September, 2008

Sick, again. Probably will be for a couple of days. Would insert hilarious internet meme here, but about to faint and fall off seat

Sorry!

It's been a week! A full week! Where the hell were you? Nobody could get anything done, the place is a mess! ITS ALL FALLING APART. WE NEED YOU!

That's what you guys were saying, right? Right?

I would have a long string of excuses here about my lazy, lazy neglect, but I used to hate that when my favourite webcomic artists would do that. You think oh my God, an update, then you click, then you see a black screen (or even worse, a photo of their face bloated with a flu or something) and some long-winded literature about how they fell over the veranda while fighting terrorists on a plane filled with snakes and gosh, just couldn't update. Which is what I'm doing now, really, but shh.

Sorry, Mr. Old Lady

Some stuff about Spore after the click.

Great. Just as I posted the discussion about Spore DRM below, EA just had to come and announce a lot of changes and info about Spore DRM. Bleh.

Most significant change seems to be that EA is allowing 'de-authorisations' to make the installations limit more flexible. Which is great! But when they provide stats to show that most people never activated ME or Spore on more than one computer, well... firstly, maybe they are a lot more wary about activating elsewhere because of the limit? And secondly, if it were me, my source of activations wouldn't come within the first few weeks of the game's release. It would come after months and years. Their stats are bereft of logical context, and thus are misleading - to EA's benefit of course. Standard PR stuff.

Furthermore, EA refused to answer questions about why you couldn't buy a copy of Spore for your family and make multiple accounts for your family members. Essentially, while EA has made some good changes and must be credited for that (you have to suspect that the online protests had some hand in this), the core problems do, by and large, remain. The depressing part is that many people will, again, 'latch on' to EA's soundbite stats about "less than 1% wanting more than 3 activations" or their partial concessions, and extrapolate that to say that all future criticisms of EA and its DRM are unfounded. We're going to see arguments of "shut up about the DRM now, EA fixed it" and "nobody wants more than 3 activations anyway", when neither of those are necessarily true!

And that's the power a major corporation still has, no matter what anyone says about the 'democratic' nature of the internet. A carefully worded press release can work wonders (For them).

I promised, right? Here we go, back to Spore. I'll get off my ass and continue that Fallout 3 series (number one and number two) later this week, as well.

So the other controversy regarding Spore was with its DRM. I shouldn't need to go over the basic facts. EA releases Spore with an 'upgraded' version of the Securom DRM, which limits paying customers to 3 installations (before they have to call to 're-authenticate', whatever that involves), and replaces the cd-check with a one-time online activation. Reviewers get concerned; people get angry. Angry enough to refuse to buy the game, and for +6000 people, angry enough to leave lengthy 1-star reviews on Amazon. Phooey.

While a visual representation of DRM would be appropriate, that was too hard. So, spore!

So the dust is finally starting to settle on one of the biggest game releases this year - Spore. Two controversies came to the fore: regarding the supposed 'lack of depth' in Spore, and regarding publisher EA's 'upgraded' version of the SecuROM DRM. In an ingenious twist, I believe I will talk about the first one first, then the second one second. I hope we can all keep up. Edit: Actually, the first one got pretty long. So I guess DRM talk comes in a couple of days.

So, how good is Spore? While many came up with the predictable rounds of praise for the game, some reviews were unusually critical for a game such a high-profile (and commercially successful) game. The argument is that the game, being divided into five stages, necessarily ends up a series of shallow 'mini-games' that lack depth, and thus replayability. This, of course, was conflated with the ongoing debate about the 'casualisation' of the industry (see here): from what I've heard and read, a number of 'hardcore' gamers (by which I mean gamers who are very involved in the culture) do think that Spore was made for a more 'casual' audience, and that's the reason it's not going to satisfy them.

All Spore tribes come in tiny little octagonal packages. I suspect IKEA.

That's right, we love it. We love games, we love reading, and we love Jay Barnson. So here's part two (and end) of the giant Jay Barnson interview.

