Why I'm so down on match-3's et al [Archive] - Indiegamer Developer Discussion Boards

Applewood

04-08-2007, 04:09 PM

Find the screenies here/ (http://dimensity.dagger-games.com/)

When someone says "independent games", I imagine this kind of quality level. Always have, always will. Anything substantially below this falls into the "shareware" category in my mind.

When punters also see games like this and stop seeing match-3, breakout and snake games, maybe there'll be some proper money to be made. Maybe. They're certainly not indepedent of publishers (which I assume is the root of the phrase) - publishers wouldn't touch em.

Stop targetting grandma and go for the other 99.5% of the game buying public ?

Honest discussion required, not intended as flamebait. My view is offered as that of a punter who has plenty of cash and buys a lot of games, who is looking for alternatives to EA shite. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Sell me something!

Allen Varney

04-08-2007, 05:07 PM

Manifesto Games (http://manifestogames.com/)

Applewood

04-08-2007, 05:18 PM

Been there, almost bought a couple. Might give VV a try when I next have time for a good sesh.

Isn't this the exception though ? All my indie related knowledge comes from posts on here so I kinda get the impression that almost all indie games are "casual" stuff I'm not interested in.

Is this how joe public thinks of indie games do you think ? I have to admit the average quality I'm used to seeing is what put me off buying a couple of things from that very site.

~LK~

04-08-2007, 05:28 PM

All my indie related knowledge comes from posts on here so I kinda get the impression that almost all indie games are "casual" stuff I'm not interested in.

same

Is this how joe public thinks of indie games do you think ? I have to admit the average quality I'm used to seeing is what put me off buying a couple of things from that very site.

I'm not sure joe public knows nor cares about who's indie and who's not. I think they see "games" in general, and decide if they look good or bad. I think they buy games based primarily on looks, storyline (theme), and then gameplay, most likely in that order.

RinkuHero

04-08-2007, 07:02 PM

I think there is no joe public. There are different audiences. Some games have the audience of young males who grew up playing Super Nintendo, other games have the audience of middle-aged females who didn't grow up playing games, and there are many other audiences, like niche audiences dedicated to particular genres for instance, such as turn-based strategy or adventure.

If you try to make a game for "every audience", no audience will like it. There's a quote that goes "if something could be anything, then it's actually nothing". I can't think of a single game that everybody could enjoy. There are games that more than one audience can enjoy, but no game that every audience could enjoy.

For instance, the game you linked to in your first post probably wouldn't be enjoyed by fundamentalist Christians, because of how satanic the demons look and because of how red everything is; there are people who just hate fantasy. The site's well-done, but people who don't enjoy the fantasy motif (and there's a lot of people who don't) won't like the game.

oldschool

04-08-2007, 08:55 PM

I have one FPS idea that I think will be great. However if I'm having problems with art and music now with a 2d game, I can only imagine what a nightmare 3d game will be. Heck to be honest I changed the style of my game literally 10 time. I won't be able to do that with 3d models that cost 20-100+ a pop at turbo squid. I'll get there one day when I have more money in my pocket.

Also, not everyone on these forums is a professional programmer or self educated in programming there are many things I still don't understand. They don't teach OOP in microbiology and chemistry classes:D

I'm sure the game I'm making you could have whipped out in a matter of days instead of the embarrassing amount of time its taking me but I'm learning.

Rainer Deyke

04-08-2007, 09:12 PM

Stop targetting grandma and go for the other 99.5% of the game buying public ?

Here is the problem, I think - the assumption that 99.5% of the game buying public is well served with the games from the mainstream game industry (and that the rest are playing match-3s). I look at the Dimensity website and feel the same boredom that I feel when looking at the shelves of a brick-and-mortar game store.

Don't get me wrong. I find no merit whatsoever in the casual game scene. There's certainly room for "games for non-gamers", but even non-gamers deserve better than a thousand variations of the theme of matching three tokens of the same color. It's silly to pretend that there's no money in this market, since money is its sole reason for existing. But it will inevitably fall under the sway of a few big companies if it does not collapse outright. Does anybody really think that small developers have any edge over big companies when it comes to producing soulless clones with high production values?

