Vault Dweller Soapbox: How to Survive the Indiepocalypse in 5 Easy Steps

[Declinator]

I’m talking about numbers here. What is the proportion of classics per period? Maybe we have three classics per decade? My point is that if you unintentionally compare the set of all classics from past decades with any recent crop of good games, things will always look like shit because the sample is too uneven. 10 years of game design cannot beat 40 years. That is what I’m trying to say.

Well let's take the gaming period of say 1992-2004 (2005 being the year in which multiplatform garbage and XBawks started to fully plague the industry), classics off the top of my head (a number of genres included, not just CRPGs):

[LIST FULL OF SHOOTERS & RPGS & A COUPLE OF GAMES FROM OTHER GENRES]

You have very few games that aren't shooters or RPGs on those lists. No higher level strategy games? No (non-RPG) action games? No racing games? It's obvious that you play very few genres.

 

[Lurker King]

Your game has to stand out. It has to do at least one thing extremely well, preferably something that hasn’t been done before. Why be an indie game developer if not to try new things, right?

But what if I want to make a game that has nothing new going with it, but is purely love from a genre that is p. much dead now(survival horror like old Silent Hill, for example) or a genre that I love but hardly has a new game(wiz-clones, for example[8 not included in this question])? Should I give up on this idea if I want to stay alive on this industry? Keep in mind that I'm asking this(while ignoring the whole 'do what your love' thing) because of the whole 'staying alive on this industry' idea.

Pay attention.

Of course, every rule has exceptions. If you’re replicating the tried and true gameplay of something as venerable as Jagged Alliance 2, Wizardry 8, or Shadow of the Horned Rat, go right ahead. If not, don’t bother.

In other words, if you can replicate the tried and true gameplay of classics, you are making an achievement. Of course, if you fail in that attempt, i.e., if you do the same thing that every other game did, but with worse graphics, worse gameplay and no journous kissing your ass, you will have even less chance to survive. In fact, even if you achieve the level of classics that is still not garantee of financial success because the classics are too complicated for modern audiences. The fact is that this whole discussion about survival doesn’t apply in this case. Only established developers talk about staying alive in the industry. Indie developers, especially newcomers that nobody heard before, don’t have that luxury. They have to do what they can to gather a team, learn their craft and create an audience in the first place. That’s what they did and the result was a classic that sold 50k, and a hardcore classic at that. How is that a failure? If I was VD, I would be so proud, man! I could quit game design tomorrow knowing that I made a fantastic game. PoE on the other hand sold 800k+, but it is a complete failure. The best and the brightest know the difference and that matters.

Well let's take the gaming period of say 1992-2004 (2005 being the year in which multiplatform garbage and XBawks started to fully plague the industry), classics off the top of my head (a number of genres included, not just CRPGs)

Well, thank you for the effort. I bet that if you choose to include only cRPGs, things wouldn't look so grim. Not ideal, of course, but not completly awful.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Your game has to stand out. It has to do at least one thing extremely well, preferably something that hasn’t been done before. Why be an indie game developer if not to try new things, right?

But what if I want to make a game that has nothing new going with it, but is purely love from a genre that is p. much dead now(survival horror like old Silent Hill, for example) or a genre that I love but hardly has a new game(wiz-clones, for example[8 not included in this question])? Should I give up on this idea if I want to stay alive on this industry? Keep in mind that I'm asking this(while ignoring the whole 'do what your love' thing) because of the whole 'staying alive on this industry' idea. It's kinda sad that you made a game that you love, spend money and time on it, to not only see it being a failure but having to give up and go back to a boring job. I mean, would you give up had AoD been a failure? The whole reason you are making a new game, if I understood right, is thanks to AoD selling well.

Yes, I would have given up had AoD failed. Given up is too strong a word, but if nobody wants to buy games you're making you should find yourself another hobby. And yes, we're making the colony ship game because AoD did fairly well for an indie and the reason it did well is because it offered something new. I see AoD being mentioned on different forums, always in the "it does C&C better than any other game" context. That's what keeps it afloat 8 months after release. People are still talking about it.

