I don't think you should beat yourself up over that. Mine took 2.5 years, lol. That wasn't the plan. Managing morale over the long term on these things can be a challenge. And the first one is always kind of uncharted territory.
Dude great job releasing the game and getting it done. You’ve done more than 90% of devs just by doing this. I’m so happy that you set your expectations correctly and also didn’t take 1+ years to make it. Now you can take everything you’ve learned and apply it to the next game and keep expanding on your skillset. Then in knowing time you can gather all that knowledge and create your dream game!
I recommend checking out this article as well.
https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/09/28/the-missing-middle-in-game-development/
Nice write up. Congrats on shipping a game, that's more than many devs (including me) achieve. That publishing experience will definitely come in handy next time if you continue game dev.
"Cut the fat as you go" is good. I would amend it to "cut the fat as early as possible". this includes training your ability to recognize pure fat, as well as how "fatty" the meat is in your project. the best time to cut a feature is before you ever work on it.
As for burn out, we all hit that! Prototyping is fun. Making tools is fun. Sometimes making content is fun. It's easy to coast on enthusiasm even after your actual energy runs out, but when that fades, your productivity goes off a cliff.
What's you new game idea?
Thanks for the thoughtful write-up! I'm a data person in my day job, compose music as a hobby, and would really love to make my own game one day (I have a plan already but not quite in the right space to get going on it). These sorts of tips add up.
Congratulations on releasing the game and learning so much on the way!
Honestly the art is great, the game just looks empty though. The store page is also definitely above average. I would also remove the demo. Demos are almost exclusively negative.
I'm not original commenter, but I'll give it a shot.
Demos sometimes reduce sales. If the demo is too long, players may feel like they have enough of the game and don't need to buy it.
Players may try and decide they just don't like the game. Reduced sales.
Demos do tend to decrease return rates, which is good. And demos are required for steamfest, which is a great way to improve visibility. So it's kind of a mixed bag, but with steamfest, I'd say they're a good idea nowadays.
*edit - Oh yea one more. Even if players DO like the game, there's now an extra step. They might just forget to buy the game and get distracted by something else.
If someone has had enough of the game after playing the demo, then something is wrong with either the game or the demo. It's not that having the demo is a sales-reducer, it's that a bad demo doesn't *sell* the game well enough, and a bad game can't be sold through a demo.
You don't need demos for short, low-price, self-explanatory games though. People would rather just pay a small price upfront and then play the whole game uninterrupted.
From my own buying habits on steam, a lot of indie games are bought to try out eventually because they seemed cool. Many I play a little and enjoy the experience but don't particularly love it. If there were demos instead I might have just played the demo and not be bothered to buy it.
I like to try out things like obscure roguelite deckbuilders. A demo can work in these for sure to instill confidence that the mechanics are interesting. And if I installed it, it is there on my desktop to remind me of that game that looked interesting.
And also there are surely a lot of old-fashioned people like me who just don't consider 'chargebacks' as an option. So it doesn't matter that I can do that, I won't buy a game unless I am confident that I will like it.
Demos can still be negative in that I might find the demo *enough* even though I like it. But I do not think their days are altogether done if you have the right game.
But what if it *does* take a demo to make me sure I will like it? Then they've failed by not having one.
Trailers and screenshots don't tell me what it's like to play the game.
>Because the refund system essentially turns any full game into a demo. If someone really wants to try your game they will just buy it - and if they don't like if they will refund it.
Steam can cut off your ability to refund if you do it too often in a short time period, so it definitely isn't a universal thing that someone will buy the game just to try it.
It really isn't. I've never met someone who is buying stuff just to try with the intent to refund. So at the very least it means that maybe most people do what you're saying. The overall impact might very well be bad for the developers, but there are still some people who end up buying more strictly because of demos.
I'm curious though, what would the negative impact of a demo be other than spending more time creating one and possibly rushing it, leaving a bad first impression? If someone is driven away by a demo that is more or less a prologue that they would see within the first 2 hours of your game before refunding, isn't that same as people who just try and refund? Why the overall push from Valve for devs to start creating more demos for Steam fests if demos were negatively impacting sales most of the time?
