Phase one of the Activision Independent Games Competition has concluded and the winners — Dstroyed and Rigonauts: Broadside — have received their prizes. Now it’s time for phase two! An official press release went out today, saying entries are being accepted any time between now and the end of the year.

Once again, indie developers are invited to submit a concept or a working prototype, and two two winners get $175,000 and $75,000 in funding to finish their games. And once again, Activision does NOT own your IP if you enter. There was some confusion last time so it’s worth noting.

The only notable change I can see: This time, the judging of entries will be handled by the folks at IndieCade. Their next conference happens to take place next week, so if you want more info on them or the competition, that’s the place to be.

Ready to go? Here’s the entry form. Good luck — I look forward to interviewing the winners again!

Last year, Bobby Kotick created the Activision Independent Games Competition, offering big money to small developers with big ideas. The $175,000 first prize and $75,000 second prize have been awarded — now it’s time to meet the winners and learn about their creations.

Ian has 75,000 reasons to smile

“When I was quite young I read an interview with Chris Roberts from the Wing Commander games and it struck me: I could make games too,” says Ian Slutz. “For the next 10 years I told anybody who asked that I wanted to make games.” After some valuable experience at Capcom, Ian co-founded Engient with Jason Earp, and together with Sang Han, they’ve created Rigonauts: Broadside – and taken home $75,000 in the inaugural Activision Independent Games Competition in the process.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Rigonauts: Broadside is the kind of game that tinkerers will likely love – first you build your war machine from a collection of parts, then load it up with “hobs” (as in hobgoblins) and march off to battle. If at first you don’t succeed, redesign and rebuild your craft and try again. “It’s got ramshackle vessels, little creatures, and cannon shells everywhere,” says Ian. “We think people will love it.”

"When people are building their vessel, pieces automatically snap together when overlapped," says Ian. "Finding a good place to put the joint was technically tricky and most people won’t notice it."

What’s more, the game received its inspiration from a very non-gaming source. “The idea started when Jason told me he wanted to make a game where you build something,” recalls Ian. “I was further inspired by the kinetic sculptures of Theo Jansen. I couldn’t help imagining little creatures riding his strange art.”

"We work out of an unheated warehouse in the Bay Area," reveals Ian. "So while 48 degrees might not sound that cold, it can be quite unpleasant when you're sitting at the computer for hours a day."

‘Those little creatures will battle against computer-generated foes…for now.  “We view the game a primarily single player,” says Ian. “The player will face different enemy machines, create designs to defeat them, unlock new pieces and repeat. We think it might be nice to have a multi-player component, but that will depend on how the rest of development goes. As a small developer we need to be careful with our resources, but we definitely think pitting your machines against your friend would be fun.”

The hobs as they appeared in Engient's contest submission

When the Independent Games Competition was announced, Engient didn’t have all the playable pieces in place – but that was okay, since that wasn’t a requirement. “Since the Activision competition was about a concept and a plan of action it matched up well with where we were,” explains Ian. “Of course, we also wanted to enter the competition to help along our company. For us, starting a small studio sometimes feels like jumping off the high dive — and hoping there’s water in the pool when you reach the bottom. This Activision competition was an opportunity to get the pool filled.”

You can swim along with Rigonauts: Broadside and Engient on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, or their website.

Rigonauts: Broadside wasn’t the only Independent Games Competition winner — check out Dstroyd too!

The next stage of the Activision Independent Games Competition will offer another $250,000 in prizes to aspiring developers. The start date is to be determined, so watch for the official announcement here.

Last year, Bobby Kotick created the Activision Independent Games Competition, offering big money to small developers with big ideas. The $175,000 first prize and $75,000 second prize have been awarded — now it’s time to meet the winners and learn about their creations.

Peter on a sunny day

Sometimes making your own game is not a question of inspiration – for Peter Angstadt, whose work-in-progress Dstroyd won the $175,000 first prize in the Activision Independent Games Competition, it was a question of motivation. “I first started on the game when I was in college,” says the 24-year-old Oakland resident. “I worked on it on and off for a while, but when I heard about the competition I crunched to try and complete the gameplay, make it as fun as possible, and try and flesh out the setting and fiction, to really show what makes it unique.” 

