Game design documents

[ASSEMbler]

I have some complete game design documents from acclaim.

The design document that shines the brightest is Shadowman 2.

It's not every day you get to see an entire game laid out
from storyboards to the level designs. It's quite a learning experience to
read one of these from a million dollar project. It’s chock full of
lore, concept art, and game play flowcharts.

I have been considering scanning and releasing these; they would
give anyone who is programming on a professional or amateur basis
a super resource. While their games were average, acclaim's documenting process was top notch. It's obvious that the sincere toil of many people
went into this document, and at almost 300 pages, it shows.

I suppose the first problem is the repercussions of releasing such
a valuable document. Secondly, I don't own scanner. Thirdly,
would it make sense to watermark it, or would it just be trouble.

Having worked hard on projects in my line of work, I am torn between
the pride I would have in others being able to see my hard work. I would also perhaps be outraged if I played the devil's advocate.

So I am asking your WELL THOUGHT OUT opinions.
Two second replies are not needed when discussing things like this.

[karsten]

so, my opinion on the matter, is that it's really up to you. /jk :D

I mean, i'm almost always favorable to a public release, since such documentation would really make people understand what is behind a videogame, how is born etc etc. and even more might show game programmers out there how to organize their work like professionals.

i would say release the pack, but the problem is: would someone steal the document for using the game concept as his own or for profit? Would it be ok for you if someone realizes the game and release as freeware? would you consider selling it someday?

I suggest you to consider to release it under some kind of license. WATERMARKING is a MUST. for what concerns scanners, don't be afraid you can esily get a really surprisingly good one for around 50$... i have a Trust one that even takes the burden of removing "noise" from magazine scans by itself and allows for CRAZY resolution and customization of the scan....

[sequent_blender]

I really don't know the ins and outs of this, however I'd be fairly wary of releasing it unless I knew the answers to a few questions that spring to mind. I trust that some of our more learned collegues may be able to answer these:

(a) Were the documents legitimately obtained (I presume they came from the Acclaim auction)

(b) Does "owning" the documentation to Shadowman 2 mean that you have the right to release it, or did someone or some company purchase the "rights" to Shadowman 2, the franchise, and hence releasing the documentation may infringe their trademarks or whatever?

If all this checks out, then really it's up to you...

Dave.

[EvilWays]

(a) Were the documents legitimately obtained (I presume they came from the Acclaim auction)

(b) Does "owning" the documentation to Shadowman 2 mean that you have the right to release it, or did someone or some company purchase the "rights" to Shadowman 2, the franchise, and hence releasing the documentation may infringe their trademarks or whatever?

(a) wouldn't me much of a problem, (b) would be more complex as merely having these documents doesn't necessarily infer ownership of the IP. If the "rest of it" (ownership of the franchise and all encompassing properties) were part of how (a) was obtained, then yes.

So (b) would be the sticking point of legality, even if this was just released to this inner circle, if you will.

[ASSEMbler]

I doubt anyone would infringe on it.

I'm just worried about too much attention.

[Barc0de]

i think a release should be made to individual and trusted members (upon their application for such privately) for serious purposes upon request. Just to be safe.

[kammedo]

Well.
Consider legal aspects first (obviously).

If im not wrong the game didnt get released at all. The company went nuts, you bought from it them via an auction, so its, well, yours. So you are the owner of it. It surely is unique (argh), and if you release it you will get much fame for that. And youll spread it all over the internet, so please before (if ever you plan to) doing so WATERMARK it.

There. *drools*

[ASSEMbler]

Well someone bought the IP for shadowman. I just don't know who, and if they'd go apeshit.

[kammedo]

Well someone bought the IP for shadowman. I just don't know who, and if they'd go apeshit.

Well, they dont have the artwork of that - so that means theyr shadowman 2 will never (if ever) be like the one you have. Thus there's no copyright infringement, right? Barc0de please double check this.

[Crescent]

Well someone bought the IP for shadowman. I just don't know who, and if they'd go apeshit.

