As part of our new Eureka! Publishing & Design Program I am going to be providing a review/critique of submissions. Each topic/element reviewed will be given a rating from 1 to 5.
The idea is that products will have to receive a minimum score (of, say, 3.5) in order to be accepted into the program. The general scores used would be:
1 = Poor (extremely poor quality, technically inferior or amateur)
2 = Below average (sub-standard compared to existing products)
3 = Average (on par with existing products; acceptable quality)
4 = Good (exceeds market expectations; quality stands out)
5 = Excellent (greatly exceeds market expectations; raises the bar)
I have some of my own ideas, obviously, about what elements should be evaluated when considering a product for publication. Among them:
* Marketability (is the genre a fresh twist or cliche?)
* Cover illustration
* Interior art
* Organization
* Writing (incl. style, voice, etc.)
* Interior design (readability, graphic design, attractiveness, etc.)
* Editing
* Playability (fun factor)
While I was sitting at my desk trying to think of the various elements of a submission that should be reviewed (i.e., scored), it dawned on me that I could get some suggestions from indie designers.
So here I am, hat in hand, asking you folks this question:
What other elements do you feel should be evaluated when considering a product for publication?
Well that is a question.
By that do you mean purely as in taking submissions and if they are good they go out with your companies name on it?
Or, as a third party publisher?
If it's the former, put whatever criteria you want, it is your name and reputation on the line. Although I would put a listing of resources you can help provide should someone not have them available to them, such as artwork and the like.
If it's the latter, I don't know. Can you really quantify things like that to an independent person coming to you to get their work published.
I guess it would help to know how you differentiate the two?
Sylus
I think you're doing yourself a bit of a diservice with this. I mean, you can have some kind of system in place to decide what games to risk you capitol on, but who's to say what will sell and what won't? The Beatles were turned down by nearly every recording company in the industry. One even told them that guitar groups were on their way out.
Success is about 5% skill, 10% hard work and 90% luck. Yes that does add up to 105%. Success is wonky.
Hi Mark,
My main question is what the games are being compared to. If it's to one another, then I think your scale will be too speculative to mean much - your initial impression of the games going in will be the same as the one coming out, just quantified a little.
It would be interesting to run a few role-playing games out there on the shelves through your metric, and use those scores as the framework for comparing new submissions. I strongly recommend, however, being very careful about scoring "marketability." You probably know that I think RPGs true market has never been assessed or perceived by the trade magazines, distributors, or retail community.
Best,
Ron
Okay, maybe my question wasn't phrased well. I'm not really looking for feedback about the fact that we are going to evaluate submissions to the Eureka! program. That's a foregone conclusion.
For information about the Eureka! program, please see this thread:
[urlhttp://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=6210[/url]
Apologies if anything I've posted has been confusing or ,isunderstood. Sometimes I stayup late working and don't maintain a sufficient supply of coffee. ;)
To Sylus Thane:
What I meant about accepting submissions was for our Eureka! program, which is a new imprint we've created for publishing creator owned indie games.
We will be putting our new Eureka! logo on the books but also allowing the designer to have their name and logo on the book as well. So it's sort of a hybrid of the options you mention. Does that make sense?
To Jack Spencer, Jr.:
Who's to say what will sell and what won't? I don't know. What I need to determine is what my company is going to publish, promote, market and sell through distribution channels.
Will I always make the right choice? I hope so, but I may not. I'm human. That's why I'm trying to come up with a somwhat impatial method of evaluating product submissions. Plus I believe the critique would be of value to the designer, as well.
To Ron Edwards:
The submissions would be compared to existing products in the market. So a submission that had art of worse quality than the average product out there (in the reviewer's opinion) would get a score lower than 3. If the art was better than the average product (again, in the reviewer's opinion) it would score higher than a 3. And so on.
I agree that it would be interesting to run a few existing role-playing games through my rating system and use those scores as the framework for comparing new submissions.
You suggested I be very careful about scoring "marketability." I agree. I don't even know that I will keep that category. I just threw out some ideas to spark discussion.
So try this, all. Forget about what I posted in terms of categories. What categories would you evaluate a product on if the designer asked you to publish, market and distribute it?
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesThat's why I'm trying to come up with a somwhat impatial method of evaluating product submissions.
OK, in an attempt to give you some more on-topic feedback, although not as on-topic as I would like.
I, personally, do not like the idea of an impartial method for evaluating submissions. I would rather place my chips on something I personally believed in and felt strongly about and fail than to have a successful product I don't feel anything for be the biggest game ever but I published it based on an impartial system of evaluation. In the first instance, whether is succeeds or fails, it was my decision. In the second instance, it was not my decision, but the decision of this impartial system. So success or failure, it wasn't my doing.
That said, it's easy for me to say this when it isn't my bananas on the line, right? I see nothing wrong with such a thing being *part* of the decision-making process, but be willing to chuck it, right? I think you had already said as much.
Quote from: Jack Spencer JrI, personally, do not like the idea of an impartial method for evaluating submissions.
To each their own, I suppose. I think an impartial scoring method or one that is as objective as possible, would be of more benefit to prospective clients and a fairer way to evaluate submissions. After all, no one would want their submission rejected because the reviewer simply didn't like the genre, would they? Maybe someone would, but I can't see it.
