How do I know my idea is good?

[Black Hydra]

I've recently had an inspiration for a game idea. This idea was worth more than most my other ideas, as this one feels like I could also complete it in the amount of time I had initially wanted to take for my first shareware project.

Now the problem is, how do I know my idea is any good? More importantly, is it something people will want. Yeah, yeah, I've heard the story, do market research, then find a game idea. However, seeing as none of you (at least those who responded to my initial post) seemed to have much of an idea of how to conduct reliable market research, I'm stuck with my gut instincts.

The game isn't incredibly unique, however I notice it doesn't seem to fit in with many of the standard games that appear to be all the rage in shareware right now. Is this good or bad? Seeing as puzzle games and 2D spaceshooters seem to be abundant here, is that because they are the most popular, or because they are a good game to make with limited resources?

Now I know that one area I can't quite decide on is target market. Based on the preliminary rough design ideas I've written down, this game could be marketted in many ways. Seeing as I can probably make the game with a more broad interest level, should I also market it that way? Or does that generally leave all areas only mildly impressed?

I know that presentation and delivery of your idea to the masses is probably more important in determining success than many other factors like genre and such, so I'm not quite sure how I plan to go about doing it.

Also, what key things have you noticed that separate your ideas that became big sellers and your ideas that flopped?

I am approaching this very slowly, as I don't want to spend a year on something doomed to fail from the start. So I need to know what kind of tests I should put my idea through to see if it will be popular, and the value of these tests?

I can tell you guys my idea if you would like to judge it yourselves?

[GBGames]

Ask your friends. Give them the two line summary of the game which describes how it will feel and play. If they say, "That sounds good" make sure they mean it because it may just be them being nice. But if they get really enthusiastic about it, you may have a winning idea. I have a few ideas myself, and I also know which one I should start on because of the enthusiastic response I got from some friends.

[maksum]

Can you play the game physically with game pieces (dice, chits, othello pieces, cards, custom cards on index cards, dominoes, etc.)? If you can, then do that. I've had some totally killer awesome ideas... played them out physically only to discover THEN that the concept didn't really work for one reason or another... without doing one minute of programming.

If that's possible, then do it... if not, then this solution isn't for you.

Mike

[Coyote]

Here's the deal based on my non-expert experience.

The crappiest-sounding ideas often turn into the biggest hit games, and the road to obscurity is paved with the box-art of hundreds of thousands of "sure-fire" ideas that never made it to market, or that flopped horribly when they got there.

I don't want to say that the "idea" of a game is MEANINGLESS. It's not. A game needs a solid "hook" - which is really more of a gimmick, a need you are fulfilling, or a pre-existing fantasy you are playing to. And that's about IT. I don't think you can really test-market an idea because it's simply too insignificant for anyone to speak to. There's not enough there. I could stand up in a conference and describe my idea in painstaking detail for 45 minutes to a group of game developers, and assuming they were all miraculously dedicated, I could come back in six months and discover that no two games developed by these different people turned out alike.

It's all in the execution, implementation, and presentation. THAT is where your market research needs to be. Are you playing to the audience's expectations and desires? Do you really understand your audience? Do you know how to get the message out to them? Do you know how to present the game in such a manner that they'll be receptive to it, and can quickly move to the point where they are having fun?

Trying to wave an idea for a game around and getting useful feedback on it is about like waving a piece of thread around and asking people to tell you how they like the new outfit you are going to make out of it. About the best someone can say is, "Well, that color might be nice," or " will it be durable?" But you really need something more substantial to go on.

I hope this makes sense. This is really NOT intended to be a flame of any kind whatsoever, but just an opinion from some guy who has seen and heard and developed quite a few game ideas in the past.

[PoV]

The best way to know if a game is going to play good is to play it. So, make a prototype. So ignore all the fancy graphics, fx, story, good programming practices (that slow you down), just to get a working version of the controls/gameplay/elements that make it unique asap. Play that, and if it has potential, build a level to test your ideas (even by hacking it together if needed). Tada, prototype. Now if it meets your expectations for fun, then go refactor or rewrite some code, and build any tools you need. Otherwise, toss it, and move on to the next idea.