Anyway, some isolated comments about the whole thing.

As you can probably tell, one of the areas I really wanted to know about were marketing and fan communication in the indie world. By the pure virtue of 'being indie', indie developers often have a sort of aura about them: we immediately assume that they will be a lot more responsive, that our feedback will have a lot more impact, and that their target audience will nearly always be you (because, well, there isn't much else). With some, like Age of Decadence, that is the case; with others... well, it's a lot harder to know. I actually suspect that some indie devs have less of a grip on what their potential buyers want than 'big suity corporations', simply because they're trying to code and make the damn game on their own while juggling a day job, and they don't have the time to scour the web so comprehensively.

10. From the view of an (ignorant) outsider, it strikes me that there is no move to establish a centralised 'hub' to promote and sell all kinds of indie games, though there are conferences and sites on learning about and supporting indie development. Is there something I'm not seeing?

Well, at one point, we looked like we were getting one. Or three. Then they jacked up their royalties to the point where they are taking the lion's share of the profits, limited their games genres to just a few that brought in the most concentrated income, and left the developers with the fuzzy end of the lollipop. Not that I blame them - business is business after all.

But that's the problem with centralization. That's the opposite of "indie," really. When you've got some kind of centralization, it means you are surrendering power and control to those guys. And they can't possibly be all things to all people. For an indie, the whole point is to do your own thing. If it makes sense to work with these guys, great. If not - screw it, you can do your own thing!

11.How much awareness is there of indie games outside more dedicated gamers? What do your relatives or the people you meet at the bar think when you tell them you're an *indie* game developer?

There's not much awareness, at least not nearly enough, even amongst the gamers who *play* these games. The "indie" thing means something to developers. But does Joe Gamer, who plays Halo 3 on his XBox 360, really recognize this difference when he gets sucked into a flash game online? I don't really know. It seems like it's just not something think or care about.

I think they attribute the difference to technology rather than team or budget. They understand that you can't do Halo 3 in Flash. At least not yet. But even young, aspiring game developers get caught in this trap of believing that technology is the limitation, rather than budget, manpower, and expertise. They don't fully recognize that they can't just get some friends together and whip out a last-gen blockbuster or MMORPG in a few weeks.

That's a challenge to indies, because our audience doesn't judge our games based upon our budget. They don't care, and they shouldn't care. I can go out to Amazon right now and buy a new copy of Oblivion for $30. Or Final Fantasy XII for $19.99 - that's the sweet spot for indie game prices. Why should someone spend that money to buy an indie RPG from my site instead of either of those games? Indies have to be ready to answer that question.

(And they have... http://www.rampantgames.com/blog/2008/02/why-indie-rpgs-indies-of-round-... )

On the plus side, I think that's starting to change a little bit. With indie games now becoming available for the XBox 360 and getting some attention in the press, I think people are starting to become aware of who we are, and what we offer.

12. How can indie game devs (and fans) raise awareness? You've said before that the "biggest problem indies have is exposure". What can be done about that, in today's industry?

The number one thing is to play indie games. It makes no sense to talk about something you aren't interested in and don't know anything about. When you can talk about games like Depths of Peril in the same sentence with Diablo 2, that means something. And that's really the point - games are meant to be played. If people are playing them, buying them, and talking about them, everything else will follow. Indie games are getting some "buzz" now in the press, something that was inconceivable as little as four years ago. Indie games need some good grassroots support from players.

The other thing we need is probably some more marketing savvy on the part of developers. That's tough. Most people get into indie game development because they want to make games, not because they want to market games. But really - we need more interesting stories to tell the press. I think the time is right, and the press really just needs something interesting to talk about from the indie gaming scene, plus a really good game to go with it, and they'll be all over it.

So play the games, talk about the games, and bug the magazines and your favorite gaming websites to tell you more about indie games.

Braid certainly got plastered everywhere, at least.

13. Is the Braid 'saga' something akin to what you are talking about here? What impact do you think Braid had on this whole area?