"What? A sci-fi book? Sci-fi sucks for RPGs. I'm gonna give it a low score because I don't want to see GRG publishing any of this drek."
That would be a very difficult position to defend. Fortunately I'm not using that type of valuation method so I won't have to. ;)
QuoteI would rather place my chips on something I personally believed in and felt strongly about and fail than to have a successful product I don't feel anything for be the biggest game ever but I published it based on an impartial system of evaluation.
But are you speaking from the perspective of a publisher or as a designer?
QuoteThat said, it's easy for me to say this when it isn't my bananas on the line, right? I see nothing wrong with such a thing being *part* of the decision-making process, but be willing to chuck it, right?
Yes and no. It will not be the absolute authority on what we decide to accept into the program. Some of our preferences would naturally be built into the scoring process. If we received a pornographic RPG, as an exaggerated example, as a submission we would reject it no matter how good the art and writing was.
Greetings Gold Rush Games Rep,
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesAs part of our new Eureka! Publishing & Design Program I am going to be providing a review/critique of submissions. Each topic/element reviewed will be given a rating from 1 to 5.
<...>
What other elements do you feel should be evaluated when considering a product for publication?
Quite frankly, if anything, I think the sort of thing you need to review is what is presented in the material first and foremost and worry about
that before you even consider issues of style, prose, grammar, or anything else. Too, for starters, this thread needs a direct (working) link to the pertinent information (http://www.goldrushgames.com/files/Eurekacontract.pdf)* about the
Eureka! imprint/publication deal so we can all get on the same page and know what, precisely, is being asked in context. Otherwise, to play paranoid devil's advocate, I'd have to ask what is in it for the author?
If this is a "I am paying you to print my book" deal then I'd have to say... nothing. Sure, you're doing the folks a favor by looking over their material, but if they have the impression they are paying you to print their material then all they'll likely want is for you to print what they have. No comments. No questions. Just do it. Nothing against you, just be aware some folk are like that.
If this is a "subsidiary joint publication" imprint in which both author and publisher will have vested material interest then, of course, the answer to your question would be way different. (Though I'd still want to know what rights are involved in the deal.) My point being you've asked a question assuming everyone here has knowledge of your other threads and your service. Most of us have probably read your posts here and at RPGnet, but what about the newbie just signed up members who might not have?
Or, and I know this will probably come as a shock to you, what if no one has ever heard of your game company. Ok, calm down. Count to ten. I know it's ridiculous, but it could happen.
Heart beating slower now? Good.
Links to the information are needed. (Golden opportunities and all that, wot?) Not just for newbies but as a memory refresh for those of us who might not have read your threads in a while. You could put a direct link in your sig, if you want, no pressure. Just a suggestion
DSTM.
That said I think a few questions posed to you, as a representative of a gaming company, might be a good start.
For instance what would turn YOU off to a submission?
If a author asked you to sign a non-disclosure form would you reject their MSS out of hand?
What if the MSS being submitted had already been "garage" published in a limited run or two?
If a MSS submitted already had copyright filed (and the author made a point to let you know) what would be your response?
You mentioned artwork, does this mean you will be checking all illustrations used to be sure that artists copyrighted and intellectual material is not being stolen?
If a author wanted to negotiate the boilerplate in your contract BEFORE submitting anything to you, would this impact how you viewed the authors submission?
For that matter will you be reviewing the MSS to ensure that no copyrighted material- such as mention or use of established worlds and derivative works of fiction that may infringe upon intellectual properties- are used?
If you find that submitted MSS do, in some minor or major way, use copyrighted material, however incidentally or accidentally, will you work with the submitters to help them fix the errors in the submitted MSS or reject the material?
There's probably a dozen other questions I could ask, but I think that suffices to illustrate the potential problems.
Was that a sigh of relief? ;)
I am sure you will make certain your legal department is going to give the MSS the once over to cover your arse, but some authors may not be aware that they've crossed that line. Something to think about when considering how far you are willing to go to work with authors who would like to print their works through your imprint. Or let it be known that any such MSS will be rejected, end of story.
Sounds like a headache to me but, hey, God favors the compassionate!
Right?
Much luck. I apologize if it sounded like I was trying to break your balls.
Kind Regards,
Kester Pelagius
* hope you don't mind?
Quote from: Kester PelagiusGreetings Gold Rush Games Rep,
I'm getting a lot of that reference today.
Please, call me Mark or Mr. Arsenault. :)
QuoteQuite frankly, if anything, I think the sort of thing you need to review is what is presented in the material first and foremost and worry about that before you even consider issues of style, prose, grammar, or anything else.
Part of the requirement for a submission to be considered for the program is that it has to be "ready to print," though. So we'd be evaluating the whole package (writing, style, design, "look," etc.) at once.
QuoteToo, for starters, this thread needs a direct (working) link to the pertinent information (http://www.goldrushgames.com/files/Eurekacontract.pdf)* about the Eureka! imprint/publication deal...
http://eureka.goldrushgames.com
The page is still being created, but you can still download the draft agreement, a cost & royalties spreadsheet and other items to give you a clear idea of where we're going with the program.
