Small Games vs
by James Hills · in General Discussion · 11/08/2001 (12:14 pm) · 3 replies
It is really great to want to change the world, and that is the type of vision that drive that will eventually lead to success, but it is sort of like saying I want to be the CEO of GM. It seems like most game developers think they can do that by buying a fancy suit (a copy of 3DSMax etc.), dreaming, and writing down great new ways to beat Ford's designs, or engines, or something else. In reality, most people in here are not GM or Ford, and they have no chance right now of being either of those companies. In the future maybe they will be, but not right now. Right now most of us are the mechanic down the street with some good ideas, perhaps a talent at detailing hotrods or tweaking engines but we don't have the capital to "do it right", but we try to do it anyhow.
I have been there and I failed many times.
One thing I have seen that seems to be a recurring problem for small developers is that they are too set on changing the world and don't think about how to do that. Instead, they seem to all say, "if only we could get 1.5 million dollars everything would work." They need to fall back a few steps and determine if this project is worth doing, and does it have any real value beyond ego building and the ability to impress friends by saying that they are working on a game. I don't fault anyone for doing that, I have dozens of "failed" game projects and designs scribbled in various notebooks around my apartment and hundreds of idea pages in various directories on my computer. I get enjoyment out of dreaming and putting ideas down on paper and analyzing how they might work. I imagine that many other aspiring game developers feel the same way, and there is nothing wrong with that.
However, I do feel sorry for those developers who are so overly driven by greed and the desire to profit that they lose sight of what drew them to game development in the first place ... the desire to create something fun that they might be able to make a buck off of. Almost no one stays with game development for the money, but I believe that if you work hard enough and think and plan that you can make enough money to live.
What I have seen some members of this forum recommend that developers do, is to work on small projects like non commercial mods for games like Quake, Unreal, or Half Life. Having gone this route in the past, I found that this left something to be desired and was not indicative of success working on a commercial project. Instead, it was mostly a hobby style endeavor; there were no budgets to worry about, no deadlines to deal with, and especially no legal or distribution issues to overcome. That being said however, 2 of the 7 people who worked with me on the Dimensionality Deathmatch Pack (for Quake1) now have multiple years of professional credits to their name, and the others could have as well if they had chosen to.
One thing that is glaringly obvious to me from the experience though, is that working on mods is counter productive if your goal is to truly release a game that will change the world. As soon as we completed the DM pack and we realized it was a huge success, we immediately set to work on a revolutionary new game and engine that was "going to change the world." We failed though, not because we lacked the technical and creative ability, but primarily because we didn't have what it took to adhere to deadlines, properly budget our expenses, and in general we didn't act like professionals. Professionalism is in my opinion is one of the principle things that publishers are looking for and there is no way that you can get that without experience acting like a professional.
Assuming your staff can create textures, models and design levels you might be better off working on a mod style game within something like the TGE. This will teach you how to be professional. You will be working with a professional engine, and have to work out professional agreements for staffing issues, licenses, and budgets but on a far more manageable scale than with a full retail style product.
Most people seem to think that a game needs to be 30-40+ hours and have everything that a game from EA or Activision has. This simply isn't true. I would rather see small developers release mini games that are FUN and show promise through a system like what I believe GG can provide. Why not focus your efforts on creating a small game with 1 episode instead of 4, with 100 textures instead of 400? Instead of needing a million dollars and 2 years of work you will be able to produce something for considerably less. Accordingly the retail price might not be 29$, but it might be 5 or 10$ which puts it right in the realm of the price for a movie and your game can be an impulse purchase.
Decreasing the scope of the project, and accordingly decreasing the cost for the consumer does another major thing ... it allows you to take a risk on something totally outlandish and it allows the consumer to also take a risk by purchasing it. If I downloaded a game for 10$ and it totally sucked I probably wouldn't blindly buy from that developer again, but I might still buy a sequel if they seemed to address my concerns. However, if the game was 29-49$ like retail games are, there is NO WAY I will ever take a risk on a "unique" game from an unknown developer. Publishers know this and that I believe is one of the major reasons why so many retail games are unimaginative and flat. There are some great games that do occasionally come out in retail so I don't mean to disparage them, but I think most people will agree that my assertion is fundamentally accurate.
Once this product is created then you would have several options.
1. You could continue releasing new episodes for the game with slight modifications and spread your development revenue and cost out over 2-3 years instead of working for 2-3 years and then getting a big check (hopefully).