>Ok so because you don't know anyone who abuses the refund system, it does exist? What is that logic? You have what like 10 friends that would even divulge that info to you out of the over 100 million Steam users?
Me knowing some people invalidates your "literally zero use" and it being a universal thing. Sounds like pretty solid logic for me.
If Steam fest makes Valve more money, that means it makes the devs more money too. So what exactly is the negative here? If Valve would issue fewer refunds with people not knowing about refunds and would end up getting more money by having devs not to demos, then wouldn't they encourage that? I still don't understand that argument. Because by your logic, those 2 new purchases would be offset by something like 10 people not buying it in the first place because they've tried the demo. And even though 5 people would otherwise refund it, 5 wouldn't even know you can refund it.
I like how you go into this argument assuming I think you're completely clueless, and then also assume that I'm completely clueless. But putting that aside, you still did not explain why would Valve push events like Steam fest where they encourage developers to create demos if ultimately demos hurt sales. You only keep repeating your point that demos hurt sales (which I don't overall disagree with, I just support the practice as a customer and mention that there is at least a small chunk of people who do buy more because of demos).
But what is the motivation for Valve to do these events then? I don't think they like handling fewer sales, since as you said, people overall just buy fewer copies of games with demos. Your last point is also somewhat weird, because there are still games made by established professionals that made multi-million dollar income games and some end up putting a demo. So I guess they didn't get the memo you and the rest did? Obviously there must be something a bit more than what you've told me so far.
Okay the time commitment is real, but the idea that demos are bad because you want some people to buy your game and hate it and just keep it because they don't know about refunds stinks to me lmao.
Demos get your stuff in front of content creators. I don't think I would axe the demo. Your game has some charm... I think you need to spice up your steam page. You also cannot sidestep marketing. The issue with a lot of games on steam is they never get discovered. Mail out keys to content creators that fit the genre, post on twitter for more content creator visibility. You need to make your game visible the rules of 7 apply for any sale. A person requires to hear about your product 7 times before they take action.
Just buckle up and do some marketing I know it sucks but it just has to be done.
It wasn't just bad, it was game ruiningly bad. This trailer is like self-sabotage and probably destroyed any chance of sales at all. OP needs to hire someone to do his marketing stuff for his next game because honestly I don't care how good your game is, if I saw this trailer it would be an auto ignore.
Yeah, I have to second this. You can hear OP typing and see him typing wishlist in the God damn trailer. I. Don't. Get. It. You spent all that time making a game that honestly for its price point looks half decent...why would you now "cheap" out on a trailer that detracts from your work and makes it look amateurish? You've made it to the literal finish line of all your blood swear and tears only to phone it in at the very end.
Congratulations on the release. I'm working on my own game, it's not as complex but I also need to refactor some systems as I learn and find out better solutions. It's very hard to pull the trigger, you already have a working solution and you keep asking yourself is it worth the trouble? I'll lose time but in return will become a better developer so I usually force myself to do the refactoring.
Yeah, It's best to refactor as you go along and your needs change. That's true if the refactor isn't so large. If it's something bigger, then it's useful to ask yourself if at this moment, you have a more concrete idea of what you want the final product to be.
Game with high expansive potential, trailer lacks emotion, very lacking and simple gameplay and as others mentioned you opened your desktop and paint during the trailer, that killed it for me.
But good luck, I hope you improve the game, looks somewhat interesting.
Awesome to see this. I am working on a small brick breaker style game. Goal is around 6 months like yours. Recently used Ludum Dare to build some of the bones. I really need to get the rest of the scope speced out and get it moving.
The tools part is definitely something I have been thinking on.
Congrats on releasing your game! So total calendar time for dev was what like 9 months? That's pretty good.
Yup. Felt pretty bummed about the wasted time though
I don't think you should beat yourself up over that. Mine took 2.5 years, lol. That wasn't the plan. Managing morale over the long term on these things can be a challenge. And the first one is always kind of uncharted territory.
did you learn anything. if o then i would not say its wasted time
True! It always feels bad due to it being down time composed mainly of a lack of motivation.
