Rock Paper Collapse

[Mick]

You said the game will have a demo right, and a $5 price point?

I just don't see a large number of players trying them demo and saying "I adore the game play, but the units do have animations so it's not worth my $5."

It seems to me that if it's not a type of game that will appeal to them, unit animations aren't really going to tip the scale.

Sure, if the TBS/God-Simulator/Econ-management/TD genre really takes off, unit animations might become a differentiating factor, but it's not exactly like there is a ton of competition in this market right now. I'm pretty sure many AI War players don't even know what the ships actually look like besides the zoom out icons.

EDIT: And if there was unit animations, I'd just turn them off any way to make the turns go by faster.

[x4000]

No hard feelings, Pepisolo.  We don't always have to see eye to eye on everything to be on good terms, and I don't hold it against you.  Hopefully the same is true in reverse.  Anyhow, I think we can leave it there, as you noted.

You said the game will have a demo right, and a $5 price point?

Yes and yes.

I just don't see a large number of players trying them demo and saying "I adore the game play, but the units do have animations so it's not worth my $5."

It seems to me that if it's not a type of game that will appeal to them, unit animations aren't really going to tip the scale.

Sure, if the TBS/God-Simulator/Econ-management/TD genre really takes off, unit animations might become a differentiating factor, but it's not exactly like there is a ton of competition in this market right now. I'm pretty sure many AI War players don't even know what the ships actually look like besides the zoom out icons.

Right, exactly.  This was my reasoning as well.  It's one of those things where throwing extra money into unit animations would just increase the budget but not the appeal of the game.  IE, it would (IMO) be a stupid decision unless we just had money to burn and were making the animations for their own sake.  I don't think they would generate any extra income, or be particularly extra pleasing to anyone in the main audience.

EDIT: And if there was unit animations, I'd just turn them off any way to make the turns go by faster.

Right.  And that also would likely be the main opinion of the target audience, making the inclusion of them doubly pointless.  Animations for the units would increase our entire budget by more than 50%, no joke, and I just don't see that as warranted in any fashion.  As you note.

[Pepisolo]

No hard feelings, Pepisolo.  We don't always have to see eye to eye on everything to be on good terms, and I don't hold it against you.  Hopefully the same is true in reverse.  Anyhow, I think we can leave it there, as you noted.

I don't hold it against you at all. On the contrary I have incredible respect for you as a developer and also as the person you show yourself to be on the forums. I like to think that even if I post something negative, it is at least constructive. On this occasion, I don't think I was being particularly constructive.

[x4000]

I appreciate that, and again all good.

[Mánagarmr]

Wow, $5? That's in the realms of "I'll buy it blind, and won't regret it even if it sucks"-territory. Very interesting. I was planning on checking it out regardless, but now it's not even an argument anymore

[keith.lamothe]

Wow, $5? That's in the realms of "I'll buy it blind, and won't regret it even if it sucks"-territory. Very interesting. I was planning on checking it out regardless, but now it's not even an argument anymore

Maybe that can be our new motto:

"Arcen Games: We'll Make You An Offer You Can't Refuse."


Oh wait

[Mick]

Wow, $5? That's in the realms of "I'll buy it blind, and won't regret it even if it sucks"-territory. Very interesting. I was planning on checking it out regardless, but now it's not even an argument anymore

Aye, it's a nice price point. Another benefit is that it's less likely for customers who decides it's not their thing to feel "ripped off".

Of course, some people seem to go into a rage if their $1 iPhone game purchase only provided them a measly 10-20 hours of enjoyment before it got stale... Holy hell there are a lot of entitled people out there.

[tigersfan]

Wow, $5? That's in the realms of "I'll buy it blind, and won't regret it even if it sucks"-territory. Very interesting. I was planning on checking it out regardless, but now it's not even an argument anymore

While we appreciate that, we also really hope you enjoy the game. I've been having a lot of fun with it lately, myself. Moreso than any of the other games I've worked on, if I'm being honest.

[x4000]

I've been having a lot of fun with it lately, myself. Moreso than any of the other games I've worked on, if I'm being honest.

Given that's a relative statement, I think that's a pretty awesome thing to say in every respect anyhow.   I doesn't say anything about your enjoyment of the other games, just says this one is better than the ones that came before.  To some extent I'd hope that would be the case with all our games, always.  Like that song "I love you twice as much as yesterday, but half as much as tomorrow" or whatever.

What I'd really hate is if our first game was seen as our best game ever, 30 years from now.  "It was all downhill from there" is not a great thing.

[Misery]

Of course, some people seem to go into a rage if their $1 iPhone game purchase only provided them a measly 10-20 hours of enjoyment before it got stale... Holy hell there are a lot of entitled people out there.

Ugh, yes.

That's one that always bothers me quite a bit.   I mean, good grief.  There was a time when even a simple game like Tetris had to be bought for full retail price.   But now?  You can get games of incredible complexity, challenge, and depth that are very high quality ON YOUR DAMN PHONE that will give you a great many hours of gameplay..... and people think that paying 1 to 5 dollars is a RIP OFF?!?!?

Really, I can get that amount by just randomly scrounging for change in the car, if for some reason I actually wanted to do that.  It's cheap as heck.


Though my favorites are the ones that complain on F2P mmos and similar games, like "How DARE they make me pay for this high-quality online game AT ALL???"   