Building several prototypes can lead to you noting patterns and tools you use often, so you can isolate/document those and build either a library or snippet collection for yourself, making future prototypes easier to make.

[Greg Squire]

Read this write up that Dan MacDonald did on Jeff Tunnel's speech at the IGC if you haven't already (http://www.planetthinktanks.com/dan/jefftunnell/).

I remember him saying that the best ideas are usually the ones that sound bad at first (like Coyote mentioned). He gave the example of his screensaver "Johnny Castaway". At first the idea seemed really stupid, but that screensaver became really popular and was very profitable.

[Black Hydra]

Prototyping. That definitely sounds like a good idea. Originally, I thought proto-typing was probably a less expanded version of the game, however, trying a smaller, possibly only something I could make in a couple of days may lend some useful insight.

I understand that ideas are not as important, however, I'm trying to be as cautious as possible so I won't waste my time due to my own haste.

Many of the main themes of my idea (by theme I refer to the core concepts that define the game) are more global and couldn't really be represented adequately without some demonstration. Should I factor that in when making my prototype? Seeing as prototyping would only really test gameplay aspects.

I am also looking hard at how I can sell this game when it is made. Aside from the obvious technical requirements, what should I do to determine how I should present the game, what methods I should emplore to get the game noticed?

[Valkilos]

Bouncing ideas off other people is always a good idea. Still, I can't help but be reminded of something Will Wright said; two of the only game ideas he's presented that people said were stupid were for SimCity and The Sims. I guess my point is that getting opinions on an idea is great, but they may not be accurate until you have your idea in a presentable and playable form.

I don't have the experience that many of the people on this board do, but I can say that prototyping a very basic version of your game will work wonders. Sure, it may end up consisting entirely of circles and squares, but at least you (and other people) can get a feel for how the game will play out... whether it will be fun or frustrating. I had an idea for an action/puzzle game that I was sure would be great fun to play. I spent a couple days whipping up a prototype, then immediately thought while I was playing it "Wow, this is like an action game, but with annoying puzzle aspects that make it not fun!" On the plus side, the original action engine and original puzzle concept both seemed to be strong on their own when I developed them into individual prototypes. The short version is - it's almost impossible to tell how good a game will be until you play it. Or play an absurdly watered-down mock-up, anyway

So um... get feedback, and make a prototype. And I'd trust feedback about the prototype more than feedback about the idea.

Good luck!

[Reactor]

Hmmm, some really good advice here.

I'm a bit different. I come up with a game idea and ask myself if I'd want to play it. If I say, "Heck yeah!" then I go ahead and flesh it out, and then make it. Since I'm working with my brother, we came up with one idea we both said "Heck yeah, I'd play it!" to, and then tapered it as best as we could to our development abilities. You ask, "How do I know my idea is any good?". Well, does it sound amazing to you? If it does, check it with a few other gamers (to anyone you could imagine playing it) and go ahead and make it. There's a very strong chance that if you would really like to play your own idea, others will too. If your idea is simply 'okay' to you, there's a good chance others will play it and think of it the same... and obviously, you don't want that

Feel free to post you idea here, btw. I'd personally love to hear it.

[Black Hydra]

@Reactor - Here goes. This is my idea. I've gotten quite a few of the details worked out. It may not be the best game for everybody, but it is definitely mirrors the style I personally like to see in games I play myself. So here goes...

Piko's Oddessy

This game takes over the journey of Piko to get back to his home. You begin the adventure where the timid alien, Piko, discovers an odd piece of technology that crash landed on his planet. After overcoming his initial timidness he looks inside and checks it out. Accidentally pressing a mysterious button the ship spurts into full jets and carries you at a blazing speed across the galaxy. Piko is initially very worried and scared, being lost in an empty corner of the universe. He meets a robot with a spaceship and they begin their adventure to get back home. (Sorry for the long storyline intro but its necessary for explanatory terms)

You would have to journey to get back to Piko's home. One feature that would make the game interesting is that as a player you get to choose the path Piko takes to get home. Each path allows you to change the storyline, meet new people and get different abilities. The game wouldn't be incredibly long but by beating the game in various ways you could unlock different modes and difficulties making it very suitable for multiple replay's.