2. You could then leverage the success of this game and go meet with a producer at a major label and say, "Hey, I did it! This game is selling online like hot cakes. Here is what I need to make my game that will change the world, and since we already have 150,000 people that have played our fist game we have proven our worth as developers".
3. You could use the revenue from your mini game to self fund your game that will change the world.
4. Continue working on ideas and look at it as entertainment they way authors, poets, and artists do. Just because you haven't sold an idea doesn't make it any less valid. I am sure I don't speak alone here when I say that writing down ideas and sketching character designs, and even creating levels out of Styrofoam blocks and army men (yes I have done that) can be just as much, if not more fun, than actually building a game to ship to stores.
These are just some ideas that I have had and I would like to hear people's opinions. Especially, I would like to hear the opinions of GG's staff on the concept of mini games being distributed through their system as apposed to large traditional style games.
James Hills
I have been there and I failed many times.
One thing I have seen that seems to be a recurring problem for small developers is that they are too set on changing the world and don't think about how to do that. Instead, they seem to all say, "if only we could get 1.5 million dollars everything would work." They need to fall back a few steps and determine if this project is worth doing, and does it have any real value beyond ego building and the ability to impress friends by saying that they are working on a game. I don't fault anyone for doing that, I have dozens of "failed" game projects and designs scribbled in various notebooks around my apartment and hundreds of idea pages in various directories on my computer. I get enjoyment out of dreaming and putting ideas down on paper and analyzing how they might work. I imagine that many other aspiring game developers feel the same way, and there is nothing wrong with that.
However, I do feel sorry for those developers who are so overly driven by greed and the desire to profit that they lose sight of what drew them to game development in the first place ... the desire to create something fun that they might be able to make a buck off of. Almost no one stays with game development for the money, but I believe that if you work hard enough and think and plan that you can make enough money to live.
What I have seen some members of this forum recommend that developers do, is to work on small projects like non commercial mods for games like Quake, Unreal, or Half Life. Having gone this route in the past, I found that this left something to be desired and was not indicative of success working on a commercial project. Instead, it was mostly a hobby style endeavor; there were no budgets to worry about, no deadlines to deal with, and especially no legal or distribution issues to overcome. That being said however, 2 of the 7 people who worked with me on the Dimensionality Deathmatch Pack (for Quake1) now have multiple years of professional credits to their name, and the others could have as well if they had chosen to.
One thing that is glaringly obvious to me from the experience though, is that working on mods is counter productive if your goal is to truly release a game that will change the world. As soon as we completed the DM pack and we realized it was a huge success, we immediately set to work on a revolutionary new game and engine that was "going to change the world." We failed though, not because we lacked the technical and creative ability, but primarily because we didn't have what it took to adhere to deadlines, properly budget our expenses, and in general we didn't act like professionals. Professionalism is in my opinion is one of the principle things that publishers are looking for and there is no way that you can get that without experience acting like a professional.
Assuming your staff can create textures, models and design levels you might be better off working on a mod style game within something like the TGE. This will teach you how to be professional. You will be working with a professional engine, and have to work out professional agreements for staffing issues, licenses, and budgets but on a far more manageable scale than with a full retail style product.
Most people seem to think that a game needs to be 30-40+ hours and have everything that a game from EA or Activision has. This simply isn't true. I would rather see small developers release mini games that are FUN and show promise through a system like what I believe GG can provide. Why not focus your efforts on creating a small game with 1 episode instead of 4, with 100 textures instead of 400? Instead of needing a million dollars and 2 years of work you will be able to produce something for considerably less. Accordingly the retail price might not be 29$, but it might be 5 or 10$ which puts it right in the realm of the price for a movie and your game can be an impulse purchase.
Decreasing the scope of the project, and accordingly decreasing the cost for the consumer does another major thing ... it allows you to take a risk on something totally outlandish and it allows the consumer to also take a risk by purchasing it. If I downloaded a game for 10$ and it totally sucked I probably wouldn't blindly buy from that developer again, but I might still buy a sequel if they seemed to address my concerns. However, if the game was 29-49$ like retail games are, there is NO WAY I will ever take a risk on a "unique" game from an unknown developer. Publishers know this and that I believe is one of the major reasons why so many retail games are unimaginative and flat. There are some great games that do occasionally come out in retail so I don't mean to disparage them, but I think most people will agree that my assertion is fundamentally accurate.
Once this product is created then you would have several options.
