Indie games: what problems are there in their development and what is most important when creating them

Over the past three years, the number of indie games on Steam has increased 2.5 times, but at the same time, developers began to earn less. Piracy of such games continues, and the development process itself takes a lot of time.

On the eve of a major gaming event WeGame 4.0 , which will take place on April 21-22 in Kiev, we decided to figure out what problems arise when creating indie games, and addressed this question to one of the developers of such games.

Revenues. According to information provided by the author of the Steam Spy analytical platform Sergey Galyonkin, the average earnings of indie game developers on Steam have decreased over three years by 49%. In the study, Sergey provided data on indie games sales on Steam and the number of copies sold. Sergey called the proceeds “naive”, since he simply multiplied one number by another, not taking into account the platform’s fees and taxes.



In total, in 2017, indie games were sold for an amount that is 25% higher than it was in 2015.

According to Sergey, the situation is quite amusing: “Steam gets more money than before. The creators of the best games are about the same, but middlings now earn less. ”

Piracy. One of the developers of indie games Jakub Kashtalski shared his impressions of the fight against piracy indie games on the site Gamasutra.

As Yakub says, the problem of piracy always remains relevant. Someone is fighting with it, putting expensive DRM-protection, someone changes the gameplay of the pirated game to protect their creation. Personally, his indie game called Headliner was twisted by 52.45% of the players. If we omit the details, then Yakub, in fact, says that fighting pirates is a useless exercise. Instead, you can lure them to your side.

The approach “at least someone played a game” did not suit Yakub, therefore in the unlicensed version of his game a screen comes out asking for support for the project.

One in the field. Often, indie games are thought out by just one enthusiast, who almost has to pull the whole game alone: ​​from design to balance. A similar story happened to the developer of indie games levpasha , which he shared in his post on Habré.

He began to write the game as a hobby, but it turned into something more. At first, he himself had to draw the models of players and enemies in the game, but he quickly realized that this would be delayed for a very long time. But even after hiring a freelance artist, preparation was delayed. We had to draw and redraw maps, develop UI, spend time on advertising, participate in the festival, prepare the game for the requirements of Steam Greenlight.

According to the developer, only his work took about 500 hours. The game appeared on Steam in early access as early as November 8, 2017, but did not receive the status of the final release.

What other problems and difficulties do indie game developers have? Why do games continue to create and really earn them? With these questions, we turned to Maxim Bezugloi , who manages the software development company Attracti . Maxim was the developer of the indie game M3Cyber , which combined the mechanics of match 3 games and card games, worked both alone and as a team. The team working on M3Cyber ​​received in 2017 a special prize from Amazon on Amazon Developer Day.

Difficulties appear with the growth of the team

There are successful and failed projects of indie teams of any size. Working alone is hard, but making decisions is simple. Difficulties begin with the advent of the team and its growth. To achieve the result, you need to interact as a mature team, and not as a group of indie singles.

There are indie games that start with one person, and there are companies that have a team from the first day - most often they come from AAA. For example, French Amplitude and their super successful Endless Space. Two founders, a small team, more than 1 million copies sold, system repeatable success. The following games are sold on average no worse than the previous ones. Such success in the planning and execution of games is far from many AAA studios.

Want to eliminate piracy? Do as in Diablo 3

Single games will be pirated until the game is launched on the gamer's side, and not on cloud-based gaming services. The solution to the problem seems simple, but when implemented for indie it will cost a lot of money. Network functionality in the game makes it partially or completely inaccessible for piracy. Ideal implementation in Diablo 3 - part of the game logic is on the servers. Diablo 3 sales figures demonstrate the effectiveness of the solution. There is a simpler solution in HoMM - some of the functions are available only when the licensed copy is online.

You risk a dream

AAA games and indie games can be compared to Hollywood and theater. AAA is Hollywood, in which you work first for the number of movie tickets sold, then for critics, and only then for the audience. Indie games are a theater in which the audience is first taken into account, then the critic, and only at the end is the number of tickets.

If you make the game, counting on the maximum number of copies sold, then you risk investment. You calculate how much time is needed, money, how soon you will finish, what functions will affect sales positively or negatively, how much you are willing to sacrifice your reputation. This will be a dry mathematical calculation.

In indie games, you risk, first of all, your dream. The so-called dark side of power seduces, in one way or another, all indie game developers. Serious guys come up to you, they say that your idea is cool, they offer to make you rich, but "here you need to tweak a little." This is the same as selling a piece of your soul. After all these edits nothing is left of your dream. It also happens that you did not convey your idea to the audience, you could not stand it - this would no longer be an indie game. It is necessary either to earn money and not to invest the soul, or to invest and go to the last.

Nobody wants to invest for the future - everyone wants the result now

Gamedev differs from all other entertainment commercial areas in that it has the most conservative approach - almost no one here is at risk. Everything is done guaranteed - so that you can play in something predictable, obvious and make money on it. No one wants to make new genres and trends. With these limitations, something really deep and interesting cannot be done. If a corporation needs billions of dollars in sales, it will make a sterile product, not a great one, which will be played in 10 years from now.