However, Dimensity is part of another, just as irrelevant part of the indie games scene. It looks at 3D real-time RPG/strategy mix. Its screenshots remind me of why I hate 3D graphics. I like strategy games with actual strategy (and time to think about said strategy), not RTS clickfests. I like turn-based RPGs. I like genuine action RPGs (Legend of Zelda and Secret of Mana, not Diablo). I hate real-time, non-action gameplay. It feels awkward and stupid. The combination of RPG and RTS elements could theoretically lead to somewhere new, but more likely it'll be yet another step in a direction that many mainstream games are already pointing, toward a world where everything is a perfect mish-mash of genres, a world where only one genre and one game style remains.

Now, there may be gamers who like this mish-mash. However, aren't they already well served by the mainstream game industry? Will they really buy a game that's more of the same, but with worse production values?

I think we can do better than that.

When I think about indie games, I think about King of Dragon Pass. I think about Cute Knight. I think about Starscape and Mr Robot. All of these games are made from previously existing elements, but all of them take them into different directions that have no direct analogue in the mainstream game industry. All of them are worth buying, IMO, unlike the crap the mainstream game industry is producing (and unlike the crap the portals are peddling).

This, I believe, is the hope of indie gaming: games that are genuinely good games (not mini-games) with at least decent production values, but substantially different, for a different audience: the 90% of the game-buying public that has no interest in either match-3 tripe nor in mainstream mish-mash.

andrew

04-08-2007, 09:21 PM

Some people want to make match-3's for bored office secretaries. More power to them. Definitely not my scene, though.

Part of what I consider "indie" would be innovation, and freedom from traditional genre constraints. Writing a cheap-looking Bejeweled ripoff doesn't exactly elevate the indie gaming scene, but I guess people must be making money doing it. It does boggle my mind that so many people keep essentially ripping off the same game idea over and over again -- only with low-grade production values.

For more cutting-edge indie stuff, I'd suggest looking at the types of games that have won IGF awards (http://www.igf.com). Cliff @ Positech is also doing very interesting stuff in the 2D sim genre.

This, I believe, is the hope of indie gaming: games that are genuinely good games (not mini-games) with at least decent production values, but substantially different, for a different audience: the 90% of the game-buying public that has no interest in either match-3 tripe nor in mainstream mish-mash.

I wholeheartedly agree with the above quote. I quit my job at a AAA publisher last year and I've been working on an indie game of my own for a few months now, aiming at exactly this market. It's a gut-wrenching thing to be spending my entire nest egg on my project, but I feel very strongly that there are many innovative ideas out there that a) can sell, and b) can push the industry forward. What spurs me on is talking to ex-coworkers at places like EA, Midway, Microsoft and others, and hearing how disillusioned they are from working on soulless and derivative products.

(Why someone would spend their precious free time working on a soulless and derivative product -- for barely any money -- is beyond me.)

- andrew

electronicStar

04-08-2007, 09:36 PM

1-As rinkuHero said there are different types of player and there is one type (or more precisely I'd call it a "non-type") that plays and buys match-3s. I agree that there is no love involved in making a casual clone, but contrary to other more typed games, the casual games sell very well if you know how to market them. I think that a lot of harcore gamers unjustly criticize the casual clones industry of nowadays but they don't realize that this industry is exactly similar to the industry of arcade games of the eighties, the same industry that nurtured them and that most of them are mentioning when asked what type of games they'd prefer to see...

2-IMHO, there is something in the low quality graphics of the game you linked to (rough models, low-res textures) that adds to the overall artistic value of the graphics, it's almost pleasant to watch.

3-Although I agree that more indie games should aim for this type of quality, I would never buy this game because of the unimaginative scenario. I'm bored of killing orcs,trolls, elves and whatever run down archetype in he same boring generic fantasy setting. Although graphics are important, I think there is one domain where indie games should not only be on par but even lead the mainstream game industry: it's orginality in the universe and or scenario.
I would like to see more original stories and settings, give me a new world to explore and I'll buy the game. Tell me a story, that's where the art is.

James C. Smith

04-08-2007, 09:40 PM

Stop targetting grandma and go for the other 99.5% of the game buying public ?