Braid has definitely had a ton of marketing power behind it, and it has kinda become a bit of an indie poster child. And deservedly so. Does your average player download Braid and say, "This is an indie game, what other indie games are out there?" I don't know if they do. But it has definitely garnered greater media and industry attention, which is great for us all.

The biggest victory of all for Braid and some of these other games is that there are these really successful games out there that are very fun, worth every penny of a gamer's hard-earned cash - but which are nothing like the technological powerhouses with hyper-realistic graphics and believable hair movements that the industry has worked for years to convince their audience is a necessary part of a quality game.

I think that shift in perspective is a huge part of the battle. The other part - for those of us making games for open platforms - is to help the potential audience look beyond publisher-dominated distribution channels for quality entertainment.

14. It seems to me that the big issue is how there might be hundreds or thousands of people who might play your indie game, but they just never find out it exists. Should/will indies start turning to more mainstream methods of 'exposure' marketing once they have the financial muscle? (e.g. Penny Arcade's Banners Everywhere, or hell, 'contracting' people for prettier websites and the like?)

You are right - that is a pretty big issue.

You make it sound as if the indies are some unified group that is gaining financial and political strength as one big collective. I mean, sure, many of us are getting smarter about what we're doing, and teaming up to try and tackle some of these jobs through cooperation that we couldn't handle on our own. But we're nothing like a united front.

Hopefully some of these more traditional marketing routes will be open to reducing some of their costs for indies. We're seeing that now in some other areas of the industry - mainly for development, with some companies offering a difference between an "indie" and a "commercial" pricing for services or whatnot. Which I think is kind of a weird distinction, because most indies do have some kind of commercial aspirations. But hey, it's an outreach program to help make life easier for indies. Maybe we'll see more of that in the marketing arena.

Another thing to consider is that indies are not just miniature mainstream game developers, and what works for mainstream by way of marketing may not work for us. In fact, in a recent interview with Nick Tipping of Moonpod (an indie game company founded by two mainstream veterans), Nick told me,"Things we thought would be invaluable turned out to be useless; Mr. Robot and Starscape got incredible reviews in magazines, but even the smallest website review has a much bigger impact than a magazine."

(http://www.rampantgames.com/blog/2008/08/interview-with-nick-tipping-of-...)

So in a lot of ways, we're still figuring out what's going to work. Sure, more successful indies will have more money to throw at the problem, which will usually yield greater success. But since indies tend to "go niche" more than trying to compete head-to-head against the mainstream, I don't know if trying to directly imitate our mainstream cousins is a smart way to go.

15. What kind of impact can indie games such as Aveyond, Eschalon and your upcoming Frayed Knights make on the RPG market in general, and mainstream RPG designs?

Because of expense, mainstream games are becoming increasingly risk-averse. They want proven designs and properties wherever possible. I think in part, indie games may be proving that there's still a solid market for types of games that have lost favor as game design has been riding the coattails of the most recent best-sellers. Maybe a few successful indie RPGs will shake things up. Maybe not.

Really, I don't care if indie RPGs make an impact on mainstream games or not. While I wouldn't mind more mainstream RPGs that match my sensibilities, I'm pretty happy so long as there are indies out there making the kinds of games I want to play. I think doing just that - addressing the niche audiences - is the biggest contribution and impact indie RPGs - and indie games in general - can make for the market.

Is it really necessary to be able to sell a million copies to that theoretical "Mass Market" in order to stay solvent as a game developer?

The Bioshock guys certainly thought so.

16. Are we seeing a trend towards simpler, less challenging RPGs that 'hold the player's hand'? Where does your design philosophy, and Rampant Games titles, stand in relation to that?

Well, I appreciate some hand-holding. I've got a few games I've never finished playing that I could probably have used a little more hand-holding on.

