Now Accepting Submissions
Pine Island Games is officially accepting game submissions!
Since we are a new company - in the process of launching our first game - I will take a few words to talk about who we are, our vision, our positioning, experience, and to delve into what prospective partners can expect from us.
Just like not every game will be a good fit for us, we aren’t necessarily a great fit for every designer. If working with an unproven company is a non-starter for you, that’s ok. I hope that in the future, once we have a few launches under our belt, you will reconsider us.
For the rest of you, I hope that in the next paragraphs I can demonstrate some of our competency, and start a dialogue about our philosophy, means, and expectations.
I’ll be tackling this in a few sections, feel free to jump around:
Who we are
What we are looking for in a designer and design
Our commitment to you
Expected contract terms
If you think we are a good fit for you, and that you have a game that would interest us, send it our way. You can find our submission guidelines and submission questionnaire here.
Who we are
Pine Island is managed by myself (Jasper Burch), with help from Chelsea Townsend (my fiancé). I handle the operations, marketing, and design and development, while Chelsea handles one off projects, is a sounding board, and runs point on company filings, and taxes.
My professional background is in finance. I started as a sell side analyst, first at a boutique broker dealer, then at a large multinational. Eight years ago, I transitioned to the buyside. In layman’s terms I was a hedge fund guy. I invested billions of dollars into companies in or tangential to real estate, housing finance, consumer finance, spec fin, and a few other related sub sectors, and managed and hedged our books’ market exposure.
I am good at numbers, financial statements, understanding markets, financial projections, valuation, projecting cashflow, P&L, structuring company balance sheets, and all sorts of minutia of mortgage markets, interest rates, hedging, and all of the other sorts of things that come with thirteen years in an industry.
Over the years I have always sought creative outlets and fulfilment outside of work. I’ve penned a few unpublished novels and designed a number of games.
Last Summer-Fall I designed and developed Nut Hunt. I very quickly felt that it was something special and worth bringing to the world.
We formally launched Pine Island Games this past spring, and as of this month I am working on the company full time.
Chelsea and I have positioned ourselves financially to be able to float the company for a few years, and launch a handful of games without the need for external capital. Ultimately, we hope to make our living publishing games – but we have a healthy runway to get there.
We are truly treating this endeavor as my next career.
What we are looking for in a partnership and game
Our aim is to build a sustainable company with a regular release schedule and a healthy back catalogue. We won’t get there with my designs alone and aim to partner with and license games from other designers.
In terms of scale, we’ll be looking to acquire the rights to 0-2 games a year.
That isn’t a lot of games, which means that we have the leeway and flexibility to build partnerships with people who we truly connect with. That also means that we will pass on plenty of awesome games by awesome people.
First and foremost, we are looking to partner with people who share our values. That is who are passionate about game design, who display professionalism, who are honest, can take constructive criticism, and put creating a great product ahead of their ego. We are looking for partners who value openness, community engagement, and display a high level of ethos. At a minimum, that means buying into our mission statement.
We strive to create memorable, fun, and beautiful games. We aim to create value for our customers, fans, and the broader board gaming and game design communities. We value personally connecting with, and being helpful to our peers and supporters. We believe that games are meant to bring people together, and that the board gaming hobby and industry will be healthier and more fun through increased equity and inclusivity.
In terms of games, we are primarily looking for gateway to medium weight games in the 30-to-90-minute range. That is games that can either be a side-dish, or main course. We value strong interwoven themes & mechanics, a combination of skill and luck, and an easy teach with deep strategy. We are not interested in party games, dexterity games, tabletop war games, rpgs, or games with an overly heavy rules lift. We tend to shy away from games whose primary mechanics focus on bluffing, king making, or are overly punishing of mistakes.
In order for a game to be a good fit, it needs to match at least 8 out of our 11 tenets of game design:
Strategic depth & mechanical elegance. Player cognitive load should be spent on strategic decisions, not on understanding complex (sometimes fiddly) mechanics. While mechanical complexity can be appropriate – it must be applied to drive an exciting strategic payoff. In general we prefer to simplify games wherever possible.
Organic start, organic progression, organic end. A progressive game play where pacing is driven by the players rather than strict mechanical progression and rounds.
Reward over punishment. Reward players for good play, rather than punish them for mistakes.
