Surveying the Silicon Prairie: Games in Minnesota

Report researched and written by Nicolaas VanMeertenPublished by GLITCH

2

AcknowledgmentsResearch TeamThis project was led by Nicolaas VanMeerten from GLITCH, with support from Carolyn Bates and Matt Lewis from GreaterMSP.

PublisherGLITCH promotes the exploration of digital games as a culture, career, and creative practice. We’re a nonprofit that works to educate, inspire, and equip emerging talent with the tools for success in the digital game and simulation fields.

Graphic DesignKatie Simning

Advisory GroupEvva KraikulSharon FischlowitzStephen GuyChip PedersenAndrew ReinerMike Linneman

Special ThanksA special thank you to the International Game Developers Association - Twin Cities chapter for maintaining their list of game developers in Minnesota.

Citation RecommendationVanMeerten, N. J. (2015). Surveying the silicon prairie: games in Minnesota. Retrieved from http://glitch.mn/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2015-MN-Games-Report.pdf

3

Background

Key Findings: Study A

Study A: Objective description of the game industry in Minnesota Figure 1. Map of digital game companies in Minnesota

Table 1. Description of game companies in Minnesota

Findings

Key Findings: Study B

Study B: Survey of attitudes and perceptions of the game industry in Minnesota

Table 2. Survey Respondent Demographics

Table 3. Frequency of Response Types

Findings

Conclusions

Next Steps

Appendix A

Appendix B

References

Legal Disclaimer

Table of Contents

4

5

6

6

7

7

9

10

10

11

12

13

13

14

15

16

16

4

Digital games are a vibrant, creative industry in Minnesota. Last year alone this industry generated an estimated revenue of $43 million dollars and employing roughly 320 employees. However, Minnesota is often neglected in national reports on the video game industry (Sivek, 2015) and local reports on creative industries (Minneapolis City Government, 2013).

GLITCH is interested in filling this gap in knowledge in to equip emerging talent in Minnesota with the information necessary to pursue careers in the digital games industry. Over the years, we have worked with many young, talented individuals who are interested in pursuing careers in the digital games industry, but they lack information on where and how to gain experience. In addition, according to LinkedIn and personal experience, talent in this industry are leaving Minnesota for employment elsewhere in the United States and abroad.

Thus, our goals were to (1) describe the composition and (2) survey people’s attitudes and perceptions of the game industry in Minnesota. Each of these goals were investigated in a separate study.

Background

5

Minnesota IndustryA snapshot of the Minnesota’s digital games ecosystem.

Sources & LinksHoovers = http;//www.hoovers.com/; RefUSA = http://www.referenceusa.com/; Survey data http://glitch.mn/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2015-MN-Games-Report.pdf

Types of Companies

Other12.8%

Publishers10.2%

Developers76.9%

Company Owner Diversity

CaucasianMales

Women or Minorities

Key Findings: Study A

Employees

325Annual43M$ Revenue

45 MNDigital GamesCompanies in

The goal of Study A was to describe the composition of the digital game industry in Minnesota. To accomplish this, we first had to develop criteria for which the companies must meet in order to be included in the study. If these criteria were believed to have been met, they were added to the list of companies used for this study. The full list of companies can be found in Appendix A. These criteria are listed below:

Registered or operating in Minnesota in 2015Business services are related to digital games

After the list of companies was finalized, data was gathered from several different databases, including Hoovers, ReferenceUSA (RefUSA), and the Minnesota Secretary of State. These data sources were recommended by experts at the Minnesota Department of Economic and Employment Development (DEED) and GreaterMSP. Once the raw data was gathered from these sources, it was summarized under three different business categories: developers, publishers, and other.

Companies placed into the “Developer” category primarily create digital games. Companies classified as “Publishers” predominantly finance and distribute digital games. Lastly, companies in the “Other” category performed a variety of services related to digital games, such as magazine publishing, audio design, and marketing services, to name a few. Companies were placed into these categories in order to succinctly describe different areas of the digital games industry in Minnesota.

Last but not least, a map of all the companies that compose the digital games industry in Minnesota was created by converting the business addresses of all companies into GPS coordinates. These GPS coordinates were superimposed onto a map of Minnesota in Figure 1.

