Manifesto Games , and online game publishers like it, are doing their best to bring creativity and innovation back into the forefront of gaming. While big corporations like Nintendo and Microsoft like to talk about innovation, the developers that hawk their wares on Manifesto Games are doing it -- and without ridiculously large budgets or losing the right to own the products they create.

In GameShark's first interview with Greg Costikyan, CEO and co-founder of Manifesto Games, We delve deeper into how this publisher works, how it helps independent game developers looking for an outlet for their work and what differentiates it from the rest of the pack. Read on:

Give us the abridged version of the Manifesto Games mission statement. What is your company trying to accomplish?

As budgets in the mainstream industry continue to skyrocket, publishers are more and more conservative about what they will fund--to the point that, today, virtually nothing gets published unless it's number four in a series, or based on a strong movie license, or slots easily into a marketing category the publishers know how to sell. That's a particular shame because since its inception, the games have been a vibrant popular artform, with highly innovative games spawning whole new genres practically every year--but the conventional market can no longer sustain that kind of innovation. We believe that the game industry desperately needs what independent music and film provide for their own fields: a place where people can experiment with offbeat and creative product, find an audience, even if a smaller one than in the mainstream--and eventually reinvigorate the mainstream through their creative efforts.

Manifesto's whole raison d'etre is to foster the growth of independent gaming.

Is it succeeding to your satisfaction?

Well, if life has taught me anything, it's that everything winds up taking longer and being more difficult than you had thought--but I feel like we're making progress.

What do you do for developers that big publishers don't or won't do?

Is that really the question? Look, this is a very different market. If you want to deal with a big publisher, you have to understand that the likelihood is that you will have very little creative input into the game, because it's going to be based on a license or some prior game, and the features list will be dictated by the marketing department. You are also unlikely ever to see a dime beyond your development funding, because at the budget levels prevailing for mass-market titles, it takes a miracle to sell enough copies for royalties to surpass your development funding, all of which is recoupable. But on the other hand, you have a shot reaching millions of gamers and having the game magazines call you a god.

If you develop an independent game, you have complete creative control, and can create the game you really want to create. On the other hand, you may have to do it on spec, or with minimal funding from friends and family, and if you sell a few thousand copies, you're doing very well. The fundamental question for any developer is whether you want to be developing the game -you- want to make, or prefer to be working on a high-end, high-poly count product that's driven primarily by marketing considerations. Neither option is dishonarable.

What do we do that's different? We don't ask for any owership of IP; we pass on 60% of the revenues we generate to developers (conventional publishers pass on more like 7% of the consumer dollar); we don't demand exclusivity in terms of distribution, so you're free to sell through other channels as well. We also don't provide development funding, nor do we have the kind of marketing resources that the major publishers do.

What criteria do you use when selecting a game for inclusion in your catalog beyond the usual (i.e. in a genre that no longer gets mainstream respect war games, graphic adventures, niche products)?

We look for three things: as you suggest, genres that still have a following but that no longer often appear at commercial retail; products aimed at definable niches--to choose two at random, divers and bird-watchers--that don't get attention from the major publishers; and thirdly, offbeat and innovative games that are trying something different, either in terms of gameplay or theme.

Beyond that, we try to ensure that a) it doesn't suck, b) it doesn't install spyware or viruses, and c) that we think someone, somewhere, will like it.

Are there any kind of games you won't include or feel don't fit the Manifesto vision?

Sure. We don't often carry games that are viewed as 'casual'--they get enough exposure through sites like Yahoo! and RealArcade, and we don't see any point in having our site look like every other online game site in creation. Or to put it another way, we view our target market as consisting mainly of gamers rather than middle-aged women. When we carry a game that also sells into the casual market (as we sometimes do), it's because we think it has strong crossover appeal to core gamers.

I know you aren't a fan of the "hit mentality" of the industry-at-large, but what is the measure of success for an indie game on Manifesto if not sales?

Well, we're not a charity; sales are certainly important to us. On the other hand, we're always delighted to find a game that's truly creative, even if it doesn't generate a lot of sales for us. To name one, we carry Toribash, a hand-to-hand fighting game in which you control your character by, in essence, animating a 3D model--very innovative, and an IGF finalist last year. It's also a game with a steep learning curve, which is a problem from a sales perspective, but we're still glad to offer it.

Do you think the mainstream game press has a bias towards independently developed games and developers?

No, I think the mainstream game press has a bias toward advertisers.

How come Manifesto doesn't use a ratings system?

We do have a player rating system; we don't rate games ourselves. We're a retailer, when you get down to it; I don't even want to think about the conversations I'd have with developers if we did rate games ourselves.

Ratings are also, when you get down to it, phony. Tastes differ, and if you are a fan of action games and I like turn-based strategy, your 10 is likely to be my 3, and vice versa. Instead, we try to explain what's cool about each of our games and what kinds of people are likely to enjoy it--and of course provide demos and free trials so people can make their own informed decisions.