But there's a sense of satisfaction that you can get from figuring your own way through devious problems in games. Doing your own detective work and discovery. If I had to pick one way or the other, I'd really lean more towards the more challenging, less hand-holding method. That being said, my ideal would be a happy medium where the player can work it out for themselves the hard way, but help would be available in-game when the player gets too stumped. Sorta like how Bejeweled might give you a hint if you spend too long not making a move.

17.How important is fan feedback for an indie developer? How much, and in what ways, does it influence the way you design and promote your games?

In mainstream game studios, you get pretty insulated from what people really think about your game. You are separated from your customers by a publisher and a distribution system two layers thick. You are cut off from your primary feedback mechanism, which is unit sales - you wouldn't know the difference between a hit and a flop until the publisher gave you numbers which might or might not resemble reality. You really aren't making games for players - you are making games for the publisher, usually meaning an overworked game-loving producer and a whole bunch of non-gamer marketers, bean-counters, and executives.

As an indie, it's a whole 'nother story. It's all about the players, and making them happy. They are the ones who pay for your game-making habit, one way or another. It's them you want to make the game for, not some dudes in a suit in some boardroom looking at numbers on a chart and trying to do remote committee-based paint-by-numbers game design. And getting that feedback from customers and potential customers - early and often - is critical.

One experiment I did this year was to release a "pilot" of my game in development, for the express purpose of soliciting that feedback on the direction I was going. It was a huge success. I found a lot of people complaining about the same things - things I can fix at this stage - and a lot of outstanding suggestions for improvement. It's that direct kind of feedback - and potential for improvement - of a work-in-progress that I just can't see happening through traditional, mainstream game development.

I think it's awesome.

A big thanks to Jay Barnson for this comprehensive look into the life and thoughts of an indie developer.

It's time for another interview (we'll see how long this frequency lasts), and this time it's with Jay Barnson, who's worked for years both in mainstream game production and running his own indie thing at Rampant Games. His blog, Tales of the Rampant Coyote, is always a great read (and he's not as lazy as me at updating).

The interview weighs in at 4,000 words, going over in quite some detail the various parts of indie game development, what it involves, where it's at, where it's going. It's pretty big, so I'm going to try dividing it in two and see how that goes.

Click here for Part One of the interview.

Frayed Knights, Jay's upcoming comedy RPG. (source)

In part one, Jay talks about how he 'went indie', the various challenges involved in indie development and marketing / promoting in the world of indie. Part Two should be up within a couple of days here at the Alley.

As always, comments are welcome!

Jay Barnson is an industry veteran, both as a mainstream developer the man behind Rampant Games. His blog, Tales of the Rampant Coyote, is always a great source of tales about life as an indie developer.

1. Tell us about yourself. Who are you and what is Rampant Games?

Well, I'm Jay Barnson - founder of Rampant Games. I have done my time off-and-on in the mainstream games business since the mid-90s. I've worked on some ancient titles you might remember like Twisted Metal, Warhawk, and Jet Moto. And even more ancient titles you probably won't remember, and in some cases I'd prefer if you didn't. More recently I've worked on a massively multiplayer RTS (yes, you read that correctly) called Saga, unpublished Wii and Xbox 360 games, and the upcoming multi-platform game The Tale of Despereaux. And when I'm not making games for a living --- I'm making them for fun, as an indie.

Rampant Games is a small indie gaming company. I originally founded it just as a tiny game development studio. Lately it's become something more, and I'm selling a lot of other people's games, and running the Tales of the Rampant Coyote blog where I discuss all aspects of gaming - but emphasizing indie gaming, computer roleplaying games, and adventure games.

2. You're a professional game developer gone indie. What was the reaction from the industry, your colleagues, to this jump?

There really wasn't much of a reaction when I left in 2000. I mean, with all the chaos and layoffs and consolidations and people changing jobs at the time, it wasn't a big deal. Some people didn't understand why I'd want to leave the greatest job in the world, but others did.

Nowadays, the indie thing is usually responded to by either enthusiasm or blank stares. Many of my colleagues don't understand the attraction of working on such low-key, low budget games. Others get really excited about it. So I guess you can't say there's any kind of typical reaction.