QuoteOtherwise, to play paranoid devil's advocate, I'd have to ask what is in it for the author?
That's not paranoid. It's good sense to ask such a thing.
In summary, what's in it for the author is:
- POD publication of their book (with their imprint/logo)
- Client maintains copyrights (we just license publishing rights)
- ISBN assignment & barcode
- Listing in R.R. Bowker's Books in Print (http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/isbn/us/isbnqa.asp) database
- Listing in the Ingram Book Co. (http://www.ingrambookgroup.com/default.asp?info=ibc) database
- Listing on Amazon.com, BN.com and others.
- Review copies sent out to those on our review list
- Association with an established publisher (http://www.goldrushgames.com) (est. 1995)
- Distribution sales via our sales office (Tundra Sales Org. (http://www.tundra-sales-org.com))
- A percentage of all sales of the book
- Representation (and potential sales) at cons we attend
- Listing in the GRG catalog, on the GRG web site (http://www.goldrushgames.com), etc.
- Marketing (not exhaustive, but comparable to what give our own products)
- A much cheaper alternative to traditional printing
[/list:u]
All told, what we're offering would cost a new start up company thousands of dollars. We're offering it for as low as a few hundred.
Quote...if they have the impression they are paying you to print their material then all they'll likely want is for you to print what they have.
To clarify, that's not what Eureka! is about. We're not a printer. We're a publisher. Our sister company, Golden Pillar Publishing, is closer to what you describe, but even GPP provides everything Eureka! will except the game/hobby distribution.
Quote...I'd still want to know what rights are involved in the deal.
Have a look at our draft agreement, which you can access from the Eureka! web page (http://eureka.goldrushgames.com).
QuoteMost of us have probably read your posts here and at RPGnet, but what about the newbie just signed up members who might not have?
You're absolutely right. An oversight on my part. My apologies. I hope I have provided sufficient links to the information. The program is still not "live" yet, but I expect it to be by next month.
QuoteYou could put a direct link in your sig, if you want, no pressure. Just a suggestion
Um.. There is a link to the Eureka! mailing list main page in my sig. It has some info there, including a link back to the Eureka! web page... ;) But I see what you're getting at. Thanks for the prod.
QuoteFor instance what would turn YOU off to a submission?
Poor quality art, writing, editing, a cliche product for an overused genre, and so on. We're looking for quality, innovative game products from indie designers. The good stuff.
QuoteIf a author asked you to sign a non-disclosure form would you reject their MSS out of hand?
No. In fact, I hadn't considered posting a non-disclosure declaration of our own to potential clients, but that's an excellent idea. I will try to work that into the submissions process.
QuoteWhat if the MSS being submitted had already been "garage" published in a limited run or two?
Doesn't matter. Heck, I'd even happily look at titles that were previously printed, sold out, and whose owner wanted to keep it in print via POD. The product doesn't have to be "new." It just has to be good.
QuoteIf a MSS submitted already had copyright filed (and the author made a point to let you know) what would be your response?
Registering a copyright offers no more protection to a work than its mere creation and recording in tangible form. All works (in the U.S.) are protected the moment they come into being.
With that said, a creator having a copyright registered already tells me that they are serious, know at least something about copyrights, and otherwise has little bearing on our consideration of whether to publish their book.
QuoteYou mentioned artwork, does this mean you will be checking all illustrations used to be sure that artists copyrighted and intellectual material is not being stolen?
All art will be reviewed, but not to ensure protection of IP. The publishing agreement has language in which the Client guarantees that their product does not violate any third party's IP rights.
QuoteIf a author wanted to negotiate the boilerplate in your contract BEFORE submitting anything to you, would this impact how you viewed the authors submission?
Not how we viewed the submission, but it could have an affect on our decision whether to accept it into the program or not. It would depend on what the specific item was.
QuoteFor that matter will you be reviewing the MSS to ensure that no copyrighted material- such as mention or use of established worlds and derivative works of fiction that may infringe upon intellectual properties- are used?
Client declarations, guarantees and warranties are written into the contract. It would be a bad idea for a Client to submit material that violated another party's IP rights.
We do reserve the right to reject any submission, howeve, including for reasons involving legal liability.
QuoteIf you find that submitted MSS do, in some minor or major way, use copyrighted material, however incidentally or accidentally, will you work with the submitters to help them fix the errors in the submitted MSS or reject the material?
It would depend on the submission, frankly. If the submission was absolutely fantastic, but included a bit of material that we felt infringed upon another person or company's copyrights or trademarks, including violations of the d20 STL, then we would work with the client to correct it.
[quote/]There's probably a dozen other questions I could ask, but I think that suffices to illustrate the potential problems.[/quote]
I see no problems thus far. Feel free to keep the questions coming. All I ask is that you review the "Draft Agreement" and the "POD Costs & Royalties" documents before posting more questions, in case they are answered in the documents.
QuoteI am sure you will make certain your legal department is going to give the MSS the once over to cover your arse...
We've got that covered.
QuoteSounds like a headache to me but, hey, God favors the compassionate!
One man's headache is another man's livelihood. ;)
QuoteMuch luck. I apologize if it sounded like I was trying to break your balls.
