I joined this forum a few years ago when I decided I would start taking game development more seriously.  This place was pretty much a godsend at the time. I made a game for Assemblee, hung out in the IRC, made contact with a lot of other developers and found out about jams and meetups here in the UK. TIGSource definitely played a big part in me reaching the wider world of indie games.

However since then I've not only left this forum but I was part of a group of people who setup a different developer forum (Super Friendship Club) which at this point in time is just about ready to give up and shut down. The other people involved in SFC had their own reasons so I can't speak for them but for me personally I wanted somewhere that embodied the best of TIGSource and explicitly prohibited the worst.

When I've given talks to people interested in makings I've described this place as the 4chan of indie games, which might not be completely fair but it's how it seems to me. Threads always seem like utter chaos, filled with large egos either trying to win a war of semantics or to be the person who posted the funniest image or most damningly sarcastic comment. I'm sure the people involved in those thread see them as really fascinating arguments on all aspects of game design theory but to me it always came across as bullshit posturing divorced from any actual productivity. When I left I just decided that TIGSource seemed to be a place to go to argue about games instead of actually making them.

I'm sure many people will disagree, but I wanted to explain how I personally felt about this place. And yes I know I could have tried to ignore the more "social"  aspects of the board and just read the feedback section where people are actually making stuff but I don't have the self restraint not to peek at whatever pointless drama is brewing this week and let it frustrate me. It was much easier for me to just cut this forum out of my life and focus on communities where people were primarily interested in making things.

Thanks I hope you like it. Currently working hard on the Alpha 2 build that should ideally be done in time for PAX.

I must know where that trailer song is from, it is driving me round the bend 

Which bit do you mean? The bit while the animated intro plays was a sound loop I bought, the music that plays during the actual gameplay footage was just something I knocked together myself.

Not been active much around here in a while, mainly because I've been working on this game. It's called Kairo. it's a first person atmospheric exploration and puzzle solving game inspired by minimalistic and abstract architecture. In terms of design and mood I've take inspiration from games like Ico and Myst.

It's now available for pre-order for $8 and pre-order includes instant download access to alpha builds for Windows and OSX. The alpha build currently includes the first (and smallest) of the three areas in the game. The game will be finished later in the year and I'll keep those who pre-order up to date with new builds.

Pre-orders and more details can be found over on my microsite for the game:
http://kairo.lockeddoorpuzzle.com

Here's my pre-order announcement trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Thde3bvMRlA

And here's a proper trailer with some gameplay:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw8YYdCNrqM

Here are a few screenshots:


I'm a one man indie team working with Sketchup and Unity to make this. I was also responsible for the sci-fi horror point and click adventure game The White Chamber (http://studiotrophis.com/site/projects/thewhitechamber) which we released as freeware some years ago to reasonable success. Kairo will be my first commercial release.

With a hectic work and social schedule I've not been to any of the Cambridge meets in a while so I am gonna make damn sure I'm there for this.

Well, apologies if it came off as smug.  A lot of devs here know about (hate) virtual goods, but not a lot of people know how it actually works, how it can actually be good for players, or just how much it can actually help an indie business get off the ground.  I haven't seen a single thread on the topic here in ages, which is pretty silly considering how helpful its been in propelling a lot of indie developers into game development businesses.

Surely the sensible course of action then is to start a thread discussing it, make a blog post about it or something. Dropping into an unrelated thread and laughing at how much more money you make through your chosen business model is probably not the best way to win people over.

I am personally in the hate virtual goods camp. I'm also in the camp of hating people calling me a hobbyist because I don't see game development entirely as money making exercise.

Yeah I must have spent well over $1k in total for GDC, with flights from the UK, hostel accommodation, summit pass, food, booze etc.. but it will so very much worth it. Maybe too much partying this year which I didn't think was possible. ^_^

(Reminder:  I'm this guy...)

Nope, I don't remember you.

Sorry I couldn't really get into this. Without actual video or voice acting, sitting watching each of the clips play out slowly through text made it hard for me to image interesting edits for them in my head.

But I'm just curious... how is it "inappropriate" to compare digital distribution to physical distribution?

In simplest terms if you physically steal something there is tangible financial loss, if you digitally steal something there is no cost of materials lost just the potential sale. Sure in both scenarios work went into the product that you want to be rewarded for but with physical items the cost of the raw materials is a real financial loss you're not suffering with a digital copy.

So the pirate copy of Final Cut Studio is have on my hard drive is not the same as me going into a music store and stealing a guitar of a similar price. And to compare them directly would be bizarre.

Second on the online feature.  Tons of people solve the piracy problem by stating that we as software developers shouldn't be selling our creations like products, but rather making them and selling related services such as online play.

Well as prescriptive advice I hate that. I don't want to make service orientated games. I like making single player story driven experiences that don't require online play. However it is appropriate for all sorts of games, just not the kind of thing I want to make.

I suspect no one has any real helpful numbers to prove anything with DRM because the situation seems just as confused in the mainstream industry as it in the indie scene.

People who are pro DRM are quick to produce figures of what percentage of their user base are playing pirated copies which is not a useful number as it doesn't give any indication of if any of those people would have bought the game.

On the other side the anti DRM war is so militant there's no willingness to understand why publishers go to DRM and any examples where it might have served its purpose.

The Windows Assassin's Creed II was a fascinating instance, because it's hard to call any clear winner on either side. The belief by publishers (which may not have any real evidence behind it) is that if you can keep your game from being cracked for a few weeks you'll get a lot more sales. With the heavy handed AC2 DRM they managed over a month before hackers built a work around. However the nature of their DRM genereated so much hateful publicity for them who knows if that affected sales too.

Peronsally I won't be bothering with DRM in my upcoming commercial game. If my game is pirated to hell and it's a commercial flop I may feel differently about that decision later we'll see.

However I think if it's something that truly worries you then I would say that making a game with some essential online feature requiring a login is going to be your safest bet.

I really enjoyed the mechanics and playing it but the fact that I finished it without ever feeling the need to think about it means it's probably a bit too easy. I kind of expected and hoped it would become hader and more taxing.

I would have thought for Solomon's Key running the NES version emulated would fit your requirements.

Haha, those were both pretty cool. Neither were quite what I had in mind though. Lose/Lose isn't actually a malicious virus, you choose to play it, and You Only Live Once was a cavestory mario ripoff used to convey a concept and not a unique fun game in it's own right. I think they both miss important aspects of what would have made the games absurd.

I didn't WANT to play You Only Live Once, it wasn't fun.

And I wasn't FORCED to play Lose/Lose.

Maybe you should try making those ideas how you envisage them. That's the thing about a game idea is that everyone will implement it into a different game.