work is a 'prima donna'?

 

Rob Fulup's so-called attitude doesn't stem from the fact that he's sold zillions of game cartridges in the past. Rather, it stems from the fact that he has better things to do with his time than work on 2600 stuff that won't make enough money to be worthwhile. If he can make enough money to justify his efforts, great. If not, there are many other things he'd rather be doing.

 

I could understand if people tried to politely inform Mr. Fulup that his prospects for making money would likely be rather limited, and that he should be aware of that before investing too much time. The apparent desire to chase him away, though, disgusts me.

Incidentally, it's spelled "Fulop".

 

I agree that a number of the responses to him were way out of line in the thread that started this whole thing. I tried to keep my responses there civil. I really don't care that he's selling this game, or why he's selling it, what he charges for it, or if he makes money off it or not.

 

What I didn't appreciate from him, was indeed his attitude, and his entire approach to determining the price in the first place. Asking a bunch of people to tell him what we thought his time (not his game) should be worth, was absolutely ridiculous. Of course it was going to deteriorate the way it did, because as soon as you ask someone to put a value on you, you're likely to be insulted when it's inevitably lower than what you think it should be, and then the insults start flying back and forth. He began accusing people who were putting what they felt was a reasonable price on the game of having a "selfish world view", and then he threw out the low figures because those people obviously were just "whining" and that the "laws of economics didn't apply to them". How am I not supposed to be insulted by that? I am very much aware how the laws of economics apply to me, every month as I struggle to pay my bills. He also said that people interested only in playing the game would "weep" because it wasn't very good anyway (and made repeated references to "weeping" and "bellyaching"). I also found it extremely insulting to be told that anything less than 4K per month is not a "real" salary. It implies that I don't have a "real" job. I dare him to come to where I work and do my job for a week.

 

He also kept contradicting himself, by saying that it didn't matter to him that Cubicolor has sold for as much as $1000, but then kept bringing it back up as a point of comparison. So of course it at least appeared that his underlying motivation was based on money - specifically how much he didn't earn off of Cubicolor, and that someone else did. He also stated that he felt his game was worth more than a homebrew, but would never justify why that was the case, and even said that it wasn't worth releasing back-in-the-day, and was just an "okay" game. How does that make it worth more than something like Strat-O-Gems Deluxe? He didn't consider it to be a homebrew, yet it was an independently produced game. What else would that make it? Throughout his posts he implied a real disrespect for homebrewers. Whether that's actually the case or not, that's the way it repeatedly came across.

 

If his intent was really to find out the price that would sell 250 copies of the game, then that's what the poll should have been about. It should have never involved salaries or perceived value of someone's time at all.

 

In the end, if he had just set the price at whatever he wanted it to be in the first place, nobody would have said anything. Those who didn't want to buy it at that price, simply wouldn't have bought it.

 

The whole episode was a complete farce. To my mind, there was no way I could not make a few editorial cartoons about it.

 

And for what it's worth - I worked on Actionauts, too. I took the files for the labels and manuals, and tweaked the layouts so they could actually be printed. Maybe I should start up a poll as to what my time is worth.

Great post Nathan. I agree it's Rob's approach and attitude that got most AA members riled up, not the price. The ones who can't or won't pay said so and that was it. (Okay, we had a 14 year old member tell him he made a stupid decision back then. Sigh.)

 

I understand that he doesn't care about the classic gaming community and he is only in it for the money. Some members of this community either forget or don't want to think that many of the programmers back then were in it for money, not to make kids happy.

 

But I don't understand how he expects that he must be paid for the time he spent on speculation in 1984. Those hours have been unpaid up till now and I don't see any other way that he can make money off that time.

 

I do tip my cap to him for updating the game. He could have just slapped the prototype on a cart and sold it, with little loss of sales to collectors.

 

This often happens to best selling novelists, who at the end of their careers or after death will publish manuscripts that didn't make it to publication when they were written. Sometimes these trunk novels do get updated. Stephen King's novel Blaze was a trunk novel that he revised and published under the Richard Bachman pen name last year. It was pretty good but nowhere near his best work.

