Slashdot Mirror
Independent Game Studios Talk Tactics
Thanks to GameSpot for its article discussing the challenges facing independent videogame studios. The piece explains: "The game industry is moving toward greater and greater consolidation... Increasingly, an independent studio capable of turning a profit from the advances-against-royalties formula is the exception rather than the rule." It goes on to talk to Bill Roper (formerly Blizzard, now at Flagship), Feargus Urquhart (formerly Black Isle, now at Obsidian) and others, with Urquhart claiming independent developers are at no special disadvantage in current times: "I sort of look at it like babies and houses, there probably never is the perfect time to have a baby or buy a house. You just have to decide to do it and then do it."
having a house must be painful
hate titty pee colon slash slash
Maybe if the general gaming public was more interested in gameplay and lifetime than newer graphics and updated player statistics, independent studios such as the ones mentioned would have an easier time about it.
Making the moon less necessary since 1998.
My favorite tactic of independent game devs is: make the game you want, with a lot of passion and no compromises. I love it when they use that one.
Another fave: well, we can't do fancy, bleeding-edge graphics, let's just make the GAMEPLAY really good. I like that one too.
As the gaming industry, more and more consolidated with games written on the outside by talented programmers/artists and subsequently distributed by ``big houses'' starts to look more and more like recording industry, I've got only one advice to Independent Game Studios: DON'T GO THERE!
It will take you another century to free yourself from allpowerful Games Publishing Industry and countless fights against soon-to-be-created GPAA.
Save yourself and your customers trouble and think about some more direct way to distribute your games, before all your work, copyrights, money etc starts to flow one way, to pockets of ``games labels''.
Read some horror stories by golden and platinum record bands that didn't make a dime on it. Well actually, in some of these cases record labels claim that said artists still owe them money.
AND DON'T FSCKING GO THERE!
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
I am a small independent game developer who handles 100% of distribution myself. It's not really all that hard, and there are advantages to keeping everything close to home.
Not only do I not have to pay some ridiculous percentage of my profits, but I am 0 steps away from my users.
Put up a decent website with a way of getting feedback from your users (I use the excellent and free phpBB message board). This can also help create a community around your product. If you listen to what they say then your game will get better and better. Another thing that I have done is try to optimize my website for certain google searches.
I can't imagine any paid distributor putting as much thought and effort into such things for one of a hundred small games they are dealing with. By doing it myself I am confident that it is being done well.
Doing this I have seen my game grow from nothing into a steady stream of sales. I'm glad I did it the way I did, rather then trying to go the easy way and get some other company to do it.
If you disagree post, don't moderate.
Just wondering, since it's mentioned so many times, what factors are there in the cost of development, really? (Assuming best-case scenario in which freeware software is used instead of proprietary software) And what's the average minimum cost of development for different platforms, e.g. mobile phones, palmtops, portable consoles (mainly GBA), PCs, and Home consoles? I'd think that the cost should actually fall, given the increased availability of necessary software..
Independent game companies usually have plenty of tactics, or else they wouldn't be as popular as they are. For example, I've been hooked on reading everything I can about an upcoming game called Guild Wars. This is going to be one hell of a game. Their kickers are going to be a non pay-to-play MMORPG(which, IMO, is huge) and "creating a game that's both easy to learn and compelling to play long term, and yet doesn't require players to spend hundreds of hours slogging through the preparation just to get to the fun bits." Defenitely going to be a game to watch.
They also claimed that the market for MMOGs basically was saturated, that 5 years ago there were 50 MMOGs around, and there still are. True, they are different ones and they do change, but there does not seem to be a market for more than 50.
I personally believe that new independents should go into mobile games: that market is still pretty much open, although it is closing fast.
Interesting use of the word "independent" in that article. Usually I consider an independent game developer one that doesn't rely on an outside publisher for support. Yet, most of the people there talked about publisher contracts, etc.
Being an independent game developer that does not rely on a publisher and that has been around for three years this month (yay!), I know a thing or two about this topic. I have some stock rants that I like to recite when this topic comes up, too.
Some background, first. My game is Meridian 59, a fantasy online RPG. Our game is a bit unique in that it was previously owned by a larger company, the now defunct 3DO, but we bought the rights to the game from them. I worked on M59 for a few years before starting our company, Near Death Studios, Inc., so I had an emotinoal investment in the game before we bought it. My business partner, Rob "Q" Ellis II, is also one of the original developers of the game.
The biggest problem for a true indie isn't money (although there's plenty of money issues for the independent), it's actually exposure. It's tough to get attention for your game when you're competing with other games that spent a lot of money on production values and marketing. Just being a "good game" is often not enough to get noticed in market saturated with advertising.
For example, we went to the offices of a reasonably sized gaming magazine. The features editor had told us that we would get some good coverage if we showed off the new 3D hardware-accelerated rendering engine from the game. (Note: Warcry is one of the good journalist sites to work with, and not the company in question here.) So, two of my co-workers bought a suitable notebook computer and drove 2 states away to show off this game. Unfortunately, the editor we had talked to wasn't in the office that day (and didn't contact us about it), so we talked to someone else at the offices. End result: we get an unflattering description in a list of other names and no pictures of our new engine. But, you can quickly see the reason why we get ignored: flipping through the magazine to the big story about EverQuest 2, you pass by 3 double-page ads for EQ-based products. (There are plenty of other bad things you can say about games "journalism" as well. But, there are a few bright points to contrast the negative.)
But, let's say that someone does somehow notice my game. They head to our website and sign up for an account. When they log in, they see a graphics engine that's obviously dated. And, at this point, we lose a lot of customers because glitz does matter to many people. They don't care about the gameplay because they instantly equate "bad graphics" to "not fun to play". The big companies don't really help much with this; people that are happy with the game they were playing 10 years ago aren't going to be buying up new games as they come to market. Therefore, they work hard to convince gamers that "better graphics" = "more fun to play".
But, we get to the final reason why being an indie developer sucks: the current business models don't help us. Most people won't buy a downloadable game for nearly the price of a game they could buy at the local store. So, while the larger companies charge $50 for the box, the indie can only expect to sell his or her game for $20-30. Admittedly, a lot of the price tag for the boxed game goes to distribution charges, but there's other factors at work here, too; people, in general, view a $50 item (a game, in this example) as "better" than a $30 item.
This gets worse on the online RPG (MMORPG) side of things. Meridian 59 charges $10.95 per month for a subscription; we could not charge less, otherwise we would operate at a net loss given current expenses. Larger games charge a few dollars more than that. But, most players don't care about that minor price difference; they don't care that one
Brian "Psychochild" Green
MMO developer's blog