1. You could continue releasing new episodes for the game with slight modifications and spread your development revenue and cost out over 2-3 years instead of working for 2-3 years and then getting a big check (hopefully).
2. You could then leverage the success of this game and go meet with a producer at a major label and say, "Hey, I did it! This game is selling online like hot cakes. Here is what I need to make my game that will change the world, and since we already have 150,000 people that have played our fist game we have proven our worth as developers".
3. You could use the revenue from your mini game to self fund your game that will change the world.
4. Continue working on ideas and look at it as entertainment they way authors, poets, and artists do. Just because you haven't sold an idea doesn't make it any less valid. I am sure I don't speak alone here when I say that writing down ideas and sketching character designs, and even creating levels out of Styrofoam blocks and army men (yes I have done that) can be just as much, if not more fun, than actually building a game to ship to stores.
These are just some ideas that I have had and I would like to hear people's opinions. Especially, I would like to hear the opinions of GG's staff on the concept of mini games being distributed through their system as apposed to large traditional style games.
James Hills
#2
I've realized through the past 5 years of 'mod' development that scale is often the thing that defeats the projects I have worked on.
I also think as a game player that many of the commercial games I play nowadays are simply too freaking long, too big, and loose focus somewhere along the way. Small tight games are easier to make, keep your team fresher and more focused.. and quite frankly would make for a steadier revenue stream.
I'm taking time right now to develop some of my artistic skills in an area I am weak, but once I'm done with that I am going to dive back into the deep end once again using the principles were discussing here , keep it small, keep it simple, make it kick ass. Well see what happens!
11/08/2001 (1:50 pm)
James your thoughts largely echo my own.I've realized through the past 5 years of 'mod' development that scale is often the thing that defeats the projects I have worked on.
I also think as a game player that many of the commercial games I play nowadays are simply too freaking long, too big, and loose focus somewhere along the way. Small tight games are easier to make, keep your team fresher and more focused.. and quite frankly would make for a steadier revenue stream.
I'm taking time right now to develop some of my artistic skills in an area I am weak, but once I'm done with that I am going to dive back into the deep end once again using the principles were discussing here , keep it small, keep it simple, make it kick ass. Well see what happens!
#3
I think you've touch a major issue here in that people think that just because they have a good idea they are going to succeed and turn over revenue. The thing people usually lack the most is knowledge of what they need to do to succeed. It's little tidbits of advice from people who have experience in development that make all the difference which is why GarageGames is such a good place for indie's to start.
Basically this is my way of saying thank you too all the people who take the time to respond to the beginer (like myself) or, like this post, try to help people out by offering advice they have from their experiences in the community.
Much appriciation,
Alc
11/08/2001 (3:17 pm)
If your looking for a success story following these principles look no further then Counter-Strike. Everytime a new version is released almost everyone who has played it and enjoyed it downloads the new version to see what's new, even if they hadn't played it for a while.I think you've touch a major issue here in that people think that just because they have a good idea they are going to succeed and turn over revenue. The thing people usually lack the most is knowledge of what they need to do to succeed. It's little tidbits of advice from people who have experience in development that make all the difference which is why GarageGames is such a good place for indie's to start.
Basically this is my way of saying thank you too all the people who take the time to respond to the beginer (like myself) or, like this post, try to help people out by offering advice they have from their experiences in the community.
Much appriciation,
Alc
Peter Riley Osborne
Now there is still a lot of ground left, but one thing that I have seen delay games, is that idea that you have to keep up with the jonses as far as features. This kills developers because they can't just work on their idea because they also have to include the latest market crazes. Oh, and the art has to be better than anything on the market. (This is argument is intended mostly for core game developers, but is probably still true in some respects to family games also.) The final blow for a lot of developers is that the combination of company pressure to release the game by a certain time, and the addition of tons of features, you run into buggy games that need numerous patches to even run properly.
So what's my point? Well, why not take the TGE, make a simple game, and then improve on it for a while. It is kind of like a hit single. If you make and FPS with just DM, and it is an awesome DM with a great concept, and good art, people will play it for a while. Then if you come out with CTF for it later, then they will play some more. Then maybe you add some role playing or tournament features. After time, your simple DM will evolve into an awesome game. And you will have a loyal audience, because you took time on each facet of the game and made them rock, rather than take forever to make a huge game that doesn't work well and isn't fun.
Now if you have a huge team and a lot of talent, you can ignore this, but maybe for a smaller group that wants to get out there and get known, this is a good model. I don't think it is the only way, just one.
Just a thought