"AmeliaTodd;c-17898931" wrote:
"muzickmage;c-17898926" wrote:
"AmeliaTodd;c-17898922" wrote:
"muzickmage;c-17898919" wrote:
"AmeliaTodd;c-17898918" wrote:
"muzickmage;c-17898914" wrote:
"AmeliaTodd;c-17898912" wrote:
"muzickmage;c-17898905" wrote:
And being that they are all going to be payed for a 40 hour week anyway regardless, I can't see budget being a major factor either. Unless of course they all work part time... on call when needed.
A budget is an estimation of revenue and expenses over a specified future period of time. It doesn't matter if someone works part time, on contract or in house. The budget is budget and it's the most important thing in producing anything. Budget exist so that the revenue can be estimated. You may have the most grandiose plans and best people on work, but if the budget says that only x amount of people can be employed for x amount of time then that's it, going over budget can make the project unprofitable and in general exceeding budget is a problem for the company (or a person funding the project). Budget dictates the production framework and scope.
I can see "budget" being a major deciding factor for team size. How many people will the budget allow the company to employ. But for the people who are employed through this budget decision, I can't see the budget playing much of a part on their 40 hour week. They either work there or they don't. And if they do, then they will be given a paycheque regardless of what they put together for Friday's meeting.
Resources are are not only the man power it's also the hours put into it. Let me put it this way, if by Friday meeting they don't meet the allocated deadline (that also ties with the budget allocated to the project) they very likely to loose their jobs. Companies don't pay for people checking in their 40 hours of work, they pay for have something to sell, there are deadlines and yearly profits to be considered. I really find your understanding of it really confusing because that's not how things are in this (or any) business really.
As for budget being worked into revenue vs expenses.... that's a ridiculous argument in today's distributive market. 30 years ago that argument could be taken more seriously when considering that the company would also need to account for packaging, shipping cost, and of course storage and inventory expenses.
But today, they pay someone a couple thousand dollars to create a piece of code, which sits on a computer, and allows for an unlimited stream of downloads for (if you're in canada) $29.99 CAD. I don't see the profit margin being that much of a problem.
And again, either they are programmers, or they are not. Either they can do it, or they can't.
Eh? I'm not talking from some theoretical perspective here. Budget is revenue vs expense, it doesn't really matter if you find it ridiculous or not.
Let me use a comparison for you.
I am a musician (programmer). I write, and play music (code, and play games). As a musician (programmer) its is NOT a fair argument for me to say that the song (code) for "Amazing Grace" will take me longer, or is harder than the song (code) for "In the arms of an Angel".
Either i'm a musician or i'm not. Either I can do the song for you, or I can't.
They are professional programmers. Its what they do for a living. You call them into the board room tell they what you want, and simply ask them.... can they do it... or not? If they say yes, then they do it. Simple as that.
Saying that the pack is priced higher, or has less items in it because of budget work that is in the pack, is what I find ridiculous.
It's not about whenever they can do it or not. How you feel fair to sale your own music is entirely your decision. If you want to spend a year on it and ask 1 dollar in the end because you feel it's not fair, that's up to you.
Most companies however will say I have x amount resource for a project, what can be done with it? The resource includes the manpower and a time frame. When the company asking whenever it's possible to do or not it's always in correlation to the budget they already have (in case of sims it's already established and divided in 4 categories), or if not they are looking to estimate and see if it's profitable.
Even if you think that time if not an issue to you, it's very much an issue in real life when you have a company to run and mouths to feed, not to mention making a yearly profit, deadlines don't exist for nothing. To bring it back to this game, a gamepack is allocated more resources than a stuff pack and a staff pack is allocated more resources than a kit pack. The company charge different price for each and to balance the expense vs profit it has different budget for each. People can't spend same amount of resource for project that brings different profit and this is set before the project starts. So I really don't understand why you find this concept so outlandish or think that it's outdated.
And what would be my budget cost to sell a piece of music?
For example:
..... I sit at my computer for an 8 hour work day, and type on a music program the notes for a particular song, save file, upload that save file to a music site, and sell it for $9.99.
That's it.
Now we can take this a step backwards and point out that I don't know how to play absolutely every existing song in the world that exists at any point in time. So if i'm going to take requests I will have to account for the time it takes me to research, and learn the music being requested so that I can finally reach the point of sitting at my computer to get it typed up. If I want to be paid per each hour of my work then I will need to keep that in mind. How many copies will I need to sell (will be my question)?
But as far as budget goes. What would I need to do this? Not very much.
Maybe my mistake is assuming that these employed programmers actually know what they are doing. Maybe they don't have code generating software, or maybe they do sit at their computers guessing at what the code might be. I have no idea. I just assumed that these people are professional programmers who know how to do their jobs. Sit them at a computer, tell them what you want, then leave them alone to do it.
Budget will dictate how many people you can hire, but for the people who are hired for a particular project, give them a computer, tell them what you want, then take a walk and leave them alone.
With the software out there these days for professional companies to use, and the ability to copy/paste files, upload them to the internet for unlimited sales.... etc. Using budget as an excuse is ... IMO, not as strong an excuse as it was a few decades ago.
Back in the 1970s (for example) when a company said they were working within the limitations of a budget, that meant something completely different than it does today. Today, we can all sit at our computers in the comfort of our homes, and create files to sell on the internet.
For musicians all we need to get started is a good music program, and we're good to go. For video games, modders do it all the time. From the comfort of their homes they create game code for loads of video games... which some argue offer better gaming experience than what the company itself is offering. What is their budget? If they were to factor in profit/loss what would their budget be so that they could pay their rent and afford to buy food?
I think what were doing here is confusing budget with ... expected sales revenue.
Likely EA is telling Maxis something like... I will fund this new GP in the amount of $10 million dollars, BUT, I will expect $50 million in return. Do that, and we have a deal. Otherwise, The sims is canceled.