Not really sure if this belongs in this part of the forum, but here goes anyway.
As an indie, I''m more interested in Value Software, or Budget, or whatever you wish to call it. But, what''s the main differences between Valueware and ''A'' titles? (No, I have not had a published game, yet.) I think overall graphic quality, sound etc. plays a part in it, but what about size? Do publishers take that into consideration? Like Swamp Buggy Racing had 2 or 3 levels, Extreme Snowsports had a total of 4 tracks (but with different venues of racing:ski, snowboard or snowmobile).
My big question is, what about the Mod scene? Quake, Half-Life, Unreal etc. are generally not bought by the average Valueware consumer. Therefore, they are very much liekly not to have been subjected to the Mod scene. Would using an Engine like Genesis3D or CrystalSpace to make full games out of Mods be a viable budget game business model? I''m talking about the Mods that don''t follow the typical shooter route. Like Powerball, Air Quake, etc. and Paintball (which is already a headgames product).
The facts are clear: a completely original idea is nearly never original Someone, somewhere, has more than likely done something very similar. If this is the case...why not take some of those ideas that have already been expressed, and develop them into a viable product?
I''d appreciate any insight on this, and thanks.
I would''nt be that sure that valueware buyers don''t play Half-Life or Quake. 1. There is the one that has no clue about computer games and goes in shop very innocently. He buys what he think is cool regardless of how much it costs. To this group count the people that want to bring someone a computer game as a birthday gift and the like.
2. The second group consists of people that simply don''t want to spend 30 or 40$ for a A class game and don''t want to play a cracked game. YES, there are still these kind of nice people not just stealing your game if they have no money.
3. The third group are people who are computer game professionals and play what makes fun. Sometimes they have had big disappointments with A-class software and don''t believe in them (exclusive) anymore. These people however might have played Half-Life and Quake.
It''s my experience that the most successful budget games are those that are bundled into "packages." (ie, Super Arcade Fun: 12 Classic Arcade Games in One!) Often multiple developers will create different games and a publisher will combine them into such a package. This way a buyer feels they are getting a lot for little money.
Also, I for one get sort of suspicious when I see what seems like a full-sized game being sold for budgetware.
- Why isn''t this a full-priced game? - Is it really unprofessional? - Terrible graphics? - Terrible sound? - Terrible ... gameplay?? - Is it really old? Did it used to be full-priced but its been around so long that they bumped it?
So far the most part I think the most successful budget games are small ones that can be packed with other small ones.
Jester101: Good points. Something to think about for sure.
Atypical: Also good points. However, with the Hasbro crap, aren''t most publishers sitting on those types of games to await an outcome of the lawsuit? Sure, you can make an original game, but still...Hasbro will find a way to compare it to Dig-Dug...
Oooh, that''s a great point, Alex. Me, when I look at games on the shelves, I don''t really care how much one is going to cost me ($40, $60, whatever). When I see a $10 game, I immediately disregard it (for all the reasons you mentioned), even if the box/jewel-case artwork looks impressive. But maybe that''s from my past experience and cynicism, which many buyers don''t have.
Still, do budget publishers consider this? It seems that a low price might alienate as many buyers as it attracts.
Wondering, copying a previous game idea is probably a very commercially viable idea. I don''t know much about the Hasbro suit, but technically you''re not allowed to copyright an idea. I read an article at GameDev recently that mentioned Tetris clones -- that Russian guy that owns the copyright sued someone who''d made a clone, but the case only had merit because that particular clone had the "tris" syllable in the name (and "Tetris", the name, is copyrighted). On the other hand, I, personally, would have a hard time working for months on a project that was just a cheap imitation of a previous game -- where''s the fun in that?
Well, it''s just that I''ve ''heard'' the bottom fell out of the Valueware/Bundle sector of the industry, because most publishers have better things to do than risk getting embroiled in a daft lawsuit with Hasbro, especially over overdone games like that.
And, you''re right about making a cheap imitation of a game. It wouldn''t really be all that fullfilling, eh? But what I sorta wanted to know/discuss, is whether an expanded Mod game could be publishable. There are a whole lot of non-violent Mods, showing an excellent use of 3D Engines. The ''basis'' for a full game is right there...so why not capitalize on it? Would publishers scoff at this? Would they even be interested?