Something went wrong. Try again later

austin_walker

Testing?

568 5245 0 1029
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Q&A: Public Funding in Canada?

Silicon Knights X-Men: Destiny was bad. I don't have a joke. It's just terrible.
Silicon Knights X-Men: Destiny was bad. I don't have a joke. It's just terrible.

I received this note from GB User @celegorm_menegroth:

I'd really like to see some follow-up work in regards to your most recent article on these points:

a) Canada had a similar program of providing funding for games ... and then along came Silicon Knights and that whole debacle. Was any money from the Canadian government actually used in settlements of lawsuits? How did that entire episode effect Canadian game developers and the grants they receive? Does UbiSoft Montreal ( or other studios in Montreal, of which there are apparently several ) use the same grant system, even though they are a huge AAA studio? Does the money going to these large studios help or harm other smaller Canadian development, even through a "trickle-down" effect where by creating a favorable environment for games development in Montreal a concentration of talent now resides there?

b) What does the resulting fallout from 38 Studios and their dealings with the government of Rhode Island say about this issue, and what are the chances of other state-level governments giving lucrative incentives in light of what the Gov. of Rhode Island says was a loss for his state?

I thought the article was good ... but could have gone a lot deeper and cast a slightly wider net to take into account studios and issues that we are more familiar with ( and in the case of 38 Studios was a contender for GiantBomb's "News Story of the Year" during GOTY discussions at the time ).

-Keto

Hey Keto!

If you're interested in the specifics of the Silicon Knights case, Polygon's Brian Crecente breaks it down really well here. The long and short is: Silicon Knights successfully applied for a number of different government grants over a period of a few years. They used that money to hire people and run the studio. Then, they successfully applied for additional funding from another gov't source, the ODMC. But once stuff started falling apart at SK, the ODMC stopped their funding payments. That's how this should work, and mostly it's how it does work: The organizations who grant the funds set up milestones and other requirements, and if the recipient of the funds fails to meet those, the funding ceases.

But the specific funds that SK used didn't stop over that studio's failure. In fact, the ODMC has since gone on to fund London, Ontario based Digital Extremes, whose Warframe has been pretty damned successful. Beyond that, Canada has multiple other programs that support game development. Quebec has initiatives that help to pay the salaries of employees at studios like Eidos and Ubisoft Montreal, and other provinces have similar programs. And there are other roles the gov't has played, like paying to hold events where private interests can meet and make business arrangements together.

It's hard to know specifically how these incentives and funding programs have affected smaller developers, but if you go read the Gamasutra piece I linked to in the initial article, you'll see that the quoted devs pretty much all say that the funding mechanisms for AAA studios aren't scaled in a way that makes them accessible for independent studios. But there is also a history of smaller devs receiving support from the Canadian Media Fund and the Rogers New Media Fund offer independent creators partial funding for their projects.

The fact of these things is that cases like SK and 38 Studios make the news, while successful cases of these programs rarely do. So it's easy to think the whole endeavor is fucked when really it's just a few really bad cases, while in fact any analysis of a funding program (let alone the entire concept of public arts funding) requires a lot more than a single case study. So I'm with you: We need longer form pieces investigating this. But at the same time, public funding for games (like films, music, writing, and other art forms) is already here, so we need to start talking about it. I wanted to get that ball rolling while still tying it to a relevant news story. For the most part, I think I managed that.

9 Comments

9 Comments

Avatar image for graf1k
graf1k

634

Forum Posts

365

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By graf1k

I'm really of a split opinion on this type of tax incentives and programs for corporations. On the one hand, it (in theory) makes possible the games we all love and could be considered support for the arts. On the other hand, these are multinational corporations (in the case of Ubisoft and Square-Enix) that shouldn't need these incentives. These incentives pit states or even cities against one another to undercut each other to bring jobs to their region. The loss of those taxes is transferred to the overall tax base, not just in that they are paying for these games/studios but it almost inevitably leads to higher income and property taxes, both of which can put increased burden on the most vulnerable taxpayers as well as the wealthy and middle class. It essentially shifts the burden off the "job creators" and on to the employees, something I personally think there is too much of as it is in America (I can't speak to the situation in Canada).

Similar incentives are common news items where I live, although it's mostly in the context of bringing non-artistic but well-paid white collar jobs to the area. It's great in the sense that it stimulates the economy, but my property taxes have gone up each of the last 5 years as a result as well. In short, it's a mixed bag.

Avatar image for dixavd
Dixavd

3013

Forum Posts

245

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Dixavd

Here's a link to the original article Austin's referring to in this blog post (if someone in the future finds this but can't find the original article, which occurs quickly once they get bumped from the front page).

Avatar image for rmanthorp
rmanthorp

4654

Forum Posts

3603

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

rmanthorp  Moderator

Man... X-Men Destiny could of been cool. What a mess.

