作者：Seth Sivak

我在GDCNext 2013大会上发表了关于获得风险投资（VC）的演讲。

投资是游戏开发过程中最少被人提及的环节之一。发行商曾长期主宰了这个环节，但在过去几年中，进入游戏领域的风险投资者与日俱增。

声明：这只是我的个人经验和观点。大家当然还有其他融资方法，所以本文所述内容只是一种参考建议，而并非唯一方法。

什么是风险投资？

我同其他开发者交谈时，发现大家似乎还不是很了解风险投资的概念及其对公司的意义。多数开发者认为风险投资者就是像唐老鸭守财奴一样独享巨资的人。

事实上，接受投资是游戏公司的一种可行做法，多数开发者却并不知道这是我们行业中相当普遍的现象。人人都知道Zynga和Supercell等公司接受了风险投资，但他们却不知道Riot Games、Meteor Entertainment、Harmonix Music Systems和Oculus VR也同样如此。

在考虑你的工作室是否适合接受风险投资时，重要的是认识到接受风险投资实际上意味着部分出售公司。这不同于传统意义上的发行合作，所以很有必要理解其中的区别。

风险投资 vs 传统发行

创立一家公司时考虑多种融资选项是个好主意，重要的是认识到每种选项之间的区别。以下是VC投资与发行商投资之间的不同：

风险投资vs传统发行商(from gamasutra)

最重要的是第一项。在接受VC投资的时候，你并不只是就单个项目与投资者签约，而是拿整个公司的命来下注。这也正是为何团队和投资者的期望和目标要保持一致的重要原因。

这种对比中的另一个关键点在于，VC通常不会涉及单个项目的开发过程。这一点有好也有坏，主要取决于该公司所需的反馈及支持。如果一家游戏工作室需要的是彻底的自主权，那就意味着它只能得到极小的资助。

如果可能的话，掌握IP控制权总是个正确的做法。因为VC是向整个公司而非单款游戏投资，他们希望公司的IP具有价值，因为这会增加公司的价值。而发行商则想要产品的IP，因为这有利于他们推出更多与之相关的产品，开发团队是谁就不重要了。

发行商通常会将自己的决策加入时间表、预算和项目日程安排中，但VC不会。但如果选择VC，游戏公司得到的帮助就比较少，但监管也会比较少，所以开发团队可以自主决策。

这里我们还要讨论一下董事会控制权的问题。游戏公司必须有一个董事会，投资者很可能会加入董事会。董事会中间有可能出现非常投入的导师型人物，但这也意味着公司需出让部分控制权。董事会通常会阻止并购现象，会对员工的薪资水平施加影响，甚至可能会要求撤换CEO。我的建议是，游戏公司最好同投资者开诚布公地讨论各自的期望。

要记住，这里所说的发行合作并不意味着每项发行合作均是如此。最好是与多家发行商见面沟通，从中找到机遇。有些发行商会尝试新的策略，追求不同的合作方式。

总结

如果你追求的不仅仅是一种足够填饱肚子的生活，那我就建议你考虑接受VC投资。目前已经出现了游戏投资热，对游戏感兴趣的投资者也在不断增长。无论工作室选择的是哪种合作，最重要的就是确保双方互信和彼此尊重。就像聘请新团队成员一样，要确保发行合作伙伴或VC适合公司和团队发展。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Raising Venture Capital for Mobile Games – Part 1

by Seth Sivak

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.

The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

I gave a talk on raising venture capital (VC) at GDC Next 2013, which is currently available on the GDC Vault. This is also a cross-posting from the Proletariat Blog.

Funding is one of the least discussed parts of the development process. Publishers dominated this conversation for a long time, but in the past few years, venture capital investors have become increasingly involved in games. The process of raising VC involves two key pieces: networking and pitching. I’ll cover these topics in later posts, but for now, let’s try to understand venture capital.

Disclaimer: This is my experience and my opinion. There are certainly other ways to go about this process; think of this advice as just another tool in the toolbox, not the only tool for the job.

What is Venture Capital?

When I talk to other developers, there seems to be an air of mystery around the idea of venture capital and what accepting it would mean for their company. Most developers think of venture capitalists as Scrooge McDuck with piles of money to swim in and (apparently) ski upon.

In reality, taking an investment is a viable way to fund a game company and most developers are surprised to know that it’s fairly common in our industry. Everyone knows about companies like Zynga and Supercell taking VC investments, but they don’t always know that Riot Games, Meteor Entertainment, Harmonix Music Systems, and Oculus VR have as well.

When considering if venture capital is right for your studio, it’s important to understand that a VC investment is actually selling part of your company. This is markedly different from a traditional publishing deal, so it’s important to know the differences.

Venture Capital vs. Traditional Publishing

It’s a good idea to consider a number of funding options when building a company and it’s important to understand the differences between each option. The table below outlines a number of differences between VC investment and publishers:

Venture Capital

Traditional Publisher

Invest in the company

Invest in the game

No revenue share

Revenue share

No help with distribution, production, research, or other services

Help with distribution, production, research, or other services

No ownership of the IP

Take ownership of the IP

No creative control

Take creative control

No production/scheduling control

Take production control

No milestones

Withhold funding based on milestones

Take board seats

Do not take board seats

The most important piece is the first one. When taking on VC investment, you aren’t just signing up to work with the investor for a single project, but rather for the life of the company. This is why it’s critically important for the team and the investors to get along and be aligned in their expectations and goals.

Another key point in this comparison is that the VCs will mostly stay out of the development process for single products. This can be a good or bad thing, depending on what the company needs in terms of feedback and support. It may seem obvious that a game studio would want total autonomy, but that also means getting very little support.

Keeping control of the intellectual property (IP) is always the right option if possible. Since the VCs are invested in the company and not a single game, they want the IP to be valuable because it will increase the value of the company. A publisher wants the IP because it gives them the ability to produce further titles with it, regardless of the development team.

Publishers will usually have considerable input into the milestones, budget and scheduling of a project; this does not happen with VCs. This was mentioned above but a company going the VC route will have less support but also less oversight, so the decision is on the development team.

Lastly, it’s important to discuss board control. Companies need to have a Board of Directors, and it is very likely that investors will want to be a part of the board. It’s a great chance to have mentors available that are very invested, but it also means giving up some control of the company. The board can typically block mergers or acquisitions, have input on salary levels, and even push to remove the CEO. My best advice is to be open and transparent with investors about your expectations.

Keep in mind that the traditional publishing deals referenced here are not representative of every publishing deal. It’s always a good idea to meet with multiple publishers and understand the opportunities available. Some publishers are trying new strategies and looking for ways to be different.

Conclusion

I would recommend considering VC investment to any game studio that is looking to be more than just a lifestyle business. There’s currently a hunger for good game investments, and the amount of investors interested in games continues to grow. No matter what sort of partnership a studio is involved with, it’s important to make sure there is mutual trust and respect from both parties. Just like hiring new team members, make sure that a publishing partner or VC is a good fit for the company and for the team.（source：gamasutra）