A lot of people are doing just that but I think you tend to notice the grandma targeting ones more because they last longer and get more sales. At Reflexive.com we sell a wide variety of games. Alien Shooter and Crimsonland did well for us. But the "grandma" games do even better. On the development side we try a mix of innovation, passion, and what you call "grandma" games. Wik & the Fable of souls (innovative, passionate, dark) wins award but Big Kahuna Reef (bright cheery match 3) sells. Never the less, we keep developing more innovation and passion games with a mix of what you would call grandma game. This year we will ship a new, innovative, passionate game that is not for grandma. But don't blame us if you see more of our match 3 and breakout games.

I don’t mean to focus on Reflexive. I am just using the mix of games we develop and distribute as an example of why you might see more “grandma” games and less games going for the other 99.5% of the game buying public. I think there is a good mix of both but it is easier to see all the grandma games because they get more attention and stay around longer.

There are some very good non-grandma games out there but it is very hard for them to get as much attention or make their money back.

svero

04-08-2007, 10:02 PM

The idea that so called mainstream games are somehow "better" or target a bigger audience is a bit of a joke. Want to talk about uninspired cloining? look no further than the hundreds of warcraft games since warcraft. Retail PC sales are dead in large part because of that. Specifically just the opposite of what was said before. It's a lack of focus on gameplay and too much focus on graphics and storyline. Games that should be 2d games require supercomputers to run and the latest video cards making them unaccessible to all but hard core enthusiasts. If you pc is a couple of years old or a laptop forget buying anything. It's ridiculous. Casual gaming had headed down the same road as far as a focus on production vs. gameplay. But there's a reason companies tend this way. It's hard not to see clone after clone sell well while more original games go unpromoted or do poorly and not have your business side react on some level.

The other thing to consider is... with the death of PC retail gaming, it's difficult for us to reach the audience that would be into an innovative shooter etc... A lot of those people who are interested in and would enjoy the kinds of games you're talking about simply aren't looking for or playing games on the PC. They're out buying xbox or wii titles.

With XBox Live Arcade etc.. the console market is opening up a bit to indies and all indications are that sales and conversion rates are quite strong there for games that would not sell at all through the big download portals. If you want to go after that audience you have to present your games where they can find them. Who of the hard core gaming audience goes to real etc..to look for a new crimsonland on a regular basis? It's a bit of a catch 22... we dont produce the games because they dont sell as well so people dont look for them so they dont sell as well and so on...

Davaris

04-08-2007, 10:09 PM

The other thing to consider is... with the death of PC retail gaming, it's difficult for us to reach the audience that would be into an innovative shooter etc... A lot of those people who are interested in and would enjoy the kinds of games you're talking about simply aren't looking for or playing games on the PC. They're out buying xbox or wii titles.

Try joining and posting in the forums where the gamers that like your type of games hang out.

electronicStar

04-08-2007, 10:13 PM

Wow this is like the third thread on the subject of graphic vs playability that I'm reading tonight.
Anyway, on this same subject, what about a game like Zombie Smasher X2?
Obviously the graphics aren't the top of the line, but the game is interesting.
I don't know their sale statistics but it seems that they had some decent sales, thanks to word-of-mouth...

Applewood

04-09-2007, 02:58 AM

For instance, the game you linked to in your first post probably wouldn't be enjoyed by fundamentalist Christians, because of how satanic the demons look and because of how red everything isAgreed, but my link was about production quality over game style - I don't like those type of games either :)

A few people above seem to be basically saying that grandma games sell better, but it also appear that this is because grandma knows where to get them,whereas johnny the shooter fan doesn't know where to look. I guess I understand this problem, but I think we need to solve it if we're to get anywhere longer term - the match-3 boat has surely sailed by now.

Regarding live arcade etc, yeah that's where we're pitching out stuff. Good quality but less of it will get you a long way there. We're even doing two derivative products as well as something pretty new. Be interesting to see what sells the most, I guess.

Anyone see a future for the Vista portal thingy ?

RinkuHero

04-09-2007, 03:13 AM

Nexic

04-09-2007, 04:01 AM

All casual games bore me, all retail games bore me. Unfortunately kids and women aren't bored of them yet.

