Support NeoGAF

[methane47]

How is it possible that Jim's ending romp and tongue wagging performance was better than Mile Cyrus' at the VMAs?

What a world we live in.

 

[Bricky]

ummm... that's sort of the point. If everybody knew of the game, it's harder for it to fail financially. Reviews from Edge, Destructoid, Touch Arcade don't just happen randomly -- most developers have to work for those (they ARE promoting -- you just don't realize it). Promoting games and getting the word out isn't nearly as easy as you make it out to be (spending money on marketing makes it easier, which is why people spend money to market a game, obviously). Not spending money to market your game is riskier.

You're looking at the -- only the games "you've heard of," as if all that is required to get you to hear of their game is a little effort. You assume if you haven't heard of the game, they just didn't promote it enough (compared to the games you have heard of). I think that's naive.

If I AND (as part of that audience) a lot of other people that could potentially be interested in the game haven't heard of the game (which apparently is the case here since it didn't do too well), then that is a failure in promoting your game. Simple as that. I'm not saying they didn't try, of course they tried, and I'm not saying it's easy, of course it isn't easy (especially with so many other Indie-games on the market competing for a place in the spotlight and no budget), but the fact remains they didn't market their game well going by its success. Even if that might sound harsh.

Let's take a look at ZiGGURAT to prove my point; the thing about scores, especially for iOS games, is the fact that there are so many games getting high scores while not being that special (not saying this game is bad, but a lot of iOS games get scores ranging from 8 to 10) that they don't really matter. But what DOES matter, is if your games LOOKS interesting. Unfortunatly, ZiGGURAT doesn't really look that special on a first look either (retro-graphics, never seen that before in an indie-game/iOS-release). When I google or search for it on youtube, there isn't that much info to be found and the info that IS there doesn't really stand out (the two big 'official' videos about it have thumbnails of the developer and a cat, not really click-worty material especially since it's doesn't make clear the video is about the game). There are almost no community videos either. The game's official site look really empty with next to no info about the game but a big 9/10 by EDGE, which is impressive but like I said doesn't really matter that much in this case.

After doing a basic quick-search for it after hearing you mention it (in a way I imagine most people would if they are interested in something), it is not hard to imagine why there are a lot of people like me (even if we're just talking about gamers interested in indie-titles) who've not heard about the game. And even if they heard about the game it wouldn't be hard to imagine why they wouldn't really be interested in buying it if they only did a quick look around the internet for a bit of info since there is so little of it even if you try (and no, a few reviews, recommendations and a handful of video's isn't gonna cut it).

Of course a game like ZiGGURAT doesn't have a marketing budget at all, but when the official launch trailer doesn't even contain any gameplay are you really that surprised the game didn't do well?

This game wasn't promoted well, no matter if they tried, and thus it didn't sell well. The competition on iOS is BIG, with lots of great games, and you're simply DOA if you don't stand out or unable to make your game known. That's the way the world works. Minecraft might've been able to get big on word of mouth, but not every game is that lucky.

 

[tranciful]

If I AND (as part of that audience) a lot of other people that could potentially be interested in the game haven't heard of the game (which apparently is the case here since it didn't do too well), then that is a failure in promoting your game. Simple as that.

...which is why companies with resources spend a lot on marketing -- to not fail at promoting their game. And if they're spending a lot on marketing, they might as well spend a lot on the game itself (so when they DO break through the noise, they got something big to show people).

If they're on a tight budget, that means they have to do it themselves -- which means they're investing their time. Time is money. It's not free. It delays the release of the game, which is lost revenue -- every month that goes by is another month of rent and bills that are eating into your dev costs. If they had the money to afford help, almost all indie devs would go that route (they're devs, not marketers -- they'd rather spend their time making the game itself better) -- almost all the games listed earlier had publishers or hardware partners to help promote. Do-it-yourself marketing is risky -- they only do it because they have limited resources. Do-it-yourself marketing can work, but that doesn't mean it's a safer bet. If it was somehow more effective to go that route, even the big guys would do it.

edit: also, ZiGGURAT released this vid on the same day as the one you posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwlTAJxOmx0

Have you heard of Hard Lines? http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/06/spilt-milk-studios-launching-an-iphone-game/

I knew of these games (bought both) before learning of their financial situations (though Hard Lines was able to pick up a bit later with a switch to F2P) -- both were getting good word of mouth around release, which is why it surprised me when they were struggling similarly to my own game (which was even more niche than those two). I've learned a lot over the past couple years and hope that will result in better results for my next project (which will be low budget, mostly do-it-myself marketing) -- I just want to point out that success stories like PayDay are nice, but that doesn't mean you can tell other devs "just do what they did and you'll be fine." The landscape is constantly changing and what works for one game might not work for another. There's no safe bets (unless you got millions and a currently successful franchise you can continue).

