I originally put this in the general forum, but feel this might be the better forum. I've read many post, not just here but on the internets, about how people are disappointed in their sales. Almost always I can see huge flaws in their game with it either being polish, HCI concepts, or bad game design. I wanted to see if anybody reading this knows of a game that they feel hit it out of the park but still failed. My definition of failed is, not making the money back that was put into it. I still have the belief that if you do the following, you can at least earn the money back that you put into it : 1. Create a game that is easy to communicate through pics and icon what it's about 2. Polish, Polish, Polish 3. Make good game design choices, Make the user make interesting decisions( risk / reward type decisions ) 4. Create a world that people what to interact with 5. Create good/obvious user interactions Please, somebody prove me wrong by showing me a game that did these things but still failed.
I'll turn this around, please prove yourself and show me a game that did these things and succeeded. I personally think twitter/facebook integration is a huge waste of time, i never get apps to use my twitter/facebook to spam everyone on my list. A pain
You don't have marketing and PR in your list, so I think it's possible to do great game, with all of the above and still slip through without any visibility, which of course means the game will fail financially. Also I believe that "polished game", "good game design" and terms like that are really relative and subjective and it's hard to say when the game is really polished (or to put it like that - no game is completely polished, there is always something you can add or make better).
I think this is an inherently biased experiment. It's possible to find flaws in any game. If Angry Birds had failed, it would be easy to dismiss the failure by saying that the gameplay is too primitive to be compelling, or that the world isn't interactive enough. The idea that a good, polished game will always make money is probably the most prominent myth about the game industry. For some reason, people who have actually worked in it long enough to release a game or two don't buy into it, though... Trying to prove it with actual examples seems a bit unnecessary. You can browse the app store and see countless scam games, generic endless runners, and 3D games with shallow gameplay and tons of bugs outperforming utterly terrific indie titles.
I would like to nominate my game Eve of Impact, and I think it "failed" because in the end it does not have enough content (that depends what you expect for 99 cents) and it is aimed at a niche sci-fi market. I think it meets your criteria. I'm not in it for the money though, creating a game and putting it in the market was #1 on my bucket list, so I'm really happy with the way it is and the achievement I accomplished. So in the end for me it did not fail
Hmm... looking at your game seems like a big problem you may have is it's hard to tell how the game plays from your screen shots. I'm actually going to buy it tonight to try it out though. Looks cool.
Another thing missing from that list is: 6) Getting that lucky break of an Apple front-page feature I can think of many games that struggled for months to get noticed - that is until Apple put the game on centre stage. Angry Birds is actually one such example of this, which most people don't realise wasn't an instant hit. Trainyard is another. I think many people believe luck is nothing to do with it, but that is just as naive as thinking it is entirely about luck. It's clearly a case of working hard and just keep going and working at it until you get that lucky break - this applies to all walks of life. Making a great game is essential of course, that's a given. And you increase your chances of getting lucky by making it even better and more polished. But you still need an element of luck to hit the big time, be it via the luck of an Apple feature, or it being something the gaming press lap up or it just having that magic formula to go viral. No game that's junk ever gets anywhere, but search the App Store on your iPad and filter out everything below a 4-star average and you'll find endless undiscovered gems, where any one of them would probably be a big hit if they were given that lucky break by Apple. Especially mine
Would be really great if you could let me know what you expected it to be from the screenshots and how that differed from your experience when playing it.