Not at all. Yours is one of the kinder messages I've dealt with lately.
Mark,
This is just a pet peeve but you have defined subjective criteria and called it objective. I know you want to sound as positive and impartial as possible but unless you will be referring to an industry standard (I do not know of such a standard) then it will be what you perceive as an industry norm. In the end, you will publish what you believe to be winning submissions by your criteria. It is admirable of you to discuss what your internal criteria will be but they are your criteria.
Secondly, the most subjective of criteria, cliché genre will most likely be your largest downcheck. Again, this is your perception of cliché yet you represent it as an objective and impartial criteria. No problem using a subjective criteria because, again, it is your company.
Just as an aside, we hve done much of the benefits you have described and it has not cost us thousands and thousands of dollars. I believe POD is viable as a JIT modeled supply chain. If employed correctly it will yield a smaller per unit net but have a considerably lower break even.
Please do not take this post as a personal attack. It is merely pointing out what some posters may not understand (myself included 8-D). In the end, it sounds like you are offering a service to allow writers to POD Publish and that is a good thing. If you read this post with an accusatory or inflammatory tone in your mental voice read it again with a neutral or chatty tone and you will get my meaning.
Keep up the good discussion, it ALWAYS helps.
Bill
HinterWelt Enterprises
The Next Level in RPGs
William E. Corrie III
www.hinterwelt.com
http://www.hinterwelt.com/chargen/
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesAfter all, no one would want their submission rejected because the reviewer simply didn't like the genre, would they? Maybe someone would, but I can't see it.
Well, maybe. But then, I wouldn't feel comfortable going with a publisher who said "I really do not like your game. I simply do not like the genre. I don't get it. I don't see what other people find so interesting about it. But I think we can make some money with you're game, so I'll publish it."
QuoteBut are you speaking from the perspective of a publisher or as a designer?
Neither. Ha! I'm speaking as an idealist. I am also speaking from the POV that is I were a publisher and something comes across my desk that sparks my interest and draws my attention, then it is likely to do the same for the game buying public.
So you feel that it is a waste of my time to solicit feedback on review criteria from the people here in this forum? Gads. I've been criticized before for not caring what my customers think. Never before have I been criticized for caring what my potential customers think. ;)
Mark,
Another point that you could review the submission on:
"Content matching the promise"
eg. "101 Spell books" not having any spell books would be a complete failure in this department.
Considering that you will have control over the marketing and such this point should not be too much of an issue.
A more delicate example of the content not matching the promise could be, a book that in the introduction talks heavily about characterisation and interaction, yet every conflict/situation is resolved throught violence.
People like to get what they pay for, I am sure that you are very aware of that. This criteria simple puts a point value on that aspect of the book. Good luck with your project.
I've been following the thread, and there have been some great points brought up, but I wanted to say this:
I think it's a great idea, and I see no problem with the method of evaluation you're using. The point is to make money after all! Hopefully you'll be able to do that with games you (as a company) are excited about, but failing that, at least games you feel confident deserve to be successful, based on the care and work that has been put into them (as your "impartial" methodology determines).
You seem to be aware as well that "impartial" doesn't mean free from biases, and it isn't the only consideration, but a good baseline. Personally, I'm glad you thought enough of us to state what the considerations are out front (often, you get generic rejections with no idea what is "wrong" - at least with this list, we can try to look through point by point and try to determine how well or poorly any particular thing was done so we can fix it).
When I get the damn thing finished, I hope to submit my game to your program.
Aidan
In a similiar line to my first reply.
Does the artwork match the content. It would be no good having H R Gieger(sp?) doing the artwork for a RPG about pixies. Or having a great pokemon cartoonist do work for a dark and gritty futuristic horror story.
Good suggestions.
Which do you folks think would be better? A 1-5 score or a binary (Pass/Fail) score?
I can see advantages and disadvantages to both, but I'm curious what you think, too.
Greetings Mr. Arsenault,
Quote from: Gold Rush Games
Part of the requirement for a submission to be considered for the program is that it has to be "ready to print," though. So we'd be evaluating the whole package (writing, style, design, "look," etc.) at once.
QuoteOtherwise, to play paranoid devil's advocate, I'd have to ask what is in it for the author?
That's not paranoid. It's good sense to ask such a thing.
In summary, what's in it for the author is:
- POD publication of their book (with their imprint/logo)
- Client maintains copyrights (we just license publishing rights)
- ISBN assignment & barcode
- Listing in R.R. Bowker's Books in Print (http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/isbn/us/isbnqa.asp) database
- Listing in the Ingram Book Co. (http://www.ingrambookgroup.com/default.asp?info=ibc) database
- Listing on Amazon.com, BN.com and others.
- Review copies sent out to those on our review list
- Association with an established publisher (http://www.goldrushgames.com) (est. 1995)
- Distribution sales via our sales office (Tundra Sales Org. (http://www.tundra-sales-org.com))
- A percentage of all sales of the book
- Representation (and potential sales) at cons we attend
- Listing in the GRG catalog, on the GRG web site (http://www.goldrushgames.com), etc.