If it were not for the first Fallout, we would not have received the latter. But who will invest in a certain first Fallout today? Nobody is guided by the principle "we will make a game that will be chamber, theatrical, great, and it will create evangelists of this game, who will extend part 2, 3 and 4 after this."

Publishers win

Alas, but after the success of the first parts, this situation often arises: a great game finds its evangelists, and after that the publishers simply take away what these guys appreciated, betray the followers of the previous game and create a new part of the game for a wider audience. On each next part of the story repeats.

Every time we all make more beautiful worlds, but less and less alive. The question is when this cycle closes? When will we get a game with graphics, immersion of the level of recent hits and at the same time the depth of interactive interaction of the old period?

Who among us is willing to take risks and do something for the future? No one will invest in the game, so that the money is brought not by her, but by her third part.

It's hard to work with a publisher. But the problem with such work is not what it indicates what to do. Old-fashion publishers really knew how to do better. They could say whether it will be sold or not. Today, publishers need you to show that your game will be sold for sure, and only then they will help you. But if I know for sure that the game will be sold, then why do I need publishers? I'd rather take a bank loan. Modern working conditions with publishers are a little unfair.

The main thing in indie is mechanics.

Indies usually differ from large commercial projects by prioritizing mechanics over content. Most often, indie has no means for a large amount of content, not to mention AAA quality. The strongest teams in the world in large studios work on the production of content of all forms - the plot, the number of objects in the game and their placement. Therefore, indie cling mostly interesting mechanics of the game.

I believe that any game where you can make a little content, but a lot of interaction will always work longer. Take some “Bomberman”, look at how many clones there are, reprints - they continue to play it, because this is a game of mechanics. Take the game The Age Of Decadence, it was done by a developer with several assistants for ten years. The game takes place on speedran for two hours, but it has tremendous depth, and a narrow audience of RPG fans have played it in the last couple of years. Any "mechanical" game will live long if it is interesting.

You can make a game on the "flavor enhancers"

There are moments in which indie can win against AAA: for example, if you use Houdini, you can build a large open world with the power of one person, with the “click of your fingers”. But you cannot alone populate the world with creatures.

You can just walk in the woods - if only there was a reason, like, for example, in Firewatch. This is a game that has very little content, but its presentation is the pinnacle of the indie polishing game. This is when “little” is perceived as “a lot”, because the recipe and serve are like in an expensive restaurant.

The main secret of serving any game is in the color palette. The simplicity of the production of black-and-white games in this regard is very tempting, but the question is how to increase this later. Here, for example, Limbo is a hack, like any game with black and white styling. It is important to get emotional immersion, removing all unnecessary. "The trick" is to create a hypersensitivity of some feelings when you turn off the second. You remove the color, you create a contrast - and the feelings become stronger. These are like flavor enhancers in today's products.




Images from the game Limbo (developer of Playdead Studios)

There is no logic in indie gaming pricing.

The cost of the game has nothing to do with reality. Unfortunately, today very little in life is connected with reality. Today, jewelry can cost more than jewelry.

The price of indie games is determined by the average index for the market. So do the publishers, so do the indies. The thought is: “How much is the AAA game today? $ 60? Okay, we put $ 60. How much is indie? $ 15? We put $ 15 ". And what will happen if you put the price not $ 15, but $ 5? Then everyone will think that it is so bad that it is not worth five.

If you want to put a fair price, then you will become an enemy to yourself. Everyone will be judged by the first impression that the game is cheap, which means it is bad and short. So it turns out that a really bad game for dishonest $ 19.99 will earn more than a good game with honest $ 5.

If the game is good, you need to set the maximum price. If the game is bad, then you need not to lower the price, but to finish the game.

I recommend making a good game, not going against the current without a clear reason, and selling it for $ 15. If you put the price at $ 29.99 for the image, then everyone will be waiting for the New Year to buy it on sale. Anything above $ 20 will lead to slower sales. All that is below $ 10 - redo and convince yourself and the players that it costs $ 15. It's my personal opinion.

Any fair price of $ 10 and below should be accompanied by good communication with users: they must understand that you give them really high-quality experience that is short for one reason or another, or there is little content in the game.

Need to learn from AAA games

Indie developers can learn from the best AAA games without sharing the value of AAA studios. If the masters made the building blocks, and the studio of them gathered not a wonderful world, but a long corridor with beautiful exhibits and three endings, then it is clearly not the creators of the blocks that are responsible. You yourself as an indie determine what you are building, but in terms of the efficiency and quality of production of the building blocks for the game, we all have room to grow, from whom to learn and for what to work.

April 21, Maxim Bezugly becomes the speaker of the lecture hall on WeGame 4.0. A complete list of speakers and their presentations on April 21-22 is available on the official website of the event.

WeGame will also host a cosplay show, awarding game developers, a tournament on Dungeons & Dragons and other nastolkam, tournaments on Dota 2, CS: GO and LoL.