As for your question, even if you're doing a Wiz 8 type game, there's gotta be something you can do that would set the game apart from other crawlers, including Wiz 8, without making a different game. Basically, when people talk about your game (and I hope it's not a hypothetical question because I fucking love Wiz 8), they should be able to say "it's like Wiz 8 but it has a really great [insert feature]" and it is that feature that would keep your game afloat.

So you make a game on enthusiasm, use what it earned to make a second game, use what it earned to make a third game, etc.

Doesn't this keep you in a loop that as soon as one game is a failure, all hell breaks loose and you are fucked?

Pretty much.

The reason I wrote this article is because of the conversations I had with several developers lately. Their games didn't sell well (or sold well but left them in debt) and now they can't continue making RPGs, looking at other genres (mobile, survival, etc) instead, which isn't an option for me. But overall, yes, one mistake and you're fucked.

This is the best advice for one that wants to stay alive. But it's a dangerous one, though. The recycle thing, if selling well, may keep you recycling over and over and we got 10 editions of Fives Nights at Freddy.

Depends on a developer. For us, it's a logical step: we need time for pre-production, which is a good opportunity to put together a combat game, but making such games (or making games simply to make money) isn't what I want. As I said before, if I cared about money, I would have never quit my job.

 

[Sitra Achara]

But what if I want to make a game that has nothing new going with it, but is purely love from a genre that is p. much dead now(survival horror like old Silent Hill, for example) or a genre that I love but hardly has a new game(wiz-clones, for example[8 not included in this question])?

Go modder. The Open-X projects for all your old favourites are on the rise. Added benefit that you don't end up like Vogel after 20 years.

 

[Viata]

Thanks for answering, VD. And no, it wasn't hypothetical.

Go modder. The Open-X projects for all your old favourites are on the rise. Added benefit that you don't end up like Vogel after 20 years.

While I respect modders, it's not something I'm into. Worse yet, what if I become the next Doug/Celerity? Can't play with chances here. It's just that I can't see making a new game if I'm modding one. I want to try making a survival horror(for example) that only copy the old sh genre. There is total conversion, but god knows how long it would takes if I go with a game that no one modded or dunno.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

I think that a lot of the productivity of that era was mainly due to the fact that the genre was being created. But I do agree with you that the broadening of the market killed a lot of experimentation.

Innovation, experimentation and creativity is correlated to industry's infancy period but I also think the developers involved were a different breed, a good chunk of LGS studios employers were MIT graduates for example, most developers (regardless of the genre) had regular tabletop sessions (which influenced their work in various ways) etc. Nowadays you have mostly millennial hipsters that grew up on WOW and MOBAs and burned out former dev stars that just want to pay the bills.

If you were to put in a lot of resources to make a Wizardry or M&M style game, how many people would care? There have been blobbers released in the past 5 years, and the codex basically yawned. What do you think the rest of the market would do? "What...turn based movement and combat? I'm relegated to grid movement? No romances? Gross!" I'm surprised the new Bard's Tale did as well as it did. There are some sensibilities that would fly in the old era, that just are just hard for a modern audience to stomach.

Well there's blobbers and then there's Wizardry, I never cared much for the former (turn-based or otherwise, I like my party-based RPGs to be isometric) but I still enjoyed the heck out of Wizardry VII and VIII mostly due to fantastic character creation system and setting which was basically a sci-fi and sword and sorcery hybrid (which I've always liked since I was a kid). That could be considered one of the defining characteristics of the classic when you think about it, managing to draw in people who are normally not interested in that type of game.

Another factor is the fact that resources are less of an issue. So there's no need to be creative. Wanna see combat in first person? Put it in first person! Want to ride around vast amounts of countryside? Create a countryside! There's no reason for devs to make games in a creative way since the inherent limitations of the old days are basically gone.

Yeah, it's kinda like movie industry and its over-reliance on CGI which often feel more jarring than creative practical effects of the past. Still, there might be some limitations in modern engines as well, I remember there was a case of of Unreal Engine not being capable of remaking even Wolfenstein 3D (the most basic of old shooters) maps faithfully. Regardless of the reason, the end result is that level design (among many things) has become a lost art, you either have linear corridors, arenas or large empty spaces (gotta mention Dishonored here which deviates from the modern trend, one of the very few modern games with smart level design), navigating one level in old Thief games is more fulfilling than most modern games in their entirety with all their bells and whistles.