I too would not immediately have picked up on your game as being any more niche than say Asteroids. Once I looked closer at the screenshots and could see the detail only then the game appealed to me, lots more. But I am a massive sci-fi fan so those details are extra cool for me to happily discover. Will check it out later, too. Downloading already but it's not playtime yet hehe Some interesting replies in this thread. Finding myself agreeing with them. Though I would say to all that most of us only want to earn Anywhere near a living. I would also like to think that say advertising would generate a return. I'm confident that my game will, so yeah it's taken a third try to really honestly say it will be done when it's done. I understand that more than ever before, I guess development time here at Zenout has doubled per project from 6 months to a full year...and no I'm not releasing in December ever again :-D
I thought the same thing before our game was released. Now I can easily see how a good game could come out and disappear completely. Its really hard to get visibility on the App store, and really hard to get sales without it. disparitygames.com
Some devs may disagree with my take on this, but having a good polished game is simply not enough with the app marketplace the way it is today. If you don't have the war chest (funds) to market your great polished game then you need to seriously consider a partnership with a publisher who can provide the muscle for marketing and user acquisition. Sure you're going to have to rev share with them, but would you rather have a big slice of nothing or a small slice of something big? The odds are stacked against small developers - Every day there are ~100 new games submitted to the App Store. (source: http://148apps.biz/app-store-metrics/) - You're going up against venture backed and well funded developers & publishers, even a ton of "AAA" console developers are focusing on mobile now - You're going up against mega corporations like GREE, DeNA and Zynga who has massive war chests to acquire users with - You're going up against games that are well branded from well established franchises Yes there are the exceptions that cut through the clutter and find success without spending much if any marketing dollars, but for everyone else the 2008-2009 gold rush is over. You've got to have a good polished game and the resources to market it and get that visibility. DP
I will name one. Max Adventure by Imangi. The folks that made Temple Run. Nattylux said in an interview this spring they still don't think it has broke even and it's failure almost closed them. So there is a good game with all the elements that failed. You have the best abc style game but if the market has moved on to xyz style games you will have missed the boat and be failure. That is why people say to stay agile or have huge marketing budgets. Release a style of game that hot is the best chance for success when you are small and don't have 100k to spend on marketing. A game style that is out of fashion is failure from the start for small indie group. I don't care how polished the game is. Truthfully I would suggest people follow twitter feeds of some of the bigger indies and read the post they make. Read the interviews imangi has given this year. Nattylux has a couple of interviews that talk success and failures and are very educational on what it takes to be a success. Sorry this ran long. But the truth is polish is important but does not guarantee success. Oh and on other game that fell short of the investment into the first version is Whale Trail. Both cases they failed to make the developer money.
It's so easy to look at the best products in the world and say just make it like that. What the laymen fail to realize is that simplicity is difficult to achieve. In order for users to have a fun concise experience that makes sense, the developers need to widdle away at a concept (which literally entails thousands of decisions) until the only thing left is that which is good and well executed. When I was a kid I always wondered why most games weren't like Nintendo's (they always seemed so simple, designed with common sense). Now as a developer with over 16 years of experience I get it. What I didn't know back then is that Nintendo actually makes their games twice! Anyway, here's one I did with a team that was a spectacular failure considering the level of polish. A Fat Rat Who's in your rat pack?Fat Rat is an intense rat-rolling race to see who can collect the most cheese! Who's in… Free Buy Now Watch Media DetailsWho's in your rat pack?Fat Rat is an intense rat-rolling race to see who can collect the most cheese! Who's in your rat pack?The story…It’s a hard life for most back alley rats. Not for our boy Blue though. Nope, he’s got a prime piece of real estate atop a barrel next to the best café in town. The café chefs feed Blue all the gourmet cheese he can eat!On this night though things are different. A new gang of rats has rolled up on Blue’s barrel and they’re starving for Blue’s pile of delectable cheeses. Now the race is on to get as much cheese as possible before the other rats scarf it all down.Cheesy we know…Features:- Entertainment for the whole Family- Wi-Fi Multiplayer for up to 4 Friends!