Making the rarity of cards more clear to players in reward screens etc.
Archive for category: Game Development
At the end of this month, I will have been working on System Crash for four years.
It’s hard to wrap my mind around that number. I’m in such a different place right now, that old life seems like a half-remembered dream.
I do remember desperation, though. Feeling trapped, like an animal. Dreams die hard, and I could feel mine kicking frantically in my chest as the daily grind slowly suffocated the life out of it.
There was nothing wrong with me. I was well-off, respected. I had great friends and an active social life. And yet, slowly but surely, desperation grew. I could feel the point approaching where I’d have to either let my dream die or do something drastic.
So I jumped.
Which was fairly unprecedented, for me. I’m not particularly brave. Or, to put it more generously, I err on the side of caution. But I guess the fear of what would happen if I made a move was eventually overpowered by the fear of what would happen if I didn’t.
It was a bit of a fuck up, though. I mean, obviously; I had originally estimated one year and here I am, four years later, still labouring to get the first game out.
I made plenty of mistakes in my design and my development process along the way. From choice of art style (I love SC’s art, but lots of indies have found success with abstraction and a stylized art style that gets them more bang for their art buck. I’ve been taking notes.) to stubbornly failing to triage certain beloved features the minute I saw that I’d run out of money before finishing them (The story campaign, for example. I should have released an arena card battler then used the money to build a story campaign in the sequel. I should be building that sequel now).
My game design isn’t as creative as I’d have liked, I basically just mashed together existing CCGs that I’d played, and I’m piss-poor at marketing and PR. I took ages to put up a proper website for the game, I don’t have a PR video or a Facebook page ready, and my blogging (the cheapest form of PR I could do) is erratic.
All in all, just a mess.
But…but the desperation is gone. I mean, I’m not where I want to be, yet, and I still want to get there, badly. But that animal in my chest isn’t kicking me in the ribs anymore. I’ve fucked up a lot, but at least I’m fucking up in generally the right direction. I’m doing something to make my dream a reality. And, to paraphrase Edison, I’ve figured out a bunch of things that don’t work.
So at least I can make different mistakes on the next game. 😉
Four years. Crazy That’s a hell of a lot of time to devote to a thing.
It’s also, I think, going to be the sum total of the thing. I’m anticipating being finished development by the end of this month. The game is looking good, just a little bit more playtesting to do and it’s a wrap. So, yeah, woo!
Here’s to four years! It was a crazy journey, but I’m ready to start a new adventure now!
Some interesting tweets from Steam Spy today.
I've made this tool for analyzing intersecting audience of several games, but haven't been using it much, because it's too heavy.
— Steam Spy (@Steam_Spy) September 19, 2015
470K people own Wasteland 2 on Steam, 508K own Pillars of Eternity, 148K own both. 121K of those also own Skyrim 🙂
— Steam Spy (@Steam_Spy) September 19, 2015
Those aren’t the kind of results you’d expect, are they? You’d think there’d be more overlap between core RPG fans. Or at least between Pillars and Wasteland fans.
Of course, some folks won’t be buying these games on Steam, for whatever reason, so the Steam statistics are an incomplete picture of the whole. Still, I’m surprised.
I think it speaks to genre being less meaningful than type of core experience/mechanics the game offers. The theme is possibly also important, some folks may be fans of post-apocalyptic wastelands but not traditional fantasy, and vice versa.
If you follow the indie dev scene at all, you’ll probably have read a number of thinkpieces recently on whether or not there is an Indie Bubble, and whether that hypothetical bubble is in the process of collapsing. Jeff Vogel, Jonathan Blow and other big names have all weighed in.
A lot of the doomsayers refer to two particular graphs released by the marvelous SteamSpy. If you haven’t seen them yet, these are they:
They show that the number of games being released on Steam is increasing exponentially over time (although a not-insignificant portion of that is due to companies dumping their back-catalogue games on Steam now that the gates are open, mind), and that, while total monthly sales has remained fairly consistent, median sales is trending toward zero.
This proves, a lot of them claim, that the Doom is here, it’s upon us. Gather your loved ones and flee into the sea, the Doom is here, DOOM!