Resonant thematic drive. Strong and memorable thematic elements are relevant mechanically. We don’t believe in stapling on themes, but strive to weave theme through game play.
Ability to plan ahead. Decisions matter from turn to turn and players should have the ability to plan ahead. Of course, the best laid plans of squirrels and gamers…
Balancing luck and skill. Our favorite games balance skill and luck. While tight strategic game play improves a player’s chance of winning, elements of luck add drama, excitement, and an opportunity for players of all levels to enjoy a game together. We prefer randomness of inputs, rather than as a mechanic for resolution.
Replayability. Replayability through both interesting, dynamic, game play, and through variable mechanics. No two games are alike.
Tactile and visual. Board games are tactile and visual experiences. We value strong physical and visual design to engage players, draw them into the game, and improve ease of play.
Screw the man, not the players. While we value player interaction and conflict in our designs, we also try to minimize feel bad and “gotcha” moments. We avoid mechanics that screw over individual players, create ganging up, or king-making dynamics.
Bringing people together. Games are a conduit for bringing people together, both through exciting game play and community.
Main course or dessert. Pine Island’s initial focus is on medium weight games in the 30-60 minute range. These games can bring people together as events (a night of Nut Hunt), or be a side dish for a social gathering (a game after dinner). In the future we expect to expand our menu of games to include more “main dishes”, or event games in the 60-120 minute range.
One of our goals with Pine Island Games is to help other designers create and launch great games. Even if your design doesn’t fit perfectly in our wheelhouse, we’ll support you to the extent that we can, whether it’s through the blog, direct feedback on your design (if you ask), or pointing you in the direction of other publishers and resources to help you in your journey.
Our commitment to our design partners
First and foremost, we will treat you and your design with the respect and dignity that you deserve. We’ll work our hardest and will make an appropriate monetary investment to make your game the best game that it can be, and to set it up for its best chance at success.
Throughout the entire process we will be open, about our thoughts, our investments, and our vision for your game.
For the first few years of Pine Island our plan is to fund games up through a crowdfunding event, and to bootstrap their growth off those proceeds. This means that our monetary investment will primarily be in: Art, Graphic Design, and Marketing.
In future posts we will delve into our budgeting process (for Nut Hunt we expect to spend roughly ~$35k to bring the game to Kickstarter), but it is important to keep in mind that every game will have different needs. For all of our games we will invest in professional artwork, top notch graphic design, and a healthy marketing war chest.
Expected contract terms
Cardboard Edison has some nice infographics on industry contract terms. We expect our contract terms to be relatively in line with the market, but I want to call out a few specifics to highlight our approach.
Royalties will be based on wholesale revenue. We believe that this is the cleanest and most fair royalty structure. Most of the variability between partnerships will be based on 1) expected unit margins, 2) expected to market expenses, and 3) how heavy of a lift we expect on the development side.
Ancillary revenue: Many contracts don’t call out ancillary revenue sources. We expect to have clauses for sub-licensing revenue, digital games, expansions and supplemental products, and merchandise.
Advances: We expect to pay advances. Variability between partnerships will be based on similar inputs as royalty variability, as well as a calculation of unit sales for the designer to earn out.
Promotion: It is unlikely that either party will be contractually obligated to promote the game. But, we are unlikely to partner with anyone who isn’t excited about promoting their own designs.
Rights, representations & other terms (rapid fire):
Non-infringement: Yes.
NDA/Non-disparagement: No. We value transparency and open dialogue.
Creative control: No.
Reversion clause: Breach of duty, time to market, cease of operations and minimum unit.
Survival clause: Yes.
We haven’t spoken with a lawyer to write up a form contract. This is just what makes sense to me from a high-level business perspective – that I think has the potential to be a good foundation for some great partnerships.
I have some experience in my prior career negotiating contracts for primary issuance of debt and equity – so I know that there is a lot missing in the above, and that there will be a lot of nuance and nitty-gritty that the lawyers want in there (jurisdiction, attorney fee, breach of duty, representation, etc.).
We will hammer all of that out with our future partners. If people are interested, let me know and I will do a follow up post talking about important rights and representations in a game licensing contract.
What if anything would give you confidence in working with a new publishing company? What expectations do you have in a partner that we haven’t addressed?
