Business success? - Do the OTHER thing?

[cliffski]

Heres a theory I put up for discussion:

Lots of wisdom has been typed on how to 'make it' doing indie games. People point to successfull games developers (popcap, dexterity, reflexive etc) and the assumption is that if you do things the way these guys do them, you will do well.
But heres an idea...
Isn't it sensible not to copy your competitors, but to compete on different terms?
Everyone is doing puzzle games. Some puzzle games do very well. Does this mean I need to do a puzzle game? or is the market for puzzle games too crowded?
Everyone is targeting the casual gamer. there are loads of them! should I target the casual gamer, or is the hardcore gamer being ignored?
Everyone is making their games easy to pick up and play. simplicity is the key. bright graphics and colorfull GUIs. appeal to the kids and the mums! Should I do this? or should I target my game at the stats-obsessed hardcore gamer who likes 'serious' games?

I reckon the reason uplink did so well is that it was a 'serious' 'hardcore' and 'complex' game launched at a time when the average indie game was a breakout clone or a match the coloured blobs game.

I've decided to say "screw the casual gamer" and "screw the nintendo colorfull cartoony look" and "screw the simplicity obsession".
My politics game will not shy away from being complex, hardcore and 'absolutely-not-at-all-like-a-puzzle-game'.
The more I hear famous industry figures stating that "we need our game to sell 5 million, and that means we are doing an accessible cross platform game that appeals to 40+ women", the more I want to do a hardcore PC-only simulation game that might sell 10,000.

Am I wrong?

[princec]

Possibly... I tried this tactic but was largely unsuccessful. I'm moving slightly away from the "extreme hardcore gameplay" in Alien Flux to something rather more light and simple with Super Elvis, but listening to the various feedback I've got from several forums I now have doubts as to whether Super Elvis is going to sell, either. But my next game is even less complicated than Super Elvis - just a space invaders shooter. Only then can I really draw conclusions as to what kind of thing sells best.

Cas :)

[mahlzeit]

Puzzle games don't have to be casual. I am convinced there is a market for really tough puzzle games. Games that require rational thinking and an IQ over 120. "Mensa" would be one of the Adwords keywords. Dexterity does this to some extent (and there is room for competitors), but I wouldn't make yet another Sokoban-like game.

Here is one idea: A game where each puzzle is like a programming problem. According to the logic given, the program should be doing X but it does Y. It's up to the player to fix the logic flaws. (It's a little like the PC-Lint ads in Dr. Dobbs. See also here (http://www.gimpel.com/html/bugs.htm)) Of course, the puzzles wouldn't be real source code (which is kind of boring to non-programmers), but something visual.

So yes, I am all for doing the opposite of everyone else. :)

[Sillysoft]

The most useful things I have learned from Dexterity and others has nothing to do with what kind of game you make. It is how to sell your game to people. Things like putting in good registration incentives, keep tweaking your app, keep in touch with your users, etc.

Yes, Dexterity made fun games, but I do not think that was the biggest reason for their success. Marketing and selling are just as important as programming. So do whatever programming you want, but follow the successful shareware companies in how you sell your game.

[merovingian]

Quoting Galaxy Quest: "Never give up, never surrender!"

The key IMO is to tweak your games until they find a receptive audience. You cannot predict the existence or lack thereof in advance. This means your games are likely to fail at first. If you fear failure that much, stop working on your game right now and go back to your day job.

That's what I've picked up from my own saga and that of Dexterity and others.

And it's perfectly viable to follow the business model of others as long as you are truly doing so, and not just a half-assed imitation of it. What Popcap does, works. What Pyrogon did, failed. I mean sheesh, if I wake up one morning without a cool idea in my head for *something*, the first thing I'll do is stick a shotgun in my mouth and say goodbye to this cruel, cruel world.

[EpicBoy]

Problem is, having a "cool idea" is about 5% of the formula. Everyone has cool ideas. Every developer I know could rattle off 5 cool game ideas on the spot. People generally don't get the subtle brilliance of PopCap in all things they do. The games are a pretty small part of the picture, in reality.

[Promaginy]

Am I wrong?

I think that you are wrong only if you create a game that few people want to play. If you create a 'hardcore' game that sells and can make you the return on investment you want, your doing the right thing. Being wrong too many times will put you out of business.

