Forums > Game Forums > Star Wars: TIE Fighter > Developer information
MrFlibble (18234) on 2/11/2013 2:29 PM · Permalink · Report
Suddenly I have some doubts about the developer being LucasArts. The demo of the game says the game was developed by a company called Peregrine Software, whereas the Wikipedia article says the developer is Totally Games (which, according to another Wikipedia article, first started as Peregrine Games, a fact which is not reflected in the company's history page here).
Rwolf (22823) on 2/11/2013 4:04 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Gamespy interview 2003 with Lawrence Holland mentions the various company names:
http://www.gamespy.com/pc/secret-weapons-over-normandy/6548p1.html
first: Micro Imagery
next: Peregrine Software
last (implied): Totally Games
(the last was the company name at the time of the interview.)
TG:s about page:
http://www.totallygames.com/company-about.shtml
Micro Imagery - founded in 1984
Totally Games - was incorporated in 1994
Logos database mentions Peregrine Software filing its TM in 1993
http://www.logosdatabase.com/logo/peregrine-software_74464641
Indra was here (20755) on 2/11/2013 11:54 PM · Permalink · Report
We need two new company roles: Production by (perhaps for LucasArts?) and Manual Design by (for Shepard Associates).
Though the company role: 'Production' has been long overdue.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/12/2013 10:19 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]What's the difference with developed by? [/Q --end vedder wrote--]Not similar in the slightest. To use the a house building analogy, the developer would be the bricklayers, the producer would be ones procuring the bricks, and the publisher would be the one marketing and selling the house.
vedder (70795) on 2/12/2013 10:51 AM · Permalink · Report
This is why I asked. Because that analogy you give is way of.
Developers are the brick bakers and brick layers. Producers are the foremen overseeing the baking and laying, who make sure it gets done in time.
Hence I found it weird that you proposed a produced by role here as LucasArts obviously seems to be the developer here. Although they probably also produced it, but it's normal for a development team of more than a dozen people to have a producer. The publisher will also have a (usually external) producer for the project.
"Produced by" is hardly a company role as both developers and publishers have producers among their staff them.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/12/2013 12:24 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]"Produced by" is hardly a company role as both developers and publishers have producers among their staff them. [/Q --end vedder wrote--]I guess it would depend on the industry. Always had trouble figuring out the difference between a project managers and producers. For the most part, the producers I've met in the entertainment industry revolve around getting the bricks to the brick layers, while the 'managing' part is done by the project manager. Don't think I've met a situation where the producer can over-rule a project manager. Unless it's the executive producer, but that's an entirely different title.
Not entirely sure if this is applicable for LucasArts. Only suggested it as if LucasArts isn't the developer, then I have no idea what company role they qualify as.
There's also a few games I've come across either in the opening credits or other credits where companies have explicitly mentioned their role as the producers. Though then again, there's already a producer role in the credits here: DeMaria Studio. Not entirely sure what they're producing though.
Note to self: Sword of the Samurai where one of the 'developers' (Genki) is not a developer but credited itself as the producer (opening credits)...so our release info is a bit incorrect.
Kabushi (261204) on 2/12/2013 12:31 PM · Permalink · Report
Producer as a company role usually refers to a company that acts as an intermediate between publisher and the actual developer. id (on games made by Raven), 3D Realms (Max Payne, Prey) and Epic (Bulletstorm) are some examples of this. Currently we often list these as co-devs, but in some cases they might be closer to publishers.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/12/2013 12:35 PM · Permalink · Report
Do you think they should be an independent company role? Especially when they explicitly mention so in the game credits? Always put them as developers in the release info, but my insides never did bode well for doing that.
j.raido 【雷堂嬢太朗】 (95185) on 2/12/2013 6:48 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start vedder wrote--]"Produced by" is hardly a company role as both developers and publishers have producers among their staff them. [/Q --end vedder wrote--] At least for Japanese companies, "Produced by" tends to mean the company that designed and had creative control over the game, while another company was contracted for the actual implementation and development. Mistwalker is a good example of such a "production" company.
For the Soul of the Samurai example given here, they shouldn't actually be listed as developer. They published the game in Japan; our current release info is incorrect.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/13/2013 1:34 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Might want send in a correction then, mate. I added Genki as the developer and it seems that the others followed suit in the additional release info. Dang I wrote a lousy and incorrect description. Semi-RPG? Hmph.
Indra was here (20755) on 2/13/2013 11:47 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start 雷堂嬢太朗 -jotaro.raido- wrote--] For the Soul of the Samurai example given here, they shouldn't actually be listed as developer. They published the game in Japan; our current release info is incorrect. [/Q --end 雷堂嬢太朗 -jotaro.raido- wrote--]Just for the record, I'm not entirely convinced that publisher is the right company role either for Genki. Only because they had a big arse "Produced by Genki" in their opening credits cinematics.
It's like that company role "Printing by" and you wonder if this is packaging or manual design, when it's probably neither.