The actual gameplay of the game would focus on you piloting this spaceship (through 3D space not 2D) and using various weapons you find to defeat the monsters you encounter. The levels would each have different scenarios so you wouldn't be a game where the levels are the same, just more difficult. Some would also have boss monsters aswell.

The game would use simplistic control's allowing you to navigate easily through the environment. The main challenge in the game would be that all the enemies would use various movement and attack patterns and have different strengths and weaknesses, so defeating them would be mostly a matter of tactics than pure mouse/joystick skill. (sort of like Zelda..)

The game would have a more innocent theme, but would have some subtle more serious content (similar to the game Pikmen). Seeing as it will be very loosly based of Homer's Oddessy, the game will have some subtle hints from that story aswell, like battling a cycloptic alien on one world, and some other things to add to it.

The game would be fairly fast paced, but I am trying to promote extreme ease in control's so that no one is overwhelmed at the start.

So what do you think? Any ideas for improvements or problems you see with my idea? Would you want to buy this game?

[Greg Squire]

I like the idea. It sounds like a fun game, if done right (as they say "the devil's in the details"). It also sounds like a lot of work because of it's size. Be prepared to spend as much time or more on level creation than actual code. Good Luck!

[Coyote]

Basic Premise and Storyline: It's fine. Nothing earth-shatteringly new and original, but it doesn't need to be. In fact, one could argue that something too creative and new would be a bad thing, as you want something that a player can grasp within seconds.

The gameplay sounds ... from this description ... done to death by thousands of 2D and 3D shooters. It really depends on what kind of weapons and bosses you are talking about. If it's variations of guns and missiles... yawn. If it's a giant space-mallet and an atomic-wedgie-pulling extension, then we're talkin'!

The part about having all unique bosses, and multiple paths and story lines that grant you different abilities and weapons... that just turns on all kinds of warning lights in my head. BIG TIME. This represents tons of work developing all these unique aspects, balancing them, testing them... for something that at least half of your players will never see. 95% of players will NOT play through to try out every option. They'll finish it once and move on.

But like I said before - it's all in the execution! Nothing I've said here speaks to whether it will be a great game or not. Mainly it's development warnings, and a first-blush feel that it sure sounds like something that has been done a few thousand times before. But those are both things that can be addressed... with additional ideas. A great game is not about a single idea. It's a TON of great ideas that compliment each other mixed together with skill and talent. And a lot of prayers that the final result doesn't suck.

[Black Hydra]

The game would definitely have some larger issues with game size, however, I plan on creating it mostly with editors and engines, so once I get the code to make one level adding more are less of a problem.

Yes, different routes would require balancing work, but I'm focusing on simplicity. The game wouldn't have tons of weapons, in my first rough ideas I had 5. There would be some optional items, but because these affect gameplay less and require much less coding they amount of them is less of an issue.

The game wouldn't expand non-linearly like some games. The plot would have a constant direction, just different paths. When adding up my first sketches of the level map there would be a total of 14 possible levels. Completing the game would force you to go through 8. So, the game isn't really designed as such to take a long time to beat, I'm going to try to place heavy emphasis and different methods to encourage replay.

One issue, as you brought up, was that 3D shooters and 2D shooters are all to common now. Does that hinder this idea? Should I try to use a different method of gameplay? My current stance doesn't emplore anything too radical, except that is probably going to be presented in a format that isn't built like many of the other shareware games of a similar look I have seen.

One of you mentioned having some exciting weapons or features that could help make it more unique. I've been trying to think of some myself. I'd like to have a little sensibility in my game so stupid weapons are out, however, having some unique properties to some of the features could give me an edge.

Seeing as my story is and basic theme was what I had thought of first, modifing the gameplay shouldn't be a big issue.