Look at Illwinter... their games (Dominions & Dominions 2) is hardcore and they appear to be selling well. Another example is Matrix Games which appeal to hardcore wargamers. These developers developed and maintain a symbiotic relationship with their customers.

I would argue that hardcore gamers are more demanding, but are more loyal when you win them over. If you give them what they want, they will be your biggest boosters. You don't need to advertise much if you have customers like that.

[Gmicek]

Another example is Matrix Games which appeal to hardcore wargamers. These developers developed and maintain a symbiotic relationship with their customers.

It's just too bad that they rape them with the cost of the games. Yikes!

[svero]

I would argue that the online game market, specifically for casual games, is an established market and an emerging market. It's not fully established yet and there are some pretty obvious routes it can/will take. (Like realarcade for mac and other cross platform or language expansions) And as well most articles about the market tend to suggest that the audience and sales are still growing.

What you're suggesting is essentially this. Stay away from the more established markets and aim squarely at potential markets. Create your own market specifically to cut out competition. If you don't have to compete with the likes of popcap it might be easier to make some sales. I don't think that's necessarily wrong, but...

This first thing that comes to mind is that an established market already has a method of distribution.

Say I make something that's bejeweled or collapse like. There's a pretty clear route to make money with that. Attempt to get it on real, bigfish, reflexive etc... and hope that it's a hit. A potential market lacks an established distribution method. Say I make something that aims at a completely different audience than the portals sell to. Suppose it's a very deep complex simulation. How do I reach the audience for that game? The portals won't want it. So I'm left to my own devices. The download sites don't really have enough traffic these days so merely putting the demo out on them will probably not reach enough people to be profitable. That means that I have to come up with either a really clever way of advertising my project for free or I have to build up the market myself using my own money. So what I've done essentially is replace competition and publisher percentages with advertising costs or guerilla marketing. And the latter may not always be successful. There might simply not be enough free routes you can take.

[oNyx]

I'm also somewhat heading into the opposite direction of that what we call "casual" games. Simply because there is a whole spectrum of genres missing in the PC market nowadays. I'm interested in that "niche", because I expect that it will continue to grow over the next couple of years.

There is an endless stream of fresh people, who'd never played a game before (remember?). And at the other end there is a (smaller) stream of ex "hardcore" players. That stream just started. I'm one of those guys and I know what they want, because it's about the same stuff I want. I know how simple minded that sounds, but it's actually rather calculated. I have a set of rules, guidelines and requirements, which will hopefully help me to deliver streamlined game experiences. [Of course I'll need to adjust/redefine em on my way]

I'm aware of the sublime alienating tone of my words, but good games are designed for being actually good for a specific audience. It happens rarely that something thrown together will end up as a good game. Therefore I'm trying that "educated" approach. I'll use every tool in the box.

Well, only time will tell how much right/wrong I was.

[wazoo]

Interesting discussion..

Me for the most part, I'm just trying to create the games that *I* want to play...

And hope like hell a segment of the (buying) market wants to play it to..

I'm just so nieve, that I'd rather create a few titles that I'm interested in, and hope to learn more about the marketing and business related strategies as I go.

I'm trying like hell to stay away from doing too much market-research-oriented titles, because FAR too many things these days are marketing produced crap, packaged for mass market consumption..

(ie. any pop singer, American Idol, most video games, etc..)

An Indie-Reactionary??? *shrug*

"Just wanna game Dad...just wanna game."

[merovingian]

Problem is, having a "cool idea" is about 5% of the formula. Everyone has cool ideas. Every developer I know could rattle off 5 cool game ideas on the spot. People generally don't get the subtle brilliance of PopCap in all things they do. The games are a pretty small part of the picture, in reality.

What subtle brilliance? The fact that they actually finish what they start and ship it? Most of the game developers I know can rattle off 5 mediocre ideas a minute too, but none of them seem to be able to execute on their own. Either their job takes up too much of their time, or their SO won't let them work on it, or some other lame excuse. It gets old after a while.

What it comes down to is getting your product out there and listening to the market. Popcap could be unseated in a year or less by the right team. They aren't Microsoft and audiences want to play the best games, not support the company they love.

Mind you, I'm not expecting Popcap's fall into obscurity any time soon, but I see a great deal of great work being done by the crews on here, and time will tell what becomes of them.

