[project1dev] Re: state of the union
- From: Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:42:49 -0800
I just want to say Eric that i've been following the thread between
you and Katie and I really appreciate you writing this. It gives me
renewed faith in the project.
This really helps us out a lot, because like you said, you were put in
the position of producer/supervisor by default. You and Alan are the
founders of the game so to speak so that's just how the chain of
command has trickled down.
I think I can really get excited about stuff again with the things
you've suggested :) lemme talk about the peer review thing: we do sort
of have that going on already, but we just need to make everyone feel
like they're getting that input listened to, or make them feel
comfortable enough to suggest things that are needed.
About the executive producer, we should pick someone everyone would
feel comfortable enough with to bash on (cuz that's gonna happen no
matter what), but confident enough in to give ideas to.
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 11:03 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> here's my official opinion of the situation:
> we have a ton of really great creative talent, a brilliant coder and a
> really awesome premise. we have a ton of people who love gaming who want to
> produce a quality classic. My dream for this game is for it to be a
> masterpiece of sorts that maximizes its potential. but there are some
> problems...
> by default alan and I are in charge, but neither of us are experienced as
> project managers and neither of us are really good in that job. We have
> tried at various times to keep with weekly updates, etc. in order to keep
> everyone (including ourselves) on track and the game progressing... these
> attempts have failed for one reason or another, and in my opinion its
> because there's nothing really to hold any of us accountable, there are no
> checks and balances, no consequences to blowing off
> assignments/projects/etc. and lets face it, this is an unpaid gig and we're
> all busy people and often times we have to make sacrifices, the game thus
> far has been something easy to push aside... With the talent we have on art
> team, the three options alan presented shouldn't even need to be exercised,
> I really think we have the people to get the art done, if properly motivated
> we could get all of milestone 1 including the temple completely finished art
> wise by the end of the month, we just need a driver to keep the talent
> (myself included) producing and on track. The problem is, we need someone
> with experience and knowledge to fill that executive producer role and I
> have failed at it, I am just not good at being the person who keeps
> schedules and keeps things organized, its not in my disposition to be the
> boss in that respect. I'm not a supervisor. It was sort of my job by
> default and i suck at it.
> things have been frustrating - frustrating for everyone, and tempers have
> occasionally boiled over because when things aren't going the way we want
> and we try to look for where the problem is, people get angry and it erupts
> into these things. If you want to say that the problem is me for not
> keeping the game moving, well I am guilty, because like I said before, by
> default I am the only one to blame. We need someone besides me to step up
> or we need to bring someone in who can manage the game and take on that
> authority, someone who can tell me when I am not giving people what they
> need or producing the way I need to, someone who can prod people who have
> assignments to finish them, someone who can make sure everyone is doing what
> they need to be doing to keep the game alive. I can write, design, draw,
> model, I can direct but I can't do that part, its just a role i am competent
> in. I think we could probably do this by committee instead of having one
> head guy in charge, where we structure things like this:
> we'll list everyones current assignments, if people are missing a task, we
> can add those as well. Every single person will give a time estimate for
> when they think their current project will be finished and we as peers will
> hold people accountable for not finishing projects by their deadlines.
> Obviously things come up or things take longer to do that originally
> estimated (we'll account for that as long as there is an explanation) but
> with strict weekly updates and time estimates it'll be easier for people to
> say "oh yeah, i need to get that done" - the deadline pressure is a great
> motivator! We could also say if something lingers without progress for 2
> weeks, we could offer the project up for reassignment, so that if someone is
> busy/disinterested/dead their task doesn't just not get finished. We need
> to really be strict on this otherwise things will break up into chaos like
> they are now.
> Basically we're all new to this, its a huge learning experience and we're
> all in it together, we all have a common goal. When things are going well,
> we will forget this blip in the system but unless we make this change,
> things will never ever ever go well. But i think WITH an executive producer
> running things and/or a peer-driven system of checks and balances, we can
> really get this done... and do something amazing.
> anyways, those are my official thoughts on it. Lets open the field for
> thoughts/concerns/questions and then tomorrow put together a list of what
> everyone is working on, what they need, their time estimates and sorta
> "start over" with a winning plan.
> Thanks,
> eric
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
