4 years on, a look at where Games Solution Center has succeeded and failed
The Games Solution Center (GSC) in Singapore, initiated by the Media Development Authority and managed by Nanyang Polytechnic, is going all out for the Game Developer Conference (GDC) in San Francisco this year. It’s not only hosting the largest number of Singapore game companies to date – 21, if you’re curious – it’s also sponsoring three different events and parties at the con.
According to its communications team from Nanyang Polytechnic, GSC’s function over the nearly four years it has been running has been to be “a one-stop resource centre that provides a rapid prototyping development environment for Singapore-based small-medium enterprises to develop their games.” Albert Lim, a member of the GSC management committee, says it also hopes to build an ecosystem for developers both fledgling and veteran.
It’s great that GSC has this noble ambition, and that it has provided both exhibition spaces for Singapore developers at GDC and sponsored events on top of the usual seminars, talks, and assistance it provides its tenants and non-GSC developers. If only all countries could be so lucky! But could its budget and resources be put to better use?
Pairing up with Pocket Gamer
On the surface, it makes no sense for GSC to sponsor three PocketGamer events at the upcoming GDC San Francisco running March 2 to 6. Attending PocketGamer DrinkUp, PocketGamer Big Indie Pitch, and PocketGamer Awards cost nothing. Getting free entry for developers doesn’t seem to be a top priority here, so what is?
According to GSC, paying guarantees that local developers – including those not tenants in the center – can pitch their games to top game reviewers attending the con, and to offer them networking opportunities with top publishers. It also guarantees that every Singapore-based developer attending the conference will be able to get into PocketGamer’s events. Free tickets do run out sometimes.
“This is our first initiative to GDC and we want to hunt in packs. Our game companies are small…if we go as a pack they are able to be seen, and then people are able to take notice and get mileage from there,” says management committee chairman Daniel Tan.
Committee member Albert Lim adds that “getting in together under the Singapore brand is a totally different thing,” he says. “PocketGamer already has an established platform on which to do this.” Lim adds that the Big Indie Pitch event – which would allow local developers access to the press – was a draw to GSC when it came to deciding on sponsorship spend as well.
Based on the sponsorship terms set by PocketGamer, Singapore studios can opt to participate in a separate pitch session with the panel, which gives them an extra boost. The Singapore Game Box brand – albeit one that has been neglected for a while – is also featured on all PocketGamer event collateral. The center will also invite “semi-government” game industry organizations from Holland and France to visit the Singapore booth.
Should non-industry folks be running GSC?
The GSC’s management committee doesn’t actually have anyone with development experience, which is why the decision about PocketGamer’s events was called into question. How can someone with no industry experience make the right decisions in this industry? The committee is made up of Nanyang Polytechnic lecturers and a representative from MDA, with no game industry representatives.
“As a government agency we’re very concerned about maintaining neutrality,” says Angeline Poh, assistant chief executive officer of the MDA’s industry group. She shares that the GSC does have the option of having industry players on its management committee, but that would raise concerns about how they would remain neutral to all parties they dealt with. “How do we ensure the community is still impartial, that everyone passing through can be treated fairly?” she asks rhetorically.
However, MDA and GSC recognize that industry feedback is still needed. “To compensate for the shortcoming of having no industry representative, we keep engaging with the industry to find out what they need. Then we take it back to GSC and assess, prioritize, implement, then go back and say ‘is this relevant?’”
“No one can ever profess to do things perfectly the first time. What we need to do is to keep taking in feedback and keep validating and refining what we do,” Poh adds. She says that GSC also consults with and gets feedback from potential beneficiaries of a proposed activity before going ahead to launch it. “This has been the modus operandi and it has worked for us so far.”
The Supremacy engine isn’t quite superior
MDA assistant CEO Poh said above that no one can profess to do things right the first time. The Supremacy engine is perhaps where the center has lacked foresight. The Game Solution Centre has its own game engine called Supremacy, designed for multiplayer turn-based games, among other genres. It went into development in 2012, when the management committee made a unanimous decision to provide local developers with a cheap alternative engine for rapid prototyping.
Enter Supremacy, which, while no doubt functional, is hardly the most appropriate game engine available today. It looks like it would have been amazing in 2002, but not so more than ten years later. Multiplayer turn-based games are also not a genre popular these days, given the processing strength of smartphone models and the high penetration of speedy mobile internet. GSC chairman Tan says that the engine “did fulfil its function and meet some needs.” However, its relevance today is questionable.
To date only two companies have made use of the Supremacy engine, which became available mid last year. One is an organization that used Supremacy to develop a serious game. GSC declined to share which organization did so. The other is a hobby-cum-publishing company called Camelot Hobbies, which has co-developed a demo of the strategy game called Dragonlord Supremacy with GSC. GSC partnered up with Camelot Hobbies following an open call for developers for Supremacy.
“[When] you develop a game engine, you cannot promote the engine alone. It was built to promote adoption for free. We worked in tandem with Camelot Hobbies to develop a game so we can showcase the features of the engine,” says Lim.
Camelot Hobbies’ crowdfunding campaign for Dragonlord Supremacy, meant to raise US$5,000 in order to deliver the first chapter of the full game to interested backers, eventually failed to meet its goal by less than US$1,000. However it’s worth noting that there was a single backer for its largest tier of US$2,000, which could very well have been a well-meaning member of staff.
GSC hopes Camelot Hobbies will continue working on its Supremacy-based game. But as far as GSC is concerned, all development of the engine has ceased. Any interested developer can request a license for the full version from the MDA. GSC did not share details on its yearly budget or how this was spent.
A final verdict
“Our plan is to do a lot more promotion – going out to the market,” says Lim of the GSC’s plans for 2015. The center has committed three more events to the industry: ChinaJoy, Tokyo Game Show, and G-Star 2015.
But is this going to be enough? Industry events, while helpful, aren’t going to serve much of a purpose if its attendees don’t know how to speak out. As the management committee shared during our interview, providing a platform to raise local developers above the horde is one thing; how they make use of this chance is another.
Singapore has long had a culture of spoonfeeding, and like it or not, the expectation that someone will speak to us and help us along is more or less ingrained in many who are Singaporeans born-and-bred.
GSC needs to recognize that the industry doesn’t lack technical skills. It needs help in soft skills. How does one pitch a game to a publisher? How does one present himself on stage in front of reviewers? How does one swallow his shyness and speak to a new person at a convention in a foreign land? Let’s not even go into how so many games falter because they have no context, since the local industry lacks expertise in building a game narrative.
GSC has been helpful to the industry thus far – this cannot be denied. However it does have a lot of room for improvement. Committee member Lim acknowledges that equipment available to tenants is outdated owing to a lack of resources; what the center has now was sponsored long ago and it does not have the budget for upgrades. So why not go on out and look for new partners? It’s a prestigious thing to work with the Media Development Authority in Singapore, and there are so many companies just looking for the right chance to further their own brand awareness.
More importantly, I still believe the GSC needs to have more industry input, perhaps from a veteran who has done his time in the industry and can work full-time for the center. Industry input is an invaluable resource that cannot be accurately gleaned from simply talking to industry players.
Still, in spite of the help, or a lack of it, the Singapore game development industry is hurtling towards a very exciting future, and I hope GSC will keep up with it.
See: Ubisoft Singapore shows how the gaming juggernaut snags the best talent from around the world
This post 4 years on, a look at where Games Solution Center has succeeded and failed appeared first on Tech in Asia.