Of course this is all a separate issue to what VD said which I don't disagree with. If Troika and LGS had access to a developed digital distribution platform like Steam or crowd funding options like Kickstarter I bet they would have survived or atleast had more of a fighting chance.

 

[Lurker King]

One thing that always bothered me about AoD is the lack of a manual. JA2 have a manual, RoA2 have a manual. Is that too much to ask? Please Vault Dweller, make a manual for your colony ship game. Even if it's just a PDF with simple screenshots, but make one.

 

[Mozg]

I'd rather have another combat demo. Having a series of constrained arena fights with significant chunks of character build progression in between teaches you the system fast in a fun way. Plus the work could double as the tutorial and/or release demo, or just a chunk of game content like the AoD arena.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'd rather have another combat demo. Having a series of constrained arena fights with significant chunks of character build progression in between teaches you the combat system fast in a fun way.

Definitely.

One thing that always bothered me about AoD is the lack of a manual. JA2 have a manual, RoA2 have a manual. Is that too much to ask? Please Vault Dweller, make a manual for your colony ship game. Even if it's just a PDF with simple screenshots, but make one.

Every task takes time. Either I'm writing more content for the game or I'm writing a manual.

 

[WingedPixel]

So as a fellow indie RPG maker your post is fairly near and dear to my heart. I also think is about 80% bullshit.

First off, finishing a game you worked on at 10+ years is amazing, very very few people have that vision and tenacity. Having 50k sales is absolutely an indie success and you should be fucking proud, more so because you've made a game that isn't easily categorized into a mainstream genre or one that gets lots of viral youtuber shit.

I also agree with your general sentiment: make unique games, do them well, build a community, etc.

But everything else you mention is pretty much garbage.

Your game sold 50k at about $30, so about $1,000,000, give or take, possibly less given sales and such over 10 years. That's a lot of money. If you were a solo developer and you were working part-time for most of the project, that would be awesome. But you were not. My understanding is you were at least 2-3 people working together for most of that time. So that $1,000,000 becomes $1,000,000/(10 * 3), so let's say $35k each. Depending on where you live, that's no longer so great. Sure you were part-time for most of if but still it's not that great. Talented gamedev people can make more than that easily, so your opportunity cost kinda sucks.

Basically your numbers barely add up. Claiming that you have some formula for success given you have one border-line successful is pretty arrogant given your one-moderate-hit wonder status.

You plan on making that money last 4-5 years (on presumably full-time?) development. So either you pay shit or expect your employees to get paid shit for a long amount of time. That's not sustainable. That's pretty much what the Indiepocalyspe is: and uninstallable Eco-system of non-mainstream development.

I hope not many people take your post to heart. Or are at least smart enough to interpret your post at "get a fucking day job".

 

[Ranselknulf]

Oh shi...

 

[Severian Silk]

Not sure what VD did in AoD that was so original.

• Recycled gameplay elements from Fallout.
• Recycled pagan Roman setting.
• Every character is the same exact asshole personality type.

On the other hand.

• Graphics are okay.

You can attest that the reception of AoD among codexers is improving over time if you compare haters earlier posts with the most recent ones.

Severian Silk posts

7 years ago: VD knows nothing about game design. Teleport hell lolollol

1 year ago: I don’t have any interest in this shit developer.

1 month ago: AoD is a good game among others.

Today: AoD has nothing original and has some gameplay elements in common with FO.

This is the PR magic happening, baby! What happened, Silk? Did Roxor’s positive review made you change your mind? No? Well, maybe VD is just bribing you. That is what is really happening here, guys!

Well, maybe I should instead say that I think the original stuff Iron Tower did sucks p bad, except for the graphics.

Geneforge:

• 200% more original than AoD
• Vogel couldn't draw a stick figure if his life depended on it
• Which sells better?

If Vault Dweller had stuck to his first 2D isometric engine, AoD would have been a COMPLETE FAILURE. VD lives off the accomplishments of his artists.

