Shadowrun
Catalyst Game Labs => Catalyst's Shadowrun Products => Topic started by: biotech66 on <04-09-14/0944:48>
-
Title says it all. How many people strong is catalyst? I just want to get a feel for how many people are behind the scenes. WotC is about 400. Paizo is 50 with LOTS of freelancers. Where does Catalyst stand?
-
I don't know if you will get a number but I don't think it is a very large number
-
Where does Catalyst stand?
On its feet.
If you'd like to see who's responsible for bringing you Shadowrun, BattleTech, or any of our games feel free to flip open to the credits section of our products.
-
The About (http://www.catalystgamelabs.com/about/) page on the CGL website indicates what I would expect the core team (9 people)to be....no idea re number of freelancers engaged.
-
The About (http://www.catalystgamelabs.com/about/) page on the CGL website indicates what I would expect the core team (9 people)to be....no idea re number of freelancers engaged.
That information is out of date.
-
That information is out of date.
Care to give us the new information? I don't understand why everyone is always so tight-lipped when this topic comes up.
-
Also remember that some people who are doing say the artwork for SR or other specific elements may not be solely working for Catalyst, but hired on an as-needed basis.
-
Care to give us the new information?
No. I don't have an updated list with me, so rather than giving out bad information I will give no information (save for my comment earlier).
I don't understand why everyone is always so tight-lipped when this topic comes up.
We're a private company, which means we answer to ourselves.
-
The answer is: "very small"
Probably around a dozen full time (if that) and a host of freelancers.
And Peter is right, as a private company, they don't have to tell squat about anything internal to the company.
-
Title says it all. How many people strong is catalyst? I just want to get a feel for how many people are behind the scenes.
The short answer is "check the credits page" of any given book. It's a fluid number that changes from project to project, so that really IS the best way to find out who worked on a thing you're reading.
-
I don't understand why everyone is always so tight-lipped when this topic comes up.
As anyone who's been the target of a Shadowrun knows, the more information is out there, the easier it is for the Runners. Hide all your info.. behind the secret dragon.
-
We're a private company, which means we answer to ourselves.
So why put anyone's information on the website then? It's to lend credibility to the individuals behind the product, and give faith in the company. Telling us to fuck off when someone asks a simple question isn't exactly lending credibility and faith.
-
Don't put words in their mouths. They didn't tell you to fuck off.
-
Putting words in someone's mouth or not, it is what it seemed like was said.
Red
-
Putting words in someone's mouth or not, it is what it seemed like was said.
Red
... How?! How does "I don't have the real information on hand, and don't want to give you wrong information" come across that way?
-
That wasn't the quoted passage.
Red
-
That wasn't the quoted passage.
Red
It was, however, part of the same statement.
-
Agreed and perfectly reasonable in my mind but the second statement could be misconstrued as hostile. I don't truly think that was what was meant, but it did seem that way.
Red
-
The part telling us to fuck off had nothing to do with the part about "I don't have any more information." It had to do with the bit that I quoted - which was "we answer to ourselves."
I get that a company doesn't want to reveal their assets, personnel, etc. for lots of reasons. But this is a company that many of us want to get to know better, because they're controlling something that has been a part of our lives for decades. The response by PeterSmith wasn't just telling us that the information is private. It was saying, "we don't answer to you or anyone else." Literally. And that's kind of a dickish way of saying things. It's bad for customer relations at the least.
-
Children, play nice.
How big is CGL?
Smaller than Saeder-Krupp. Enjoy. ;D
-
Well, this thread certainly took an...interesting...turn. :o
@Peter - thanks for the correction.
-
The part telling us to fuck off had nothing to do with the part about "I don't have any more information." It had to do with the bit that I quoted - which was "we answer to ourselves."
I get that a company doesn't want to reveal their assets, personnel, etc. for lots of reasons. But this is a company that many of us want to get to know better, because they're controlling something that has been a part of our lives for decades. The response by PeterSmith wasn't just telling us that the information is private. It was saying, "we don't answer to you or anyone else." Literally. And that's kind of a dickish way of saying things. It's bad for customer relations at the least.
I think the "answer to ourselves" referred specifically to the information about the company, which a private company is certainly entitled to. It was horribly phrased, especially considering theres been some bad blood around in general, but I think (hope) his intention certainly wasnt to be a dick about it.
Either that, or CGL is taking its megacorp fluff a bit too close to heart...
Edit: Also, it would do people in general well to remember that while corps (private companies) have no legal obligation to do so, a bit of transparency towards your customer base will rarely do harm.
-
Hey guys, since this took a very awkward turn, I'm going to lock it. Especially since everyone knows, "size doesn't matter". ;)