Surveying the Silicon Prairie:
Games in Minnesota
Report researched and written by Nicolaas VanMeerten
Published by GLITCH
Acknowledgments
Research Team
This project was led by Nicolaas VanMeerten from GLITCH, with support from Carolyn
Bates and Matt Lewis from GreaterMSP.
Publisher
GLITCH 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 Design
Katie Simning
Advisory Group
Evva Kraikul
Sharon Fischlowitz
Stephen Guy
Chip Pedersen
Andrew Reiner
Mike Linneman
Special Thanks
A special thank you to the International Game Developers Association - Twin Cities chapter
for maintaining their list of game developers in Minnesota.
Citation Recommendation
VanMeerten, 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
2
Table of Contents
Background
4
Key Findings: Study A
5
Study A: Objective description of the game
industry in Minnesota
Figure 1. Map of digital game companies
in Minnesota
6
7
Table 1. Description of game companies
in Minnesota
Findings
6
7
Key Findings: Study B
9
Study B: Survey of attitudes and perceptions
of the game industry in Minnesota
10
Table 2. Survey Respondent
Demographics
10
Table 3. Frequency of Response Types
11
Findings
12
Conclusions
13
Next Steps
13
Appendix A
14
Appendix B
15
References
16
Legal Disclaimer
16
3
Background
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.
4
Key Findings: Study A
Minnesota Industry
A snapshot of the Minnesota’s digital games ecosystem.
$43M
325
Annual Revenue
Employees
45
MN
Digital Games
Companies in
Company Owner Diversity
Caucasian
Males
Women or
Minorities
Types of Companies
Developers
76.9%
Publishers
10.2%
Other
12.8%
Sources & Links
Hoovers = http;//www.hoovers.com/; RefUSA = http://www.referenceusa.com/;
Survey data http://glitch.mn/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2015-MN-Games-Report.pdf
5
Study A: Objective description of
the game industry in Minnesota
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 2015
Business 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.
Business Type
Developer
Publisher
Other
Figure 1. Map of digital game
companies in Minnesota
6
Results
Table 1. Description of game companies in Minnesota
Developers
Publishers
Other
Companies
34
5
6
Minority/Female
Owned
4
0
1
Subsidiary
0
1
1
Registered in MN*
29
3
5
Mean (Standard Deviation)
Company Age (in years)
6.2 (5.9)
12.6 (5.9)
4.8 (7.7)
Employees
6.2 (12.8)
30.4 (25.7)
26.5 (0.7)
Revenue (Hoovers; in dollars)
1.3M (3.2M)
2.2M (1.7M)
7.7M (3.3M)
Sales (RefUSA; in dollars)
2.6M (4.3M)
6.5M (6.6M)
6.2M (7.9M)
*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/
Findings
The 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 Disparity
Despite 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.
7
Company Types
There 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 Diversity
There 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 Locations
Based 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 Limitations
Although 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.
8
Key Findings: Study B
Survey Respondents
Attitudes and perceptions of Minnesota’s digital games industry from the local workforce.
Respondent Gender Diversity
Male
Female
Other
20% 1 - 2 Years
82% Caucasian
Ethnicity
20% 3 - 5 Years
37% 0 - 1 Years
7% Asian
4% Mixed
Years
Experience
17% 5 - 10 Years
7% Other
Caucasian
5% High School
20% Some College
8% 10+ Years
14% 36k - 50k
14% 21k - 35k
Education
75% College Degree
25% 51k - 90k
Annual
Income
16% 91k - 120k
18% <21k
12% >121k
Most Frequent Suggestions for Improvement
Increased
Community
Development
Increased
Industry
Visibility
$
Increased
Access to
Paid Work
Source
VanMeerten, 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
9
Study B: Survey of attitudes and
perceptions of the game industry
in Minnesota
The 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
Table 2. Survey Respondent Demographics
Number of Respondents
140
Mean Age (in years)
29.39
Gender
113 Male, 25 Female, 2 Other
Ethnicity
82% Caucasian
7% Asian
4% Mixed
3% Other
2% Native American
1% Middle Eastern
1% African
0% Hispanic
0% Caribbean
Education
1% High School Diploma
4% High School Graduate
20% Some College, no degree
7% Associate Degree
57% Bachelor’s Degree
7% Master’s Degree
1% Professional Degree
3% Doctorate Degree
10
Table 2. Survey Respondent Demographics continued
CurrentlyPursuing a Career
in Games
80 Yes, 59 No, 1 NA
Employed Industry
Experience Composition
(many people had multiple
experiences)
60% Development
53% Production
44% Design
42% Management
40% Art
36% Other
33% Creative Writing
31% Research
31% Web Development
29% QA
27% Audio
24% Analytics
22% Non-Profit
18% Public Relations
16% Journalism
4% HR
0% Legal
Income Breakdown
11% Under $10K/year
7% Between 10k-20k/year
14% Between 21k-35k/year
14% Between 36k-50k/year
11% Between 51k-70k/year
14% Between 71k-90k/year
16% Between 91k-120k/year
7% Between 121k-150k/year
3% Between 151k-250k/year
3% Above 250k/year
Years of Experience
37% 0-1 Years
20% 1-2 Years
20% 3-5 Years
17% 5-10 Years
6% 10-20 Years
2% 20+ Years
NA = Not Available
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 categorized into eleven categories, based on the content of their response. The results
are listed in Table 3.
11
Table 3. Frequency of Response Types
Response Category*
Percentage of Responses
More Paid Work Locally
31%
Community Development
17%
Visibility
15%
Business Development
8%
Better Game Development
6%
Access to Resources
6%
Diversity
4%
Bigger Companies
4%
No Suggestion
4%
Government Incentives
3%
Values
1%
Youth Education
1%
*Full descriptions of the categories can be found in Appendix B.
Findings
As 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.
12
Conclusion
As 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.
Next Steps
1. 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.
13
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.
Appendix A: List of companies
included in Study A
Abstract Puzzle
Activision Publishing
Activision Publishing Minneapolis
Allen Interactions
Andamio Games LLC
AtPlayMusic, LLC
Big John Games
Concrete Software
DAGERS
Destineer Inc.
Destineer Publishing
Eduweb, Inc.
Fantasy Flight Publishing
Faust Logic
From Nothing Game Studios
Frostbit Studios, L.L.C.
Game Informer Magazine
Game Mill Entertainment
Glitch Gaming
Global Gaming Initiative, LLC
Golden Gear Consulting
Graveck Interactive LLC
Guangcong Luo Software LLC
Howling Moon Software
Intropy Games, LLC
Jenkat Games
King Show Games
LearningWare Inc.
Monster Games Inc
Mouse Potato Games L.L.C.
Naming is Hard, LLC
nativeX Holdings, LLC
NOMAD Apps
Pistachi Studio LLC
Plaid World Studios
Portage Interactive
Qonqr, LLC
Super 2 Games
Thoughtshelter Games
Trident Inc. (Atlas Games)
Try Catch Games
ValuSoft
Visual, Inc.
Whiteout Entertainment, LLC
Yellow Chord Audio
Zachstronaut
Zivix
14
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.
15
References
TXP, 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.
Have ideas to improve this report?
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 [email protected].
Legal Disclaimer
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.
16