What I didn't appreciate from him, was indeed his attitude, and his entire approach to determining the price in the first place. Asking a bunch of people to tell him what we thought his time (not his game) should be worth, was absolutely ridiculous. Of course it was going to deteriorate the way it did, because as soon as you ask someone to put a value on you, you're likely to be insulted when it's inevitably lower than what you think it should be, and then the insults start flying back and forth.

 

I've spoken with Mr. Fulop on the phone numerous times. I would agree he does not come across well on-line, and I would agree that the way he asked what his time should be worth was unfortunate. I think what he wanted to find out was whether it was worth taking the time to finish off Actionauts nicely. A fair thing to want to know, even if he asked it very poorly. Trying to estimate a fair salary is not possible or reasonable without knowing what a person would produce. If someone could crank out a game as good as Thrust+ every week, that person should probably earn some real money (though in the 2600 marketplace, even that level of productivity would probably not even manage $50,000/year). On the other hand, someone who would take three months per game to produce the likes of N.E.R.D.S or The Last Ninja shouldn't earn much of anything.

 

Still, even if Mr. Fulop asked a question unwisely, attacking and ridiculing him improves nothing. All it does is make it more likely that the next 1980's programmer who finds some prototype EPROMs lying around will, rather than having them dumped, simply send them to the dump. Why release the game for the benefit of a bunch of jerks?

Still, even if Mr. Fulop asked a question unwisely, attacking and ridiculing him improves nothing.

I agree. There were attacks made on him that were completely unwarranted, and really reflect badly on this community. The problem was, he kept feeding into that (intentionally or not), and after that, the topic was doomed. It was one of those threads you just knew was going to spiral out-of-control.

 

For what it's worth, a few bad apples aside, AtariAge is one of the better-behaved forums out there. But someone coming in from the outside has to read enough posts from a broad enough of a spectrum of people to realize that, and also to learn whom to ignore. I've been on other forums where the initial impression I have of the people is that I wouldn't want anything to do with any of them, ever. Unfortunately, a vocal enough minority can ruin the reputation of an entire online community. First impressions are lasting ones. I try to lurk on forums that are new to me for a long time before ever posting, so I have a better idea of what to say or not, and what I might be in for. But Rob indicated he doesn't spend much time on forums (or at least this one), and I think that was to his detriment. Of course, with his interest in the 2600 long having waned, that's understandable. I'm not sure what he was expecting when he posted, but I think most long-timers here could have predicted the responses pretty easily.

 

That said, I still have a great deal of respect for the work Rob did on 2600 games. Missile Command was one of the reasons I bought my first 2600, and Demon Attack absolutely floored me when I first played it (and I still consider it to be one of the best third-party games). It's his online skills that need a bit of work.

 

I do tip my cap to him for updating the game. He could have just slapped the prototype on a cart and sold it, with little loss of sales to collectors.

I agree - it does show a desire to put out something beyond a mere historical curiosity. But I think it backfired a bit because it made it less of an item just for collectors, and something more desirable to gamers in general, and he repeatedly stated that wasn't his target market.

 

I'll give him mad props for offering a free copy to anyone in the military though. That showed a lot of class, and was largely overlooked in the whole morass of the rest of the thread.

I dunno, I actually had the impression he was just toying with the audience, not unlike a troll does. Fire a couple of inflammatory, elitist/arrogant remarks like "I don't consider 4K/ month a real salary .. not even close. Do you?" and watch the fireworks. Even if he really feels that antisocial, he can't expect to post that publically without getting according feedback.

A person who wants to get paid for his work is a 'prima donna'?

 

Not at all - it was his other remarks (as highlighted in the other posts here) that led me to use this label.

 

Chris

I don't have the thread handy to reference but as I recall it, right off the bat he rubbed me the wrong way. It was a 2-part poll. The first part asking if programmers should earn a salary for their work, the second part trying to determine what that salary should be.

 

I felt like I was getting a phone call from a telemarketer who had a set script to sucker people into hearing their whole pitch. Obviously people who are employed should get compensation. Therefore the rest of what he claims should be equally factual and straightforward.

 

I later got the impression that he thought the entire AtariAge audience was still 10 years old. We may have been back when he made a living programming for the 2600 but that was a long time ago. We're adults who can recognize a sales pitch. And a bad one at that.

His whole attitude was: "Pay me the money I want because of how special I am."

