In a commercial sense, you invest time, money and effort and expect something in exchange - in your case exposure, if I understand it correctly. Something that looks impressive, polished but small enough to be possible to accomplish it in a timeframe and budget that will let your studio survive the fact it will not give you back enough money.
Perhaps top down h&s indeed is a bad choice, the market is over-saturated atm.
A tower defense perhaps ? Can incorporate impressive vfx, much of the code base is available at a reasonable price at the asset store and you can define its scope at will.
1 Like
That’s chicken before the egg, you can aim for as many sales as you’d like… Doesn’t mean you’ll come anywhere it… So if you aim for a more complex / different / larger project it’s a bigger risk? Or is it? You may find due to competition you could be in the same boat.
I’m stuck on the path, many hours and lots of money has already been put into a Sci-fi FPS / RPG. It’s not changing, the one thing that’s worse than taking on a complex project is indecision. You could end up wasting more time…
I’d of thought tower defense would be much more common than H&S games?
1 Like
That’s something the XNA forums had which is strangely lacking around here – heavy, very serious discussions of marketing strategies, websites of all levels that would do reviews, real numbers being shared, etc. – in short, how a true small indie could try to get noticed without mortgaging the house for a 10 second Superbowl ad.
3 Likes
One problem - especially at the lower end is that the battlefield is changing really fast. I did a round of ‘market research’ last fall - but the truth is - in the last 8 months or so the market’s changed pretty dramatically at the low end.
Well, you can really approach it from whatever angle you choose. Given the thread title, I kind of figured you wanted to go from sales figures backward. This is a no brainer but the formula would kind of look like this:
SALES = Media Coverage * Review Quality * Price * (Demand / Competition)
COSTS = ( Time * Overhead ) + Equipment
Obviously that’s an over simplification - but you can plug in whatever values you want and solve from there. Many start with Time, others with Price, it’s about as arbitrary as starting with Competition. But all the variables are related, if you have enough time and money, you can potentially just smash your way through the Competition.
1 Like
The number of TD games is big but at this moment :
- the top one at steam HERO DEFENSE on Steam seems easy to beat in graphics.
- new releases Tower Defense seem quite easy to beat as well, it is not a “hot” area.
- you already have many of the assets ready, the genres TD - FPS - RPG - H&S are not too distant in terms of graphic assets.
It is about exposure, your strong point seems to be graphics. In FPS - RPG - H&S it is difficult to get noticed, due to competition.
Ikaruga was launched at the same time (2001) with Unreal Tournament. Both are remembered today for their graphics.
In any case, I am curious to see what you will decide at the end 
Best luck with your project !
2 Likes
Are they that popular? I checked on Steam again and there’s literally 9 pages of single player FPS / RPG games… That’s not even including the Sci-fi theme, seems to me more of a Niche…
Also including most of them are AAA games…
My point of view - which can’t really be generalized - is this: either make mobile games that take 1-3 months to finish, or work on your dream project. No in between unless you’re working for someone else of course.
The reasoning is this. If you’re looking for money, relatively dependable success, experience, or you’re treading water and don’t know what to do right now, it’s better to pick a nice fun genre on mobile and knock out a well-done project in a few months. I’ve decided recently that I’m going to finish at least one successful and relatively complex mobile game (probably a space shooter since there aren’t too many good ones on mobile) before I put serious work into my own dream project.
But if you’re aiming at a medium-large PC game, the way I see it is this. It will only work out of you can put blood and tears into it, and do a daily grind that will be often unpleasant, for a period of years. Considering how easy it is to lose motivation, there’s no rational basis for believing that’s possible for something that isn’t your golden dream (and possibly not even that!).
So frankly my opinion is do whatever your dream project is, or go mobile.
1 Like
I really like hearing you say this. I think the experience you pick up working on a mobile game will really pay off in the long run!
Just follow through enough that the game is actually fun, don’t scrap it before you get through it into release!
1 Like
Yes, as I said on the other thread, I’m aiming to really get cracking on my dream project in a year or so, so it’s just a matter of figuring out what’s the best way to use my time in the meantime. Besides some asset store products I want to start freelancing soon, and generally try to arrive at that starting point next year without the need for a 9-5 job. Otherwise it’s going to take too long to make the kind of game I want to make.