What makes it unique, in Peter’s own words, is “tight real-time strategy married to a ballistics game.” If you’re familiar with 2D combat games like Worms and Scorched Earth, picture those will real-time elements woven in, and you’ll have an idea of what Dstroyd offers. “I was probably most inspired by Gunbound,” says Peter. “My friend Michael Peddicord and I had a lot of fun playing that back in college, and Michael helped out a bunch in the beginning of the project. We really liked Gunbound’s destructible terrain and how it has that ‘easy to learn, hard to master’ difficulty curve going for it. Plus, I’ve always been a fan of real-time strategy games.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

And therein lies the key innovation to Dstroyd: if you want to win these battles, you’ll need to do everything all at once. “First, it’s all real-time, so there’s no waiting for your turn,” says Peter. “Second, I’ve worked in real-time strategy elements — you build cannon towers, counter-batteries, barracks, and units to attack your opponent and defend yourself.  And it of course has fully destructible terrain like you’d expect, but I’m hoping to add some new environmental mechanics, like pockets of lava, water to pooling up in the craters to slow ground units, trees, and grass catching on fire.”

This prototype is the what the competition judges saw. It may not look like much now, but check back after some of that $175,000 is invested!

Dstroyd isn’t complete, but per the rules of the competition, it didn’t need to be – it was more about presenting the judges with a good idea and explaining the vision behind the game. Peter’s prototype for Dstroyd took a couple of months to finish, and his entry included a narrated video of the game in an early state. “I’m always on the look out for competitions to enter,” says Peter. “It’s a good way to set deadlines and work towards a real goal, which can be hard if you’re writing games as a hobby outside of your day job.” With $175,000 to show for his efforts, game development is now a realistic career path. “I wanted to enter because I really wanted the opportunity to become a full time independent developer,” he says. “I didn’t have the resources to go full time, but I felt if I could put my full effort into my games, I could make some really great stuff. “

Concept art for Dstroyd's weapons and units. From here, the apocalypse looks kinda cute.

Peter and his studio, Turtle Sandbox, retain the IP to Dstroyd, but as the competition sponsor, Activision gets the first opportunity to publish the game if and when that time comes. But that’s still a ways off – you can check up on the game’s development at http://dstroyd-game.tumblr.com and follow Peter on Twitter. Meanwhile, Peter’s got a nice chunk of change to keep him motivated – not to mention reassurance that he’s on the right path. “The hardest part for me was taking the plunge: quitting my job and turning game development from a hobby to a full-time job,” he admits. “There’s always doubt running in the back of your mind about the quality of your game, the concept, and about what happens if it doesn’t pan out.  But the important thing is that you keep trying and make it happen!”

Dstroyd wasn’t the only Independent Games Competition winner — check out Rigonauts: Broadside too!

The next stage of the Activision Independent Games Competition will offer another $250,000 in prizes to aspiring developers. The start date is to be determined, so watch for the official announcement here.

Because this is a friendly reminder that submissions for Activision’s Indepedent Games Competition are due at the end of this month.

As has been stated, you don’t have to have a working prototype to enter; you have to have a solid idea and a solid plan on how to bring your game to market. If you can explain your game idea like a pro, you might get the chance to make your game like a pro. Give it some thought this weekend; it’s not too late, but it will be soon, since the cutoff for entries is August 31.

The rules are here and, despite a common confusion, Activision does not own your IP if you enter. You simply have to prove that you own your IP so Activision doesn’t get sued by someone else saying you ripped them off if your submission wins the contest. The IP is still yours to keep, sell, fold, spindle, mutilate, whatever.

I figure most development teams will be keeping things close to the vest — there’s $250,000 in prize money in the first round alone, with more to come later — so I won’t say “Post screens of your work here!” But I am curious to see what shows up online after the submission deadline.

I am slowly getting excited about the Independent Games Competition that Activision is sponsoring this summer. There are about seven weeks left until the deadline for submissions runs out…and there is still some confusion that may be stopping people from wanting to enter at all.

Both programmers and media outlets alike have reported that the intellectual property rights (commonly just called “IP”) of any contest submissions will belong to Activision if you enter. This was based on both the endearingly legaltastic phrasing of the rules and an interview quote by Activision’s Laird Malamed that wasn’t very clear. I yelled and screamed and tried to say that’s not true, and that I had a Laird podcast interview to prove it, but you know…I’ve learned that yelling and screaming only gets a message so far.