- Marketing (not exhaustive, but comparable to what give our own products)
- A much cheaper alternative to traditional printing
[/list:u]
So, though it is not explicitly stated, we can assume that this is a program strictly for books. No "boxed sets" or RPGs with "board game" or other gimmicky elements (like cards) need apply, yes?
That's very important to know, IMO, since some indie designers may make use of non-standard resolution mechanics and methods. But if the program is strictly for books, that means anything that can't be printed strictly as a book need not apply, or can it?
Also, as an aside, what manner of binding are we talking about here?
Will authors have a number of choices to choose from ranging from, say, perfect bound to saddle stitched? And what kind of paper will be available within the book? For the art? Covers?
Incidentally, will there be galleys or proofs made available for review by potential customers?
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteFor instance what would turn YOU off to a submission?
Poor quality art, writing, editing, a cliche product for an overused genre, and so on. We're looking for quality, innovative game products from indie designers. The good stuff.
Ah, road block right there in the "cliche" or "overused genre" bit.
The main thing here will be a response of "Who is to say what is a cliche or overused genre?"
Every author will (hope and want to believe) their MSS has that extra *something* that sets their endeavor apart, but if that work happens to fall into a genre category you aren't even going to accept submissions for that month. . . Loss of potential customer.
Or, from a writer's point of view, if you say your magazine is "open to all submissions" but then have a form rejection letter that simply states that you did not like the work, personally, as a matter of your own reading taste what you've just stated is that, as an editor, I, the writer, need to entertain you.
Problem is that should
NOT be my job, unless you're running a fanzine.
Sure, editors have to sometimes think that way. It's a judgement call, but which is the
more appropriate question to ask: "Does this story entertain me?" -or- "Will this story entertain my readership?"
Or, to put it a different way, ask yourself when the last time the market came knocking on an editors door to ask them what their taste in the next big trend was. Never has happened, unless you're with the Illuminati or the Bilderbergers maybe. In which case I've said too much already!!! ;)
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteIf a MSS submitted already had copyright filed (and the author made a point to let you know) what would be your response?
Registering a copyright offers no more protection to a work than its mere creation and recording in tangible form. All works (in the U.S.) are protected the moment they come into being.
With that said, a creator having a copyright registered already tells me that they are serious, know at least something about copyrights, and otherwise has little bearing on our consideration of whether to publish their book.
Interesting. Let me rephrase. . .
Say I have a game, X, that I have both registered copyright and trademark for. Would this make it easier for you or more difficult from the published end of things to work with?
Would you prefer that authors who approach you have their MSS ready to submit and print with all the bases covered, or at least as many as possible?
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteYou mentioned artwork, does this mean you will be checking all illustrations used to be sure that artists copyrighted and intellectual material is not being stolen?
All art will be reviewed, but not to ensure protection of IP. The publishing agreement has language in which the Client guarantees that their product does not violate any third party's IP rights.
Ok, but what if a third party sees a book published by your company that has artwork in it that they feel is derivative (or a blatant rip off) of something of theirs and decide to file suit against your company.
Are you sure that such a disclaimer will protect you?
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteIf a author wanted to negotiate the boilerplate in your contract BEFORE submitting anything to you, would this impact how you viewed the authors submission?
Not how we viewed the submission, but it could have an affect on our decision whether to accept it into the program or not. It would depend on what the specific item was.
So, to be accepted into the program, you're saying that the author would have to first sign the contract??
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteFor that matter will you be reviewing the MSS to ensure that no copyrighted material- such as mention or use of established worlds and derivative works of fiction that may infringe upon intellectual properties- are used?
Client declarations, guarantees and warranties are written into the contract. It would be a bad idea for a Client to submit material that violated another party's IP rights.
We do reserve the right to reject any submission, howeve, including for reasons involving legal liability.
Granted, it would not be a good idea to submist material that obviously violated established rights of another property. But what about something done in parody or spoof?
Are you familiar with the movie Zardoz? If not it basically is a post-apocalyptic flick in which heavy use is made of imagery/ideas derivative of the Wizard of Oz. But it's taken almost to spoof/paradoy. Then again it could be argued such protrayals fall perfectly within fair use, being a cultural icon and all. (Iffy.)
I assume that such borderline works will be considered on a case by case basis, but what if someone plagerizes a obscure work that no one reading your slush that week is familiar with?
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteThere's probably a dozen other questions I could ask, but I think that suffices to illustrate the potential problems.
I see no problems thus far. Feel free to keep the questions coming. All I ask is that you review the "Draft Agreement" and the "POD Costs & Royalties" documents before posting more questions, in case they are answered in the documents.
As you asked so nicely. . . :)
I see that you are asking for a number of rights. I asked earlier about modification to the boilerplate. . . But now what I want to know is how one mediates disputes between the author and the publishing house if a problem arises. What will be the recourse available to the undersigned if they have a dispute with contractual obligations?
As for the rest of if. . . Kiddies, if you're reading this, and haven't read the PDF, or have and don't know what to make of it. Speak up now while the man is here. It's six pages and says a lot, but what does it really all mean? Do you know?
Curious about why it refers to NET and not GROSS?
Have questions about liability, fees, charges, or other costs that you may incur as a result of. . . ???
Want to ask the man how this program will differ from going to the local Kinko's or vanity press?
