Our changing market place in the next year...

[Alan_3DAGames]

Hi, when Xbox live for the 360 started, it seems to me it was going to be very good news for indie developers like us.

Now I'm not so sure.

So I wanted to find out what you all thought about it?, and how you think its going to affect our market place?.

From my point of view, I think the 360 marks a transition point where the big companies are starting to see a way into smaller downloadable games for all platforms.

For example we have two examples in the past week here...
"Vivendi Acquires Studios for Xbox Live Arcade"
http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=417078
Where they are going to have two studios targeting downloadable games.

And this news, "Digital Distribution and the PS3"
http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=417070
Where Sony not so surprisingly states...
"digital distribution is the future of both the industry and of PlayStation platforms--and yes, that means lots of paid downloadable content"

We all know downloadable games are the future, but now the big companies are putting serious money into targeting it. Plus with download limits around 50Mb its in direct competition with our existing games.

At the same time, we have the inevitable need to always improve the quality of our games year after year, as the download market is already full of simpler games.

So I think our Indie downloadable market is getting squashed from both directions. We must improve the quality of our games which costs more time and money. But now the bigger companies are aiming at smaller games and putting lots of money into it.

Our games are usually labelled as the “casual games” market. I think that name implies certain types of games. If however its considered from the point of view of calling it the “casual purchase” market which is what I think it really is. Then I think even if the big casual purchase games developers don't create the same games as us, they still compete for players attention and money ever more in the downloadable market.

The quality bar is raising for indies at the same time as the barrier to entry is lowering for the big companies.

I know I have to improve quality, but the longer term is looking more uncertain then ever, the way things are changing.

[simonh]

Yep, was inevitable really. I had a meeting scheduled with MS for weeks about getting Super Gerball on Live Arcade, then one or two days before they cancelled, saying they had enough ball games. I doubt I will ever get another chance, as it's all gearing up now for the big publishers to firmly dominate Live Arcade.

[Anthony Flack]

I'm not scared of competing on quality, and never have been. It's always been my position that you need to make games that a decent number of people will want to play more than any other game - regardless of development budgets.

The thing that concerns me is the barriers to actually getting the games released. I expect we'll be hearing more of "we've already got enough ball games" in future - even if your game is the better ball game. It sucks that hardware manufacturers are allowed to control the game software business. It's enough to make me want to just go independent.

[theshadowfan]

Quality, fun factor, and whether or not the game is unique have always been key factors in making a successful game. There will always be an underground market. If you look at any industry there are independents. Indie developers just have to be smart and plan out their route of success if they want to make money.

[Alan_3DAGames]

That's unfortunate about Super Gerball. I like the concept/theme of the game.

“If you look at any industry there are independents.“
That's not the case for many markets. For example, the vast majority of manufacturing markets. Even Indie music isn't that profitable unless its got good marketing support, which is actually big business marketing in a way that makes them look like Indie music. So they are not actually Indie at all, its a marketing brand identity.

I'm not scared of competing on quality, but it costs more time and money. How much extra time and money then becomes the question. Which also then leads to exactly what Anthony Flack was saying, about the barriers to actually getting the games released. If it becomes harder to get customers yet I need more profit per game to fund longer development times, then that becomes a big problem, which is likely to get worse over time.

In the longer term, I can see we are going to get dominate PC distribution companies, like EA "live" and Take2 "live" which targets the PC market, while XBox live and PS3 live etc.. target the consoles.

Most people searching for games will inevitable end up going to these services as these services will spend millions advertising themselves.

That's going to be a growing problem for smaller games distributors and developers.

and I think it is an inevitable process, but now it finally seems to be happening for the downloadable market.

[Coyote]

Well, the good news is that we can't ever be "squeezed out" of the Internet - well, unless the anti-"Internet Neutrality" bills pass here in the U.S., in which case we may find ourselves having to pay tremendous fees to stay on the Internet.

So here's my question: What's your Unique Selling Point? Why would someone buy your game?

Is it simply because you have online distribution? Then you might be in trouble as guys with bigger budgets jump into that space.

But if it's a unique, fun game - then it's a marketing complication. I hope and believe, however, that the increased difficulties are going to be offset by an increase in opportunity. If your portion of the pie shrinks by 10%, is it that bad if the overall size of the pie doubles?

[KNau]

Indie development was already infested with naive console dev wannabes posting "How do I make a game for the Game Cube" and then getting pissed off when you tell them (truthfully) that they can't. The downside of the console market coming online is that on the surface it has the appearance that now they can. Although in reality they still can't.

It justs adds another round of goldrush mentality:

First it was indie development in general:
"I heard this Pavlina guy is worth a bazillion dollars! We need to get online and go indie so we can get rich beyond our wildest dreams!"

Then it was puzzles & portals:
"I heard Bejewelled made a bazillion dollars, then a guy cloned it and made half-a-bazillion! If we make a clone and get on Real Arcade we'll be rich beyond our wildest dreams!"

Now it's the consoles:
"I heard Geometry Wars made a bazillion dollars on X-Box Live! We absolutely must get a game on the consoles, then we can be rich beyond our wildest dreams!"

The trouble with any gold rush is that 99% of the "rushers" either die on journey there, get robbed / killed by a claim jumper or go home empty handed. But that other 1% makes it look oh, so sweet!

Funny the rush to consoles despite the extra expense, red tape and lower margin of doing business there, meanwhile you can still hear the crickets chirping in the Mac gaming market. You can never count on business fundamentals to persevere in a gold rush.

[sillytuna]

Actually we'd be really interested in learning about the Mac market. Info greatly appreciated!

[Sakura Games]

Mac was a good market. Portals are already ruining it, history repeating I guess :D too late now, sorry!

[KNau]

The Mac market used to do really well for people, often converting at double the rate of the PC market. It's come down since the bigger players have noticed but I think there's still potential there. I'd still rather gamble on the PC and Mac market than the consoles.