Mikademus

04-09-2007, 04:52 AM

I understand what you mean and I hate low production values as well. But I don't think that game is a particularly good example either. I don't really like 3D games, and a lot of people who buy independent games don't like them either, or the requirements for higher-end computers. When I think of what independent games should be like, I think of games like Aquaria (http://www.bit-blot.com/aquaria/) -- high production values, but not trying and failing to look like or have as much content as an AAA game either.

I like 3D, but I consider it a medium, and one that is not suitable for everything, as all other game aspects the suitable technology and presentation should be chosen to suit the product. This also means that one should consider 3D to make 2D games. That said, Aquaria looks like a wonderful indie game, and I must agree that this, too, is more along the lines of what I have in mind when thinking "indie", rather than yet another Tetris-inspired puzzle game with graphics borrowed from the 'net and voice acting borrowed from your best friend. Unfortunately, it is this lowest level of "casual" games that I've noticed many equate with "indie", just as "independent movies" bring up notions of horrible high-school "experimental" flicks and low-budget b&w eastern-european melancholic crypto-intellectual pretentious borefests.

As I see it, the main difference between indie, or any, games and AAA-titles is really the amount of contents, or perhaps, the ambition of that contents. Of course, more advanced contents will often require programmatic adaptations, etc, but at least I think of indie games as "real" or "proper" games of lesser scope: low budget should not mean low quality or value.

~LK~

04-09-2007, 08:40 AM

The idea that so called mainstream games are somehow "better" or target a bigger audience is a bit of a joke. Want to talk about uninspired cloining?

Thats two seperate thoughts here. They DO target a bigger audience, and have the means to do so. Now as far as the cloning aspect, I can't argue. But as you said, "It's hard not to see clone after clone sell well while more original games go unpromoted or do poorly and not have your business side react on some level." They sell, I think most likely because there isnt anyone putting out a product that visually can compete, and if there are, it's not being marketed in the right areas.

Maybe the issue is perception as stated afew times already of "casual gaming". For years, the picture in my head of what casual gaming is had always been ones of match 3's or games that are very nastalgic of the one's I played in the 1980's looks and feel. To the point where labeling somthing as casual games almost feels derogatory. I know this is not the case, but perception is king. I also think that, as stated earlier, match 3 type games do sell better than fps or other style games.. in the method in which indie's usually market there games. You can't go into a store of classical music, and sell Hardcore Rap very well.

James C. Smith

04-09-2007, 08:59 AM

A few people above seem to be basically saying that grandma games sell better

I just want to clarify that my assertion was not that people make more grandma games because they sell better. I was trying to claim that they make a lot of every kind of game and YOU notice the grandma games more because they sell better.

But your main point about the quality of the non-grandma games does have a lot of truth to it. It is hard to find really polished well made games in the Indie/download space unless they are casual grandma games. I think the problem in this area is that if you want to make a game for johnny the shooter fan you are competing against Valve, EA, Activision, Blizard, Id, and the rest. You can't compete with them in term of "quality level". They will beat you every time. You can't really compete on price either because johnny can get last year’s FPS game in the discount bin for $10 and it will blow away any idie game in terms of amount of content, technology, and polish. You need to focus on offering something that johnny the shooter fan can't get from the big players.

I do think that Microsoft's efforts to make Vista be a gaming platform could help the PC as a gaming platform and therefore help indie developers. Selling 360 controls in the PC isles has got to make a lot of PC game developers happy. If wonder is Dell and Gateway are offering machine with 360 controls yet.

andrew

04-09-2007, 09:40 AM

I think the problem in this area is that if you want to make a game for johnny the shooter fan you are competing against Valve, EA, Activision, Blizard, Id, and the rest. You can't compete with them in term of "quality level". They will beat you every time. You can't really compete on price either because johnny can get last year’s FPS game in the discount bin for $10 and it will blow away any indie game in terms of amount of content, technology, and polish. You need to focus on offering something that johnny the shooter fan can't get from the big players.

That's very true... most large studios can't (or won't) risk real innovation, so they try to compete in the "who has the most flashy content" race.

Can you provide the gamer an innovative, professional experience that they can't get from the "big" studios? And, can you do it on a budget that's sufficient enough to keep the quality bar high, but low enough such that, say, 100K sales would be considered a success? I think you can. Digital distribution + inexpensive high-end graphics cards + XBLA + blogs/youtube/viral marketing == big opportunity. I think the gamer base is so large now that genre doesn't limit you, as long as the game has that "it" factor which connects it with an audience.

