lucidimage

Members
  • Content count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

112 Neutral

About lucidimage

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Some points on Steam Greenlight. It is discussed that this system will change in the future, as its currently creating a bottle-neck for Valve. But details on how it will change or what approach they will take in the future remains to be seen.   Demographically speaking, Steam gives you as the developer access to more gamers than you could dream of reaching on any other platform. The average "Top 50" Greenlight project has over 38,000 people vote that "Yes, I would buy this". For titles that are actually greenlit, that number is much higher. You do the math on that, even if only half of these potential buyers actually buy- suddenly you've sold 20,000+ copies of your $10 game. Obviously the nature of the beast though is that you need these thousands and thousands of gamers to approve your game on Steam for it to even be Greenlit. Which means your game and pitch are quite good.   At the very least though, Greenlight provides something to developers they've never had: Access to thousands of gamers who will instantly tell you if your game concept or technology prototype is even worth buying. You can use the platform to not only get exposure for your project, but you can also quickly find out if gamers even find your project interesting. You will find their feedback is QUITE honest. But at least you will not have to worry about your mom sugar-coating. You can find out if your concept is solid 2 months into the dev cycle verses working for a year on a game that you come to find out has zero interest to most gamers.
  2.   This is great feedback. And thanks for the compliment, while it's easier to take the small approach- it becomes difficult to make your game stand-out from the masses on smaller games. But you bring up a great point about focusing on the creative aspect to find your market. Although "going big creatively" is a bit easier said than done, but I think your point as a whole is dead-on.       Appreciate the feedback. It's definitely a bit validating to hear that from other developers on how they approach this. As far as the experience with shipped titles go, its surprising to me how little that actually helps anything other than your own personal growth. But you make some great point regarding finding your niche. We're hoping our new title will open us open up the doors to a new niche for us, but we will have to see how it plays out.   Thanks again for the feedback guys.
  3.   1. No. It's recommended. 2. Yes. 3. No.   Thanks for the feedback Tom.   I ask because my original game was developed fully in house and was fairly large scale (MMORTS) even though it was fully self-funded and independent, but it also took half a decade to build and was old technology by time it was released. Licensing technology was really in it's infancy at the time and not readily available (or remotely affordable).   Are you saying that the availability of things like UDK, Unity even Crydev etc does not make it any easier than developing an indie game 5-10 years ago or just does not make attempting to develop a "AAA" game any easier for indies?
  4. Hello, my name is Micah. I'm pretty much the classic definition of an indie developer. Self-taught. No professional game development background. Self-funding. Boot-strapping. A nobody.   Today I'm looking to find out what drives an indie developer to "go big" verses keeping it small? And what are the benefits/ROI that made you make that decision?   A little background for you.   I was the founder of a small indie studio who developed "Dawn of Fantasy" for the PC. It was originally published by 505 Games after a VERY extended (and self-funded) development process (around 5 years) then was eventually greenlit by the Steam Community. After a small break from game development, I jumped back into an epic new fantasy based FPS for the PC. After a very "mild" taste of success and development, I wanted to go HUGE! The problem with these epic projects is that they can also be epic time-sinks or worse, and epic-disaster.   After around 10 months of development on this project, we found we could NOT maintain a self-funded project with AAA visuals without another dramatically huge dev cycle (5+ years). Putting our mega project on hold, we've moved onto a much smaller 2D platformer called "Tesla Breaks the World!" for the PC, Mac and Linux. We're developing it on Unity 3D and have spent the past 5 months developing out our prototype and nailing down the "look and feel" of the game.   We're currently on Kickstarter, where we're struggling a bit but have a realistic shot of trying to hit our small goal: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1660691250/tesla-breaks-the-world   We feel we can wrap up development on this project by the end of this year (with or without the Kickstarter- KS obviously allowing us to add additional polish & features).   Pro's of a small project: -Much smaller budget -Dramatically fewer resources (team members, tools, assets etc) -Smaller timeline = quicker to market = potential revenue faster -Smaller games = More games   Cons of a small project: -Limitations on fleshing out your story or technology -Sacrificing features to meet self-imposed deadlines -How do you standout from thousands of other small titles? -How do you price your small project when selling it? -How can you market an indie title that isn't breaking down design barriers or impressing with AAA visuals?   So the question is: Right now, we're developing out a small title and have yet to really hit the point in our journey to know if this is a better business plan for our indie studio verses dumping large amount of time and effort into a larger scale project.   So how do you develop? Is it a mistake to go small? Is attempting a AAA indie game impossible in the current market or easier with the availability of more technology?   We would love to hear other developers thoughts and feedback on this topic and how they're currently structuring their business plans. I realize team size, talent, budgets etc all weigh in. But I'm very curious what drives an indie developer to take the risk of "going big" verses keeping it small. Thanks for reading!  
  5. We're now 26% to our goal on Kickstarter and sold out of the Early Backer reward tier! Thanks for everyone who has backed or provided feedback!   Here is a quick look at behind the scenes for the 2D animation process in Tesla Breaks the World!   http://youtu.be/78ituw_9fGY  
  6. Hello,   We've recently launched our game on Kickstarter and Greenlight called "Tesla Breaks the World!". A 2D Puzzle-Platformer for the PC, Mac and Linux.   You play as Nikola Tesla, battling hordes of 1800's-era undead and of course, Thomas Edison!   Our Kickstarter got off to a nice/small start but we're already experiencing a slow-down just 1 week into the project. We've sent out updates to almost 200 gaming sites around the globe but only 3-4 posted articles on the game (smaller gaming sites). I'm curious what other indie developers are doing to attempt to market their games? We've leveraged our own personal and developer social network, but as a small developer, that is very limited.   You can check out our Kickstarter here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1660691250/tesla-breaks-the-world   Any feedback you guys have would be much appreciated!
  7. A new fantasy based FPS project launched on Kickstarter: [url="http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1660691250/nightrealm-tales-fantasy-fps"]http://www.kickstart...les-fantasy-fps[/url] I'm not looking to solicit, but the pitch is community driven game development. The question is: Is that really possible? i.e. community driving what new maps, new weapons, new features, what gets updated next etc. It sounds good on paper, but do you think it can actually work? [img]http://archetypeglobal.com/press/images/1.png[/img]