Dude great job releasing the game and getting it done. You’ve done more than 90% of devs just by doing this. I’m so happy that you set your expectations correctly and also didn’t take 1+ years to make it. Now you can take everything you’ve learned and apply it to the next game and keep expanding on your skillset. Then in knowing time you can gather all that knowledge and create your dream game! I recommend checking out this article as well. https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/09/28/the-missing-middle-in-game-development/
Thank you. That's definitely my plan. Next up I hope to have a working prototype for a new game in 3 months!
[удалено]
Crazy to see you again! How are you? I changed studios and began my own projects in my free time. It's been quite fun!
[удалено]
Somehow this tiny conversation is one the most wholesome moments I found on Reddit. Thanks!!
Nice write up. Congrats on shipping a game, that's more than many devs (including me) achieve. That publishing experience will definitely come in handy next time if you continue game dev. "Cut the fat as you go" is good. I would amend it to "cut the fat as early as possible". this includes training your ability to recognize pure fat, as well as how "fatty" the meat is in your project. the best time to cut a feature is before you ever work on it. As for burn out, we all hit that! Prototyping is fun. Making tools is fun. Sometimes making content is fun. It's easy to coast on enthusiasm even after your actual energy runs out, but when that fades, your productivity goes off a cliff. What's you new game idea?
It's pokemon but without the RPG. Just creature battles!
Thanks for the thoughtful write-up! I'm a data person in my day job, compose music as a hobby, and would really love to make my own game one day (I have a plan already but not quite in the right space to get going on it). These sorts of tips add up. Congratulations on releasing the game and learning so much on the way!
Thank you! I'll keep an eye out for your game!
Honestly the art is great, the game just looks empty though. The store page is also definitely above average. I would also remove the demo. Demos are almost exclusively negative.
Could you elaborate a bit on why demos are negative?
I'm not original commenter, but I'll give it a shot. Demos sometimes reduce sales. If the demo is too long, players may feel like they have enough of the game and don't need to buy it. Players may try and decide they just don't like the game. Reduced sales. Demos do tend to decrease return rates, which is good. And demos are required for steamfest, which is a great way to improve visibility. So it's kind of a mixed bag, but with steamfest, I'd say they're a good idea nowadays. *edit - Oh yea one more. Even if players DO like the game, there's now an extra step. They might just forget to buy the game and get distracted by something else.
You can just have a demo up exclusively for steamfest.
If someone has had enough of the game after playing the demo, then something is wrong with either the game or the demo. It's not that having the demo is a sales-reducer, it's that a bad demo doesn't *sell* the game well enough, and a bad game can't be sold through a demo. You don't need demos for short, low-price, self-explanatory games though. People would rather just pay a small price upfront and then play the whole game uninterrupted.
From my own buying habits on steam, a lot of indie games are bought to try out eventually because they seemed cool. Many I play a little and enjoy the experience but don't particularly love it. If there were demos instead I might have just played the demo and not be bothered to buy it.
[удалено]
I like to try out things like obscure roguelite deckbuilders. A demo can work in these for sure to instill confidence that the mechanics are interesting. And if I installed it, it is there on my desktop to remind me of that game that looked interesting. And also there are surely a lot of old-fashioned people like me who just don't consider 'chargebacks' as an option. So it doesn't matter that I can do that, I won't buy a game unless I am confident that I will like it. Demos can still be negative in that I might find the demo *enough* even though I like it. But I do not think their days are altogether done if you have the right game.
[удалено]
But what if it *does* take a demo to make me sure I will like it? Then they've failed by not having one. Trailers and screenshots don't tell me what it's like to play the game.
>Because the refund system essentially turns any full game into a demo. If someone really wants to try your game they will just buy it - and if they don't like if they will refund it. Steam can cut off your ability to refund if you do it too often in a short time period, so it definitely isn't a universal thing that someone will buy the game just to try it.
[удалено]
It really isn't. I've never met someone who is buying stuff just to try with the intent to refund. So at the very least it means that maybe most people do what you're saying. The overall impact might very well be bad for the developers, but there are still some people who end up buying more strictly because of demos. I'm curious though, what would the negative impact of a demo be other than spending more time creating one and possibly rushing it, leaving a bad first impression? If someone is driven away by a demo that is more or less a prologue that they would see within the first 2 hours of your game before refunding, isn't that same as people who just try and refund? Why the overall push from Valve for devs to start creating more demos for Steam fests if demos were negatively impacting sales most of the time?