Just.... aaaaagh.  So irritating.

[Teal_Blue]

Regarding "it's done when it's done." There are exactly two kinds of developers who can do that: those who don't need the income from their games to survive because it is not their main job; and those that don't need the income from their next game because they are already incredibly rich.

Or those that have a much tighter grasp on budget and scheduling than you seem to? I thought AIwar was a smash hit? You seriously didn't earn enough money from that game to not have to rush your next title? Was Tidalis rushed?

The reality is that almost all developers are "push out" developers, as are most software developers in general. It's called a budget and a schedule, and we actually take more liberties wih ours than most developers are able to. Valley 2 was delayed by 3 months because it wasn't good enough prior to that. Shattered Haven was put on ice for 4 years while I figured out its needs. Skyward Collapse has always meant to be small and focused, and there's nothing that has been cut that is want to put back in if I had more time.

You have already said that you basically dropped the ball budget-wise with Valley 2. If you'd spent the Valley 2 money on a smaller project then there wouldn't have been such a mad rush to get it finished. Other developers may also be "push out" developers, but it just strikes me that you are pushing your deadlines too far, which is worrying. Whether that's due to financial pressures, poor budget control, or even just a certain attitude: whatever, I just think it's hurting the quality of your games a little too much.

Google "kill your darlings," seriously.

Do you realise how condescending these "google ... " sentences are? Do you really want me to google it -- OK:

Up comes a film released in 2013. Description.

"A murder in 1944 draws together the great poets of the beat generation: Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac and William Burroughs."

Not sure what relevance that has to the current debate, but thanks, anyway. Edit: okay, so it's a Faulkner quote. I've only read The Sound and the Fury (which was great) but I don't recognize the quote.

I think the reason you have this impression of Arcen being "push out" where you might not with other developers is two fold...

Hey, you might have a point there. Being so open is a double-edged sword, certainly. Maybe my impression is wrong -- but I've got to stick by it. Your final game quality seems to be compromised by having such tight schedules. 

Secondly, we don't really toot constantly about our own financial pressures until they start coming to a head. Valley 1 went 6 months over schedule to make sure it was as good as possible at the end, and we had -$6k in money when it launched. Less when Valley 2 launched. I completely avoided taking a salary this year until this month to make sure that the projects could get out in a quality way while we also didn't shed staff.

Sounds to me like it's really a budget control issue then. It shouldn't really get to the desperation stages of you having to not take a salary in order for the company to stay afloat. Obviously, this is going to put undue pressure on when you need to release that next game.

With Skyward we're showing more discipline, have a stronger central idea, and are not letting scope creep take over the project. Nothing from our original beta-level designs has been cut except for crime, which was a late addition and turned out neither to be fun nor needed. Well, chapmen and traders were also cut for the same reasons, but they were not exactly direct gameplay in the decision making sense. Edicts were cut, but those were not in the original design and they've been actually replaced by something both more complex to code and more interesting. Same with score getting wrapped into that. All of that falls under prototyping iterations rather than cutting for time, anyhow.

I have no problems with crime being cut. Scoreboards I thought would have been great. What about multiplayer? Is that still making it in? Sounds also like you would have also liked to have  had a proper beta period, but you just don't have the time for one.

Anyway, none of these are the attributes of a developer just pushing stuff out willy nilly.

Hey, I don't think you're pushing stuff out willy nilly, but you have had extremely harsh deadlines which can't be good for the game or yourself. I don't like to see you guys work 24 hour + shifts like you had to during AVWW2 as I recall.

That's the idea here: Skyward is tight and interesting, and we'll see how it does. If well, then expansions.

I hope it does extremely well as I don't think I've seen the true Arcen, yet. I want to see the day when you have a lot less pressure on your shoulders and can take your time somewhat. Maybe that is an unrealistic scenario in the average life of an indie dev, though.

Hopefully that makes sense....The Trenches.

I'll check out The Trenches. I really don't have the breadth of knowledge of how other indie developers work in order to say whether the way you operate is typical or not, although it might interesting to research the issue.

No hard feelings. I hope SC does amazingly well, maybe then you can afford to give your next game the time it deserves.

Basically I want to ask Pepisolo, what business is it of yours? I mean, give me a break, you are breaking this guys balls and acting like he owes you an answer. The fact of the matter is its not your business at all, and he doesn't owe you anything, not even a polite reply. You are lucky i'm not making this game, because i'd lose a customer giving you hell for your attitude.

Anyway, enough of that,
later,

-Teal

[x4000]

Teal, we already worked it out and things were settled.  He doesn't need to be chided, but thanks.

[Teal_Blue]

Sorry, its not really my place to say anything either, but he just talked with a tone that sounded
so 'rude' i couldn't help it. Anyway, I'll hush up and keep quiet now.

-Teal

[keith.lamothe]

But the horse isn't dead yet!

We've all got our foibles, sometimes they're even helpful.  It's just a matter of being gracious even when you know the other person is at least somewhat in the wrong.  Otherwise it becomes very difficult to see one's own mistakes.

[x4000]

@Teal: It's okay, it's just that this is how flame wars get started.  We really don't need bad blood between anyone here, especially given that all the parties involved are super nice people in the first place.  And I'm not just saying that.