Exodus Of The Machine Teaser 1

[chemical_art]

Right, evaluating the probable risk and probable reward when selecting a project to execute is very important.  Something doesn't have to be a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow if it only takes one guy 2 months to make.  We're aiming a bit higher than that here, but we're also very conscious of keeping costs down so this thing doesn't have to shoot the moon to be a success.

Yeah, but I feel like I'm already going off track.

The core issue which I mean is differenation your game from other games. This needs to be clear and immediate at a glance. The game as a whole doesn't need to be different, but the trailer / intro needs to emphasis greatly the differences so as to attract the audience.

Just like if you were writing a paper, you would have your intro make a bold assertion to make it interesting.

[keith.lamothe]

The core issue which I mean is differenation your game from other games. This needs to be clear and immediate at a glance. The game as a whole doesn't need to be different, but the trailer / intro needs to emphasis greatly the differences so as to attract the audience.

Just like if you were writing a paper, you would have your intro make a bold assertion to make it interesting.

The latter point is actually stronger: it needs to be interesting, and it needs to be interesting immediately.

If it's not interesting, it doesn't matter how original it is.

Of course, if it's not original, that tends to do bad things to how interesting it is perceived to be.  Conversely, appearing obviously original helps that initial "is it interesting" moment.  But it isn't decisive either way.

Anyway, part of the interest here will be that it's original (I'm not aware of very many turn-based mil-sci-fi games where you have to get your party across a planet quickly without running out of food, getting killed by native threats, etc), and that will be one of those early hooks we want to get into the viewer/reader.  There may or may not be stronger hooks that need to go first, I'm not sure yet.

[chemical_art]

I'm not aware of very many turn-based mil-sci-fi games where you have to get your party across a planet quickly without running out of food, getting killed by native threats, etc), and that will be one of those early hooks we want to get into the viewer/reader.  There may or may not be stronger hooks that need to go first, I'm not sure yet.

The issue of marketing is that opinions vary wildly.

I can think of plenty of games where "turn-based <time period> games where you have to get your party across a <location> quickly without running out of <timed threat>, getting killed by <location> threats, etc)

The issue is how you do so. Which is why RTS's can have the same premise while being so different. Again, not trying to beat you down, I'm just saying your concept isn't that original, so the presentation and perhaps a unique mechanic will make it cool. When you appeal to previous fans, those vary fans pick up upon similar games, so that itself is a double edged sword.

[keith.lamothe]

I can think of plenty of games where "turn-based <time period> games where you have to get your party across a <location> quickly without running out of <timed threat>, getting killed by <location> threats, etc)

Which examples are you thinking of?

[chemical_art]

I can think of plenty of games where "turn-based <time period> games where you have to get your party across a <location> quickly without running out of <timed threat>, getting killed by <location> threats, etc)

Which examples are you thinking of?

In FTL, you in a turn based space game try to get your party (of crew) across a galaxy without running out of fuel (and outrunning the rebels), or getting killed by the pirates, aliens, or rebels.

That is just one example. The genre is very broad. I know there are plenty of different examples of flavors of it, but the genre is crowded.

[keith.lamothe]

In FTL, you in a turn based space game try to get your party (of crew) across a galaxy without running out of fuel (and outrunning the rebels), or getting killed by the pirates, aliens, or rebels.

I understand that FTL is described as a turn-based game, but is it really?  All the encounters play out in real time unless they're just multiple-choice questions.

FTL is very reminiscent of Oregon Trail, though, so there is likely to be some overlap, yea.

Do you have other examples?

[x4000]

I agree that that premise is not that unique, and I think it's a matter of the execution that really matters.  And I don't mean that as a slam against you, Keith, I mean it in the same way that I think the Shattered Haven premise is not that unique, but it's execution is really unusual.  In other words, neither game is "high concept," and few games are.  You can't sell me on it in a sentence based on the premise.

But you can intrigue the heck out of me with two sentences, if they're the right sentences that show me what IS unique about the game.   I think that's what chemical_art was getting at. And then clarify broader premise much later.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

I can think of plenty of games where "turn-based <time period> games where you have to get your party across a <location> quickly without running out of <timed threat>, getting killed by <location> threats, etc)

Which examples are you thinking of?

In FTL, you in a turn based space game try to get your party (of crew) across a galaxy without running out of fuel (and outrunning the rebels), or getting killed by the pirates, aliens, or rebels.

That is just one example. The genre is very broad. I know there are plenty of different examples of flavors of it, but the genre is crowded.