 

If that's not the definition of a prima donna I don't know what is. That's all he wanted to talk about. How much his time was worth. How special the game was since it has his name on it. How his time has intrinsic worth (of > $4K / month!) regardless of the value of what he's producing with his time, just because it was his time. Give me a break.

 

And I'm not buying this "online vs. in-person" thing. He wrote things that were condescending, arrogant, and insulting and saying that he's inexperienced online doesn't cut it. It is very easy to be a jerk online, and say things you wouldn't dream of saying in person, since you aren't face to face with people - but you're still being a jerk.

 

Like Nathan said, the whole thread was a ticking time bomb from the moment he created it, but his attitude was poor throughout the entire thing (except when, as Nathan mentioned, he offered a free game to members of the military) and IMO he came off looking the worst of just about everybody in that thread.

I dunno, I actually had the impression he was just toying with the audience, not unlike a troll does. Fire a couple of inflammatory, elitist/arrogant remarks like "I don't consider 4K/ month a real salary .. not even close. Do you?" and watch the fireworks. Even if he really feels that antisocial, he can't expect to post that publically without getting according feedback.

My impressions exactly.

 

Even the free give away for the military guy seemed a bit calculated to me (though I could be wrong here).

IMO he came off looking the worst of just about everybody in that thread.

2nd worst for me. That "wc"-kid was really, really bad.

How much his time was worth.

 

This is kinda why I used the telemarketer analogy. He tried to sucker everyone in with a statement (should programmers earn a salary) knowing the answer would be yes. At no time did common sense prevail and admit: "This game was done by me in my spare time when most of you were still eating boogers. But I believe you all owe me for that time spent."

 

I think he easily could have asked for $100 or more per game if he just was straightforward and treated everyone like adults.

 

And note to self, if you're trying to pump yourself up and and convince everyone you're some rock star, don't post a real picture of yourself in your avatar if you look like creepy uncle Billy-Bob in a mugshot after a rough night drinking.

IMO he came off looking the worst of just about everybody in that thread.

2nd worst for me. That "wc"-kid was really, really bad.

Yeah, but wc (I assume you mean Wickeycolowhatever) is 14 years old or something similar. I hold adults to a higher standard of behavior.

Yeah, but wc (I assume you mean Wickeycolowhatever) is 14 years old or something similar. I hold adults to a higher standard of behavior.

That's true and I do the same.

 

But during the discussion, I didn't knew he is that young. So back then he was even more annoying than Rob.

At no time did common sense prevail and admit: "This game was done by me in my spare time when most of you were still eating boogers. But I believe you all owe me for that time spent."

 

I think he easily could have asked for $100 or more per game if he just was straightforward and treated everyone like adults.

He really should have done more research before ever deciding to release the game. He could have come up with the numbers pretty easily. How many he might be able to sell and at what price. The thing is, he wouldn't have believed them anyway. His game would always be worth more than anyone else's.

 

A quick glance through the AtariAge store shows several boxed prototype reproductions for sale, and a price of $35. Albert was selling a couple of others recently at about the same price (Rubik's Cube 3D and Saboteur). Saboteur was written by Howard Scott Warshaw (who is at least as well-known as Rob), and was released with his participation. To me, that game should have been the point of comparison. I don't know what the original price for Saboteur was when it was still in the store, but it would have been easy enough to find out before Rob ever started any of this. But he just couldn't get past someone selling Cubicolor for $1000.

 

He won't have to worry about that again though. He's got 300 copies of Actionauts that he'll be trying to get rid of for the next 25 years. Anyone want to take bets on him setting up a table at a game expo somewhere to try and unload them?

 

And note to self, if you're trying to pump yourself up and and convince everyone you're some rock star, don't post a real picture of yourself in your avatar if you look like creepy uncle Billy-Bob in a mugshot after a rough night drinking.

Yeah... the grumpy mugshot didn't help.

 

Incidentally, people have spent an estimated 114,000 years playing Rob's games. Although I'm sure most of that is probably slogging their way through Night Trap looking for nudity.

I do tip my cap to him for updating the game. He could have just slapped the prototype on a cart and sold it, with little loss of sales to collectors.