- Cuddly Characters- 3D Graphics and Interactive Backdrops- Zany Powerups with more on the way- Single Player Challenges- Fast Physics and Networking- Cross platform compatible (iOS vs. Android) Information Seller: Genre:Racing, Sports Release:Jun 04, 2012 Updated:Nov 30, -0001 Version: Size:0.0 TouchArcade Rating:Unrated User Rating:Unrated Your Rating:unrated Compatibility:HD Universal nvx Well-Known Member Jan 7, 2011 195 0 0 UK http://www.nevonix.com #15 nvx, Jul 17, 2012 Where did you hear that? Care to elaborate? Jeremy Alessi Member Sep 1, 2009 22 0 0 #16 Jeremy Alessi, Jul 17, 2012 I read that in an article about 10 years ago (Wired, Game Developer, Gamasutra... one of those). I think it was Miyamoto who said it but I can't remember for certain. I can't find it on Google but it was during the GameCube era that I read it. RevolvingDoor Well-Known Member Dec 13, 2009 200 0 0 #17 RevolvingDoor, Jul 17, 2012 Biggest issue I can see with "A Fat Rat" right off the bat (sorry, everyone) is that the high level of polish does not extend to the icon. There is nothing about that icon that screams "polished 3D graphics." You have some very attractive screenshots that most people will miss out on, because the icon is nothing like them. The gameplay is rather fun, even single player. If you're still planning on promoting/supporting it, definitely consider changing the icon. Foursaken_Media Well-Known Member Patreon Indie Jan 17, 2010 3,421 30 48 Raleigh, NC http://www.foursakenmedia.com #18 Foursaken_Media, Jul 17, 2012 First, it depends on what a "failure" is in your eyes... <$5000 gross? Not enough to recoup costs? For us, Sky Gnomes and Mad Chef both didn't do too hot. I may be bias, but to this day I think both games are super polished, upper echelon games, especially Sky Gnomes (innovative concept, new multi-player concept, depth, content packed, etc). Neither were featured by Apple either, which is disheartening. The fact is... all you can do is MINIMIZE the luck factor. You can never remove it. How do you minimize it? Make a super polished game, spend tons of time on PR, KNOW PEOPLE in the industry/Apple (that one is key)... but still, all of those things will only lower the chance of a failure, never completely remove it. rikschennink Well-Known Member Oct 12, 2011 127 0 16 Webdeveloper Netherlands http://www.rikschennink.nl #19 rikschennink, Jul 17, 2012 Yes, my thoughts exactly, just tuning down the saturation on the rats a tiny bit might make it look better already. Jeremy Alessi Member Sep 1, 2009 22 0 0 #20 Jeremy Alessi, Jul 17, 2012 As per the icon, our artist created about 10 of them before we settled on that one. I was into it because I think it reminded me of some Nintendo art (this was unintentional on the artists part): The icon that came in 2nd place was this one: (You must log in or sign up to post here.) Show Ignored Content Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next > Share This Page Tweet Your name or email address: Do you already have an account? No, create an account now. Yes, my password is: Forgot your password? Stay logged in
I read that in an article about 10 years ago (Wired, Game Developer, Gamasutra... one of those). I think it was Miyamoto who said it but I can't remember for certain. I can't find it on Google but it was during the GameCube era that I read it.
Biggest issue I can see with "A Fat Rat" right off the bat (sorry, everyone) is that the high level of polish does not extend to the icon. There is nothing about that icon that screams "polished 3D graphics." You have some very attractive screenshots that most people will miss out on, because the icon is nothing like them. The gameplay is rather fun, even single player. If you're still planning on promoting/supporting it, definitely consider changing the icon.
First, it depends on what a "failure" is in your eyes... <$5000 gross? Not enough to recoup costs? For us, Sky Gnomes and Mad Chef both didn't do too hot. I may be bias, but to this day I think both games are super polished, upper echelon games, especially Sky Gnomes (innovative concept, new multi-player concept, depth, content packed, etc). Neither were featured by Apple either, which is disheartening. The fact is... all you can do is MINIMIZE the luck factor. You can never remove it. How do you minimize it? Make a super polished game, spend tons of time on PR, KNOW PEOPLE in the industry/Apple (that one is key)... but still, all of those things will only lower the chance of a failure, never completely remove it.
Yes, my thoughts exactly, just tuning down the saturation on the rats a tiny bit might make it look better already.
As per the icon, our artist created about 10 of them before we settled on that one. I was into it because I think it reminded me of some Nintendo art (this was unintentional on the artists part): The icon that came in 2nd place was this one: