Game Development: A Better ApproachAs far as independent game development goes, it often pays to dream big and act small. Consider it a basic tenet of today’s increasingly popular minimum viable product (MVP) theory, a business strategy which advocates shipping smaller and more polished, yet less expansive or robust titles more rapidly.
According to advocates, it's far preferable to produce a shorter, smaller game that's built around a few well-polished features versus spending time and money on a meandering title that tries to be all things to all people. By doing so, proponents say, you’re able to produce sharper product on tighter turnaround, offer more timely responses to market developments, and bring cash in the door faster, allowing for healthier, more organic growth.
"Too many developers start with an overambitious plan, which they’re pre-committed to adhere to, or push too far too fast in the hope of growing rapidly to meet investors’ expectations."
Here are a few hints, tips and strategies for designing a game around this philosophy, which our principals – software publishers and consultants to today’s top publishers alike – have found to be of benefit:
1. Plan Extensively Up-Front and Keep Production Cycles Manageable -- When scoping out a game and plotting a development calendar, by all means strive to do your best, and push boundaries. However, a lot of developers undeniably kill their games through over-ambitious development – more commonly known as trying to cram in too much. But one game can’t hope to please everyone, and focus produces better results. It's far better to serve a niche with a brisk but polished eight-hour game with a handful of innovations than it is to produce a 20-hour game that does many things poorly. Before entering active development, make certain to trim every bit of fat off your game in order to produce a clean, polished product that makes players happy and gets them talking.
Likewise, limit your game's core mechanics to a few features that are well put-together and leave plenty of time for fine-tuning and polish, with playable prototypes and ongoing iteration offering a better approach to design. Be sure to source fans’ feedback via betas, demos and early hands-on tests as well. It’s much easier to craft superior titles based on direct hands-on feedback than by building random parts in tandem and bringing them together late in the game, only to find you’ve got a disaster on your hands.
2. Release in Parts Versus One Big Whole -- Spending two years to develop a grand-scale game means that you’re taking a huge gamble. The virtual equivalent of reading tea leaves and hoping you’ll correctly divine where the market’s headed months hence, you might as well throw darts at a board and hope they’ll land on the correct guesstimate. Stakes are higher than ever today as well. Fail to accurately interpret cultural signs, and your game effectively exists in limbo, burning overhead for no good reason, only to flop and potentially bring an end to the studio that worked on it when it releases.
So instead of attempting to project so far out with ambitious designs, consider releasing four or five smaller games in parts or episodes over the course of the same time period. That way, players can get into the game sooner than later. This allows you to discern if a project’s connecting out of the gate at less expense, start the process of brand building and bring in revenue streams more rapidly that can help fund future projects. Moreover, a staggered release schedule makes it far easier to tailor future installments of your game around fan feedback. If your audience reacts well to the role-playing elements in your game, for example, but doesn't care as much for the racing parts, you can spend time, money, and effort developing your game around the desires of your player base instead of flushing money into gameplay mechanics that no one ends up needing.
3. Expand Organically -- It's important to get a polished, playable piece of your game into the public eye as quickly as possible. But from there, you should also make a point of growing organically according to actual cash flow, and criticism and compliments from the players. Expanding one’s studio too fast or launching a huge product with a "bang" can overwhelm your financial wherewithal or overwhelm the player. Instead, it’s often smarter to grow at a slow and steady pace so you don’t needlessly inflate head count or monthly burn, and give players a chance to grow into the game.
Too many developers start with an overambitious plan, which they’re pre-committed to adhere to, or push too far too fast in the hope of growing rapidly to meet investors’ expectations. The wiser goal: Work to build a small, loyal fanbase and stable recurring revenues, then reinvest in expanding your title and company. Once stability’s been established, you can see what’s working, and adjust strategic roadmaps and plans for expansion or acquisition accordingly. Military theorist Carl von Calusewitz once observed that “no plan survives contact with the enemy.” As battle-hardened studio generals leading their troops of programmers, artists and engineers to war well know, flexibility and ability to adjust on a dime is crucial to survival, today more so than ever.