But a fresh article on Develop Online that says the same thing, only more politely? That can get the message a little further. Let me quote the main bits:

“It was thought that if you enter the contest you automatically give up your IP rights to Activision. That’s not true at all. What the wording in our rules meant was that if you enter the contest with your own game idea you have to prove that your idea belongs to you. That’s all it meant.”

Activision didn’t completely rule out the possibility of acquiring IP from finalists of the contest – but insisted that such a business move would only be possible after the competition hands out $175,000 to the winner and $75,000 to the runner up.

“If you win the contest, and we want to publisher your game, we then enter into a completely separate discussion about who owns the IP. But by default the game designer keeps it.”

In the game biz, publishers owning IP is still the norm; it’s cool to see the industry evolve to accomodate deals like Respawn/EA and Bungie/Activision, but most publishers, like THQ, still expect to own the IP in any development deal. It’s not good or bad — it’s just one way of doing business, and it’s a way that has worked well for many years. Even as other methods arrive, it will almost certainly still be an option.

But in the case of the Activision Independent Games Competition, the IP belongs to you unless you choose to sell it — and you only get into that discussion if you win. And you cannot win if you do not enter. So…don’t let the fear of losing your IP stop you from entering. That’s all.

Would you like a chunk of the $500,000 Activision plans to give to indie game creators this year? Activision’s Senior VP/Head of Development Laird Malamed tells you what you need to know about the Independent Games Competition — not to mention how to run around the world. Plus, MW2 offers new maps and new melodies, Kat expresses her love for a program you’ve probably never heard of before, Dan sings a capella again, Transformers fans get antsy, the hot topic of used games only heats up more, we celebrate a Memorial Day job well done, and we get a phone call from the mysterious Ron of Swords.

Get the podcast on iTunes
Get the podcast on Zune Marketplace
Get the podcast on your own with RSS Feedburner
Or use the links below to listen in the browser or download direct.

More info after the jump…

Co-host: Katrin Auch, light gun enthusiast, graphic designer, bassist, photographer, videographer, and inventor of Headshotmas

Special Guest: Laird Malamed, Senior VP Head of Development, Activision

Soundtrack: Yameen – available on iTunes, Amazon MP3, and all online music stores

Relevant show links:

The tacos were eventually delicious.

Back in February, when Bobby Kotick spoke at the DICE conference, his speech included a bombshell — something about half a million bucks to be awarded as part of an independent games competition. We finally have the details on that competition today, in the form of an official press release as well as a page containing the official rules and entry process.

I’m going to have Laird Malamed, Senior VP & Head of Development, on my podcast tomorrow to talk about some of the details — but I have already heard some incorrect assumptions (and crushing negativity) about why Activision is doing this, so I wanna address that. This competition is not intended as a way for Activision to buy new IPs or even new studios. The only string attached to this prize money is that Activision gets a “first look” deal at the resulting game. Laird has clarified this to Industry Gamers:

If we do a publishing deal, then IP ownership is discussed, and we get the rights to it. For anything else that is submitted or doesn’t win, they keep their IP. One of the reasons we’re using an independent judging system and also using a third-party collection and submission process is that Activision won’t see a majority of submissions at all. Names will be turned into code numbers and all that sort of stuff to protect privacy and to protect IP if they submitted an idea and didn’t win. The ultimate goal here is that they are making their games, and if they win the prize and we don’t publish it, then that’s great, it’s theirs. We hope it comes out and we hope to get to play it.

UPDATE 6/3 (a few times): I want to clarify the IP ownership even further, because Laird’s statement isn’t entirely accurate. Some folks have interpreted the rules and/or Laird’s quote above to mean that Activision will automatically own the IP if you win. I see what they see when I read that quote, but my podcast conversation with Laird was different, so I looked into it and found that Activision does not automatically get the winner’s IP.

If the winner creates a game that Activision would want to publish, then they would discuss that publishing deal after winning, and that publishing deal would involve, as Laird suggests, a discussion of IP ownership. Many publishing deals do involve IP ownership, so I think that’s why he phrased it the way he did — it’s the norm for the industry, but this contest is the first of its kind, and the winner’s situation and resulting deal might be different. According to the lawyers who drew up the rules — because I went back to them and asked — relinquishing IP ownership is not a provision to enter this contest, and the publishing deal would be a separate negotiation, starting from scratch. And of course, first, you have to make a game and win the competition before you can do that…so in terms of the contract, this “maybe down the road if a publishing deal is agreed upon” aspect actually has no bearing on what will be created this summer. If you want to know the rules of the contest, read the rules of the contest.