[Promaginy]

It's just too bad that they rape them with the cost of the games. Yikes!

Rape is kind of a strong word... they obviously have priced their products correctly because they have been around for years. If their prices were unsustainable, they would have to lower them or shut down.

Premium games command premium prices. The amount of research that goes into creating a war simulation is greater than any puzzle game. Their customers demand accuracy and realism and are willing to pay a premium price for it. Many Matrix customers would probably look at a Wargame priced for $9.99 and think that there is no way it is as well done as something that is $49.99. Value is in the eye of the beholder.

[Vectrex]

"Problem is, having a "cool idea" is about 5% of the formula. Everyone has cool ideas. Every developer I know could rattle off 5 cool game ideas on the spot."

I hear this alot and frankly I very VERY rarely hear what i would consider a good idea. maybe I'm just picky :) I think that's alot of the trouble in that people think they have these great idea's, just like programmers think they can draw :D . Maybe they have the start of an inkling of a good idea but I guess i'm not interested until there's a more full design as I think it's the subtle details of an idea are more important than the idea itself. Just one gameplay detail done badly can ruin the whole game and this is especially important in indie games as we don't have movie tieins and whatnot to sell it regardless.

www.similarmusic.com

[Jim Buck]

What is the inspiration/perspiration ratio again? :)

It's really all about execution. If you have an idea that has already been done before, you can execute it exceptionally well and have a great product. However, even a genius idea will flop if executed poorly.

Summary: ideas truly are worth $0.008333333333 (at the rate of a dime for a dozen :) ).

[arcadetown]

Logic/puzzle games are an uphill battle I suggest people avoid. Action/puzzles seem to be where it's at for now. We've fought our battles with BLOX Forever and even though it sells great here and reasonably well elsewhere it's hard to fight the large distributors perceptions.

Personally think ease of use is a huge issue but we learned that if you hit a core user right it plain old doesn't matter. Witness World Domination (http://www.arcadetown.com/worlddomination/index.asp). Dang thing is impossible to figure out but enough guys do and enjoy it so much it's selling like hotcakes. Repeatedly urged the author to add hand holding messages, but no dice so far.

[Vectrex]

"Summary: ideas truly are worth $0.008333333333 (at the rate of a dime for a dozen )."

well ideas are, but GOOD ideas are gold :) and I think the execution is part of the idea, so bad execution = bad idea in my book.

[Jim Buck]

By execution, I mean the actual creating of the game - programming, the artwork, etc. It's separate from the idea. In that the person/team that created the idea is usually the person/team executing the idea, certainly there is a correllation between competent idea and competent execution, but that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. :)

[Vectrex]

"Witness World Domination. Dang thing is impossible to figure out but enough guys do and enjoy it so much it's selling like hotcakes."

gah this is what I mean, no good idea's around at all, blatent ripoff of nuclear war on the Amiga from years ago. Other clones credit the original at least.
Still i guess if they're making cash :( *shuffles through old amiga disks*

http://screenmania.retrogames.com/amiga/01/amiga_0009_3.html

http://free-game-downloads.mosw.com/abandonware/amiga/games_m_o/nuclear_war.html

[mahlzeit]

gah this is what I mean, no good idea's around at all, blatent ripoff of nuclear war on the Amiga from years ago. Other clones credit the original at least.
Think of it this way, how many people playing World Domination now did play the original Amiga game? If World Domination would not exist today, would they all load up the Amiga emulator to play Nuclear War? There is nothing wrong with bringing an old, forgotten game back from the dead. Not all game ideas have to be new and original -- they just have to be good. (In fact, when is the last time you did see a truly novel game idea?)

[Jack Norton]

Am I wrong?
Well since you do indie dev in your spare time as extra income, why not try? :) you don't have much to lose!
I went into the sports simulation genre mainly because is a kind of game I like, I wasn't making any marketing consideration honestly when I started... I am happy by my results.
However, if a puzzle game can sell 10/day, well... :D

[merovingian]

"Witness World Domination. Dang thing is impossible to figure out but enough guys do and enjoy it so much it's selling like hotcakes."

gah this is what I mean, no good idea's around at all, blatent ripoff of nuclear war on the Amiga from years ago. Other clones credit the original at least.
Still i guess if they're making cash :( *shuffles through old amiga disks*

http://screenmania.retrogames.com/amiga/01/amiga_0009_3.html

http://free-game-downloads.mosw.com/abandonware/amiga/games_m_o/nuclear_war.html

And Doom 3 is just a remake of Doom, which is just a remake of Way Out, Puzzle Inlay is just glorified Chinese tangrams, Arkanoid is just prettied-up breakout, which is just Pong with a few rendering errors, The Sims is just an extreme makeover of Little Computer People, the entire RTS genre is descended from the illicit love child of Eastern Front and Modem Wars, and Freecell is high-fallutin' solitaire.