 

[Viata]

 

[SniperHF]

Your game sold 50k at about $30, so about $1,000,000, give or take, possibly less given sales and such over 10 years. That's a lot of money. If you were a solo developer and you were working part-time for most of the project, that would be awesome. But you were not. My understanding is you were at least 2-3 people working together for most of that time. So that $1,000,000 becomes $1,000,000/(10 * 3), so let's say $35k each. Depending on where you live, that's no longer so great. Sure you were part-time for most of if but still it's not that great. Talented gamedev people can make more than that easily, so your opportunity cost kinda sucks.
.

I think you're missing two points here.

1. In the post he said:

You made your first game and it sold well enough to continue. Congrats! Now you have to do it all over again, but you need to do it better (see Step 1) and faster. In our case it means making the second game in 4-5 years without lowering quality. We’re aiming for 4 years; 5 is acceptable, 6 isn’t. Granted, the main reason AoD took so long is because:

If under your definition, 1,000,00 is not enough for further development then you wouldn't consider it a success and you would stop and not even begin another game under VD's plan. Iron Tower considered it enough for their needs on the second game therefore they continue. That number is different for everybody and every game.


2. Iron Tower are also making a cheap to produce combat crawler game to provide additional funds using the already produced framework of the first game. To be sure the effects of this are unknown but it's a consideration.

 

[Sitra Achara]

I hope not many people take your post to heart. Or are at least smart enough to interpret your post at "obtain 3rd world slaves".

Fixed

 

[LESS T_T]

VD...is on Gamasutra!: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Vinc...to_Survive_Indiepocalypse_in_5_Easy_Steps.php

 

[Infinitron]

So as a fellow indie RPG maker your post is fairly near and dear to my heart. I also think is about 80% bullshit.

Location:
Toronto Ontario

Bus tickets, bitch!

 

[SniperHF]

The "math is a social construct" line making it in a Gamasutra featured post is pretty hilarious

 

[HobGoblin42]

You plan on making that money last 4-5 years (on presumably full-time?) development. So either you pay shit or expect your employees to get paid shit for a long amount of time. That's not sustainable. That's pretty much what the Indiepocalyspe is: and uninstallable Eco-system of non-mainstream development.

But by its definition, Iron Tower wasn't even affected by the so-called Indiepocalypse:

a.) the lack of visibility wasn't a major problem for AoD
b.) AoD reached its target audience and monetized them surprisingly well
c.) the sales of AoD generated enough funds to finance their next production for years
d.) nobody at Iron Tower has to work for free (anymore) or has to take a debt to continue their dream to be a game developer

Furthermore, $1,000,000.- USD with 3-4 people over 5 years would make about $50k USD/year per person which is a very good income for indie devs, especially if some are working from countries as Ukraine (where $30k USD/year is more than a competitive salary for programmers).

Meanwhile, more copies of AoD will be sold (of course at much lower rates).

Uninstallable eco-system: I know what kind of indie developers you're talking about: hipster noob devs without any professional experience but big egos and artistic ambitions. But AoD verifiable proved that Iron Tower isn't one of those miserable victims of the Indiepocalypse.

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD...is on Gamasutra!: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Vinc...to_Survive_Indiepocalypse_in_5_Easy_Steps.php

They liked the article and invited me to post it on Gamasutra.

 

[HobGoblin42]

Indiepocalypse will never end, a comment from Gamasutra hit the nail on the head:

Great article, thanks. It's a saturated marketplace. The indipocalypse won't end, as such. I liken it to the music industry. Nearly anyone can pick up a guitar and write some songs, and it's fun to do so people will always be doing it for free. The same is now true for making games (even if it's a bit harder). Trust me. I learned guitar at 15, and Unity/programming at 27. Anyone can pick these things up pretty quickly without formal training.

So both markets will be crowded forever more and only the deliberate, calculating (and somewhat lucky) professionals will earn a living from them. In my eyes.

Therefore, "How to Survive Indiepocalypse in 5 Easy Steps" should be "How to Adapt to the Indiepocalypse in 5 Easy Steps".

 

[Viata]

He's just jealous that VD is rich and releasing rpg left and right now.

Spoiler

Who am I kidding?