P.S. I don't mean to look down on "casual games", because I'm a big fan Zuma, Hexic HD, Puzzle Quest, and others. Those are very professional-looking, innovative games -- just aimed at a casual market.

Shanks

04-09-2007, 09:59 AM

Applewood

04-09-2007, 02:01 PM

Can you provide the gamer an innovative, professional experience that they can't get from the "big" studios?
Well, yes and no. No, my little firm couldn't compete in the FPS space or MMORPG etc, so we don't try. We've got a badass pool game that's better than a lot of stuff passed out in the commercial arena though. I've never advocated direct competition with EA, but I just want to see things done right. Without trying to boast, our pool game pisses all over every other indie one I've seen, simply because we're doing it to a pro standard over time instead of rushing out some budget crap, for example. If EA did a pool game, it'd have the WPBSA players in it but would otherwise be no better than ours. This is where we aim to compete - where 98 programmers are not required. Now a pool game is never going to win any innovation awards either, but innovation is another area as far as I'm concerned. I just want to see stuff done properly.[/QUOTE]

P.S. I don't mean to look down on "casual games", because I'm a big fan Zuma, Hexic HD, Puzzle Quest, and others. Those are very professional-looking, innovative games -- just aimed at a casual market. Funnily enough, I don't either. Zuma has been played to death by yours truly on the 360 and I know this is itself a clone of an earlier game. My open derision for match-3 programmers is based largely around the fact that most people seem to do them because they can't manage anything else. The authors of the games above clearly don't fit into that category so I've nothing but respect for them.

Twitchfactor

04-09-2007, 02:27 PM

I really dont understand whats in the match - 3 games that has made it such a hit..probably bejeweled set the trend and everyone became addicted and started wanting such games...I myself was addicted to it but I have never
played another clone of it and have never liked any of the match 3 games..
infact it has made me averse to even trying the good ol bejeweled..

I actually think the "lack of understanding" of any genre is one of the things that makes a clone bad.

People see something that's popular, have no understanding or respect for how it is crafted, come to the conclusion it's crap, attempt to make their own version and lo-and-behold, a stinky mess in a box (or downloaded). This happens in ALL mediums; art, music, movies, books, etc (c'mon, how many of you think you can make a good rap/house/country song?).

Indie games seem to have this more so, due to the immediate grasp-ability of the core elements of indie games.

Approaching anything without a full understanding and respect will result in a hollow mimicking, at best.

To me, when it comes to "indie" development, the whole point of "what sells" should not be a factor. The only factor should be, "what works for YOU". Make a game that's true to you and make it great and that's that.

Now of course, there are business considerations, of which most people on this forum don't have to worry about. For the ones that do, the best tactic is not to pour everything into your Magnum Opus, but to do like Reflexive does; build the "out of the box" stuff along side the "we know there's a market" stuff and make them both great (don't forget that part).

I personally love shooters and platformers, but I don't expect my personal game projects to outsell Diner Dash or Bejeweled any time soon. If I'm looking for a meal ticket, some day I'll take the time to analyze, understand & respect a Match-3, then embark on doing something that fits the market and brings something new, to justify people giving me their $20.

soniCron

04-09-2007, 02:53 PM

...there are business considerations, of which most people on this forum don't have to worry about. Jeeze. Have we turned into a hobbyist forum? :o

Applewood

04-09-2007, 03:03 PM

Jeeze. Have we turned into a hobbyist forum? You mean you'd not noticed before ? :confused:

I don't think there are any forums anywhere where it's just commercial coders helping each other out. They always fill up with l33t h4x0rz ime, who then drown out the content.

soniCron

04-09-2007, 03:24 PM

Indeed, I did notice, but I've been secretly wishing it was just my imagination. :(

bignobody

04-09-2007, 04:13 PM

Since I'm currently working on a match 3 (or more accurately match 3 matches of 3. Hope it won't confuse the target audience :D ) I guess I'll speak up.

Let me backtrack a little by saying NotSoft is small time. Its my hobby that I fund with my day job. I'm not expecting it to make me rich, but I would at least like it to pay for itself. That's currently not happening.

