• Hey Guest! Ever feel like entering a Game Jam, but the time limit is always too much pressure? We get it... You lead a hectic life and dedicating 3 whole days to make a game just doesn't work for you! So, why not enter the GMC SLOW JAM? Take your time! Kick back and make your game over 4 months! Interested? Then just click here!

Since most indie games are doomed to fail or go unnoticed...

pixeltroid

Member
Since most indie games are doomed to fail or go unnoticed, what kind of games are safe to make? Why should you make games?

First of all, by "indie", I mean a game that's developed by one person or a very small team -- like the ones discussed on this forum and posted on sites like itch and gamejolt.

I believe that in this age where indie games are flooding the market and gamers can buy anything they want online without even leaving their homes, it has become a nearly impossible task to put out a product that interests people -- that is, without professional marketing and hype (but even then, some well marketed and hyped games fail miserably but that's another story).

In order for your indie game to get noticed, you need -- in addition to a good game -- lots of marketing and favorable reviews from well known websites and personalities. But that is a very rare thing to happen to indie developers, especially one man teams. 90% of the time, most indie projects fall into the black hole of obscurity. There is only so much a twitter or facebook account can do in terms of free online marketing (that is, assuming, you have plenty of followers on your game accounts). The very sad truth is that, unless you're working on a well funded and well marketed project, nobody but you really cares about the games complex storyline or the secret areas or the game mechanics you are putting so much time and effort into creating.

Given the state of things, I believe the best and safest kind of games to make would be crisp short games (not more than an hour long) that aren't too difficult to beat. So that way, even if the game goes unnoticed, the dev would not have lost out on too much time. Why? Because spending 1000 hours making a game, and having 500 people play it is far far less psychologically damaging than spending 2000 or 3000 hours and having 500 people play it.

If people actually happen to like it, the entire process of making the game can be considered as one elaborate marketing exercise for the "sequel" -- since reaching out to an audience that enjoyed your first game is a whole lot easier than expecting an audience to try out a game from an indie they have never heard of!

Indie game development is like making a very low budget film -- you're not going to spend too much on it if you know you're taking a risk and realize that your chances at success are bleak. That way any big success comes as a pleasant surprise and works as motivation for making a better sequel.

As for why indies should be making games, I think that varies from person to person. My reasons are as follows:

a) I always wanted to make my own games. This is obvious.
b) It has helped me in terms of personal branding. Having "game developer" as a hobby on my CV has been a great advantage. I work as a graphic designer and not too many other graphic designers have this hobby, so it has really helped me stand out from the crowd when I attend interviews. Potential clients and employers have remembered me as "that game design guy", even if their projects have nothing to do with games.
c) Game development may one day work as a side source of income, or at least open doors for me somewhere.
d) Its a nice way to flex my creative muscles, in the sense, game design lets me do stuff that I cant do on my paid client projects.

What are your thoughts?
 

YanBG

Member
1) Design: I'm for making bigger or atleast more complex game because that way you learn new coding techniques and improve your skills constantly(hate repetition and filling in content). I don't want to stay on the beginner level where you have lots of people using stock assets and making similar games(drag&drop). That's more of a wasted time for me than having unfinished but advanced game.

2) Sales: To get more players you can try finding your target audience(all the random tweeting is not for me), for single dev games you don't need a lot of sales but building a fan base from these niche players would be great. I think it's better to have a publisher, who'll take care of marketing and sales. You'll get more in the end, despite their cut because they can have established player base too, say historical strategy gamers. My problem is they wouldn't want to help with development and from a new dev would want a completely finished product.

But that's just me, i'm not into mobile games, atleast not yet. I'm trying to look at it as a businessman/entrepreneur too not just designer but if mobile actually earns you more go for it!
 
I

immortalx

Guest
I'd say it has always been like that. Sure, the rules "to get there" have drastically changed, but it's the same game. I'm no game developer but I'm old enough to have observed the trends. I remember some heavily marketed titles for 8 bit computers that when you played them, left you wondering who in their right mind let that thing get released. The race for the Christmas period had software houses push their 16 year old star-coders to their limits. Those who could handle the pressure are names that are remembered to this day. But for each one of them, there where hordes of others that had zero success stories to tell.
Years later I discovered games that I hadn't seen in magazines of the time, which later received honorable mentions as "highly under-rated". Sadly, that's all they achieved.
Does all that sound familiar? I bet it does.

