game development VS software development

[fishes]

hello everyone, I'm novice in program.Is there sombody here explain which one is better, game development or application development?

[ggambett]

Better for what?

[fishes]

I mean the market,And in other words making money. Which one is more easy to sell.

[ggambett]

It depends on the game and the application... but you shouldn't decide on "what makes more money" but on what you want to do, what you know, and so on.

[super_e]

In addition to ggambett's post, any "killer" idea whether implemented on an app or a game will definitely sell. :)

[cliffski]

software development.
If you arent totally driven to do a computer game. don't make one. There are enough people knocking out color matching puzzle games trying to make a quick buck...

[Anthony Flack]

Yeah.

If you have to ask, then make an app.

[Bluecat]

Why not try both?

You'll need to learn how to program, so I'd recommend that you start small. Write a couple of apps that will teach you the basics of programming, and then write a (very) simple game, or get a hold of a game that is extensible and make a mod. Rinse and repeat a couple of times, and by then your skills will have developed and you'll know more about what you prefer than you do now?

As for money, both games and apps have the potential to make a lot of money for the indie developer. As others have said, you'll have to figure out what you want to do yourself.

[Mark Fassett]

The right app probably has greater sales potential than a game. Truly, if I had a great idea for an app, and I wanted to support it, I'd make one. Selling something at $49.95 or $79.95 or even more appeals to me :)

[Coyote]

If you can find and exploit a good 'vertical market' with an application, you can make a killing. But of course, all the easy and obvious ones are taken (and usually overcrowded).

These days, success means survival in the games business. That's about the best you can hope for. And most companies don't even manage that.

[Sunshine]

See that's why you be smart like me, and write a game that uses MFC. Then when you are done you can go to game development, or application development either one. :D

[fishes]

Thanks guys.
Yes ,Killing idea Does need a lot of research. Most of my ideas have been put in practice and do well in the market. :(
In my opinion the application development has the risk of no sell but that's never happen in game's. Is it right?

[lonestarr]

Applications:
pros: you can make it alone (no artists needed), you can sell it at a higher price if you find a good niche which has been forgotten or underestimated by others.
cons: it's not that fun to develop and you may need to learn some very boring papers about the domain you target.

Games:
pros: it's fun, your children will like you more than usual ("dad MAKES games").
cons: you need artists, the market set the price, your game needs to be really great to survive.

Both:
pros: indie way of life, products' life is long (more than retail) so 3 or 4 average selling products can generate a good income.
cons: financial risks, marketing/distribution is boring unless you're entitled to this or you have good partners.

-lonestarr

[Phil Newton]

In my opinion the application development has the risk of no sell but that's never happen in game's. Is it right?

I'm pretty sure there's plenty of games and apps that don't sell very well at all.

[ggambett]

In my opinion the application development has the risk of no sell but that's never happen in game's. Is it right?
Not at all. It's more like "very few games sell".

[Bluecat]

Applications:
...
cons: it's not that fun to develop and you may need to learn some very boring papers about the domain you target.

I have to disagree with this. The thing is, it very much depends on the individual and what they think is fun or not. Huge numbers of people work for free on non-game open source projects in their spare time. I doubt if they'd do it if they didn't enjoy it.

cheers

John

[DavidRM]

Applications:
...
cons: it's not that fun to develop and you may need to learn some very boring papers about the domain you target.


That might be true at a *job*...but in my experience, working on software of your own design, that people use and appreciate is great, whether it's a utility or a game.

Also, an artist is good for utility software too. Not as vital as in a game, but still damn handy. Think UI design, toolbar icons, splash screens, and so on.

-David

[mahlzeit]

Another benefit of application development: You can sell site licenses. Many (bigger) companies are happy to purchase multi-user licenses, so if your application is useful for businesses, site licenses can bring in a lot of extra cash. Offering multi-user licenses for my product, Compare and Merge (http://www.compareandmerge.com), was one of the best business decisions I made.

A potential downside of application development: When you release an application, you kind of promise to update it. Customers will send you plenty of suggestions and after a while the app will have grown way beyond what you first imagined. Needless to say, this requires a lot of work. Tweaking a game requires work too, but the changes are trivial in comparison.

[lonestarr]

@Bluecat & DavidRM:
Right, but sometimes the market drives your development in another way (develop new "industrial" features like bridge with office applications, target people whose day job is unknown to you). My point was not about having good time developing on your spare time, but doing business as an indie.

That said, I develop a 3D application since 2 years, and it's VERY fun :)

@DavidRM:
See here (http://www.iconexperience.com) for average-priced icons...

@mahlzeit:
Your software seems great, and I agree about site licenses. I'd suggest you add an option for doc (MS Word) files, see Compare-It 3 (http://www.grigsoft.com/wincmp3.htm).

-lonestarr

[Bluecat]

@Bluecat & DavidRM:
Right, but sometimes the market drives your development in another way (develop new "industrial" features like bridge with office applications, target people whose day job is unknown to you). My point was not about having good time developing on your spare time, but doing business as an indie.

That said, I develop a 3D application since 2 years, and it's VERY fun :)
-lonestarr
You're right about the market driving features in commercial applications. Or more precisely, the marketing (or sales) people driving the features. But your comment said that applications were not fun to create, and that is what I disagree with, having spent most of the last twenty years creating commercial applications. Sure there been times that have been memorable for the unenjoyable attributes, but overall I can honestly say that I enjoy doing application development.

Now though, it's time for a change, and that's why I am working towards becoming an indie.

[Michael Flad]

Application development does have one big advantage compared with games - updates.
If (and only if ;-)) you manage to create a new app used by a lot of customers and you've got a bit of luck you may find yourself in a very comfortable situation. Once the number of users is big enough you'll for sure get a lot of very resonable feature requests for future versions. And if you've added some of the more advanced new features you're able to release major upgrades for which registered users have to pay a (reduced) fee too.

Site/mass licenses are a very good idea too - have for instance a look at what became out of Fineprint, once a very simple shareware printer driver with a simple ui and limited functionality ...

www.fineprint.com (http://www.fineprint.com)
Have a look at the news section - the numbers are amazing (now if only I had such a great idea :-))

[lonestarr]

@Bluecat:

your comment said that applications were not fun to create
Right, I should have said: "not as fun as games" :)

@Michael Flad:
I don't know if updates are really important for a $20-$30 shareware? I've recently purchased a $7 update for this (http://www.conceptworld.com/QNP/), maybe they had a good income if their user base is big!

-lonestarr

[DavidRM]

Right, I should have said: "not as fun as games" :)


And I would still disagree...but that's me. To each his own.



I don't know if updates are really important for a $20-$30 shareware?

It matters. And the reason is simple:
Would you rather get half of $20-$30? Or nothing?

Personally, I keep wondering why I have to pay full price for sequels to games I've purchased before. For example: I've purchased, Civ, Civ2, and Civ3 at full price. I'm beginning to be bugged by that. Can't I get *something* in exchange for my loyalty as a player? Ah, well. Maybe someday.

-David