Now, I don’t know whether there is actually an indie bubble. Maybe, maybe not. What I do know is you can’t use that graph to draw the types of conclusions people are drawing from it. A little bit of statistics is a dangerous thing.
The problem lies in people claiming that the graph proves it is getting harder for the average developer to earn a decent income by selling their games. Because the median was higher in the past, and now it’s near zero. Makes sense, right?
No. It doesn’t.
That graph shows sales figures for Steam only, not games being sold as a whole. And Steam changed its policies to lower the bar to entry. Which means that a lot of developers that weren’t on Steam (and thus weren’t reflected in the stats) are now on Steam, and affecting values like the median.
Let me illustrate why this means you can’t draw real conclusions, if it isn’t already clear.
Let’s say you have the Olympic 100m sprint. And, for the sake of example, let’s suppose that 20 runners are allowed into the event, the top 20 in the world. And let us further suppose that big sports brands watch the event and award lucrative sponsorship deals to the top 10 runners in the race.
So 10 out of 20 earn lucrative sponsorship deals. That’s 50% of the Olympic runners who earn big bucks. So if you’re in that race those are some good odds at making money. The average earning will be fairly good, and the median earning for a runner in the sprint will also be pretty high, (the 10th place sponsorship amount)/2.
But let’s say that one year the Olympics committee decides that the Olympics needs to be more of a “people’s event”. They’ll let 1000 runners compete, and you don’t have to meet a particularly high barrier of entry, it’s first-come, first served. So what ends up happening is a whole bunch of “average joe” runners get in. They’re not going to beat Usain Bolt, but they figure it’s the Olympics, why not, what a lark!
They all run, and the top 10 get lucrative sponsorship deals, as before.
But the average and median will change. 10 out of 20 is 50% who earn money. 10 out of 1000 is only 1%. The overall amount of money given out stays constant, but the average earning of a runner competing in the 100m sprint drops way down, weighted by all those hundreds who didn’t earn anything. And the median will now be zero, because most of the sprinters didn’t earn a sponsorship deal.
So the question is, is the situation better or worse than it was before?
The answer is that it’s pretty much the same. The people who never had a chance to win lucrative sponsorship before still don’t have a chance. They’re dragging the stats down now that they’re being counted, but their earnings were always 0 and that hasn’t changed. The top athletes in the world were always competing with those people, it’s just that in the past they out-competed them to get a slot in the top 20 in qualifiers, now they’re out-competing them directly, on the day, in the race.
For the top athletes, the situation isn’t that much different. There will be some added competition from athletes who just missed the top 20 cutoff during qualifiers, but they had to out-compete them to get a spot in the top 20 anyway, so it’s just another qualifier.
The point here is that lowering the bar to entry and letting in a bunch of low-performers can dramatically alter the stats, simply because you’re counting people you never counted before. The median earnings of an Olympic runner will tend toward zero the more people you let run in that race, yes, but it doesn’t actually mean it’s really any harder to be a top earner.
It’s still as hard as it was before, ie fucking hard.
Which is why I don’t think you can really point to that graph as proving anything, besides that more devs are getting their games on Steam now.
Which we already knew.
What I’d be interested in, personally, is a graph showing number of indie devs earning above a certain amount, maybe a couple of hundred K, for the last few years. If that number has dropped, maybe The Doom is upon us. But I have a sneaking suspicion it’s actually gone up. That’s just my gut instinct from having followed the indie scene for a while, it seems like more indies are making a decent living in recent years, regardless of the “median” dropping. But that’s just a suspicion, it could be wrong.
Let me kick off my Gamescom posts by sharing the piece I wrote for IGN on our trip, the motivation behind it, who went etc. In later posts I’ll talk about my experiences, personally.
I think I’ve mentioned this before, but System Crash is such a big project that I can’t hold all of it in my head at once.
The downside of this is that I keep having to relearn parts of my code. “Oh, that’s what I was doing here” etc.
The upside is that occasionally I’ll read a line of dialogue I forgot I wrote and think “Not bad, laddie, not bad at all!”