Category: Game Design

Categories
Game Design Game Development Games Geek / Technical

Vote for MiniLD #20 Entries!

While MiniLD is usually much more loose than a regular Ludum Dare competition, I am running horribly late when it comes to closing this competition properly. That said, it’s time to vote!

Voting is only open to those who submitted a game. It’s an opportunity for everyone to congratulate each other, provide feedback, and play some quirky and interesting games! Even if you can’t vote, you’re more than welcome to check out the finished games yourself.

With 24 submitted entries, MiniLD #20 was one of the biggest! Considering the special rule of “Only One of Each”, a lot of people rose to the challenge. Some of the games are artistic and experimental, some were haunting, some were clever, and some were just plain fun.

Categories
Game Design Game Development Geek / Technical

MiniLD #20 Is a Go!

I’m hosting the MiniLD #20 this month, and it starts……NOW!

Theme: Greed.

Special rules: Only One of Each.

In programming, it’s easy to make lots of copies of objects. Well, I’m putting a stop to that! For this MiniLD, you’ll need to ensure that every object in your game is unique. If you build a wall, there better be a single wall (it doesn’t matter how complex it is) and not many tiles composited together to make a wall (unless all of those tiles are completely different from each other, which might make an interesting game…) Granted, maybe everything derives from a common object, but you can’t have two objects that are exact copies of each other. If that means you can only make a few objects, then work within those constraints. B-)

Optional secondary theme: Fishing. Just because.

You have 48 hours to make a game using the above theme and rules and optional secondary theme. Go!

Categories
Game Design

Free Game Design Course: Game Balance Concepts

Balance

Last summer, I participated in game designer Ian Schreiber’s free Game Design Concepts course. It it still readily available on his blog, and it is still free.

Last week, I learned he was offering a new summer class: Game Balance Concepts, which is focused entirely on balance. Game balance doesn’t seem to be well covered in the literature out there. In fact, in a book Schreiber cowrote, Challenges for Game Designers, there are only a few sections that touch on it at a high level. This course seems to be a good start to fill in the gap.

This course, like last year’s, is free, but he also offered a pay version for it, which I gladly took advantage of. Basically, I get to participate in the class as he presents, ask questions, and give feedback, all live. Besides getting a few other extras that he described in the blog, I can also send emails directly to him, giving me pretty awesome access to a game designer’s brain.

Today was the first class, and it was all introductory. We discussed what balance generally means, how it can be achieved, and how different kinds of games can make balancing more or less difficult. We talked about things I was aware of but haven’t given much thought to before, such as determinism and how it impacts solvability. There was more discussion about the importance of the metagame today than I’ve seen in any of my discussions about games, including playing Dungeons & Dragons with friends.

I’m looking forward to participating in future classes this summer. I’m not sure if paid access is closed, but you can definitely follow along on the main blog if you’re interested. Also, if you use Twitter, you can follow along with us as we discuss it using the hashtag #GBCU.

How much thought do you give to game balance when you design your games? Do you find more formal courses such as Game Balance Concepts helpful, or do you prefer to learn learn about game design in other ways?

(Photo: Balance by tourist on earth | CC-BY-2.0)

Categories
Game Design Game Development Games Geek / Technical

Encourage Creativity: Addicube

Encouragement

One of elements I’ve identified for living my life on purpose is encouraged and supported creativity. Even though it is part of my life purpose, it doesn’t mean it is just for me. Part of the point of a life purpose is that it applies to everyone around me, too. I’m not only focused on making sure my own life has encouraged and supported creativity, but I want to make sure that the people around me are encouraged and supported as well.

So when I learned that Corvus Elrod, former writer of Man Byte’s Blog and current writer of Semionaut’s Notebook, was partnering up with Charles Berube of The Wasabi Project to create a game called Addicube, I thought, “That sounds great!”

But then I learned that the project won’t get started until it is fully funded. See, the project is currently waiting for enough funding through Kickstarter.com, which is a funding platform which allows projects to ask for donations from fans and friends. If enough people donate, the project happens, but if there isn’t enough funding, then no one pays any money. Well, back in January, having newly created my life purpose statement, believing in Corvus Elrod, and knowing that I wanted to encourage and support creativity, I pledged my support at the Benefactor level. Sometimes “That sounds great!” is good encouragement, but money helps, too. B-)

As of this writing, Addicube on Kickstarter has 51 backers and 89% of the $3,500 it needs to be completely funded, but there’s a deadline. If Addicube gets enough funding by April 25th, then Elrod and Berube will get started.