What the hell is your point? Make a fun game, market it competently, and you'll be OK.

Make a game only a developer could love and the developer will be the only one who'll love it.

[Vectrex]

"What the hell is your point? Make a fun game, market it competently, and you'll be OK.

Make a game only a developer could love and the developer will be the only one who'll love it."

well the thing that bugs me about that game is it's directly copying it, even to the point of using the same comedy with the names. All the games you mentioned took the original idea, expanded on it, added to and changed the content to make it they're own game. i've got no problem resurrecting old game styles, I love old game styles :) But it's like taking doom3 adding 2 weapons and 3 new enemies, redrawing the textures and calling it your own. Sure ID can get away with that, but it was theirs to start with.

mahlzeit -"In fact, when is the last time you did see a truly novel game idea?"
exactly :D

[oNyx]

[...]Arkanoid is just prettied-up breakout, which is just Pong with a few rendering errors[...]

I almost spit my precious caffeine across my keyboard :D

However, people actually don't want innovative games. It's sad, but it's true. Innovative games just doesn't sell - even if they are pretty good (Tomb Raider 23 and Fifa 2097 will outsell em easily).

Well, but it's not that bad. You can redefine a genre two times a year. You can bend or break the established rules. And you can of course make a game, which feels completely new even if it's actually just one of those 5% changes of a default formula.

I really would like inventing a truly new genre (like everyone else heh). Something completely different, which is fun. Herein lies the problem it's not easy. Even really weird ideas could be put into one or maybe two of the established genres: puzzle, logic maze, jump'n'run, jump'n'shoot, shoot'em up, beat'em up, side scroll beat'em up, sim, sports, rts, rpg, bemani, pinball, arcanoid... etc.

IMO it's really not that important to make something 100% new (it's kinda impossible anyways). Be satisfied with your work, get some bucks out of it and eventually make a living that way; that's good enough, isn't it?

[KNau]

Innovation for innovation sake can be dangerous, too. Remember the saying, "The pioneer is the guy with the arrows in his back".

Creating an entirely new genre and gameplay mechanic means you not only have to sell your game but you have to spend a disproportionate amount of time educating the users in how to play it. Invariably what happens is that the first game of a new genre receives lukewarm attention but paves the way for much more successful clones of itself later. The pioneer gets overrun by copycats once the new frontier has been made "safe" and players have accepted the new genre.

The new market of computer users have been using PCs for less than 6 years on average, and that includes the "many and male" 18 to 35 year olds. Old Amiga, C64 and even arcade designs are not familiar territory for these people so even though we all see them as "clones' they seem like fresh concepts to the user. Cripes, they are still making (and selling) Pac Man clones!

I think innovation is best done in small increments, based upon proven concepts and that old designs are fair territory for basing new games on. I just wish developers would broaden their range. There are maybe 4 or 5 Nuclear War clones, including my own Power Mad available through Xing Interactive, but hundreds of Tetris and Match 3 clones. With so many fantastic overlooked games from yesteryear I don't know why there isn't more variety.

[Vectrex]

good answer. Don't get me wrong I love old games and their tight gameplay and a agree you'd be pushing it to make something actually unique. But if you take an old game and update it at least add SOMETHING to it :), or give credit where credits due like www.remakes.org . I still think there's room for different/less casual games in the market. That said my games aren't particulary original ;)

[Rod Hyde]

Even really weird ideas could be put into one or maybe two of the established genres: puzzle, logic maze, jump'n'run, jump'n'shoot, shoot'em up, beat'em up, side scroll beat'em up, sim, sports, rts, rpg, bemani, pinball, arcanoid... etc.
Typing of the Dead (http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/165/165674p1.html?fromint=1). Now that's a weird idea. Kill zombies by typing quickly.

And the sequel, "Typing of the Project Managers".