A friend of mine had suggested on more than one occasion to "make a casual game", so I thought about it for a while. I finaly gave in by making it a challenge for myself - "Can I make a matching game that I like?".

Ultimately, by jumping on the bandwagon and making something market-proven, I hope to be able to have better production values in the following game, which will be anything but casual!

Applewood

04-09-2007, 04:20 PM

Just don't call it "Minge" or something :D

bignobody

04-09-2007, 04:53 PM

Don't worry. Got a "casual friendly" proper name for it. Even registered the .com.

zoombapup

04-09-2007, 05:50 PM

Why is everyone so hung up on whats indie, casual or anything else?

People make match-3's because they sold (once upon a time). Clearly only the better ones now really sell.

There's certainly nothing inherently evil about a match3 game. I've had plenty of good play time playing different "casual" games, because they are simple time-wasters. Easy session based play. If you want an alternative twist, try something like Strange Adventures in Infinite Space, FastCrawl or the like.

I do agree that most indie games have poor production values. But then again, I've seen plenty of funded games that were the same :)

I just think its too easy to get hung up on all this labelling when it serves no purpose. I'm kinda sad that the match-3 noobness has kind of forces some useful people off the forums (Nick, John and Ste), but thats life I guess.

Me, I just make games that interest me. I play games that interest me. I dont give a crap what someone labels them. I can judge for myself wether I like something or not. Thank god most indie games still have a demo (hell, I doubt I'd ever buy a game without a demo these days).

Make a killer demo and I'll buy.. simple as that.

ragdollsoft

04-09-2007, 06:41 PM

Websites like NewGrounds have some pretty cool-innovative stuff in there, much more than commercial portals. Of course there's a ton of crap, but what stands out (the good stuff, thanks to the voting system) has passed the test of thousands of hard-core 13yr olds, not 50 year old housewives.

Anthony Flack

04-09-2007, 06:58 PM

I do think that Microsoft's efforts to make Vista be a gaming platform could help the PC as a gaming platform and therefore help indie developers. Selling 360 controls in the PC isles has got to make a lot of PC game developers happy.

Having played around a little bit on 360 Live Arcade, I think if MS can bring that across to the PC completely intact (the same content, the leaderboards, online play, the 360 controller, complete integration with the Xbox service) then it could be the biggest shot in the arm for PC gaming since Doom.

I'm also very happy that MS are making the effort to establish a de-facto standard PC gamepad (finally), and particularly since the 360 pad is as close to perfection as any gamepad has come I think.

Sharpfish

04-10-2007, 01:27 AM

I'm also very happy that MS are making the effort to establish a de-facto standard PC gamepad (finally), and particularly since the 360 pad is as close to perfection as any gamepad has come I think.

while I agree with the sentiment, and I also rate the Xbox360 pad highly (I prefer it to my previous favourite - the GameCube pad), that is when talking about analog. The D-Pad on the 360 controller is really innacurate and is one of the worst i've used. It's ok if we stick to using the thumb sticks however 'cos they are great. :)

All we need now is MS to give the Pad away to system builders (Dell etc) to help make it a real 'standard'.

I miss the Amiga, even without a std supplied joystick, almost everyone had one for it anyway (nearly all owners were gamers). :(

Anthony Flack

04-10-2007, 03:59 AM

Still room for improvement, huh? I admit, in my short time with the system I never really tried the D-pad. Gotta be better than the horrible Playstation one though, right?

They are tricky things to get right, it seems. I quite liked the Sega Saturn's one.

Josh1billion

04-21-2007, 10:21 PM

Some people want to make match-3's for bored office secretaries. More power to them. Definitely not my scene, though.
I think hardly anyone would make match-3's (such a dry, same-old same-old genre) if they weren't such huge moneymakers. Stuff like that does very well in the market, perhaps being the most successful single genre in the casual industry.

That's unfortunate for creative, innovative people like me and you. We actually want to create games that are good, fun, interesting...

I'd like to see more games with depth topping the portal charts. An RTS, an RPG, even a fighting game... not just another Bejeweled with a different graphics theme. Until that happens, we can't always break the bank by expressing our own ideas...