Kind Regards,
Kester Pelagius
P.S. As always grammatical and syntax errors are purely the fault of sleep deprived gremlins! ;)
Mark,
In my experience if you grade them with a specific number at the end it will help to make your final decision. Especially when there are several products that are similiar.
Hi Mark,
My first impression, based on your first post, was to recommend removing the numerical scale or collapsing it to 1-sucks, 2-OK, 3-good. But then I decided that 4 would be better - so that you really have to bite the bullet between 2 and 3. A mid-value on numerical scale tends to create an artificial cluster as the rater grows lazy. A poorish product with a great feature or two, and a pretty good product with a fatal flaw or two tend both to get rated "3" on a 1-5 scale.
Also, and this is a horribly unscientific anecdotal sort of thing, I recommend not going above a scale of 4. Once past 6 increments, issues such as the difference between "very average good" and "average average good" start cropping up.
Best,
Ron
Hi Mark,
The list of criteria look fine on the surface. But you're implying that you then intend to average the scores and compare the average to a minimum threshold.
QuoteThe idea is that products will have to receive a minimum score (of, say, 3.5) in order to be accepted into the program...
* Marketability (is the genre a fresh twist or cliche?)
* Cover illustration
* Interior art
* Organization
* Writing (incl. style, voice, etc.)
* Interior design (readability, graphic design, attractiveness, etc.)
* Editing
* Playability (fun factor)
What does it really mean to do that? Averaging says that an excellent cover illustration can make up for poor playability, and that the cover plus good interior art and graphic design can make up for abysmally awful playability.
It also means that weakness in art or organization or writing style could keep a product with marvellous playability out -- so that, for example, the 1e AD&D books would not have been publishable in 1979 by these standards.
Neither of these possibilities is a good thing, at least not from my point of view as a potential customer.
I suggest a pass/fail threshold for each individual element, in addition to an average of
open-ended individual scores that can be increased above the normal range when a feature truly merits it. So, truly excellent art or playability alone could get a product in, provided it was at least adequate in all the other areas. The pass threshold could be lower for some items than for others, and it could include specific cases and expectations -- such as, poor spelling in the editing is a failure condition, not because it's so harmful but because it's so easy to fix; or minimal cover art consisting of tasteful text and abstract graphics might pass while a poor or inappropriate illustration would not.
- Walt
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesSo you feel that it is a waste of my time to solicit feedback on review criteria from the people here in this forum? Gads. I've been criticized before for not caring what my customers think. Never before have I been criticized for caring what my potential customers think. ;)
Not sure what you're saying here.
I wouldn't say waste of time, but I personally wouldn't do it. This may explain all of the money I've made in the publishing industry, but having never been might be a better reason. I think I'm the sort who believes more in instincts. Devleoping an objective criteria takes more work and, from what little I've seen and read about business, works about as well as instincts (worse in some cases, I guess. Better in others). That seems to be where I'm coming from.
Quote from: Kester PelagiusSo, though it is not explicitly stated, we can assume that this is a program strictly for books. No "boxed sets" or RPGs with "board game" or other gimmicky elements (like cards) need apply, yes?
Correct. Our printer is not able to produce and distribute boxes, cards, etc., via their POD print system.
QuoteAlso, as an aside, what manner of binding are we talking about here?
Perfect (square) glue binding.
QuoteWill authors have a number of choices to choose from ranging from, say, perfect bound to saddle stitched?
No.
QuoteAnd what kind of paper will be available within the book? For the art? Covers?
Interior pages will be printed on 60-lb. offset, opaque 480 PPI, creme white acid-free paper (for books 6x9" and smaller -- if we allow that option; it's undecided yet) or 50-lb. offset, opaque, 500 PPI, white acid-free paper (for 8.25x11" books).
Covers are printed in full color, one side, on 80-lb. offset, enamel paper and laminated.
QuoteIncidentally, will there be galleys or proofs made available for review by potential customers?
I wasn't planning on sending proofs off to the clients, but it's certainly possible.
QuoteThe main thing here will be a response of "Who is to say what is a cliche or overused genre?"
The publisher.
QuoteEvery author will (hope and want to believe) their MSS has that extra *something* that sets their endeavor apart,
And that would be part of the evaluation.
Quotebut if that work happens to fall into a genre category you aren't even going to accept submissions for that month. . . Loss of potential customer.
That would not happen. We would not ignore certain genres in certain months. That's silly. What I mean by a cliche or overused genre is, say... "A fantasy game. Just like D&D but better."
QuoteOr, from a writer's point of view, if you say your magazine is "open to all submissions" but then have a form rejection letter that simply states that you did not like the work, personally, as a matter of your own reading taste what you've just stated is that, as an editor, I, the writer, need to entertain you.
No, as a
publisher you need to sell you product to me and I, as the publisher, need to belileve that the product would appeal to our customers. There's a big difference between that and "entertaining me."
Eureka! would have no obligation to print every submission that comes its way and I have no intention of doing so. There
has to be some sort of evaluation criteria to weed out those products that simply aren't up to par in terms of quality.
QuoteSay I have a game, X, that I have both registered copyright and trademark for. Would this make it easier for you or more difficult from the published end of things to work with?
Neither.
