4 ms·

Interesting take on the indie game development scene. i've always felt that while passion is vital, there's a tangible undercurrent of economic realities are of

Interesting take on the indie game development scene. i've always felt that while passion is vital, there's a tangible undercurrent of economic realities are often glossed over. the mention of "time travel" was cute, but it got me thinking. Perhaps, in a way, the game dev industry might be a few steps behind in leveraging some structured decision-making processes? but then again, can we truly quantify creativity and intuition, especially in such a dynamic industry? I do appreciate the effort to build a risk assessment framework, even if it feels slightly oversimplified. I'm looking forward to seeing how this evolves and hopefully, this nudges the industry / idealistic indie devs towards more informed decisions. nice effort.

raincole 3y ago
How is it different from a typical startup, except a startup can (in the US) potentially get much more funding before the product is profitable?
- MissingAFew 3y ago
  Define "typical".
- canvascritic 3y ago
  Indie game development and startups share similarities in risk and reward dynamics. but i'd argue that the indie game scene often comes with a more personal touch and artistic expression, while startups primarily pivot around solving a specific problem or filling a market need. also, the feedback loop in gaming is more immediate and visceral, based on player experiences. still, the comparison is apt in many ways, and maybe there are lessons each side can glean from the other.
- empressplay 3y ago
  Most indie games don't have the advertising budget of the studios and can't afford digital advertising campaigns and so they have to rely on organic discovery via blogs, youtube and word of mouth. But whether something is going to catch fire or not is often the domain of voodoo witches. The person who can figure out how to make the right game at the right time consistently will be rich, the one who doesn't will not.
- badpun 3y ago
  Startups don't even have to be profitable, nowadays many get aquired or even go IPO while deep in the red. Games seem much harder.
chii 3y ago
> leveraging some structured decision-making processes? i feel like there is no structured decision making that will produce a successful game. In the same way, there's no such a decision making process to painting a piece of artwork that will sell.
- amenhotep 3y ago
  Well, there are. It's just that the games produced by those processes are FIFA and Call of Duty, and step 1 of the process is basically "be the publisher of FIFA or Call of Duty".
  - phillryu 3y ago
    I think the question is more like could a great team produce the next FIFA AND the next Call of Duty due to some kind of process improvement? I don't know, maybe there are hugely inefficient processes right now, but the sorcery of the art, to find 'the fun' of a new game concept or formula still feels very mysterious and ambiguous. Of course most games are just building on existing formulas of fun, but then you need a fresh edge to fight the established incumbent of the genre. And if you found this secret process or meta formula for coming up with new amazing game formulas, why not just keep it to yourself to build the most spectacularly successful game studio in history. (Maybe that's Nintendo? Blizzard at its best also has some magic touch on any new genre they touch, even where they mess up like Overwatch they end up making and taking down the entire genre with them.) I dunno, maybe in ten years game development will be like some automated AI windtunnel/R&D lab remixing various game genres and formulas and spitting out new fun things. But I like that there is a sorcery to it for now that elevates human creativity over process.
    - amenhotep 3y ago
      This is of course very true, genuine creation in video games is still and perhaps always will be (and indeed arguably we should hope it will remain?) an unsolved problem! I was just being somewhat snarky due to the parent seeming to wholly disregard the idea of assembly line video games when they are very much a feature of the landscape :P

raincole 3y ago

How is it different from a typical startup, except a startup can (in the US) potentially get much more funding before the product is profitable?

MissingAFew 3y ago
Define "typical".
canvascritic 3y ago
Indie game development and startups share similarities in risk and reward dynamics. but i'd argue that the indie game scene often comes with a more personal touch and artistic expression, while startups primarily pivot around solving a specific problem or filling a market need. also, the feedback loop in gaming is more immediate and visceral, based on player experiences. still, the comparison is apt in many ways, and maybe there are lessons each side can glean from the other.
empressplay 3y ago
Most indie games don't have the advertising budget of the studios and can't afford digital advertising campaigns and so they have to rely on organic discovery via blogs, youtube and word of mouth. But whether something is going to catch fire or not is often the domain of voodoo witches. The person who can figure out how to make the right game at the right time consistently will be rich, the one who doesn't will not.
badpun 3y ago
Startups don't even have to be profitable, nowadays many get aquired or even go IPO while deep in the red. Games seem much harder.

chii 3y ago

> leveraging some structured decision-making processes? i feel like there is no structured decision making that will produce a successful game. In the same way, there's no such a decision making process to painting a piece of artwork that will sell.

amenhotep 3y ago
Well, there are. It's just that the games produced by those processes are FIFA and Call of Duty, and step 1 of the process is basically "be the publisher of FIFA or Call of Duty".
- phillryu 3y ago
  I think the question is more like could a great team produce the next FIFA AND the next Call of Duty due to some kind of process improvement? I don't know, maybe there are hugely inefficient processes right now, but the sorcery of the art, to find 'the fun' of a new game concept or formula still feels very mysterious and ambiguous. Of course most games are just building on existing formulas of fun, but then you need a fresh edge to fight the established incumbent of the genre. And if you found this secret process or meta formula for coming up with new amazing game formulas, why not just keep it to yourself to build the most spectacularly successful game studio in history. (Maybe that's Nintendo? Blizzard at its best also has some magic touch on any new genre they touch, even where they mess up like Overwatch they end up making and taking down the entire genre with them.) I dunno, maybe in ten years game development will be like some automated AI windtunnel/R&D lab remixing various game genres and formulas and spitting out new fun things. But I like that there is a sorcery to it for now that elevates human creativity over process.
  - amenhotep 3y ago
    This is of course very true, genuine creation in video games is still and perhaps always will be (and indeed arguably we should hope it will remain?) an unsolved problem! I was just being somewhat snarky due to the parent seeming to wholly disregard the idea of assembly line video games when they are very much a feature of the landscape :P