Frankly, I want Addicube to happen, and I’d like to ask you to help. The deadline is looming, and they’re so close to having the Kickstarter project fully funded.

Please go to Addicube on Kickstarter, learn more about the game, and pledge $5, $10, $25, or more. If you really want to make an impact, pledge to be one of us Benefactors at $250+. Let’s encourage creativity and get this game made!

(Photo: Encouraging note | CC BY-SA 2.0)

Categories
Game Design

How Deep Is Your Game Design?

Measuring pole

Jay Barnson posted a link to a video of Chris Hecker’s game rant from GDC. More details from Hecker’s own site at Please Finish Your Game.

The rant is great, so I suggest watching the video and reading Hecker’s article. To summarize, he is concerned that game developers, especially indie developers, are too satisfied with making lots of quirky, simple games, especially within a short period of time. With competitions such as Ludum Dare encouraging developers to create games in a weekend, Hecker agrees that cool mechanics can come out of them, but he wonders if there could be more value in exploring those mechanics as deep as possible.

He gives the example of Jonathan Blow’s Braid. Hecker argues that Braid has more value than hundreds of Indie Game Jam games.

I think Braid has more value because it explores its mechanic to the depth the mechanic deserves. I strongly feel that game mechanics have a kind of natural depth and value, and it is our duty as developers to follow a mechanic to its logical and aesthetic extent.

In a somewhat related article, Alex Weldon of Bene Factum wrote Density, Not Volume last year, and he argues that game designers should create games that focus and serve core mechanics rather than try to pile on as much as possible. Adding to a work doesn’t always make it better. It just makes it more. He gives the example of the original Super Mario Bros.

In these games, the player has a very limited range of powers and the enemies are likewise more like variations on a theme than completely different entities – in Mario, for instance, the Koopa is essentially a Goomba that leaves a shell behind when killed. Buzzy Beetle is a Koopa immune to fireballs. Spiny is a Koopa immune to being jumped on. Terrain and power-ups are similarly limited. The level design is based around the interplay between the player’s finite abilities and this small range of assets and challenges, presented in different combinations. And that’s enough – the original Super Mario Bros. has 32 levels, but manages not to be repetitive, because the designers were forced to be creative with what they were given. The resulting game is simple but dense, in the sense that every ounce of potential has been squeezed out of these simple building blocks.

Hecker argues that game mechanics and dynamics need to be fully explored more often. Shipping shallow games quickly isn’t enough. Weldon argues that designing a game from a bottom-up, mechanics basis is the way to go. In both cases, quality and depth is praised over quantity and volume. Cranking out 20 games a month is impressive, and you can probably discover some cool mechanics in the process. Still, it would be much more valuable to players and the game industry if you went back to some of those quickly conceived games and fully explored what is there. For example, Blow explored time manipulation thoroughly, and he didn’t add unneeded elements, such as 3D graphics for the sake of it. The game had a lot of depth, and it didn’t feel disconnected or filled with useless cruft.

How do you feel about Hecker’s rant? Do you agree that more game developers need to “follow a mechanic to its logical and aesthetic extent”? Are indie games too shallow by and large?

(Photo: Measuring poles | CC BY 2.0)

Categories
Game Design Game Development Marketing/Business

Is Single-Player Gaming Dead?

Sharing the experience

Back in October, Raph Koster wrote about a PC World interview with the lead designer of Dragon Age, a major single-player game from Bioware. Mike Laidlaw on single-player games talks about the idea of creating such games today, when games such as World of Warcraft and even Facebook games such as FarmVille dominate by leveraging their social components.

Social networking games are the current big thing. For indies who would prefer to keep making shareware, the idea that someone could make a ton of money through a relatively simple MMO is as frustrating to hear about as major game developers who learned that Tetris, as simple as it was, sold much better than anything they were working on. I know more than a few indies have grumbled that while selling virtual items and subscriptions to an MMO is piracy-proof, they don’t want to make those kinds of games. With major indies reporting piracy rates of for-sale games in the 90+% range, sticking with single-player games sounds like a tough bet.

So what do you do if you want to make single-player games? Give your player a way to share his/her story.

Instead of a game that tells the player the same story that every other player will hear, give the player the means to create his/her own story. Make the experience of playing the game personal. And make sure the player has a way of sharing that experience.