FTL isn't a turn-based game though. It's way more pausable action than "turn-based".

[chemical_art]

FTL isn't a turn-based game though. It's way more pausable action than "turn-based".

The overworld is completely much turn based, and it is arguably more turn based then even oregan trail, since during the action bits (with the emphasis of shields needing to be overwhelmed) you can both pause and it is in your advantage to do so.

[x4000]

Exodus is purely turn-based unlike either of those games, just as a point of clarification.  Not that that's really salient to the points you were making, but I thought I'd point that out.

[chemical_art]

But you can intrigue the heck out of me with two sentences, if they're the right sentences that show me what IS unique about the game.   I think that's what chemical_art was getting at. And then clarify broader premise much later.

Exactly.

Intrigue is a great word. Give two sentences to make me intrigued and look deeper. Vague, unspecific statements are a turn off. Very specific things are a turn on. To use FTL saying "with unique choices and bonuses, no game will ever be the same" is a turn off, but saying unique races for each playthrough, which allow dramatically different missions and new equipment" intrigues me more. For AI War, saying "This game has its own unique progression" is a turn off, saying "balance the reward of more options with the risk of increased ai aggression" is more of a turn on. Saying "balance the need of aquiring weapons to defeat the ai, while not taking too much and rousing the ai aggression" is better still.

[x4000]

My idea for the first tiny bit of the trailer would be:

Start with "You have died of dysentery... and robots" as a great opening line for the trailer (and then we leave it at that as far as Oregon Trail references).  Then people are looking at it through the OT lens immediately, and we can commence with the unique things.

The second block of text could be something along the lines of "Plan For The Long Haul: Every expenditure of ammunition, fuel, food, or health is permanent in your campaign."

With accompanying visuals and pacing and all that to support both things, and then moving into other things that are unique and interesting.  And for that second line, that may or may not get pushed further back in the trailer depending on if we come up with something that is even better than it.  But I think that's a pretty cool second hook, and the first hook that makes people think of OT is something that is clearly already working wonders to make people excited.

[Vyndicu]

Hmm interesting I was reading what you talked about performance, page 3, and how ship are flying off when something is shooting at them.

I notice this behavior a LOT with neinzul hybrid and shields. Perhaps I could make a video demonstrate it. If you want to.

[x4000]

Hmm interesting I was reading what you talked about performance, page 3, and how ship are flying off when something is shooting at them.

I notice this behavior a LOT with neinzul hybrid and shields. Perhaps I could make a video demonstrate it. If you want to.

That can still happen because of the throttling that we have to do.  The more ships there are on a planet, the more throttling we have to do to keep it to tens of millions calculations instead of hundreds.  Usually this sort of thing doesn't happen, but if it's happening with those guys in particular, maybe there's something up with them.  Probably a savegame would be more useful to Keith.

[chemical_art]

My idea for the first tiny bit of the trailer would be:

Start with "You have died of dysentery... and robots" as a great opening line for the trailer (and then we leave it at that as far as Oregon Trail references).  Then people are looking at it through the OT lens immediately, and we can commence with the unique things.

The second block of text could be something along the lines of "Plan For The Long Haul: Every expenditure of ammunition, fuel, food, or health is permanent in your campaign."

With accompanying visuals and pacing and all that to support both things, and then moving into other things that are unique and interesting.  And for that second line, that may or may not get pushed further back in the trailer depending on if we come up with something that is even better than it.  But I think that's a pretty cool second hook, and the first hook that makes people think of OT is something that is clearly already working wonders to make people excited.

It's going to be hard, because opinions are going to very wildly.

For me, you would first setup the setting, and then the "hook" and from there explain and give shout outs.

If you give a shout out first, you polarize to those who get the reference. If you give the setting and hook afterward, you are then trying to appeal to those who like the shoutout. If you give a shout out first, that shoutout will be on the viewers mind the rest of the trailer, and will be viewed with the OT lens for better or worst.

If you give the setting and hook first,  then the setting and hook get the full attention of the viewer.  Nothing wrong then from fleshing out and giving various shout outs.

In my opinion, the second approach will give better results then the first: You will get more sales by telling the hook before bringing up previous games rather then bringing up previous games first. It helps distinguish your game. To put another way: The first point you bring will be remembered most, so make that your game, not another one.

<Just to clarify my biases, I love FTL aside from the forced saves [which can be circumvented.] I do NOT like Oregan trail.>