5 ms·

Last year, I finally worked up the nerve to make a free web game into a real, complete game and release it on Steam. Since I was doing it for fun, I decided to

Last year, I finally worked up the nerve to make a free web game into a real, complete game and release it on Steam. Since I was doing it for fun, I decided to make the game free (this meant I missed out on learning if people liked the idea enough to pay, and also I couldn’t use sales to drive interest). I grudgingly set up a Discord server and released the game. I was lucky that someone with millions of followers recommended my game, and that the overall response was positive (“very positive” on Steam, briefly), but what did I really get in the end? A couple of fans, a few hours of talking about my game with strangers, an interesting story (“a billionaire beat my game!”), and witnessing people beat me (handily) at my own game. Was it all worth it? Should I do it again? Honestly, I don’t know. I’m still processing it all. I do have a nagging feeling that my tech skills could be put to better use, or at least help people I know, instead of strangers. Like I said: still processing :)

spencerflem 3y ago
I struggle with this a lot @ helping people with tech It seems like most of the industry is pushing bits around or trying to make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else. Rambling, but it you get any good insights I'm definitely interested in hearing them
- schemescape 3y ago
  I don’t really have any insight, but I found this comment (and its parent) helpful as a starting point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36508063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36508063 It seems so obvious, but it’s also easy to lose sight of, especially when technology is so interesting!
- Tade0 3y ago
  > It seems like most of the industry is pushing bits around or trying to make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else. My co-worker from a decade ago named it "shovelling virtual gravel" and I think this expression really catches the spirit of it.
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    i like that a lot
  - jareklupinski 3y ago
    beats pulling the real stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRh0QiXyZSk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRh0QiXyZSk Tennessee Ernie Ford - Sixteen Tons
- golergka 3y ago
  > make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else I haven't worked in a single company that have succeeded in making their owners rich without giving the clients what they want. Have you? The only entities I know that do that are organised crime and governments.
  - Firmwarrior 3y ago
    Comcast Well, that's kind of a mix of both categories, to be fair
  - cbau 3y ago
    A lot of companies directly go against their users to enrich the owners, see Reddit right now. Just the rational move by companies that have established monopolies/oligopolies. Also companies that exploit negative externalities.
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    Some examples: - Everything Microsoft has been doing to windows: adding ads, shuffling the UI around, resetting the defaults every update - see also: reddit, facebook, everything else in it's "enshitification" phase - Anything involving ads is (imo) polluting the world - Things that are literally polluting the world (usually not tech, but sometimes) do on net these companies do more good for the world than bad? maybe, but certainly most of the work going into them seems to be in "capturing value" which is of no use to me. Most of the proprietary software I've used has slowly gotten worse over time.
    - golergka 3y ago
      You're not providing arguments for the thesis that their products are bad. You're providing arguments for the thesis that their products have gone worse than they were before. However, with all the ads and stuff that we don't like they still provide a lot of value for their users. Personally, I no longer use Windows, reddit or Facebook for these exact reasons — to me, these products no longer provide value. But I don't pretend that my tastes are shared by everybody else: a lot of people actually don't care about ads, they don't care about the fact that reddit is closing the API and they like the shitty memes that facebook is putting in their feeds.
sillysaurusx 3y ago
Well, what was it?
- schemescape 3y ago
  Link is in my profile. I didn’t think the specific game was super relevant to the story, so I decided to leave it out. I also wanted to avoid the HN trope of “cool story! I’m working on this thing that’s only tangentially related: …” :)
dimgl 3y ago
If you made money, why wouldn’t it be worth it?
- schemescape 3y ago
  In case that was directed at me: charging for the game limits the number of people who will play it, and the biggest “payout” for me was seeing people play my game and talk about it (and show me tricks I didn’t know existed). Coupled with the fact that I would have realistically grossed less than $4k (for hundreds of hours of work), trying to earn money would have probably made it less worth it.
  - grog454 3y ago
    > Coupled with the fact that I would have realistically grossed less than $4k How many concurrent players did you have on steam? This seems low unless the only monetization you're thinking of is a purchase price.
    - schemescape 3y ago
      Peak concurrent users in a day topped out around 10 on Steam (it's a niche game). Other stats: there's about 40 people on the Discord and there are 27 reviews on Steam. That's as a free game--I assume the numbers would have been lower (probably much lower) if it cost actual money. As far as monetization on Steam, what are you getting at? DLC? I'll admit to not knowing (mostly as a player and, more recently, as a developer) of any other way to spend money on games besides buying them or DLC on Steam. Edit: I'm ignoring "free to play" since I don't like that model (as a player or developer). Edit: Wow, looks like the median indie game makes barely $1k: https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/04/25/what-if-steam-didnt-take-30/ https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/04/25/what-if-steam-didnt-...
      - grog454 3y ago
        Coming from mobile indie games, I was thinking ads (which I now realize steam doesn't allow) and mtxn. Despite whatever moral qualms people have with this type of monetization I can say there are many multiplayer games that would not be possible without them (or VC funding). I agree that for most games, the difference in installs between free and not-free is many orders of magnitude.
tobr 3y ago
Let me see if I follow. You made something because it was fun to make it. You “grudgingly” shared it. It had some success, and now you wonder what did you really get in the end? What did I miss? You did it because it was fun. And… it was fun? Then just because you release it and share it with others, now only external validation counts? I think this is a trap I fall in all the time as well. I make something, and as long as I keep it to myself, only my own experience with it determines if it was a success or not. As soon as others get to see it… what I think of it doesn’t matter anymore. Only their reaction.
- schemescape 3y ago
  Oops, I meant I “grudgingly” setup a Discord server (and happily released the game). Sorry that was very unclear now that I’m re-reading it! Having said that: you’re right that once I released it, I suddenly had thoughts about how well I thought it should do, and those were hard to quell. Edit: Discord did end up being the right thing to do, however. That’s how I was able to connect with many of the players (that I probably wouldn’t have gotten a chance to talk to otherwise). My only gripe with Discord is the “walled garden, but somehow de facto communication medium” aspect.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