I used to believe that mobile games were nonsense (I still do from a gamer's point of view). But just look at the insane sales of games that people play at the bus-stop. That would have made me a horrible developer If I ever tried to be one :D. So what was revolutionary in that case, was not the game themselves, but the medium. And it looks like it hasn't even reached its peak. It might sound cliche, but being at the right place at the right time is a strong skill.
The other thing is having great work ethic. I used to build guitars as a hobby and ended up finishing a build in about a month. Even my very first one. Another hobbyist friend of mine was in the "planning stage" of his first guitar for about 2 years... Whenever he asked me how I did this, I always gave him the same advice that he failed to follow: Dive into the deep and burn yourself. It will only make your skin harder. Nowadays, I don't follow my own advice with programming, thus not producing anything serious. But hey, I'm a hobbyist and I want to reward myself with a beer for every 10 lines of code. Whoever wants to do professional work though, has to be able to be his own boss and push himself. There's no excuses for depression and burning-out. It's work, it's hard, and it's like what we all do for a living.

Anyway, these are more or less some random thoughts and not what would be a complete list.
 
C

CombatCalamity

Guest
Since most indie games are doomed to fail or go unnoticed, what kind of games are safe to make? Why should you make games?

First of all, by "indie", I mean a game that's developed by one person or a very small team -- like the ones discussed on this forum and posted on sites like itch and gamejolt.

I believe that in this age where indie games are flooding the market and gamers can buy anything they want online without even leaving their homes, it has become a nearly impossible task to put out a product that interests people -- that is, without professional marketing and hype (but even then, some well marketed and hyped games fail miserably but that's another story).

In order for your indie game to get noticed, you need -- in addition to a good game -- lots of marketing and favorable reviews from well known websites and personalities. But that is a very rare thing to happen to indie developers, especially one man teams. 90% of the time, most indie projects fall into the black hole of obscurity. There is only so much a twitter or facebook account can do in terms of free online marketing (that is, assuming, you have plenty of followers on your game accounts). The very sad truth is that, unless you're working on a well funded and well marketed project, nobody but you really cares about the games complex storyline or the secret areas or the game mechanics you are putting so much time and effort into creating.

Given the state of things, I believe the best and safest kind of games to make would be crisp short games (not more than an hour long) that aren't too difficult to beat. So that way, even if the game goes unnoticed, the dev would not have lost out on too much time. Why? Because spending 1000 hours making a game, and having 500 people play it is far far less psychologically damaging than spending 2000 or 3000 hours and having 500 people play it.

If people actually happen to like it, the entire process of making the game can be considered as one elaborate marketing exercise for the "sequel" -- since reaching out to an audience that enjoyed your first game is a whole lot easier than expecting an audience to try out a game from an indie they have never heard of!

Indie game development is like making a very low budget film -- you're not going to spend too much on it if you know you're taking a risk and realize that your chances at success are bleak. That way any big success comes as a pleasant surprise and works as motivation for making a better sequel.

As for why indies should be making games, I think that varies from person to person. My reasons are as follows:

a) I always wanted to make my own games. This is obvious.
b) It has helped me in terms of personal branding. Having "game developer" as a hobby on my CV has been a great advantage. I work as a graphic designer and not too many other graphic designers have this hobby, so it has really helped me stand out from the crowd when I attend interviews. Potential clients and employers have remembered me as "that game design guy", even if their projects have nothing to do with games.
c) Game development may one day work as a side source of income, or at least open doors for me somewhere.
d) Its a nice way to flex my creative muscles, in the sense, game design lets me do stuff that I cant do on my paid client projects.

What are your thoughts?
I'll tell you the best game to make to guarantee cash to put food for your family.



It's called
Working a 9-5 job, probably an IT job as it aligns well with game dev.
The standard is just 40h/week, and you're guaranteed to get paid every month at a much reasonable amount than being an indie which a. doesn't pay that well, and b. doesn't always pay.



Making video games is always a gamble. Every art field is like that. Movies, music, same thing. There is no safe bet. Game dev is a little bit better though. I personally would avoid platformer games as they're everywhere. But every once in a while I was wrong and some really great ones appear out of the blue and blow the records. So TL;DR nobody really knows! Stop worrying too much and focus on just making a great game.

If money or stability is your end goal just work a regular job.. Otherwise, do this as a hobby/side thing with a focus of releasing a great game, then and only then people might love your game and pay for it. This is probably your best chance.