Study A: Objective description of the game industry in Minnesota

Figure 1. Map of digital game companies in Minnesota

Business Type

Developer

Other

Publisher

6

7

Results

Companies

Minority/FemaleOwned

Subsidiary

Registered in MN*

Company Age (in years)

Employees

Revenue (Hoovers; in dollars)

Sales (RefUSA; in dollars)

Developers

34

4

0

29

6.2 (5.9)

6.2 (12.8)

1.3M (3.2M)

2.6M (4.3M)

Publishers

5

0

1

3

12.6 (5.9)

30.4 (25.7)

2.2M (1.7M)

6.5M (6.6M)

Other

6

1

1

5

4.8 (7.7)

26.5 (0.7)

7.7M (3.3M)

6.2M (7.9M)

Mean (Standard Deviation)

Table 1. Description of game companies in Minnesota

*Company is registered with the secretary of state in Minnesota. **Employee numbers were calculated by taking the average of employees listed in Reference USA and Hoovers. M = Million; K = Thousand; NA = Not Available; Hoovers = http://www.hoovers.com/; RefUSA = http://www.referenceusa.com/

FindingsThe results presented above are a snapshot of the current digital games industry in Minnesota. There are forty-five companies working on or with digital games operating in Minnesota. On average, these companies are under thirteen years old and employ from six to thirty people. Despite their small size, these companies generated roughly $43 million (Hoovers) in revenue and $75 million (RefUSA) in sales during 2014.

Based on the findings above, we have achieved our first goal of describing the composition of the digital games industry in Minnesota. These results provide us with valuable information about the industry in Minnesota that will be used to identify areas for improvement. This study has also shown us the limitations of the current data available and motivated us to suggest solutions to this problem.

Income DisparityDespite the large amount of revenue generated by the digital games industry overall, the majority is earned by a few companies. This is reflected by the large standard deviations present in the revenue and sales rows in Table 1. This may make it difficult for many companies to offer paid internships and offer mentorship opportunities. Thus, we believe it is important that those companies who are able to afford paid internships, offer them to aspiring talent in Minnesota.

8

Company TypesThere are an overwhelming number of digital game development companies in Minnesota in comparison to other types of companies. A wider variety of companies, such as peripheral manufacturers, analytics services, quality assurance, or video production would increase the sustainability of the industry, and provide more opportunities for people to become involved that may not interested in developing digital games. However, this trend is already coming to fruition. In the past couple of years there have been several companies founded in areas beside game development. In order to support this trend, other areas of the digital games industry need to become more visible to emerging talent in Minnesota.

Leadership DiversityThere are many successful digital game companies in Minnesota, but very few of them are owned by women or minorities. This lack of diversity in leadership positions may be problematic for the future of the industry in Minnesota, because it could hinder our ability to attract and retain diverse talent. One possible solution for this problem would be to provide women and minorities with the support that they need, such as mentorship or training programs, to pursue positions of leadership in the Minnesota digital games industry.

Geographic LocationsBased on the map in Figure 1, it is clear that the majority of companies that compose the digital games industry in Minnesota are located in Minneapolis-St. Paul and the surrounding areas. Although, there are a few companies located outside of this area, in St. Cloud, Northfield, and North Branch.

Data LimitationsAlthough this data provides us with a great deal of information about the industry in Minnesota, it is only a snapshot. Additional data needs to be gathered annually to determine whether we are able to change the industry in the ways we intend to. In addition, some of the younger companies did not have records in the databases used for this study, so more information about young companies will need to be sought out via other means for future iterations of this study.

9

Increased Community

Development

Survey RespondentsAttitudes and perceptions of Minnesota’s digital games industry from the local workforce.

Key Findings: Study B

Respondent Gender Diversity

Male

Female

Other

Caucasian

82% Caucasian

7% Asian4% Mixed

7% Other

EthnicityYears

Experience

37% 0 - 1 Years

17% 5 - 10 Years

8% 10+ Years

20% 3 - 5 Years

20% 1 - 2 Years

20% Some College5% High School

75% College Degree

EducationAnnualIncome

14% 21k - 35k

14% 36k - 50k

25% 51k - 90k

16% 91k - 120k18% <21k

12% >121k

SourceVanMeerten, N. J. (2015). Surveying the silicon prairie: games in Minnesota. Retrieved from http://glitch.mn/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2015-MN-Games-Report.pdf

Most Frequent Suggestions for Improvement

Increased Industry Visibility

Increased Access to Paid Work$

10

Number of Respondents

Mean Age (in years)

Gender

Ethnicity

Education

140

29.39

113 Male, 25 Female, 2 Other

82% Caucasian7% Asian4% Mixed3% Other2% Native American1% Middle Eastern1% African0% Hispanic0% Caribbean

1% High School Diploma4% High School Graduate20% Some College, no degree7% Associate Degree57% Bachelor’s Degree7% Master’s Degree1% Professional Degree3% Doctorate Degree

Table 2. Survey Respondent Demographics

Study B: Survey of attitudes and perceptions of the game industry in MinnesotaThe goal of Study B was to learn about people’s attitudes and perceptions of the digital games industry in Minnesota and how they thought it could be improved. We did this by surveying people involved in the local industry, who have many different areas of expertise, years of experience, and positions within their companies along with people who are not currently employed in the digital games industry in Minnesota. The demographics of the survey respondents have been summarized in Table 2.