While size is definitely going to be a factor, I am approximating about 400-500 hours of work to get everything done. Code wise, I think that by making an editor(s) so that I can create all the levels, cutscenes, dialogue and interfaces will probably speed up the actual creation. Seeing as physics wise I'm not going to have to do nearly the work required for games based on land, that was one major attraction to the game.

Does anyone have any other ideas of what you feel I might need to do to make my product stick out, or be more fun?

EDIT - Oh, and coyote, to respond to your 'done to death' feel with 3D spaceshooters I thought it odd to notice that you've made one yourself. In fact it looks like your major product. I'm not here to make a big deal of that, however, if the genre is popular, then it may not be a bad idea to work on one?

[Bluecat]

While size is definitely going to be a factor, I am approximating about 400-500 hours of work to get everything done.

Okay. Now multiply that number by 2.3 if you are a great programmer/artist, 3.1 if you are an average programmer/artist, and 6 if you are new to programming/art.

Does anyone have any other ideas of what you feel I might need to do to make my product stick out, or be more fun?

I like your idea. As I was reading it, I was reminded of Farscape. Adding something of the surrealist element that was present in Farscape might make your game stand out a bit too.

[Coyote]

BlackHydra - Mea Culpa! Yep, I had to learn things the hard way, there. Void War began as more of an intellectual exercise for me, and a desire to meet a need within a niche of a niche. It was only halfway through development that I said, "Gee, it'd be cool to make money on this too." Only THEN did I learn all the hurdles and obstacles I'd face turning it into a commercial product.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be done... I'm definitely considering a Void War sequel in the future, because I'm just that much of a glutton for punishment. But I am saying it's a hard row to hoe, especially with so many layers of expectations built over the years and many, many games. If you can manage those expectations, deliver something better than anything else has ever done, and manage to divert expectations so they don't crucify you for daring to defy convention.

Though your game sounds more like a rails shooter, as opposed to Void War which is more of a space-sim-meets-FPS. Rails shooters are FAR more plentiful than space sims, and have a lot more competition in the indie market. You'll need a more powerful hook than "multiple storylines" to make yourself stand out. Something beyond "defeat unique bosses." Remember how Defender totally turned the side-scrolling shooter genre on its ear with the addition of a single mechanic?

[Black Hydra]

I suppose I never thought my game having a redundant gameplay idea as I sort of viewed the idea much closer to an adventure game. Seeing as I'm not focusing as much attention to skill and more shift to logic, I don't think the game will be as much like other space shooters I have seen.

However, that is something to be careful to watch out for, as I didn't initially want to make this as a variation of previously made games. In fact, before anyone even mentioned 3D space shooters, I hadn't even thought of them in regards to my game. So I will have to remain steadfast in driving the gameplay aspect away from such an event.

As for your predictions on time to produce the game, I am well aware of over-optimism by game producers. The reason I quoted 400-500 hours because my last project which I felt was of a similar, but slightly smaller scale took me about 300 hours. Basically I figure they have similar amounts of code (assuming I make editors and not try to hardcode most this stuff...) however, this one will have more media that will be required.

It could definitely go over that, however, whenever I envision anything smaller, I can't see myself putting the effort to sell it as a game. But that estimate is only for coding and development. I will probably spend an undefined amount of hours testing, setting up a webstore, marketing, designing ect.

Seeing as the main theme of the game I plan to be is very different from typical space shooters I hope I can use that to differentiate myself from the crowd.

Multiple storyline routes, is mostly a gimmick for replay. What I had noticed, is that for most of my ideas, unless I made the storyline apparently infinite, or decided to make all the levels different versions of each other, I would have to make a very long game. So this, along with unlockable features, allows the player to continue playing after the storyline is over through a different path and with more difficulty. I will try to promote the idea that the goal of the game is to unlock all the features not just to beat the game so that players can catch on and continue playing.

[Anthony Flack]

I still don't have much of an idea how your game will play. I have an idea about the story, and the level structure. But as for the game itself, all I know is that it's a 3d shooter with the emphasis on logic and tactics, somehow.