Making a 'short game' as you said doesn't work either. Look at play store and come back here and tell us how it is.. You're lucky to get some downloads at all.
 

pixeltroid

Member
It's called
Working a 9-5 job, probably an IT job as it aligns well with game dev.
The standard is just 40h/week, and you're guaranteed to get paid every month at a much reasonable amount than being an indie which a. doesn't pay that well, and b. doesn't always pay.
I've been working 9-5 jobs as a graphic designer since 2005 so far as a monthly salary is concerned I'm good.

But I wasn't talking about jobs at all. Im talking about how indie games (whether done as a job or a hobby) tend to fail, and what the practical approach to game development for indies should be.
 
I'd say that making lots of short games and taking part in game jams increases your chance of a game getting noticed, whereas spending all your time on making a single big game that will be played as many times as (and in some cases even fewer times than) any other game you took 3 days to make is a really heartbreaking feeling.
 
Indie games aren't just flooding the market, but games from a literal decade ago are still flooding the market... again. I wouldn't even consider the hobbyists as part of the market.

I have twenty small games under my belt and they've meant nothing beyond selling myself as a programmer that companies want to hire. That's where I've made money. Forget the fame, that's someone else's job.
 
T

Taddio

Guest
Financially, you're not dealing with the same kind of numbers at all in Indie vs. AAA. A lot of AAA games do fail to cover their costs, and when they're in the hole, they can be in the hole by millions. They have to sell a lot of preorders sometimes just to cover the costs of developpement.
Wheras an an indie, you don't have investors to please and the developpement cost is nowhere near those of big studios, so you don't have to sell 250k copies just to break even, and profit is split in much less ways.
Those home-run stories like Minecraft, Tetris and Cup-head are rare, but it's better to aim for the stars and just land on the moon than thinking too small, IMO. Just stay realistic, tho.
 

Toque

Member
Interesting topic. I would rather fail with a small game than the time/effort/money of a large game. But I think both has minuscule chances of making much money for indies. Like has been mentioned even large studios can make money losers. I say finishing a game is hard make a game you enjoy making.

I never broke even making mobile games. And thats the way it probably should be.
 

RujiK

Member
MARKET PERSPECTIVE TIME. Of all the markets for entertainment, video games are actually one of the least bloated.

Steam gets about 900 new games a month, but this includes shovelware, dlc, and asset flip garbage. If you only count half decent games it's probably closer to 100 games a month.

100 games a month may seem like a lot, but let's compare that to some other markets:

BOOKS (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • English novels: ~1500 new books a DAY.
  • Childrens books: ~1100 a day
  • Comic books: ~130 a day
  • English poetry: ~100 new books a day (Even POETRY is more flooded than indie games)

MOVIES: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Feature film style: ~100 a day or 3000 a month.
  • TV Shows: ~50 a day or 1500 a month.

MUSIC: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Pop Music: Over 1000 new CD's a day (CD's! Not songs)
  • Rock Music: Over 1500 new CD's a day
  • Country: Over 300 new CD's a day
  • Electronic: Over 1500 new CD's a day
  • Even obscure genres like "Soul-Jazz & Boogaloo" have over 1000 new CD's a month.
GAMES: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Switch Games: ~1 a day. (40 new game this month)
  • Ps4 Games: ~2 a day. (57 new game this month)
  • Xb1 Games: ~2 a day. (54 new game this month)
  • PC games: ~2 a day. (62 new game this month)

Comparatively, new video game releases have much less competition.

If you're still worried about exposure, try and get your game released on a smaller storefront like GOG. Gog.com only gets about 30 new games a month. (5-10 if you exclude DLC and special editions.) If you can get your game on gog, you will get considerably more exposure for free.

It may seem like a rough market, but I'm sure writers, actors, and musicians would love to have the relatively small amount of competition that us indies have. ;) It's really not hopeless!

EDIT: Oops. I previously had the music-per-day mislabled as music-per-month. Corrected now.
 
Last edited:

Toque

Member
MARKET PERSPECTIVE TIME. Of all the markets for entertainment, video games are actually one of the least bloated.

Steam gets about 900 new games a month, but this includes shovelware, dlc, and asset flip garbage. If you only count half decent games it's probably closer to 100 games a month.

100 games a month may seem like a lot, but let's compare that to some other markets:

BOOKS (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • English novels: ~1500 new books a DAY.
  • Childrens books: ~1100 a day
  • Comic books: ~130 a day
  • English poetry: ~100 new books a day (Even POETRY is more flooded than indie games)

MOVIES: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Feature film style: ~100 a day or 3000 a month.
  • TV Shows: ~50 a day or 1500 a month.