NetHack is a perfect example of a single-player game that lets you experience a story to share with others. The in-game story is minimal, the NPCs aren’t very complex, and there’s not a lot of dialogue. What the game does do is provide plenty of fuel for stories that players love to share with one another. Yet Another Stupid Death, or YASD, is a common phrase for NetHack fans. I’ve even posted my own stories of these deaths. See Engraved Note to Self and YASD, the First for 2008 for short stories about my own travels in the Mazes of Menace.

Of course, those stories aren’t shared inside of NetHack. While you can watch others play online, most people talk to each other or write about what happened. The game doesn’t easily facilitate communication between friends.

But your game can. Dragon Age apparently has a Social Engine, but as Koster points out, most successful Facebook games are successful because of the player’s ability to interact with others. Even if your game is meant for one person to play, it doesn’t have to be a solitary experience.

Dragon Age has its Social Engine.

There are iPhone games that allow players to send progress updates to Twitter.

Facebook notifications let you know if someone has challenged you in Sea Friends.

Can a friend go to YouTube to view a replay of the way I handled a tricky boss? Can I show off an achievement? Could my friends send me time trial challenges?

What does your game do for allowing shared experiences?

(Photo http://www.flickr.com/photos/wanderingone/ / CC BY 2.0)

Categories
Game Design Game Development Games Marketing/Business

Marketing Is More Important Than Product Quality

GamesIndustry.biz recently published a post called Marketing influences game revenue three times more than high scores. Research has shown that the belief that game reviews have an impact on the sales of a game is a false one.

Or at least a poor quality game with big marketing dollars behind it will sell much more than a good quality game with poor marketing.

On the one hand, it’s discouraging. Gamers already complain about bug-ridden games, the need for patches, and subpar playing experiences. I was shocked to find that FIFA ’09 for the Nintendo DS had crash bugs in it, and according to at least one comment in a game review out there, it seems that FIFA ’10 has its own share of show-stopping bugs. That the FIFA games are at the top of the charts in terms of sales has to make game players feel disheartened. And when game companies start shoveling anything they can out the door, customers will feel the need to be more discerning about their purchases. The video game industry already had a crash when anyone could and did make an Atari game. People stopped trying to find fun in video games when most of the products were horrible. And, of course, marketing dollars become even more important, which means the larger companies with the greater capabilities win.

On the other hand, none of this is really news, is it? Ask anyone who knows anything about marketing, and they’ll tell you that marketing is way more important than most people think it is. If you create a fantastic game that no one wants, of course it won’t sell. If you create a game that a lot of people want, even if the attempt isn’t the best, it will sell. Part of product development should be market research: finding out if anyone cares about what you’re creating.

It’s true across all industries, and it’s true for the video game industry. That said, what can an indie game developer do?

Generating Buzz for Indie Games and Advice for Aspiring Indies have some marketing tips which should fit your budget. It also helps to remember that major publishers such as EA and Nintendo need to make a lot more money than you do, and so your marketing budget doesn’t need to match theirs in dollars. You can spend much less and still make enough money for your business. Also remember that your time is a resource, and there are plenty of ways to improve your marketing that just happen to take more effort than money to pull off.

Marketing will have a huge impact on your sales potential. Don’t ignore it.

Categories
Game Design Game Development Games Marketing/Business

EA Acquires Major Facebook Game Developer

Facebook has grown to be a powerful social networking force to be reckoned with, and game developers who have taken advantage of the popularity are pulling in plenty of money through ads, virtual good sales, and exposure. And now, EA purchased PlayFish, the biggest publisher of social games on Facebook, for about $400 million.

So what does it mean? PlayFish’s business model, selling virtual goods through social games, is appealing enough for a major mainstream game publisher to buy into it. And if EA is buying into it, it means we’re going to see a lot more of it.

On the one hand, indie developers now have to directly compete with EA on the Facebook platform. It was bad enough for a small developer to try to gain some exposure when Zynga and PlayFish were dominating. It isn’t too far-fetched to think that EA is going to get the most eyeballs and sales, leaving everyone else with smaller pieces of the pie.

On the other hand, this is Facebook. With over 2% of the entire world’s population running active accounts, it’s a very large pie. Also, just because PlayFish now has a lot more marketing and production muscle behind it, it doesn’t mean that the smaller indies can’t produce major hits themselves. Long-lasting indie games are the rule. If a game doesn’t last past a month, it doesn’t succeed. If you can create a high-quality game that takes advantage of the social aspect of gaming, you have a good chance of competing.