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

ummm... that's sort of the point. If everybody knew of the game, it's harder for it to fail financially. Reviews from Edge, Destructoid, Touch Arcade don't just happen randomly -- most developers have to work for those (they ARE promoting -- you just don't realize it). Promoting games and getting the word out isn't nearly as easy as you make it out to be (spending money on marketing makes it easier, which is why people spend money to market a game, obviously). Not spending money to market your game is riskier.

You're looking at the success stories -- only the games "you've heard of," as if all that is required to get you to hear of their game is a little effort. You assume if you haven't heard of the game, they just didn't promote it enough (compared to the games you have heard of). I think that's naive.

And this is jumping away from the realities of the original point: the spending of deep 8-digit marketing budgets being mandatory, and to that wierd red herring of "every independant can't be a success", which is a shaky corollary. For low-budget outfits like the Payday 2 folks, or Gunman Clive guys, or Aksys guys or whoever, that not only isn't possible, it may not even be necessary.

In fact, the scrappy "talk the quality, talk the angle" aspect the Payday 2 guys did did the speaking for them, which then ignited the wildfire of internet hype, which kept rejustifying itself to people with subsequent videos, development updates, and dev talk. If those first flames saw it and went "nah" or "that looks like crap from that LP" it would've fizzled but those guys had that opportunity, and a $25m marketing budget and 2 tons of PR reps wasn't the key to that door success or fail. The personal touch is nearer to free than that. Far closer.

Quite why your posts keep bolting away to these teetering angles of "never fail indies" and marketing being extremely difficult without tons of moolah is wierd.

 

[Bricky]

...which is why companies with resources spend a lot on marketing -- to not fail at promoting their game. And if they're spending a lot on marketing, they might as well spend a lot on the game itself (so when they DO break through the noise, they got something big to show people).

The point of the video this thread was exactly to show that is not needed. You're reasoning in circles now.

If they're on a tight budget, that means they have to do it themselves -- which means they're investing their time. Time is money. It's not free. It delays the release of the game, which is lost revenue

I'd say not having good promotion for your game means more lost revenue than getting it out earlier and is easily worth the time, but let's agree to disagree on that.

-- every month that goes by is another month of rent and bills that are eating into your dev costs. If they had the money to afford help, almost all indie devs would go that route (they're devs, not marketers -- they'd rather spend their time making the game itself better)

Which was exactly my point; to be successful as an indie your marketing skills should be at least as good as your skill at making great games. That's how the market works. If you just want to focus your efforts on making a great game; go ahead! Sometimes that is enough (Minecraft says hello again). But don't expect to make a living off your game then because often it is not. Even the PAYDAY guys promoted their game, just not with a marketing budget the size of the moon. They did the low-budget promotion route the right way, which an example of something less successful like ZiGGURAT simply didn't if you ask me. You can't always expect to make a game, release a video or two about it, get a few good reviews and have word of mouth do the rest. Once again; promoting your game isn't easy, but that is an essential part if you want more than a few people to buy your game.

-- almost all the games listed earlier had publishers or hardware partners to help promote. Do-it-yourself marketing is risky -- they only do it because they have limited resources. Do-it-yourself marketing can work, but that doesn't mean it's a safer bet

This is completely true, but that wasn't really what this discussion was about.

If it was somehow more effective to go that route, even the big guys would do it.

Nope, that is the problem; the big guys don't do it BECAUSE most of them don't realize it can be the safer bet. But there are more than enough examples of publishers that do go this route and succeed to counter your argument (Atlus had next to no marketing for a long time yet they are successful (their first big-marketed game is Dark Souls II), Paradox Games uses almost no marketing yet their games sell because they know their audience, etc.)

edit: also, ZiGGURAT released this vid on the same day as the one you posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwlTAJxOmx0

First of all this was released in 2012. Secondly, it is nothing but a funny sketch that doesn't really inform you about the game. That can work, but when you're already an unknown indie you'd have to be really funny or go viral if you want people to buy your game based on a video like this. I'm not seeing how this video would sell the game to a lot of people, but that is just a matter of opinion of course.