QuoteWould you prefer that authors who approach you have their MSS ready to submit and print with all the bases covered, or at least as many as possible?
If you're referring to copyright and trademark registration, it doesn't matter, really. If you're referring to something else, perhaps you could restate your question more clearly.
QuoteOk, but what if a third party sees a book published by your company that has artwork in it that they feel is derivative (or a blatant rip off) of something of theirs and decide to file suit against your company.
See the draft publishing agreement. In it the client agrees to certain conditions; essentially that the client is responsible for ensuring their work does not infringe on others' IP rights (including the d20 and OGL or other licenses), and client also agrees to defende and hold GRG harmless in such cases.
QuoteAre you sure that such a disclaimer will protect you?
I don't think it's appropriate to dscuss legal theory here in this thread. I am not a lawyer. I do know the clauses are pretty standard fare, however.
QuoteSo, to be accepted into the program, you're saying that the author would have to first sign the contract??
To be
accepted? Yes.
QuoteBut what about something done in parody or spoof?
We would evaluate parody product on a case-by-case basis. I cannot give you a blanket policy statement.
Quote...but what if someone plagerizes a obscure work that no one reading your slush that week is familiar with?
That has no bearing on the legality of a product being accepted as parody or satire, IMO. But that's what we have lawyers for.
Quote...what I want to know is how one mediates disputes between the author and the publishing house if a problem arises.
I believe section XIII.L. covers that. It describes the requirements for formal mediation in cases in which there is no resolution reached between the parties.
QuoteAs for the rest of if. . . Kiddies, if you're reading this, and haven't read the PDF, or have and don't know what to make of it. Speak up now while the man is here. It's six pages and says a lot, but what does it really all mean? Do you know?
We encourage clients to consult an attorney with any questions regarding the agreement (bearing in mind that the current version is a non-official
draft). The agreement itself restates this in section XIII.C. Just FYI.
QuoteCurious about why it refers to NET and not GROSS?
Because that's the way we structured it. Due t the POD pricing structure and other fees and costs involved with our bringing a POD book to market, we felt it best to structure it that way.
QuoteWant to ask the man how this program will differ from going to the local Kinko's or vanity press?
That's easy. Take a product produced at a local print shop and compare it to one of our POD products (we list them on the
Eureka! page (http://eureka.goldrushgames.com)), in terms of production quality and other features (barcode, distribution, etc.).
Quote from: Walt FreitagHi Mark,
Hi there, Walt.
QuoteAveraging says that an excellent cover illustration can make up for poor playability, and that the cover plus good interior art and graphic design can make up for abysmally awful playability.
True. We could require a product receive a minimum overall score of X and also state that no catagory can receive a score of, say, 1, and still pass.
QuoteIt also means that weakness in art or organization or writing style could keep a product with marvellous playability out (**unnecessary personal criticism deleted**)
Correct.
QuoteSo, truly excellent art or playability alone could get a product in, provided it was at least adequate in all the other areas.
Which is precisely what would happen using the system I suggested above.
Greetings Mr. Arsenault,
Hope all is well in your part of the world this fine day.
Per your orignal question. . . Mr. Edwards has a point. If you were offering a editing service a scale of 1-5 (or whatever) would be very helpful to the author, for sure. But if this is purely a classification for you, as publisher, to decided "yeah or nay" about a submission then maybe that is what you should go with.
Keep it simple. Unless you would like to provide some feedback to authors so they can get a better idea of why their submission wasn't accepted, in which case such a scale would likely be very helpful, if taken in the spirit intended.
Thus the questions that need answering are probably 1) which would work best for you, and; 2) what do you intend to do with the information after you review a submission?
If it's going to stay "in house" then keep it simple. Just my opinion.
Now, on to. . .
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuotebut if that work happens to fall into a genre category you aren't even going to accept submissions for that month. . . Loss of potential customer.
That would not happen. We would not ignore certain genres in certain months. That's silly. What I mean by a cliche or overused genre is, say... "A fantasy game. Just like D&D but better."
Ah, IC. That's sounds reasonable. (Must have misunderstood your previous remarks, apologies.) You're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, that over used themes will have a lower chance of acceptance than, say, a game that happens to fall in a pseudo post-apocalyptic genre with flavorings of cyberpunk with the spin that the characters are, say, Tibetan monks instead of the typical cyborgs, humans, or enforcers. So long as the game is compelling and the standard genre tropes aren't abused or simply reused without anything to set them apart from half a dozen other games similar to the one being submitted?
Wow, that was a bit long winded. *rolls eyes at self*
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteOr, from a writer's point of view, if you say your magazine is "open to all submissions" but then have a form rejection letter that simply states that you did not like the work, personally, as a matter of your own reading taste what you've just stated is that, as an editor, I, the writer, need to entertain you.
No, as a publisher you need to sell you product to me and I, as the publisher, need to belileve that the product would appeal to our customers. There's a big difference between that and "entertaining me."
Eureka! would have no obligation to print every submission that comes its way and I have no intention of doing so. There has to be some sort of evaluation criteria to weed out those products that simply aren't up to par in terms of quality.
Good point. Come to think of it, and there's no reason for you to unless you think it's a good idea, how about including a paragraph stating this on the Eureka! page?