I think it’s a bit hard to answer @ 's question, since it depends on so many things, but for a PC game I think it probably isn’t worth trying to make something on that scale unless it’s your dream game, so IMO it isn’t really worth worrying about the market, it all hinges on whether you have motivation to finish it. Any good game is going to do reasonably well, there are players for every genre. If it’s a multiplayer-only game it’s probably harder since you’re competing for a regular slice of people’s limited time, but singleplayer games always come to an end and then people want another one.
1 Like
Because the question can’t be answered, you can logically assess the market. Discuss it to see if there’s an angle you haven’t already thought of. Then do the best you can, at one point this was an easier puzzle to solve… AAA comes in waves and droves, with many titles appearing quite far apart from each other in the time line… Which creates “cracks” in the market to fill, early adopters found this very profitable.
Torchlight is a good example of going for something relatively simple and timing it perfectly. D3 was dragging its heels and it seemed like it would never get released. Someone assessed the market and took advantage, but as competition increases the gaps close.
It doesn’t really depend on “many things”, we understand (or should) the state of the market segment we try to enter. Although even a summation of variables will never encompass the full picture, some of it is out of your hands and that’s something you put to the back of your mind and forget about.
It’s also nothing to do with “motivation”, if you’re doing this as a commercial venture then “motivation” is irrelevant. You have a dependancy and if you can’t finish it then you should of never started in the first place. It’s the exact opposite of business sense.
1 Like
If you want to embark on a purely commercial venture, you could always invest. I hear there’s this sick new turn based party based tactical RPG that’s coming together at lightning speed - it uses a 3rd person camera and has a really cool combat system. That genre is hot right now too - I’d bet it’ll sell 100k copies on release! 
2 Likes
I think going medium is the way to go. Something that takes maybe a 6months to 2 years to build. That way not many people will have games like yours, as most people go for the easy/quick to make stuff. I also think an interesting thing to note would make a “simple” version of a game. For example clash royale in my eyes is a “simple” 3 lane unit moba type game like LoL. Are these two games clones? No they are not, but a very simplified form and makes a lot of money and is possible to build. But if we did a simplified D3 that would just be hack and slash and there are too many of those lol.
I think an important thing to do is build a game that can easily be morphed into something similar. I see the gamedev story company reuse the same art style and exact GUI in every single game they make. At that point they just changing the code and spit out a new game every once in a while. I think too many dev’s are too busy jumping around on art styles and game ideas that makes it impossible to do anything quickly once you get stuff done.
So in a sum going medium but reusing assets to push iteration of the next medium game in a few months imo is the way to go. Where starting over from scratch each time is the real killer.
2 Likes
I couldn’t disagree more. There’s a fallacy that making money on the internet or as an ‘entrepreneur’ in general is difficult, because the market is unpredictable and you need to have some brilliant idea and implement it with perfect timing, but from my own research it isn’t the case. The fact is that anyone can be successful, that the most boring but logical business ideas are the most dependable, but that it takes a long, long road of hard, boring grind that might go on for years, with everything riding on your shoulders. And 99% of people are simply not prepared to do this, or quit early, or fail because they cannot put in the work necessary on a consistent basis. Think of how many people can’t even start an exercise regime of an hour a day, how much less would they be able to put in 10 hour days for years in something they don’t even particularly enjoy?
Motivation is absolutely pivotal, but it’s something that people think they’ll always have, they don’t realize is a finite resource. So it’s essential to find ways to acquire the most possible, and the first thing is working in something that means a lot to you.
1 Like
You’re confusing a hobby with business, people are paid to do a job and produce a result. In a game development company, you do or go bankrupt… There is no motivational “issue” because it can be the difference between success or loosing everything and your staff loosing their jobs. Generally staff in this line of work are highly motivated and highly resourceful people, irrelevant of that it doesn’t matter as long as the job gets done correctly…
I think I can assume correctly that you’ve never run a company with a roster of staff have you? Even if you’re a lone wolf doing this full time, you need to assess whether or not you have what it takes to finish it before you start.
Well unless you’re a multi-millionaire who can afford to fritter money away…
Disagree all you like, but if you can’t stand the heat and all that…
1 Like
I really don’t think that’s the right attitude to go into business with. To simply declare that your line of work requires high motivation and resourcefulness and then pressure yourself to fit that image is not going to help.