3. I understand that over the last few years, you have had to maintain Rampant Games as a 'second job', essentially, after a day at work. This seems to be something many indie developers have to do, until (if) their venture becomes profitable. Is this a big problem or challenge for indies in general, and how did you deal with it?

Based upon the overwhelming proportion of indie games that end up in the graveyard of unfinished projects, I'd say it's a huge problem.

I've found that the more I hate my day job, the easier it is to work on indie games at night. Not that I'd prefer a day job I can't stand just so I can have that level of motivation.

It's been a few years since I had a full-fledged commercial indie game release, so maybe I'm the wrong person to talk to. But for me, it comes down to commitment to the project, and discipline. I'm a terribly undisciplined person, myself, so for me I just have to make it a habit. When I get into the habit of putting 4 hours a night - usually between 9:30 PM and 1:30 AM - into working on a game, I get things done. When I fall out of the habit, weeks go by with very little progress.

Eschalon: Book 1, one of the RPGs hosted by Rampant Games.(source)

4. What are some of the key differences in the way you develop and work on the games now that you are indie? Apart from, say, graphics, are there differences between mainstream and indie games that stem from having a different kind of work process?

Indie games are probably closer to how mainstream games were made about twenty years ago, I'd guess. Most of the differences come from creative control and team size. In mainstream games these days, a big part of game direction comes from a number of people at the top who might not even play games. And while there's still plenty of creativity in the process, it gets diffused through a large team.

With an indie game, there's a much smaller team and creative control is down at the immediate level of the one or few people actively creating on the game. Everyone on the team has to wear multiple hats, is more heavily invested in the final product, so you don't get so much of a "factory worker" mentality.

I think indie games show much more of the personality of their creators. It's sort of the "garage band" effect - it's not been watered down by corporate demands. It's rougher-edged, but a little closer to the source.

5. One of the biggest challenges appears to be that you have to handle the more 'suit-y' side of management all by yourself: but at least you have total freedom. Can there be no compromise? Do you see any prospects for more collaboration or communication between indie development and mainstream developers or publishers, or does indie always have to stay 'one-man-and-his-computer' to retain its rougher, creative side?

I'm really glad you asked that. And no, I don't think the latter is necessary at all. We are already getting some collaborative efforts and joint ventures already, and it would be awesome to see more of it. As much as we make a big deal about "indie" versus "mainstream," it's still the same world.

It's just that the videogame industry, like most other media, has evolved in such a way that it is the middleman (the publisher) who is in the driver's seat now. They call the shots, decide what's being made, decide how hard its going to be marketed, decide when its going to be released (ready or not), what license it will use, and they'll play all kinds of weird marketing, political, and money games as they do it.

All being an indie really boils down to is rejecting this model of how the industry "must" work, and putting the game makers - and their customers - in the driver's seat instead. That's really all there is to it! And when they are done, if the publishers and mainstream guys want to get in the act, too, and the deal makes sense - go for it!

6. In your blog you have often stated that making your own game is not just about being creative: that you also have to learn to market your own games, and so forth. What kind of things did you learn or pick up as you built Rampant Games from the ground up?

I had to learn or re-learn everything from the ground up. I've written entire articles about this. I was totally clueless. Now I'm only mostly clueless. About the only thing I did know how to do was write game software, and see that through to the end of the project. I actually believed that this was at least 90% of what had to be done. Nowadays, I know better, and I mock my less experienced self. Fortunately, we're separated by time, so my younger self doesn't deck me for mocking him.

So what did I need to learn?

Starting from the basics of running a business - how does one form a company? What kind of company structures are there, and what do they cost? What are the fees / taxes / requirements in my city and state? How do I report it on my income taxes? What are the legal dangers a company can run into? How do I set up sales via the website? How do I even create a website that doesn't suck? What's a reasonable monthly cost for a server?