spencerflem 3y ago

I struggle with this a lot @ helping people with tech It seems like most of the industry is pushing bits around or trying to make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else. Rambling, but it you get any good insights I'm definitely interested in hearing them

schemescape 3y ago
I don’t really have any insight, but I found this comment (and its parent) helpful as a starting point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36508063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36508063 It seems so obvious, but it’s also easy to lose sight of, especially when technology is so interesting!
Tade0 3y ago
> It seems like most of the industry is pushing bits around or trying to make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else. My co-worker from a decade ago named it "shovelling virtual gravel" and I think this expression really catches the spirit of it.
- spencerflem 3y ago
  i like that a lot
- jareklupinski 3y ago
  beats pulling the real stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRh0QiXyZSk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRh0QiXyZSk Tennessee Ernie Ford - Sixteen Tons
golergka 3y ago
> make specific shareholders rich at the cost of everyone else I haven't worked in a single company that have succeeded in making their owners rich without giving the clients what they want. Have you? The only entities I know that do that are organised crime and governments.
- Firmwarrior 3y ago
  Comcast Well, that's kind of a mix of both categories, to be fair
- cbau 3y ago
  A lot of companies directly go against their users to enrich the owners, see Reddit right now. Just the rational move by companies that have established monopolies/oligopolies. Also companies that exploit negative externalities.
- spencerflem 3y ago
  Some examples: - Everything Microsoft has been doing to windows: adding ads, shuffling the UI around, resetting the defaults every update - see also: reddit, facebook, everything else in it's "enshitification" phase - Anything involving ads is (imo) polluting the world - Things that are literally polluting the world (usually not tech, but sometimes) do on net these companies do more good for the world than bad? maybe, but certainly most of the work going into them seems to be in "capturing value" which is of no use to me. Most of the proprietary software I've used has slowly gotten worse over time.
  - golergka 3y ago
    You're not providing arguments for the thesis that their products are bad. You're providing arguments for the thesis that their products have gone worse than they were before. However, with all the ads and stuff that we don't like they still provide a lot of value for their users. Personally, I no longer use Windows, reddit or Facebook for these exact reasons — to me, these products no longer provide value. But I don't pretend that my tastes are shared by everybody else: a lot of people actually don't care about ads, they don't care about the fact that reddit is closing the API and they like the shitty memes that facebook is putting in their feeds.

sillysaurusx 3y ago

Well, what was it?

schemescape 3y ago
Link is in my profile. I didn’t think the specific game was super relevant to the story, so I decided to leave it out. I also wanted to avoid the HN trope of “cool story! I’m working on this thing that’s only tangentially related: …” :)

dimgl 3y ago

If you made money, why wouldn’t it be worth it?

schemescape 3y ago
In case that was directed at me: charging for the game limits the number of people who will play it, and the biggest “payout” for me was seeing people play my game and talk about it (and show me tricks I didn’t know existed). Coupled with the fact that I would have realistically grossed less than $4k (for hundreds of hours of work), trying to earn money would have probably made it less worth it.
- grog454 3y ago
  > Coupled with the fact that I would have realistically grossed less than $4k How many concurrent players did you have on steam? This seems low unless the only monetization you're thinking of is a purchase price.
  - schemescape 3y ago
    Peak concurrent users in a day topped out around 10 on Steam (it's a niche game). Other stats: there's about 40 people on the Discord and there are 27 reviews on Steam. That's as a free game--I assume the numbers would have been lower (probably much lower) if it cost actual money. As far as monetization on Steam, what are you getting at? DLC? I'll admit to not knowing (mostly as a player and, more recently, as a developer) of any other way to spend money on games besides buying them or DLC on Steam. Edit: I'm ignoring "free to play" since I don't like that model (as a player or developer). Edit: Wow, looks like the median indie game makes barely $1k: https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/04/25/what-if-steam-didnt-take-30/ https://howtomarketagame.com/2023/04/25/what-if-steam-didnt-...
    - grog454 3y ago
      Coming from mobile indie games, I was thinking ads (which I now realize steam doesn't allow) and mtxn. Despite whatever moral qualms people have with this type of monetization I can say there are many multiplayer games that would not be possible without them (or VC funding). I agree that for most games, the difference in installs between free and not-free is many orders of magnitude.

tobr 3y ago

Let me see if I follow. You made something because it was fun to make it. You “grudgingly” shared it. It had some success, and now you wonder what did you really get in the end? What did I miss? You did it because it was fun. And… it was fun? Then just because you release it and share it with others, now only external validation counts? I think this is a trap I fall in all the time as well. I make something, and as long as I keep it to myself, only my own experience with it determines if it was a success or not. As soon as others get to see it… what I think of it doesn’t matter anymore. Only their reaction.

schemescape 3y ago
Oops, I meant I “grudgingly” setup a Discord server (and happily released the game). Sorry that was very unclear now that I’m re-reading it! Having said that: you’re right that once I released it, I suddenly had thoughts about how well I thought it should do, and those were hard to quell. Edit: Discord did end up being the right thing to do, however. That’s how I was able to connect with many of the players (that I probably wouldn’t have gotten a chance to talk to otherwise). My only gripe with Discord is the “walled garden, but somehow de facto communication medium” aspect.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]