You really need to prototype this up. Everything else is fine - but peripheral. If the core gameplay is fun, it will be great. If not, it will suck. Simple as that. So do that prototype!

Also, don't be fooled into thinking that level design with an editor is easy compared to hardcoding stuff. Level design is gruelling no matter what you use. In any content-driven game, writing the actual code isn't such a big deal compared to all the content production. I'm speaking from a depressingly large amount of personal experience here.

[Reactor]

Yeah, I have to agree with Anthony Flack. It's sounds like a nice base to work from, but I think the thing that will either make or break your game will be the gameplay. I'm also (like Coyote) working on a space game, and we've found that there are hundreds of other factors to keep in mind, past basic storytelling, or level design. For example, we don't have any pre designed levels, or missions (it's hard to explain) or a story. But, we've had to spend most of our time working on balancing issues with gameplay, and other things as simple as physics (ship to ship collisions). So, while I like the sound of your idea, I'm not sure I could say "Heck, I'd buy it!" because there's so much more that makes up a solid gaming experience. We think our main idea is pretty good, but it certainly won't sell the game without those other things in place

A little feedback about the whole thing though...

Double, if not triple the amount of development time you're estimating. It's amazing how much things will blow out. If you haven't developed before, you'll be in for a real shock if you're not generous with your time allocated for development, even if that's just for coding.

Keep Piko's Odyssey grand. Keep it epic in nature! Epic music, epic graphics (if that's possible)... an epic feeling to it all. By epic I don't mean 300 weapons, 99 different badguys, etc. By epic, I mean the way it makes the gamer feel. An Odyssey (make sure you spell it right for the final game) should be epic in nature, and sweep the player up in it. I think that would sell your game much more than multiple storylines.

Also, be careful that splitting up the story you have doesn't weaken the overall impact of your game. It can often be hard to create a brilliant storyline, let alone split it into eight, and have each of them as impactful as the other. I'm going to believe you'll do well at that though, so that's just a little reminder.

I hope some of the above rabbiting on is helpful

[serg3d]

Just my (limited expirience). I had a puzzle game idea, quite original, and looking great to me. I made a prototype, which I could play hours. It was a lot of fun for me. So I proceed and made a playable demo, with totorial. Here was a catch. Out of 10 people only 2 were able to get through tutorial. Thouse who get enjoyed the game a lot. The rest... well..they tell graphics is good....BTW they were not "target audience" - they were programmers mostly. So now the project is on hold, until I finish more accesseble game and have time for complete redesign...

[Holmqvist]

It sounds like an exciting game if you can pull it off, I like when games have a storyline. But it also sound as a lot of work..

Now I'd like to take this opportunity to tell people about my similar thread in announcements... I want some help too, with the same thing. "is my idea good?" I've got a simpler idea, Birdie Hunter, and I've got a prototype aswell..

/ Jacob

[Dom]

I'd agree again with those who say 'prototype it'.

You should be able to knock a gameplay prototypr up in a week or two (and gain some valuable insight in what methods will work well/don't work for the game itself, code wise)

Then the REALLY important thing is to get someone from your target audience to play it (a friend, parent, doesn't matter). You will be unable to be truly objective about it.

Make sure try not tell them ANYTHING about the game itself. Let them work it out (if they can). If they do get stuck try to give a minimal 'prompt'. Anything you do tell them, note down - it should be used to base your tutorial on.

If you have to use more than about 3 or 4 sentances worth of instruction for them to play a game, then it is probably too complicated.

Finally ask them if it was any good - but be prepared for them to always say it was better than they really thought!

[Black Hydra]

While I haven't had years of experience in the field, I know the work ahead of me. The last project I worked on had an editor that was rather simple, and it was still a huge pain to make the levels, so I am aware of the downsides of using editors. What I meant mostly, is that in the past I had focused on hardcoding everything, which made editing, testing, debugging more complicated. So if I can focus on making some editors to handle some of the things I will have in my game I can control it a little better.

I'm not really constricted to a timeline like some people who have to do this as a living. So if it takes over a year then it takes over a year. I definitely don't think it will be a walk in the park, but I'm being very careful of such all to common 'I can code anything in a week' problems. Every feature requires more time, so I will have a very optimized design plan that will rid inefficiencies I see in production.