I agree - it does show a desire to put out something beyond a mere historical curiosity. But I think it backfired a bit because it made it less of an item just for collectors, and something more desirable to gamers in general, and he repeatedly stated that wasn't his target market.

 

Rob was very reluctant to admit that it was updated. If I hadn't mentioned it, I'm sure he wouldn't have brought it up.

 

I don't understand why he didn't see this as a selling point.

A quick glance through the AtariAge store shows several boxed prototype reproductions for sale, and a price of $35. Albert was selling a couple of others recently at about the same price (Rubik's Cube 3D and Saboteur). Saboteur was written by Howard Scott Warshaw (who is at least as well-known as Rob), and was released with his participation. To me, that game should have been the point of comparison. I don't know what the original price for Saboteur was when it was still in the store, but it would have been easy enough to find out before Rob ever started any of this. But he just couldn't get past someone selling Cubicolor for $1000.

 

I did think of bring this up in the original thread but decided against it. Saboteur was the same situation. An unreleased prototype from a high profile former Atari game designer. It was even updated from the original prototype.

 

At the Phillyclassic 5, Saboteur was selling for $45 with box and manual. I took a pass on it but it was a close call. I played the game and the price was just a little too high for me, considering all the other games that I bought at the show. Of course I didn't think that I wouldn't be able to buy it later thanks to Inforgrammes.

 

Bob Polaro also sold Stunt Cycle reproductions at the Phillyclassic 4 show. I don't think he updated it; it was a complete game. I believe it sold for $45 as well.

I agree - it does show a desire to put out something beyond a mere historical curiosity. But I think it backfired a bit because it made it less of an item just for collectors, and something more desirable to gamers in general, and he repeatedly stated that wasn't his target market.

 

The cartridge contains all the original levels, with the proviso that the "killscreen" level 6 has been changed to be solvable (the level data table had four entries; the data that was read for 'target position' the the target offscreen; since the game uses collision-detection to determine if the player hits the garget, the level was unwinnable. I moved the player/target positions to be on-screen).

 

The only things that are changed are:

 

-1- There are some new levels which should have some real 'play value' (none the original levels offered any real challenge).

 

-2- The copyright message has been updated.

 

-3- A couple of weird bugs have been patched around. It's still possible with a bit of fiddling to force the cart into 'goofy mode', but it's not likely to happen in normal play.

 

-4- If the robot goes offscreen, it appears on the other edge without weird or objectionable behavior.

 

I could have finished some things off more nicely, but going much further would have taken away from the 'feel' of the original prototype.

How special the game was since it has his name on it. How his time has intrinsic worth (of > $4K / month!) regardless of the value of what he's producing with his time, just because it was his time. Give me a break.

 

If he can get $4K/month via other means (note that in California, that really isn't all that much) then his time is worth $4K/month. That's not 'prima-donna' complex--that's economics.

 

I think there's perhaps a confusion between the following two statements:

1. To put this game together nicely will take XXX hours of my time. If instead of producing this game I put in extra time at the office, I could earn myself $YYY there. If I won't profit more at least 7% more than $YYY (to cover self-employment tax) there's really no reason for me to bother.
   
2. I'm such a kewl dood that you fools are going to pay me $25/hour to illustrate manuals with crayons, 'cos I'm just such a kewl dood!
   

Perhaps you were hearing statement #2; I was hearing statement #1.

How special the game was since it has his name on it. How his time has intrinsic worth (of > $4K / month!) regardless of the value of what he's producing with his time, just because it was his time. Give me a break.

 

If he can get $4K/month via other means (note that in California, that really isn't all that much) then his time is worth $4K/month. That's not 'prima-donna' complex--that's economics.

 

I think there's perhaps a confusion between the following two statements:

1. To put this game together nicely will take XXX hours of my time. If instead of producing this game I put in extra time at the office, I could earn myself $YYY there. If I won't profit more at least 7% more than $YYY (to cover self-employment tax) there's really no reason for me to bother.
   
2. I'm such a kewl dood that you fools are going to pay me $25/hour to illustrate manuals with crayons, 'cos I'm just such a kewl dood!
   

Perhaps you were hearing statement #2; I was hearing statement #1.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but it sounded like he believed he should earn 4k/mo for the sunk cost of time spent 20 years ago. That sort of thinking is irrational, IMO.