Earlier this year I created a social game called Sea Friends, based off of a simple game I created called Minimalist. The mechanics are simple, and I’ll be the first to admit that it’s not a great game, but at one point I had almost 400 people playing it in a single month. I was surprised to find people I wasn’t friends with becoming fans of the game! The game was an experiment in outsourcing and rapid project development, and I wrote a Sea Friends post-mortem if you want to know how it went, but for a game that I think loses its appeal after a few sessions, it seems to have at least a tiny bit of staying power. As of this writing, I can see that a handful of people played it today, and many more have played it in the past week. The top ten players for the month all scored over 50 levels, and the number one player for the month broke 170! Who are these people?! I don’t know, but they’re saving real coral reef when they play, so that might be part of the appeal of the game.

Here are some questions: with EA on Facebook, what will happen to the markets outside of Facebook? Will casual portals see Facebook taking away their traffic? Will we find Facebook Connect on many non-Facebook sites? Can the market get saturated with virtual good economies, or is there unlimited potential here? Can Facebook as a platform be ignored if you’re going after a different part of the market, or is its size going to require you to acknowledge it in some way, even if you don’t make a Facebook app?

And when did single-player games become such a tiny niche product?

Categories
Game Design Game Development Marketing/Business

Generating Buzz for Indie Games

Paul Taylor of Mode 7 Games, creators of Determinance, wrote an article for Gamasutra called Building Buzz for Indie Games which I think ties in and expands upon Christopher M. Park’s advice for aspiring indies that I wrote about last week.

He starts by emphasizing marketing, quoting Tim O’Reilly’s message that obscurity is a bigger problem than so-called piracy.

Most marketing books and articles will tell you that marketing should start with product creation, that if you created a product before finding out if anyone wants it, you’re going to fail. Taylor and Jeff Tunnell will argue that the nature of the video game industry makes it harder to predict what people will want to play. Who would have thought that World of Goo would have been the success it is?

The bottom line for Taylor: if you are passionate about something, it will be easier to develop, but you’re going to need to find a way to get it in front of people. The more mainstream the product, the easier it is going to be, but the wackier it is, the more work you’ll need to put into marketing. And given that you’re an indie, you’re probably not trying to make something pedestrian or mainstream in the first place.

He talks about the importance of building your presence early on. All you have is simple concept art or a crazy programming demo? Post them up! SOMEONE is bound to care about them. Look at Dejobaan Games for an example. I remember seeing early videos of AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! – A Reckless Disregard for Gravity before I even knew what it was. Wolfire Games has a development blog that constantly gets updates with technical details, concept art, videos, and general information about the business of making games. These two indies give their fans a place to rally for them.

Taylor wrote a four page article with marketing tips, taking you from concept announcement all the way through to post-release. Read the entire thing, and check out the links at the end of the article for more information.

Categories
Game Design Game Development Games Marketing/Business

Advice for Aspiring Indies

Back in August, Christopher M. Park of Arcen Games gave advice for aspiring indie game developers.

He has a number of observations after releasing his first game, A.I. Wars, and my favorite part is categorizing what class of indie game you might have your hands on. He separates them into three main groups: Indie Darlings, Undiscovered Gems, and Hobbyist/Nonprofessional.

Knowing which category you’re in is important because it allows you to realize what you can do to improve sales and get publicity. It is very important to recognize if your game is part of the last class. If you think you are running a business, but you don’t set your priorities so that you treat your business as one, it will be an uphill battle until you admit that you haven’t been dedicating the time and effort that a business calls for.

Another set of observations I liked: art is really important, but it’s usually not as important as most people think it is. Releasing a finished game with placeholder art is much better than not, and you can always release an update or a sequel or a completely new game with better quality.

As a side note, I used to think that graphics were much less important than I think they are now. Thanks to my time spent in the Game Design Concepts course and in Twitter conversations on the topic with Krystian Majewski, I’m now of the mind that the audiovisuals are as much a part of the design of a game as the mechanics.

Majewski said:

Otherwise, you run into a situation where you have an addictive game with exchangeable, hollow visuals. A growing problem today.

Bottom line: art is really important, but don’t let it be an excuse for not finishing your game.

Park’s other big observation echoes what you might hear from any discussion about marketing and sales. Refine your story. Tweak your copy. I love that Park gives multiple examples of emails he has sent out over three months.

The article has some good nuggets of information, so I would suggest reading it in its entirety. It’s not going to detail a plan for you to follow, but it is always a good educational opportunity to see what someone’s business looks like when it makes contact with the market.