It might discourage some but, then again, it might make those who want to submit think twice about whether their work is really ready to be submitted for printing. Just a thought.
Quote from: Gold Rush GamesQuoteWould you prefer that authors who approach you have their MSS ready to submit and print with all the bases covered, or at least as many as possible?
If you're referring to copyright and trademark registration, it doesn't matter, really. If you're referring to something else, perhaps you could restate your question more clearly.
Apologies. What I mean is, if I have a MSS set and ready to go, with grahpics and title (and the sort of things that can have a SM or TM applied to them) would you prefer to see such MSS as, say, opposed to just a MSS that hasn't had artwork and titles worked up for it yet?
Thanks for taking the time to reponsed and clarify.
Best of luck!
Kind Regards,
Kester Pelagius
edited for clarity
Quote from: Kester PelagiusUnless you would like to provide some feedback to authors so they can get a better idea of why their submission wasn't accepted, in which case such a scale would likely be very helpful, if taken in the spirit intended.
That's our intent, yes.
products can be resubmitted, but we thought it would be helpfull for potential clients to know what we felt needed to be improved before we would reconsider a submission.
QuoteThus the questions that need answering are probably 1) which would work best for you, and; 2) what do you intend to do with the information after you review a submission?
Yes, I understand that. I'm not asking for those reading this thread to decide our policy for us. I'm looking for feedback to help me determine how best to present the evaluation of product submissions.
Ultimately it will be my decision and I certainly am under no obligation to consider any comments from those outside of my company. But I invited said feedback in the hopes of considering POVs that I may not have considered.
QuoteYou're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, that over used themes will have a lower chance of acceptance...
Correct.
Quote...if I have a MSS set and ready to go, with grahpics and title (and the sort of things that can have a SM or TM applied to them) would you prefer to see such MSS as, say, opposed to just a MSS that hasn't had artwork and titles worked up for it yet?
All products submitted for consideration must be complete and "ready to print." We can be contracted to design the cover, of course. But not having at the very least a cover illustration knocks a product out of consideration.
QuoteThanks for taking the time to reponsed and clarify.
My pleasure.
Hi Mark,
My apologies for any unnecessary personal criticism. If you had any role in the writing, art, production, or publication of the books I mentioned, I was unaware of it and I certainly did not select that example based on any perceived connection to you personally.
The point I was trying to get at is that your list emphasizes style over substance.
When you average a bunch of ratings with equal weighting, those overall aspects of quality that are represented by the most specific and numerous criteria are emphasized. To show what I mean, I could shift the emphasis the other way by grouping Cover Illustration, Interior Art, and Interior Design into a single list item (e.g. "Visual Presentation") and expand Playability into three list items, such as: Accessibility, Usability (game design quality if it's a game system, suitability for the system if it's supplemental material), and Depth (sustained play value over time).
But instead of going that far, how about just evening the playing field:
Content
* Game design functionality OR Suitability of material for stated purpose
* Writing (inc. style, voice, etc.)
* Accessibility (organization, clarity, completeness)
* Sustained play value (relative to price)
* Originality
Presentation
* Cover illustration
* Interior art
* Interior design
* Editing
* Integration of elements (art is appropriate to content, etc.)
As the criteria list currently stands, you can take away one item and you'd have suitable rating system for a coffee table book, a home-and-garden magazine, a clothing catalog, or a corporate annual report. One item out of eight reflects that we're talking about games and materials to be used in games.
It makes me sad to think that when I buy a cookbook, the publisher might have chosen it for publication based on criteria just like that, except with "How well the recipes actually work" substituted for "Playability." It makes me even sadder to think of textbook publishers who might be stuffing "Subject Matter Accuracy and Completeness" into that lonely eighth slot.
I suppose this just reflects the reality of the modern marketplace which you can't escape. But I still find it unfortunate. That's my opinion, which you did ask for. Nothing personal.
- Walt
Quote from: Walt FreitagMy apologies for any unnecessary personal criticism.
No need for an apology. I didn't perceive any personal criticism.
QuoteThe point I was trying to get at is that your list emphasizes style over substance.
How do?
QuoteWhen you average a bunch of ratings with equal weighting, those overall aspects of quality that are represented by the most specific and numerous criteria are emphasized.
Ah. I think I follow what you're saying.
QuoteBut instead of going that far, how about just evening the playing field:
Content
* Game design functionality OR Suitability of material for stated purpose
* Writing (inc. style, voice, etc.)
* Accessibility (organization, clarity, completeness)
* Sustained play value (relative to price)
* Originality
Presentation
* Cover illustration
* Interior art
* Interior design
* Editing
* Integration of elements (art is appropriate to content, etc.)
That's something to consider. Thanks.
QuoteAs the criteria list currently stands, you can take away one item and you'd have suitable rating system for a coffee table book, a home-and-garden magazine, a clothing catalog, or a corporate annual report.
I fail to see a fault to this from the perspective of a company seeking to publish other peoples' games.
QuoteI suppose this just reflects the reality of the modern marketplace which you can't escape. But I still find it unfortunate. That's my opinion, which you did ask for. Nothing personal.
And I appreciate you sharing it with me. :)