How do you manage a team? What do you do when there are problems, especially when you aren't paying your crew more than the price of pizza? How do you find an appropriate artist, and how much will they cost? How do you find "off-the-shelf" content that works for your game? Will the licenses for all your code and data libraries work together?

Who is your audience? What kind of video card are they using? How do you promote your game? Is advertising on site X worth it? How much should you charge for your game? How do you write a press release? How much gameplay should your demo offer?

These and a zillion other questions become apparent once you start trying to do this as a real business. And for every question you answer, you also discover two more questions.

Void War, Jay's 3D space combat game.((source)

7. Are you able to tell us about some specific steps you take to find out exactly who your 'audience' is and how to keep in touch with them?

I use the blog and my forums for that, really. For Frayed Knights, I've actually posted a bunch of design ideas to the community and received feedback directly on stuff I hadn't even put in the game yet. I even had people sending ME ideas for dialog between the characters - I think a couple of community members had a better handle on the "voice" of the characters than even I did.

It was really the most amazing, collaborative thing I've ever participated in - and I still have a lot more to do. But I think the game is going to be much better because of it.

8. What are some of the common mistakes indies make when promoting their game? Or things they forget? What, in your opinion, can indies do to try and reach more people that might enjoy their game?

I think the most common mistake is that they forget to do any real promotion at all. Or they wait until the last minute to start thinking about it. Or they spend their time telling their peers about it rather than their potential customers. Indie game developers rarely have enough money to buy games, anyway. :)

I think the most important thing - at least to start - is to network. This is pretty hard, as many game developers can be kinda introverted. But getting to know people, knowing who to ask questions of, who to contact for whatever situation you find yourself in, is pretty key.

9. Many Rampant Games titles offer extensive demos. You could pretty much play most of the game with Democracy, though with only one country. Eschalon Book 1 and Frayed Knights also have 'pilot' demos. So are 'big' demos a good thing, then?

From talking to a lot of people about this subject from different parts of the field, I can state definitively that "it depends." Ideally, the demo should be just big enough to suck the player in, and small enough to leave him or her hungry for more. For a lot of casual games, a sixty-minute time limit works great. For other kinds of games, limiting it by content might be better. Or by features.

It really depends upon the game and the audience. For something like an RPG, for example - an RPG is typically pretty huge, and it might take a little bit of time for a player to get used to the gameplay, and warm up to the characters and story. A big demo - like the kind Spiderweb offers with its games - might be perfect. Just as you are getting into your groove, getting invested into both the story and the characters you've been building - bam, you hit the end of the demo and you REALLY want to see what happens next. For a little casual game that you play in ten-minute snatches, a time limit or number of uses might work best. There are new pricing and monetization models coming all the time. Some games just let advertising subsidize your game-playing, and that may work great, too.

It's as much art as science.

The second part of this interview will cover the awareness of indie games amongst the public and the kind of profile they have, as well as whether games are becoming 'easier' and the importance of fan feedback. Check back in a couple of days!

You know, I'm thinking it might be wise of me to set down some sort of schedule for updating. Save people all that agony of waiting. But then, I'm sort of commenting on recent affairs, and nothing's worse than writing when you've got nothing. Also, I was busy playing Icewind Dale II. Sue me.

It tickled a very familiar place in my brain when I (and probably half of you) heard that EA screwed up, again, with customer service. Guy preorders EA game, guy changes address, guy requests game sent to new address, EA does not comprehend, ends up refunding the preorder which, naturally, is limited and now he can't ever get the bloody thing. It's a familiar mixture of hilarity, idiocy and quiet despair at the human condition for anybody who's gamed longer than a few months. So much so, in fact, that it is generally received with weary resignation: yes, we know [insert big corporation name] are a bunch of morons, no, they don't seem to ever realise it (or get hit by karma-lightning and go out of business), yes, I sympathise with you, but no, I doubt anything will happen. Hell, it's just expected of EA now, for a lot of people.

Why do you keep doing this to me?