The only thing the contest rules state about IP is that, by entering, you are assuring Activision that YOU own the IP to what you have created — that is, you’re not using copyrighted characters or music or elements from existing properties, and Activision would not get in trouble for bringing your game to the market. That is a reasonable thing for Activision to ask you to be very, very sure about. But that is quite different from what people have misinterpreted it to be. So, just for the record, the IP of the contest entry game remains the property of its creator unless the creator chooses to relinquish it as part of a publishing deal that may or may not take place after the contest concludes. First, get the money and make your game. Then you can decide what you want to do with the IP.

(And that, folks, is why the site is called OneOfSwords.)

There’s more discussed in that article, as well as my interview with him on this week’s podcast, but that nugget’s worth getting out there before people start assuming things that aren’t there.

The rules are worth reading. Even if you’re not a programmer and can’t create a prototype or show a video of a work in progress or something fancy like that, you might find that you want to enter based on the strength of your game idea and your ability to articulate it.

I’m figuring that most people here are interested in games, not businessmen, but Activision’s CEO Bobby Kotick spoke at the DICE 2010 summit today. It’s an annual think tank for the bigwigs of the game industry; often there are some interesting speeches about the future of the industry and things like that. It’s not really an event where people uncork hot new gameplay videos or make huge announcements. But Bobby Kotick made some anyway — the biggest in my opinion being the casual announcement of the 2010 Activision Independent Games Competition.

There weren’t many details offered, but here’s the basic outline: You present Activision with your creative game concept in text and video, and you might win enough money to make that concept into a living, breathing game. More details are “coming soon” and I don’t know them yet. But if you’re an indie developer or even dreamed of being an indie developer, I figure this is good news. When I find out I’ll pass it on; there are obviously many more details that need to be announced anyway. For now, I guess you should be brainstorming your game ideas and polishing your prototypes accordingly. [Update: There was some paperwork online but apparently it had the wrong info, so I'll link to the right info when it's posted.]

For me, that was the biggie of the speech. Gamasutra has a pretty concise wrapup with lots of quotes, and if you missed GamePro and 1Up‘s live blogs, you can replay them. But here’s some stuff from the speech I found interesting:

- No PowerPoint slides. It was just him talking, dressed in jeans and a sweatshirt. It was all rather personal and a lot of time was spent talking about his early days as a software developer and playing Defender and Infocom games.

- He mentioned that pitched a game himself back in the day and it didn’t get picked up.

- He underestimated Harmonix when making the deal to acquire Guitar Hero. “We really didn’t even think, hey, we should go to Boston and meet these Harmonix guys and see what they’re up to.” He also suggested that it could have a profitable partnership. I almost wished he’d said “we could have made beautiful music together.”

- He doesn’t play a lot of games because he’s afraid it’s basically all he would do. His addictive personality makes it too tempting, so this is as close as he can get. “”If I was regularly playing Modern Warfare 2 I would not be able to stop and it would be at the expense of all my other responsibilities.” I think this is a bit like someone with lots of points on their license owning a Ferrari dealership. You do what you can to be close to what you love.

- He clarified the whole “taking the fun out of making games” quote as a joke told to a room full of bankers — he’s referring to the wild, irresponsible companies that surrounded him back in the day who thought the business of games was supposed to be fun too — and they went bankrupt having all that “fun.” I remember saying that was probably what he meant on KOXM back when he made the comment, and I was right. Yeah, he should have said it differently, but at this point, all you can do is clarify or let people continue to beat you to death with your own words.

- He said, “I thrive on seeing someone so inspired that they’re up at 4am creating content at the expense of their family life.” I strongly suspect this was his way of saying “I love it when people are really passionate about what they do” but it can be read (and has been reported) as “Ignore your children and get back to work!” I suppose your interpretation entirely depends on whether you like seeing Bobby Kotick as a guy in charge of a company who speaks to a large audience uncensored, or you have more fun making him out to be a monster.