Afaik, all the original Valiant characters (which were bought by Acclaim in 1996) returned to Valiant Entertainment in 2005 after the bankruptcy but they could have been resold since then.

[sequent_blender]

So it would appear, in summary, that there's sufficient doubt about the legality of releasing the documentation that you should probably avoid a widespread release.

However I think, as Barc0de previously said, a limited release to trusted members of the forum (upon request) on condition that no-one is permitted to further forward it without gettng permission from you, may be appropriate.

This should be done by PM because there's no guarauntee that some people that may object, or otherwise potentially cause trouble, don't have access to this section of the forum. Just my opinion.

[Omar]

Releasing anything based on it without the license would infringe copyrights.
Doing anything based on the documents by itself would be costly (remember that the million are going into actual production, documentation and pre-production is a fraction of total development cost) so no shady developers will do that.

Putting watermark indeed is only asking for trouble and watermarks are plain stupid and should be banned from the internet anyway. Having obtained and scanning releasing those documents is one great action of goodwill but not warrant of sticking a watermark when you consider the work that have been put into it originally.

By the way writing 300-pages design bibles this way is not always a good thing for the video game industry, at least there's an open debate. When you say:
"While their games were average, acclaim's documenting process was top notch"
Consider that there is a relationship.
Documenting = reducing risks, locking contents = doesn't matter if the game ends being bad, it's too late anyway
Building video games is not as simple and mastered as building a movie.
The best games were never built this way.

[kammedo]

Consider that there is a relationship.
Documenting = reducing risks, locking contents = doesn't matter if the game ends being bad, it's too late anyway
Building video games is not as simple and mastered as building a movie.
The best games were never built this way.

Yep true, but we are talking tech stuff here - no final viewpoint. You shouldnt start a game if you dont believe it will be a success, at least imo.

[mairsil]

Building video games is not as simple and mastered as building a movie.

True, but it is still, to a certain extent, a software engineering problem. Design and other technical documents are a requirement in many fields of software engineering and it is natural that some parts of the game industry would rely heavily on them.

[ASSEMbler]

Building video games is not as simple and mastered as building a movie.
The best games were never built this way.

Every single game has a plan. Weapons, levels, theme. No one makes a game without a design document. How do you coordinate 40 people without one?
Impossible.

[Parris]

Well someone bought the IP for shadowman. I just don't know who, and if they'd go apeshit.

This is the precise reason Diddydonn & I decided against currently releasing "Emergency Mayhem". Given that Codemasters were about to release a (very different) version of it on the Nintendo Wii. One developer we asked about it actually laughed and said 'Go on, live dangerously!' and I thought 'Nah, not right now thanks!'

I also think it should be made available only to trusted members. As for watermarking it...

I am torn. A) You don't want it falling into the hands of someone who immediately thinks he / she can profit from it and B) at the same you don't want too much attention. :noooo:

[Flyinghigh]

wow i would like to see such a Game design Document.
I could learn a lot from it for my own business.

[Barc0de]

Shadowman2 was released on the PS2 Kammedo. The game development manual is very much the property of whoever owns the IP I m afraid.

[kammedo]

Hmm Ok. But it states "Acclaim". ASM buyed it from theyr funeral auction?

[KaL_YoshiKa]

I guess the question is..if they now own the rights to Shadowman does that included all documents produced retrospectively. They own the legal rights to Shadowman and presumable all trademarks and publishing rights but does that intitle them to ownership of production documents that were made prior to their acqusition of the Shadowman franchise.

If I understand my laws correctly (and I'm only going by what I know) I would expect that these documents were protected mostly by Acclaim's confidentiallity agreements and not by ownership. I'd guess the only thing this could risk is damaging the potential profit of future shadowman games which could be grounds to sue. Or breech of copyright as Acclaim is now dead so you're not breeching their privacy laws to my knowledge though I guess the new company could make a claim that they now own the documents.

I'd say release them but I'm not the one who'd be held liable but I would like to check them out.