400-500 hours is a ballpark. In the end hours worries me less than timeline. I figure if I am not reaching my goals in time then I just need to pick up the pace or recalibrate my goals.

As for a prototype, I am definitely going to be making one for this and having it tested. Seeing as the storyline and some of the non-linear concepts were my original ideas, modifying gameplay shouldn't affect those as much.

As for what was said about tutorials, I do intend to have a simple tutorial at the start of the game that the player can decide to skip (or retake between missions, if he wants to brush up). The tutorial won't be too long, but I found that tutorials are an all to often step that is skipped in creating a game. Nobody reads readme's. I plan on engineering the game for maximum ease since piloting your ship and using the controls shouldn't be where the challenge in my game lies.

Where could I get some testers for my prototype? I have a few friends that would probably be willing, but I often can't get the best advice from them.

[Dom]

You don't want to listen to what your testers say usually. Especially if they are friends. The most valuable bit is to sit (silently!) and WATCH what they actually do. You can very quickly guage what confuses them, what buttons they try pressing & when (thinking it does something totally different usually) etc. Chances are they won't approach it anything like the way you do - they may have pre-conceptions that alter the way they try playing that you don't have.

[Black Hydra]

Yeah, I know that all to well. I had my friend try stuff from my last project, and I was quick to notice every little thing he tried and didn't pick up right away.

That deals mostly with intuitiveness. Gauging how much fun their having really has to come straight from them.

[Anthony Flack]

I found that tutorials are an all to often step that is skipped in creating a game. Nobody reads readme's. I plan on engineering the game for maximum ease since piloting your ship and using the controls shouldn't be where the challenge in my game lies.

Correct. Nobody reads readmes. Ever.

But people don't generally like tutorials either, so keep it short. Really really short. Better still, introduce concepts as you go. Even if the first level is only "move left and right", if you can find a way to make moving left and right fun for a couple of minutes' gameplay, then you've already got the player hooked. Continue to add more controls gradually in this way, and before they know it, they'll have learned all their stuff and they're already hooked and having fun...

Much, much easier said than done, of course. I've been tearing my hair out over this issue myself, but it is incredibly important to get it right.

Good call with the controls. The challenge should never be in struggling to get your avatar to do what you want it to do.

[Uhfgood]

I want to add something. Everyone says make a prototype, but i say start with a prototype, if it doesn't work, don't think it's over, instead start honing it down, cutting it, shaping it. From some of my limited experience i've started with what seemed to be boring ideas, that basically I kept working on until it worked. Obviously if you've put a lot of hard work into it and it still isn't working the no use in beating a dead horse, however don't assume it's dead until you've put some time into making it work.

[Black Hydra]

Of course, I'm going to try to fix the gameplay problems before I scrap the idea.

As for tutorials, your definitely right. I'd like to have the game just start with the extremely basic controls.

However, presenting the game with a short tutorial, IMO is better than just saying click to move. I'll try streamlining the tutorial so it is as minimal as possible, however if the user is guessing the controls that isn't good either.

Seeing as you'd probably only start with one weapon in this game, you would only have to learn to move and shoot. Maybe some more complicated maneuvers like strafing would be demonstrated quickly before facing a boss or something.

Thats one of the main reasons I have to make the controls as simple as possible.

Another thing I was thinking I could do is to make the demo incredibly easy except for the end if it is long enough. If the demo is really easy it will probably make up for some poor control skills.

[Emmanuel]

I can tell you guys my idea if you would like to judge it yourselves?

Create a webpage that describes the game as if it was completed and you were out to convince customers to buy the full version (mockup screenshots help, but obviously you may need to skip that at this point). If you have different audiences in mind, create one page per audience from scratch, each one touting different benefits, tuned to the audience.

This will help you a lot in identifying how your game differentiates, how people can relate to what they know, why they would like to play it, etc.

If you post the URL of these pages somewhere, I will be happy to comment ! (not judge)