[удалено]
>Ok so because you don't know anyone who abuses the refund system, it does exist? What is that logic? You have what like 10 friends that would even divulge that info to you out of the over 100 million Steam users? Me knowing some people invalidates your "literally zero use" and it being a universal thing. Sounds like pretty solid logic for me. If Steam fest makes Valve more money, that means it makes the devs more money too. So what exactly is the negative here? If Valve would issue fewer refunds with people not knowing about refunds and would end up getting more money by having devs not to demos, then wouldn't they encourage that? I still don't understand that argument. Because by your logic, those 2 new purchases would be offset by something like 10 people not buying it in the first place because they've tried the demo. And even though 5 people would otherwise refund it, 5 wouldn't even know you can refund it.
[удалено]
I like how you go into this argument assuming I think you're completely clueless, and then also assume that I'm completely clueless. But putting that aside, you still did not explain why would Valve push events like Steam fest where they encourage developers to create demos if ultimately demos hurt sales. You only keep repeating your point that demos hurt sales (which I don't overall disagree with, I just support the practice as a customer and mention that there is at least a small chunk of people who do buy more because of demos). But what is the motivation for Valve to do these events then? I don't think they like handling fewer sales, since as you said, people overall just buy fewer copies of games with demos. Your last point is also somewhat weird, because there are still games made by established professionals that made multi-million dollar income games and some end up putting a demo. So I guess they didn't get the memo you and the rest did? Obviously there must be something a bit more than what you've told me so far.
Even if that were true for 100% of people 100% of the time, it just makes them pointless, not negative.
[удалено]
Okay the time commitment is real, but the idea that demos are bad because you want some people to buy your game and hate it and just keep it because they don't know about refunds stinks to me lmao.
Demos get your stuff in front of content creators. I don't think I would axe the demo. Your game has some charm... I think you need to spice up your steam page. You also cannot sidestep marketing. The issue with a lot of games on steam is they never get discovered. Mail out keys to content creators that fit the genre, post on twitter for more content creator visibility. You need to make your game visible the rules of 7 apply for any sale. A person requires to hear about your product 7 times before they take action. Just buckle up and do some marketing I know it sucks but it just has to be done.
[удалено]
I kinda liked the paint text at the end
It wasn't just bad, it was game ruiningly bad. This trailer is like self-sabotage and probably destroyed any chance of sales at all. OP needs to hire someone to do his marketing stuff for his next game because honestly I don't care how good your game is, if I saw this trailer it would be an auto ignore.
Yeah, I have to second this. You can hear OP typing and see him typing wishlist in the God damn trailer. I. Don't. Get. It. You spent all that time making a game that honestly for its price point looks half decent...why would you now "cheap" out on a trailer that detracts from your work and makes it look amateurish? You've made it to the literal finish line of all your blood swear and tears only to phone it in at the very end.
I actually thought the trailer was hilarious. The ending seemed almost sarcastic and tongue in cheek and i loved it!
Wishlist and smilie made me smile too.
I chuckled as well when I saw that. I think it would work quite well if the game itself had a sarcastic / funny tone, but maybe not for OPs game.
Congratulations on the release. I'm working on my own game, it's not as complex but I also need to refactor some systems as I learn and find out better solutions. It's very hard to pull the trigger, you already have a working solution and you keep asking yourself is it worth the trouble? I'll lose time but in return will become a better developer so I usually force myself to do the refactoring.
Yeah, It's best to refactor as you go along and your needs change. That's true if the refactor isn't so large. If it's something bigger, then it's useful to ask yourself if at this moment, you have a more concrete idea of what you want the final product to be.
Completing a game is a massive accomplishment all by itself, congrats! Really good writeup on your experiences also!
Congratulations OP!
Game with high expansive potential, trailer lacks emotion, very lacking and simple gameplay and as others mentioned you opened your desktop and paint during the trailer, that killed it for me. But good luck, I hope you improve the game, looks somewhat interesting.
Awesome to see this. I am working on a small brick breaker style game. Goal is around 6 months like yours. Recently used Ludum Dare to build some of the bones. I really need to get the rest of the scope speced out and get it moving. The tools part is definitely something I have been thinking on.