Have you heard of Hard Lines? http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/06/spilt-milk-studios-launching-an-iphone-game/

This article about Hard Lines only helps to prove my point if anything. It shows scores don't really matter that much (for iOS games) when it comes to sales, relying on next to no PR can be successful (since his first game seems to have done well without promotion) and a bit of PR does help to drive sales (in the long-run), at least that is what the developer here assumes. The problems with his PR are that it was really launch-focused, which can work but didn't work here, and a few other small problems (I'm sure oversaturation of the App Store also plays a big part in a game like this having disappointing sales) but those problems have nothing to do with our discussion.

I knew of these games (bought both) before learning of their financial situations (though Hard Lines was able to pick up a bit later with a switch to F2P) -- both were getting good word of mouth around release, which is why it surprised me when they were struggling similarly to my own game (which was even more niche than those two). I've learned a lot over the past couple years and hope that will result in better results for my next project (which will be low budget, mostly do-it-myself marketing) -- I just want to point out that success stories like PayDay are nice, but that doesn't mean you can tell other devs "just do what they did and you'll be fine." The landscape is constantly changing and what works for one game might not work for another. There's no safe bets (unless you got millions and a currently successful franchise you can continue).

Of course there is no golden self-promotion marketing formula, and that is not what Jim tried to say either. The point was that you don't really need expensive marketing, whether you are a small studio or not, to have success with your game. Not EVERY game will succeed by doing the same PAYDAY did, but it's more about the general idea.

All I'm saying is that an indie should be creative in promoting their game and put as much work into that as making the game itself if they want to make money (and doesn't need to invest an enormous amount of money to be successful in this at all). That's what separates an indie-bomb from an indie-success. There is a reason why indies like Team Meat (Super Meat Boy), Re-Logic (Terraria), Supergiant Games (Bastion) and Vlambeer (Ridiculous Fishing) and even smaller indies like Bertil Hörberg (Gunman Clive) are success stories; they've not only released great games, but knew how to make them get the attention they deserve as well (without giving publishers or marketing companies bags of money to do this for them).

BTW: Success with your endeavors as an indie developer!

 

[tranciful]

The point of the video this thread was exactly to show that is not needed. You're reasoning in circles now.

The choice isn't so much "is it needed?" -- the choice is more like "which is safer?" Even for indie games, there's a lot on the line. You don't want to spend years working on something and have a bomb regardless of how big you are.

I'd say not having good promotion for your game means more lost revenue than getting it out earlier and is easily worth the time, but let's agree to disagree on that.

Right, but my point is that either way it's costing you. Marketing is also worth it if done right. Neither is free, though -- so when comparing the two, it's not like you're deciding to spend money or do it yourself for "free." Doing it yourself for free is going to cost you a lot of time.

If you have the capital, it's often in your interest to use some of that capital to market your game -- that's why people spend money on marketing; it works.

If you don't have the capital, you do it yourself. It can cost you a lot of time, but you don't have monetary capital so this is your only choice. You can make it work, but that doesn't mean it's a safer bet. In most cases, you only go this route if it's the only route available to you.

Nope, that is the problem; the big guys don't do it BECAUSE most of them don't realize it can be the safer bet. But there are more than enough examples of publishers that do go this route and succeed to counter your argument (Atlus had next to no marketing for a long time yet they are successful (their first big-marketed game is Dark Souls II), Paradox Games uses almost no marketing yet their games sell because they know their audience, etc.)

I really doubt the big guys would like to switch places with Atlus or Paradox Games.

I've never suggested that without big marketing dollars you're guaranteed to fail. My point is that I think very few developers/publishers would opt to skip spending money on marketing if they had the money to spend. I even know plenty of indie games that invest in facebook ads etc.

Is $0 PR a death sentence? No. But it absolutely makes it an uphill battle. If given the choice, I think most developers would prefer to save themselves from the added stresses and workload of marketing their game. It's like saying indie games can do fine without Steam. Sure, some do fine without Steam with extra effort (build your own storefront, find ways to attract eyes to your small, unknown website). For most, Steam can be integral to their indie game's success -- very few indie developers would choose to exclude themselves from Steam.