Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

juicybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 280 posts

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#111

Post by a13o »

I was deeply involved in the indie scene during this time and played many of these local multiplayer games at GDC indie events, weekly barcade meetups, game jams, Indiecade, etc. I think this misled many developers. Your peers are together often, able to play local multiplayer games, and giving you a false sense of market. I played hundreds of hours of these games in that setting, but never once booted them up at home on my own couch. If you weren't careful you could fall into the game developer version of a comedian's comedian.

One gameplay critique I think this post-mortem missed was that the keep-away mechanic at the heart of the game is a zero-sum mechanic. One player is keeping away, and having fun; while all other players are being kept away from, which is frustrating. They addressed this a little in the fuller release but I think keep-away itself is mechanically bankrupt so even a gorgeous coat of paint can't bring it around.

All of the other local multiplayer 'successes' from this period were distilled fighting games - Towerfall, Nidhogg, Killer Queen, Duck Game, etc. These allowed for new players to enjoy themselves even in defeat. For Toto Temple, a game of mixed newbs and vets would turn into a vet running circles for the full time limit and then someone suggesting we switch to Towerfall.

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#112

Post by matwood »

keyle wrote: post #25

When the movie "Indie games" came out, this was the prime time to get indie games out. The whole indie market thing was hot. But at a certain point, thanks to the free availability of game engines and their overal quality, the market got flooded with developers living on 5c a week and eating noodles, working on serial games and releasing top quality indie games. It became a game of marketing. And sadly that's where w…

> It became a game of marketing.

Welcome to selling pretty much anything.

"Early to bed, early to rise, work like hell and advertise." - Ted Turner

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#114

Post by magicalhippo »

epolanski wrote: post #54

The amount of negativity and criticism in the comments here is sad. Not only I think it's way too easy to criticize other's work and choices (in hindsight), but there's also a total lack of empathy. We should cherish many small developers and entrepeneurs that share their experiences with such honest and thorough posts about the experience as they offer unique and valuable inputs and reflections.

I remeber Gamasutra (game dev news site) having a regular Post Mortem column, where developers who had shipped a game would write about what worked and what didn't during development and launch of the game.

Even though I wasn't a game dev I really enjoyed reading these, as most contained info applicable to other teams as well.

edit: Oh wow, I had assumed they had gone the way of the Dodo after being bought way back, but seems they're still going: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/search?q=post%20mortem

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#115

Post by stereolambda »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #101
ykonstant wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m more into story driven games I have yet to see a story as good as the Blackwell series. Perhaps you have made up your mind that indie games do not have good story lines, so you are not looking for them. I don't know.

I had a quick look and it looks really low-budget. The thing is, I have limited time to play games, so I can be very selective what I spend that time on. This means I can limit myself to games that do everything right, not just one thing. That means story, but also production value. Good acting, good mo-cap, good graphic, a good sound track, etc. Why would I spend the limited time I have for gaming on games that don'…

Just for another perspective, there is a limited space of games story- and gameplaywise that can get major funding. If you want something outside this, you have to go indie. You can be also satisfied with the AAA games. Just as there are great independent films and Hollywood classics. They should be able to coexist in the market.

But honestly I don't play AAA titles because they are expensive (don't feel worth it for me, so similar argument as yours), and are designed for long immersive sessions and not 20 mins here and there. There are secondary factors like Linux compatibility and disliking the companies. For story and visuals I prefer films. Second hand I hear that mainstream titles are either designed stupid easy, or in a small niche with spiteful level of difficulty, but this is probably exaggerated sentiment.

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#116

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #67
keyle wrote: post #25

When the movie "Indie games" came out, this was the prime time to get indie games out. The whole indie market thing was hot. But at a certain point, thanks to the free availability of game engines and their overal quality, the market got flooded with developers living on 5c a week and eating noodles, working on serial games and releasing top quality indie games. It became a game of marketing. And sadly that's where w…

For me the main problem with indie games is the amount of value you get for your money. Games are software, if you sell 10 copies or 10 million, it’s basically the same amount of work. That is: no matter how big your development budget is, or how many you expect to sell, 100% of that budget goes into developing 1 copy of the game. However, the actual budget does scale with the number of expected sales. A game that is…

> The AAA game may cost me 4 times as much, but it gives me 400 times the value.

I... guess? If your only calculation of value is how much money was spent making the latest edition of a cookie cutter experience like 90% of AAA games are (because execs aren't willing to risk budget coloring outside the lines). And frankly I find that pretty sad, but looking at sales numbers I guess that's the majority of the gaming market.

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#117

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

laeri wrote: post #103
Aaargh20318 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me the main problem with indie games is the amount of value you get for your money. Games are software, if you sell 10 copies or 10 million, it’s basically the same amount of work. That is: no matter how big your development budget is, or how many you expect to sell, 100% of that budget goes into developing 1 copy of the game. However, the actual budget does scale with the number of expected sales. A game that is…

I have a different experience. I can't play most of the AAA games as their gameplay seems quite simple in a lot of cases and they often follow common structures. Indie games are radically different in a lot of cases as they usually take more risks and just the personality of the creator(s) shines through. My most favoure genre is roguelikes/roguelites which is just not present in AAA titles.

Have you played Scavenger SV4? Might not quite be the kind of thing you're into but it is definitely something the developer put a lot of time into making interesting.

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#118

Post by bigger_inside »

hhmc wrote: post #91
bigger_inside wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't forget Rimworld. One guy making a huge and sprawling game that ignored the studio sensibilities and became hit (and a couple of memes).

> that ignored the studio sensibilities I mean, it's strongly 'inspired' by dwarf fortress, so any heterodox design credit mostly belongs there

design credit, absolutely! I'm speaking of Yayo and human leather hats, though. :D

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#119

Post by reddit_refugee3 »

keyle wrote: post #25

When the movie "Indie games" came out, this was the prime time to get indie games out. The whole indie market thing was hot. But at a certain point, thanks to the free availability of game engines and their overal quality, the market got flooded with developers living on 5c a week and eating noodles, working on serial games and releasing top quality indie games. It became a game of marketing. And sadly that's where w…

"True" indie games are far from dead, there are just different degrees of quality and success. Yeah, there is a lot of shovelware, but there are also tons of amazing indie games coming out on a regular basis.

Re: Releasing an indie game on 3 consoles at once and failing financially (2016)

#120

Post by reddit_refugee3 »

fileeditview wrote: post #42
keyle wrote: post #25

When the movie "Indie games" came out, this was the prime time to get indie games out. The whole indie market thing was hot. But at a certain point, thanks to the free availability of game engines and their overal quality, the market got flooded with developers living on 5c a week and eating noodles, working on serial games and releasing top quality indie games. It became a game of marketing. And sadly that's where w…

I disagree. There are still "true" indie games out there. Just the masses of games produced that call themselves "indie games" are not. Often it seems to be used as an excuse for an unpolished, boring and in the end shitty game. You are right that it became a marketing game. It was a hype and everyone started to call its product an indie game. The solution however is not more marketing. It will automatically solve it…

Yeah, I think it is important to distinguish worthless shovelware with quality indie titles. Both still exist.
Post reply on HN