The survey was distributed between July 15, 2015 and August 31, 2015. This time frame was chosen, because it is less busy in comparison to Fall when many companies are trying to ship products for the holidays. We distributed the survey through two main methods:

1. Direct email invitations to fill out the survey were sent to local games companies listed in Appendix A.

2. Invitations to fill out the survey were posted in many different social media channels that have a focus on games in Minnesota

11

CurrentlyPursuing a Career in Games

Employed Industry Experience Composition (many people had multiple experiences)

Income Breakdown

Years of Experience

80 Yes, 59 No, 1 NA

60% Development53% Production44% Design42% Management40% Art36% Other33% Creative Writing31% Research31% Web Development29% QA27% Audio24% Analytics22% Non-Profit18% Public Relations16% Journalism4% HR0% Legal

11% Under $10K/year7% Between 10k-20k/year14% Between 21k-35k/year14% Between 36k-50k/year11% Between 51k-70k/year14% Between 71k-90k/year16% Between 91k-120k/year7% Between 121k-150k/year3% Between 151k-250k/year3% Above 250k/year

37% 0-1 Years20% 1-2 Years20% 3-5 Years17% 5-10 Years6% 10-20 Years2% 20+ Years

NA = Not Available

Table 2. Survey Respondent Demographics continued

How do we improve the local games industry?Survey respondents were asked to describe the most important thing that needs to be improved about the local industry. Roughly half of the survey respondents provided an answer to this question. Their sentence long answers were catego-rized into eleven categories, based on the content of their response. The results are listed in Table 3.

12

Table 3. Frequency of Response Types

Response Category*

More Paid Work Locally

Community Development

Visibility

Business Development

Better Game Development

Access to Resources

Diversity

Bigger Companies

No Suggestion

Government Incentives

Values

Youth Education

Percentage of Responses

31%

17%

15%

8%

6%

6%

4%

4%

4%

3%

1%

1%

*Full descriptions of the categories can be found in Appendix B.

FindingsAs a result of this survey, we achieved our second goal and learned a great deal about people’s perceptions and attitudes of the digital games industry in Minnesota. The survey received a large number of respondents, with 140 people filling out the survey over the month and a half it was open (July 15, 2015-August 31, 2015). The sample that filled out the survey was also fairly young, predominantly Male, Caucasian, and most had completed at least some college coursework.

Of the survey respondents who were employed in the industry, the majority of them had experience with development, production, and design. There was also a wide spread in salary amounts among respondents, with the majority earning between $21 thousand and $120 thousand per year. In addition, almost 80% of the respondents had less than five years of experience within the digital games industry.

Lastly, the most frequent suggestions for improving the industry in Minnesota were, 1) access to more paid work locally, 2) increased development of the digital games community, and 3) increased visibility of the local digital games industry.

13

Next Steps1. According to the survey, emerging talent are struggling to find opportunities to work

in the digital games industry in Minnesota. It is unclear whether people are unable to find positions due to issues of visibility, they do not have the experience necessary to qualify for positions in Minnesota, or there are simply too few open positions to meet the demand. Additional data will need to be gathered to answer this question.

2. Survey respondents indicated that additional community development is necessary to improve the digital games industry in Minnesota. In order to address this concern, GLITCH is launching the Immersion Program, a 4-week intensive course that will be embedded in digital game companies, public institutions, and universities. Each cohort in the program will learn everything from game development to marketing and animation while gaining exposure to the industry and receiving valuable mentorship. This will help to introduce new and emerging talent to the companies, public institutions, and universities that compose our digital games community in Minnesota. In addition, this program will help increase the visibility of local games companies, and provide them with access to local talent.

3. The majority of companies that make up the digital games industry in Minnesota are developers. Thus, there may be opportunities to create companies in other areas (marketing, business development, public relations, publishing, etc.), which may increase the strength of our industry overall.

ConclusionAs a result of this report, we now know a lot more about the digital games industry in Minnesota. There are over 40 companies, which provide a variety of business services, such as developing games, publishing games, marketing and advertising services for games, and many more. These companies employ over 320 people and generated roughly $43 million in revenue in 2014. Most of these companies are located near Minneapolis-St. Paul.

However, alongside these positive findings, there are also problems with the digital games industry in Minnesota. There is a lack of diversity in the leadership of these companies. In addition, there is a wide gap in the amount of revenue generated by these companies. A few highly successful companies generate a large portion of the revenue in the digital games industry in Minnesota.

In addition to these areas that could be improved, we have learned a lot about attitudes and perceptions of the digital games industry in Minnesota through the survey. Respondents indicated many areas of the industry that could be improved, but the most highly cited suggestions for improving the digital games industry in Minnesota were: 1) access to more paid work locally, 2) increased community development, and 3) increased visibility.

