Instant Action Announcement Discussion
by Dusty Monk · in General Discussion · 03/13/2010 (12:36 pm) · 5 replies
I'm kind of surprised that I didn't see an open discussion already about Instant Action's announcement, but well it *is* Saturday.. and if you're at GDC you're probably still nursing that hangover..
If you haven't seen it, here's G4's coverage of the announcement, along with some comments from the man Lou Castle himself clarifying some of the questions about how the imbedding will work.
This announcement certainly has me thinking long and hard about my own distribution, once the game is finished, and I'm wondering if anyone else is doing the same.
My question is for other indie developers using T3D technology out there, whom are in progress, and are thinking about how they'll distribute their games, and it is this:
Is the availability of this technology enough to tempt you away from using the big digital distribution portal -- ie., Steam, Impulse & Direct2Drive?
Being able to imbed a trial version of the game, or heck even the entire game, within a blog, facebook page, or forum post, is a very powerful notion. On the other hand, right now when I hear about a game and I want to buy it online, there's pretty much exactly one location that I, and for the most part everyone else that I know of, think to go: Steam. And in the end, it's about getting as many eyes on your product as possible. So does the viral nature of this technology make it worth beating down Instant Action's door? Or are you thinking "pfft, nothing beats putting it on that Steam powered front page.."
Also, a question for the devs of GarageGames, once they get back to their computers.. :) Does using Torque 3D give us an advantage in being prepared to take advantage of this imbedded technology offered by Instant Action? Are we better suited using T3D's code, or in the end, is any engine going to have to go through the same things to build a streamable/downloadable version of your game..
Cheers!
Dusty MOnk
If you haven't seen it, here's G4's coverage of the announcement, along with some comments from the man Lou Castle himself clarifying some of the questions about how the imbedding will work.
This announcement certainly has me thinking long and hard about my own distribution, once the game is finished, and I'm wondering if anyone else is doing the same.
My question is for other indie developers using T3D technology out there, whom are in progress, and are thinking about how they'll distribute their games, and it is this:
Is the availability of this technology enough to tempt you away from using the big digital distribution portal -- ie., Steam, Impulse & Direct2Drive?
Being able to imbed a trial version of the game, or heck even the entire game, within a blog, facebook page, or forum post, is a very powerful notion. On the other hand, right now when I hear about a game and I want to buy it online, there's pretty much exactly one location that I, and for the most part everyone else that I know of, think to go: Steam. And in the end, it's about getting as many eyes on your product as possible. So does the viral nature of this technology make it worth beating down Instant Action's door? Or are you thinking "pfft, nothing beats putting it on that Steam powered front page.."
Also, a question for the devs of GarageGames, once they get back to their computers.. :) Does using Torque 3D give us an advantage in being prepared to take advantage of this imbedded technology offered by Instant Action? Are we better suited using T3D's code, or in the end, is any engine going to have to go through the same things to build a streamable/downloadable version of your game..
Cheers!
Dusty MOnk
About the author
Dusty Monk is founder and president of Windstorm Studios, an independant game studio. Formerly a sr. programmer at Ensemble Studios, Dusty has worked on AAA titles such as Age of Empires II & III, and Halo Wars.
#2
Actually that's not quite true. Unity, for example, has a web plugin that allows to play Unity content in a browser. What the InstantAction guys have been doing all along is pretty different, though.
The IA plugin is not tied to a specific technology. Rather, it always allowed embedding any game done with any engine into a browser by interfacing with their plugin.
I think most people simply assume that somehow the InstantAction tech ties into Torque but alas it does not in any way.
With the new push, it appears the InstantAction guys are now taking this one step further and are lowering the entry barrier here even further.
03/16/2010 (6:05 am)
@JasonActually that's not quite true. Unity, for example, has a web plugin that allows to play Unity content in a browser. What the InstantAction guys have been doing all along is pretty different, though.
The IA plugin is not tied to a specific technology. Rather, it always allowed embedding any game done with any engine into a browser by interfacing with their plugin.
I think most people simply assume that somehow the InstantAction tech ties into Torque but alas it does not in any way.
With the new push, it appears the InstantAction guys are now taking this one step further and are lowering the entry barrier here even further.
#3
I doubt there be many exclusivity clauses [and by now anyway, those should be avoided like hell], so you may well be adding posibilities, not just options: you have your game on Steam *and* the demo on your site *and* on facebook... it all adds to it.
03/17/2010 (8:49 am)
The questions that Mr. Dusty Monk made are really interesting. I wonder though, why not both? why not "all of the above"?I doubt there be many exclusivity clauses [and by now anyway, those should be avoided like hell], so you may well be adding posibilities, not just options: you have your game on Steam *and* the demo on your site *and* on facebook... it all adds to it.
#4
For one, when you work with the portal provider, you're going to be doing more than just uploading your game and hoping for the best. If I were to choose to go with Instant Action, for instance, I would expect to work with the developers of Instant Action to assure that I have the technology working correctly in my app. And I'm going to spend time, money, and resources designing my application and making changes to make it as friendly to the imbedding process as possible. For instance, if you have to download 1.2GB of your client before the player can begin playing, that's not going to be all that "imbed" friendly.
On the other hand, if you put your game on Steam, how much of Steam's resources are you going to take advantage of? What about things like Steam achievements, access to friends lists, etc. You can eschew all those things, but if you spend time making them a part of your project, then your game is just going to do that much better on that portal.
Having not actually spoken with either portal, I also don't know what kinds of exclusivity they would be interested in maintaining, if any at all. But I would not be surprised if there were incentives for you to choose one over the other.
So I suspect, at least in my case, given my limited indy time and resources, it will be a matter of which portal can offer the most for your product, and in turn devoting as much of your resources as you can spare to make your project play nice with that portal.
Dusty
03/17/2010 (10:04 am)
I think that "all of the above" is definitely the best choice if you have that option available. But I suspect that at least for myself, I'm going to decide to put my strongest support into and behind one particular portal or another. For one, when you work with the portal provider, you're going to be doing more than just uploading your game and hoping for the best. If I were to choose to go with Instant Action, for instance, I would expect to work with the developers of Instant Action to assure that I have the technology working correctly in my app. And I'm going to spend time, money, and resources designing my application and making changes to make it as friendly to the imbedding process as possible. For instance, if you have to download 1.2GB of your client before the player can begin playing, that's not going to be all that "imbed" friendly.
On the other hand, if you put your game on Steam, how much of Steam's resources are you going to take advantage of? What about things like Steam achievements, access to friends lists, etc. You can eschew all those things, but if you spend time making them a part of your project, then your game is just going to do that much better on that portal.
Having not actually spoken with either portal, I also don't know what kinds of exclusivity they would be interested in maintaining, if any at all. But I would not be surprised if there were incentives for you to choose one over the other.
So I suspect, at least in my case, given my limited indy time and resources, it will be a matter of which portal can offer the most for your product, and in turn devoting as much of your resources as you can spare to make your project play nice with that portal.
Dusty
#5
Probably, that should also enter in the equation as a new factor then: what plataform has a nicer API, or most streamlined integration procedure?
Also, would help to point out each platform goods? I get lost into the abstraction when starting to think about one path over another.
03/17/2010 (10:21 am)
Well that was really well put, I haven't considered post-production in the equation, and is definitively an important point.Probably, that should also enter in the equation as a new factor then: what plataform has a nicer API, or most streamlined integration procedure?
Also, would help to point out each platform goods? I get lost into the abstraction when starting to think about one path over another.
Torque Owner Jack