MUSIC: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Pop Music: Over 200 new CD's a month (CD's! Not songs)
  • Rock Music: Over 1500 new CD's a month
  • Country: Over 300 new CD's a month
  • Electronic: Over 1500 new CD's a month
  • Even obscure genres like "Soul-Jazz & Boogaloo" have over 1000 new CD's a month.

GAMES: (New releases from Amazon.com)
  • Switch Games: ~1 a day. (40 new game this month)
  • Ps4 Games: ~2 a day. (57 new game this month)
  • Xb1 Games: ~2 a day. (54 new game this month)
  • PC games: ~2 a day. (62 new game this month)

Comparatively, new video game releases have much less competition.

If you're STILL worried about exposure, try and get your game released on GOG. Gog.com only gets about 30 new games a month. (5-10 if you exclude DLC and special editions.) If you can get your game on gog, you will get considerably more exposure for free.

It may seem like a rough market, but I'm sure writers, actors, and musicians would love to have the relatively small amount of competition that us indies have. ;) It's really not hopeless!

Funny I was thinking the same thing with the music comparison. I should start making music and see how well I do. I can tell you it would be worse than making games!!!! Your math might be a little off but I think it proves the point.


I was contemplating this is a great time for indi developers in some way. Try making and releasing a game in the 80's and 90's. You have zero access to markets. At least today an indi has tiny but still a chance.
 
T

Taddio

Guest
I should start making music and see how well I do.
Bro...don't do this. Just trust me on this one. Been there, done that, and 4 albums, 3 tours and countless miles added to the minivan engine later, I can ASSURE you with 100% certainty that you're better off deving games in the comfort of your home than in the music buisness. Those who are there are crazy and couldn't/wouldn't do anything else anyway. If it's not the biggest call of nature of your life, it's just not your path.
I know you were being ironic, but just in case any kid read this and thinks it's a sound idea, you know...:D
 

Elodman

Member
Interesting questions and answers, methinks. Cant say too much on that without sufficient experience.

I recently realized game development is quite a hard work sometimes, after some months not suitable for relaxing (though better then ERP system coding). Then switching to another engine / framework and learning that I found quite interesting and beneficial. As that is still learning and not working, and endless problem-solving. Also new theories are fun to find.

Who and why should walk this doomed path? Anyone, who can afford it, can endure its hardships, as rarely it is quite rewarding - with or without generating income.

Also if the majority of failed games are really shovel-ware, then one should decide early on, if all his investment, effort will ever be returned. Design and fantasy and good evaluating sense needed. Seems, coding skills are more abundant then the aforementioned ones...

I cant say anything regarding marketing...it is also a great if not the biggest hurdle, which I really dislike with all its unfamiliar on-line advertising possibilities. All these commercial and persuading processes are so so alien to my kind. A game should earn its reputation from game-play.

In the golden-age mostly whizz-kids were able to produce games, nowadays almost any average skilled dude. Interestingly creative ideas seem to have vanished with AAA titles recently, so perhaps the Indie segment is the last resort for genuine ideas.
 

YanBG

Member
Just watched this guy and he says pretty much what i was thinking:


Short puzzle platformer won't sell well on Steam.
But sure for first game you can't go with team-based procedurally generated action RPG.
 
Just watched this guy and he says pretty much what i was thinking:


Short puzzle platformer won't sell well on Steam.
But sure for first game you can't go with team-based procedurally generated action RPG.
Don't forget to have previous almost hit games and an audience.Starting game development 10 - 30 years ago also helps. Don't be afraid to use the corpses of previous games to climb your latest game to new heights.

Give away a few hundred thousand copies via newsletter sign ups so everyone is playing your game and knows its name when it comes out, you'll also harvest a lot of emails and user data too.

Then once you go big and make millions, sink it all back into marketing to go even bigger. There's a world that will never know you've released a game unless they see it on TV or a movie theater.

I had lunch with a marketer and learned a lot.
 

Niels

Member
It's also a case of "what is succes to you".
My first Jam-entry got 100+ downloads and was played by a twitch steamer and discussed on the official Jam video on YouTube.
As hobby gamedev those thing made it worth the effort.

It actually bothers me to see all those starting Gamedevs with dollarsigns in their eyes, filling their project with monetization options while it's clear they didn't spend more than 3 week smashing it together from copied scripts, tutorials and free to use assets.

Right now I'm not really focused on a single project, or engine, but the experimenting and learning is half of the fun of Gamedev for me :)
 
Top