14

Abstract PuzzleActivision PublishingActivision Publishing MinneapolisAllen InteractionsAndamio Games LLCAtPlayMusic, LLCBig John GamesConcrete SoftwareDAGERSDestineer Inc.Destineer PublishingEduweb, Inc.Fantasy Flight PublishingFaust LogicFrom Nothing Game StudiosFrostbit Studios, L.L.C.Game Informer MagazineGame Mill EntertainmentGlitch GamingGlobal Gaming Initiative, LLCGolden Gear ConsultingGraveck Interactive LLCGuangcong Luo Software LLCHowling Moon Software

Appendix A: List of companies included in Study A

Intropy Games, LLCJenkat GamesKing Show GamesLearningWare Inc.Monster Games IncMouse Potato Games L.L.C.Naming is Hard, LLCnativeX Holdings, LLCNOMAD AppsPistachi Studio LLCPlaid World StudiosPortage InteractiveQonqr, LLCSuper 2 GamesThoughtshelter GamesTrident Inc. (Atlas Games)Try Catch GamesValuSoftVisual, Inc.Whiteout Entertainment, LLCYellow Chord AudioZachstronautZivix

4. The visibility of the digital games industry in Minnesota needs to be enhanced. Thus, we need to make an effort to engage with local government, media outlets, and public institutions. By engaging with these different organizations and telling them about our industry and why it matters, we can increase the visibility of our industry.

5. This study will be conducted annually by GLITCH. However, additional data need to be gathered to understand the state of young and small companies in Minnesota, because they were under-represented in the databases that were accessed for this study. In addition, this report may be improved by collaborating with the team that creates the Creative Vitality Index for Minneapolis (Minneapolis City Government, 2013) to standardize our metrics and data sources. This would also allow us to compare the performance of the digital games industry to other creative industries in Minnesota.

15

Appendix B: Category Descriptions

Access to Resources: This category refers to access to many different types of resources, such as capital for developing games, education, or talent.

Better Game Development: Responses that fell into this category felt that in order to improve the local games industry, we need to develop better games that receive critical acclaim.

Bigger Companies: Responses placed in this category felt that there was a lack of established and successful companies in Minnesota. They felt that it was important to either attract or build these companies here in order to improve the games industry here.Business Development: Responses placed in this category cited the need for business development in the games industry in Minnesota. Specifically, there needs to be more investment into these companies and they need to develop sustainable business models.

Community Development: Responses placed in this category covered two related topics: (1) The need for additional communication between companies and communities in Minnesota. (2) An increase in access to more opportunities to gain experience and develop relationships with mentors for individuals interested in pursuing careers in the game industry.

Diversity: Responses that referred to diversity mentioned the need for additional support for females and an increase in the different types of positions available, beside game development.

Government Assistance: Responses in this category mentioned the need for tax incentives for game companies.

More Local Paid Work: Responses that were placed in this category referred to the need for access to more full-time job opportunities in the Minnesota game industry.

No idea: The responses placed into this category did not have a solution for how to improve the games industry in Minnesota.

Values: The responses in this category referred to the need to develop the game industry here in Minnesota without compromising their creative integrity.

Visibility: Responses in this category placed an emphasis on making sure that the public knows about the Minnesota game industry and the companies and people who compose it.

Youth Education: The responses in this category said that we need to focus on educating our youth that is interested in pursuing careers in the game industry.

16

ReferencesTXP, Inc. (2012). The economic impact of the creative sector in austin – 2012 update. Austin, TX: Author.

Siwek, S. E. (2014). Video games in the 21st century: the 2014 report. Washington, DC: Electronic Software Association.

Minneapolis City Government. (2013). Minneapolis creative vitality index report 2013: understanding the scale and impact of minneapolis’ creative industries.

infoUSA, Inc. (2015). Retrieved August 31, 2015, from ReferenceUSA database.

Hoovers, Inc. (2015). Retrieved August 31, 2015, from Hoover’s Company Records database.

Do you have ideas for this report? Do you lead an organization that wants to contribute to this conversation? This draft is open for comments. The usefulness of this report depends on getting the story right, and giving credit to all those who contribute. Send your feedback to nic@glitch.mn.

Have ideas to improve this report?

GLITCH reserves the right to make changes, corrections, and/or improvements at any time and without notice. In addition, GLITCH disclaims any and all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of errors, omissions, or discrepancies. GLITCH disclaims any liability due to errors, omissions, or discrepancies made by third parties whose material GLITCH relied on in good faith to produce the report. Any statements involving matters of opinion or estimates, whether or not so expressly stated, are set forth as such and not as representations of fact, and no representation is made that such opinions or estimates will be realized. The information and expressions of opinion contained herein are subject to change without notice, and shall not, under any circumstances, create any implications that there has been no change or updates.

Legal Disclaimer