Avatar image for mattyftm
MattyFTM

14914

Forum Posts

67415

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 11

Edited By MattyFTM  Moderator

Someone needs to initiate the new guy properly. You aren't allowed to mention Silicon Knights on Giant Bomb without this video:

Loading Video...

Seriously though, been loving these Q&A blog posts, Austin.

Avatar image for theht
TheHT

15998

Forum Posts

1562

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 9

Good follow-up! Here's the Gamasutra piece mentioned. It's from 2011, but still a great read. A more up-to-date and widespread analysis in the same vein would be fantastic.

Avatar image for joshwent
joshwent

2897

Forum Posts

2987

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By joshwent

@graf1k: You pretty much summarize my personal change from being a Green Party socialist to a small government, economically conservative direct democracy kind of guy.

All too often with these efforts to redistribute wealth for the arts, the funding itself is seen as a success of the system, without delving further into any potential negative repercussions or contradictions. With this current discussion specifically, it's confusing to see folks like Austin simultaneously be proponents for government arts grants and government tax breaks. One is giving tax money to support jobs, but the other is reducing tax income to support jobs. That's an oversimplification, of course, but too much of both of those systems is clearly unsustainable. Or at least, only sustainable if you disregard the necessary increased taxation of the citizenry to allow for more money to be spread around to these businesses.

And broad support for games company tax breaks is especially strange considering that Austin's larger piece around this issue lamented companies like Ubisoft (Montreal's big tax break success story) not taking any risks and just producing cookie cutter sequels. Even suggesting that those monolithic entities might be empowered to be more "creative" with their art if they had more support from a government.

But, at least to me, the hundreds of millions of dollars of support that they've already had for years is part of what makes them able to not takes risks. Their business and employees are cushioned by tax money, so the "risk" to innovate becomes unnecessary. The Canadian government is interested in getting jobs for its citizens, not interested in making good video games. And the best way for a games company to ensure employment stability is to make games for the lowest common denominator audience.

At the very least, I think it's crucial to delineate precisely what public funding programs we're discussing to have a productive conversation. Saying, "It's important to put more tax money towards games", or "Canada does it and they make tons of games!", might feel good and be an easy rallying cry, but ignoring the discrepancies between the myriad forms of that funding will never get us anywhere, and worse, might lead to support for programs that lead to the exact opposite goal we're trying to reach.

Avatar image for gaff
Gaff

2768

Forum Posts

120

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Gaff

@joshwent: I feel the need to point out that grants and tax incentives for game developers are two very different things.

The tax incentives some countries give to game developers are aimed at attracting jobs to their region, that's true.

Grants, like the ones given by the European Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA), or Ontario's OMDC, or any other organisation outside of the US, has specific requirements on what can apply for a grant. Take the EACEA for example:

European production companies with proven experience and interested in developing a video game concept or project presenting:

Originality, innovative and creative value, cultural diversity and an enhanced portrayal of Europe's cultural identity and heritage, compared to existing mainstream works

Commercial ambition and extensive cross-border potential to reach European and international markets

Concept (to the point that the concept is realised) and project (from concept to playable prototype) development of commercial video games.

The games must have:

Originality, innovative and creative value, cultural diversity compared to mainstream works

Enhanced European cultural identity and heritage

Substantial interactivity with a narrative component

High level of ambition in terms of gameplay, user experience and artistic expression

Commercial ambition in European and international markets.

Cross-border potential

Credit: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/creative-europe/actions/media/development-video-games_en

Yes, it is a veiled attempt at "promoting European values and more marginalised voices in video game development over the onslaught of American media", but still, there are strict requirements.

Also, to put things into perspective, the OMDC grant is up to CND$ 150,000 (which can be 50% of the budget max), and the EACEA's grant is up to EUR€ 150,000. It doesn't cost a lot per tax payer.

Avatar image for joshwent
joshwent

2897

Forum Posts

2987

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By joshwent

@gaff: Thanks for the specific info, but your point is exactly what I was trying to say above. That in these discussions, tax incentives and grants are not distinguished when people advocate for "government funding of the arts", even though, as you point out, they're very different things.

Without making a judgement about either, I'm just trying to say that not discussing them separately leads to arguments about abstract ideas, rather than examining specific initiatives that we can improve through greater understanding.

Avatar image for monkeyking1969
monkeyking1969

9095

Forum Posts

1241

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 18

To be honest I think supplying tech, i.e.: jobs where everyone is getting a decent wage comparatively to the rest of the economy is a net positive for cities, provinces/states, and even nations. There are so many ways governments support all sorts of business form farms to factories. There is nothing new or special about supporting tech in this way...except they often don't smell like cow shit as much.