I think successful people in any difficult business are those who cut themselves all the slack they possibly can, but without forgetting that there will be times when things will be very very rough. They are not afraid of hard work, or of risk - because one way or the other they won’t be able to avoid either - but they are prudent in every possible way. You have to be an expert strategist and plan everything very well, but be ready to fire from the hip whenever you need to - and you will need to.
That sort of mindset is hard to come by, it takes both a sort of humility and a rock-hard ego, and there’s a good reason why many fall short.
I didn’t declare it anywhere, you miss-read. I said Generally people are highly motivated etc. it’s just an observation not a business plan.
This ain’t a hard concept to grasp Billy, if you become “un-motivated” and don’t produce the goods. You can’t pay the bills, so it’s not an “option” and / or opinion.
Lack of motivation is not an option for success, but it is an option for failure, which is rather more likely
Anyway, fair enough if you think assessing the market is more important than assessing one’s own strength and motivation, but I disagree, and everything that I’ve come across supports that conclusion. I’m keenly aware of all the times I’ve stopped working on something because I’m sick of it, or when I spent all day and all night for too many days until I burned out, and it gnaws at me when I think of the size of the project that I want to tackle. I know I’m going to have to be damned smart about how I approach it and chances are that I’ll fail, but if I actually use what I’ve learned, it will be a positive experience for me one way or the other, and perhaps give me enough reason to believe that it’s worth a second try, if the first one goes to hell. And maybe I’ll even succeed.
Yes, but saying that it isn’t an option doesn’t stop it from happening. Saying that is, as @Billy4184 says, pressuring yourself and potentially others to fit some image that may not be realistic.
Just because people are “generally” highly motivated in a business doesn’t mean that they’ll stay that way without effort being put into keeping them that way. I suspect that this is why some game dev (and plenty of other) companies have such high turnover rates. Initial passionate motivation is taken for granted, it gets relied upon in times of pressure, and eventually people get burned out and move on.
The underlying issue is that you’re treating motivation levels as if they’re a choice someone makes, which isn’t the case at all. Who would ever willfully choose to be un-motivated? Someone doesn’t “become un-motivated” because they woke up one day and decided to be like that. It’s the result of some complex set of circumstances. Just willing yourself to be motivated when the framework of needs and desires* around that isn’t being satisfied only works for so long and quickly leads to burnout.
So in a way you’re right: it’s not an option. But that’s not because it would be a bad choice, it’s because there’s isn’t choice to be made in the first place.
Instead of pretending it won’t happen because you won’t willfully choose it (who would ever do that anyway?) instead you have to take control of the needs and desires that surround someone’s motivation levels where you can, and maintain positive outcomes in those areas.
- Neat. I was aware of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, but I didn’t realise it was such a direct fit to what I was talking about.
3 Likes
Well this is the most illogical conversation I’ve had in a while but sure I’ll bite. Forget games for a second, do you understand what happens in companies when someone becomes “un-motivated” and doesn’t do well at their job? Just in case, they get replaced.
I don’t believe many people working at places like Mcdonalds, or supermarkets are particularily “motivated” but they do what they need to do to get the job finished. Again, you don’t have to be “motivated” to finish the work… At times it will happen but you do what’s the smart thing to do and keep on working or take a break until you’re replenished… That’s what stat holidays are for etc.
Irrelevant of how much “motivation” is involved, you have a budget and a timeline to release a product. If you don’t you’ll find yourself in fiscal difficulty…
This is how pretty much every company works ever, I’m slightly baffled here. If you don’t do it, you don’t get paid and lack of “motivation” is a weak excuse not suited to actual business.
Can’t stand the heat? Well with the amount of games released, there’s plenty who can. It’s probably worth considering another career.
1 Like
There is truth to some of what @ is saying as well. In my case, I have a limited window of time. I am, sadly, not a multi-millionaire and I can’t spend forever chasing dreams. The fact that there’s a clock hanging over my head adds stress, but it’s also an asset in terms of keeping me focused and not f’ing around.
It’s that clock that keeps pushing me forward, keeps me from getting side tracked, and stops me from chasing endless rabbit holes. If I were in a situation where I didn’t have that clock, I would never have made the progress I have - and my project wouldn’t be in the healthy place I think it is at the moment.
1 Like