 

[Vault Dweller]

Your game sold 50k at about $30, so about $1,000,000, give or take, possibly less given sales and such over 10 years. That's a lot of money. If you were a solo developer and you were working part-time for most of the project, that would be awesome. But you were not. My understanding is you were at least 2-3 people working together for most of that time. So that $1,000,000 becomes $1,000,000/(10 * 3), so let's say $35k each. Depending on where you live, that's no longer so great. Sure you were part-time for most of if but still it's not that great. Talented gamedev people can make more than that easily, so your opportunity cost kinda sucks.

You're looking at it the wrong way.

First, working part-time doesn't count as it's nothing but a hobby (i.e. shit you do in your free time for your own amusement). If I had to figure out what I've actually earned, I would count only the 2 full time years as that's the only time I could have been working elsewhere and the only valid 'lost wages' claim. Second, like I said, it's not about getting paid for your work, it's about moving forward and using the money we've earned to fund our next game, which is the only thing that matters.

Basically your numbers barely add up. Claiming that you have some formula for success given you have one border-line successful is pretty arrogant given your one-moderate-hit wonder status.

Wasn't "absolutely an indie success!" just a moment ago?

You plan on making that money last 4-5 years (on presumably full-time?) development. So either you pay shit or expect your employees to get paid shit for a long amount of time. That's not sustainable. That's pretty much what the Indiepocalyspe is: and uninstallable Eco-system of non-mainstream development.

I plan on making that money last 3 years (until we release the colony ship on Early Access) and I hope that AoD will keep selling and the dungeon crawler will boost our revenues as well. Maybe it will work as I hope, maybe it won't. Time will tell.

 

[WingedPixel]

But by its definition, Iron Tower wasn't even affected by the so-called Indiepocalypse:

a.) the lack of visibility wasn't a major problem for AoD
b.) AoD reached its target audience and monetized them surprisingly well

The Indiepocalypse is mostly BS and just people not properly understanding their market (and somehow thinking that indie games is a separate market), or just not adapting to a quickly changing environment. Also, you can't really say they weren't affected, how many sales did they lose because there were so many other games released at the same time? We'll never know. VD also spend 10+ years marketing their game, that's not easily repeatable or actionable advice.

c.) the sales of AoD generated enough funds to finance their next production for years
d.) nobody at Iron Tower has to work for free (anymore) or has to take a debt to continue their dream to be a game developer

Furthermore, $1,000,000.- USD with 3-4 people over 5 years would make about $50k USD/year per person which is a very good income for indie devs, especially if some are working from countries as Ukraine (where $30k USD/year is more than a competitive salary for programmers).

I never said that AoD wasn't successful, I just pointed out that when you run the numbers it's not as amazing as it seems. Also "very good income of indie devs" is a shitty metric, you need to compare to what the market rate you can earn and $50k for an experienced programmer in North America is shitty. Accepting that pay leaves a lot of money on the table, I don't believe that's a sustainable business model. Making this "advice" shitty. Sure they can accept a lower than market rate and I don't know where they are located, and if they're in Poland or something then the numbers look a lot better.

 

[WingedPixel]

You're looking at it the wrong way.

First, working part-time doesn't count as it's nothing but a hobby (i.e. shit you do in your free time for your own amusement). If I had to figure out what I've actually earned, I would count only the 2 full time years as that's the only time I could have been working elsewhere and the only valid 'lost wages' claim. Second, like I said, it's not about getting paid for your work, it's about moving forward and using the money we've earned to fund our next game, which is the only thing that matters.

I'm look at it from a pure business perspective, where the numbers don't look so good. From a passion/hobby/blood & sweat perspective a pure numbers analysis doesn't make as much sense, but I believe that ignoring that side and ignoring the opportunity costs of game dev is a disservice and shitty advice. Especially when most of the circumstances of your development aren't repeatable (unless you plan on spending 8+ years part-time again...)

Basically your numbers barely add up. Claiming that you have some formula for success given you have one border-line successful is pretty arrogant given your one-moderate-hit wonder status.

Wasn't "absolutely an indie success!" just a moment ago?

Yes it was a success, I just don't think you provded any useful, actionable advice beyond make a good game and build a community.

And for the record I hope you're not a one-hit wonder!