another thought: the 'coded and then described' thing is similar to architecture. architecture has to actually work, it has to have a structure that doesn't fall apart, much like games need to be debugged. i think games are closer to architecture than painting

Nah, the difference between a programmer and an architect is that a programmer is both the architect and the construction workers that need to build the building with physical labor.

I realized that a new indie developer cannot rely on press release since most press are really not that beneficial.
If you get covered by Kotaku or the like you might have a boost in sales, but in most cases press won't help that much.
You make a game, release press, and then hope for any luck. This could be a very disappointing process.

What can be useful is directly reaching out people.

In the past we had mailing lists. Now we have twitter\facebook and the likes.
Reaching out to people this way can increase your sales a lot more efficiently than some press.

The issue is that new indie developers don't have that much reach as well.


In this thread I want people to post a message they want to shout. For instance a tweet they want retweeted, but it could be shared in other forms.
You write here a tweet or preferably a short message, and then people viewing this thread may choose to share it to their followers.

We don't exchange links, we don't force you to tweet anything, you don't even need to tell you retweeted or posted someone else's message. You just post what you want to spread, and people may choose to or not to spread it.

Sort of a press\reach out TIGForums "service".

Where should we provide feedback?
Well anyway, seems to work fine on my iPad 3, although I was a bit confused with the menus and how much clicks it requires to start the game.
The music also seemed to be confusing a bit... like it changed to a new music after a short while.

The game itself was kind of fun. The start where the screen shakes before the stampede is really awesome.
I passed only one level after I gave up, but I am someone who don't play that many games. Maybe I will try again later or before bed time.

Is there any other kind of feedback testing you need?

Yea, I also agree with the notion, just it was phrased a lot better than my jaw breaking arguments.
This is why I said that instead of donating to a kickstarter project, supporters can buy existing games instead.

s_l_m, on a global scale, kickstarter has rising by several orders of magnitudes more than IndieGoGo.

So there is either no correlation or very little correlation.

It follows in the sense that there is no correlation between Kickstarter's "popularity" and IndieGoGo's popularity.
If it did trickle down, we should have seen it correlate.

Maybe you are the one who don't know how to use your brain?

Well, what we see is that the kickstarter success doesn't trickle down to other crowd funding websites like you suggested. It might have a negative effect if as the result of Kickstarter's success IndieGoGo is in a stalement.
One simple thing to see is that usually a team would submit their project to either kickstarter or IndieGoGo but not both. Which means high profile teams will submit their project to Kickstarter and it will cause a self feeding loop.

It's a hard question to ask if we would be better without kickstarter, Maybe without kickstarter there would never be any interest in crowd funding, I am not sure. But what we can see is that Kickstarter's success does not trickle down.

Just look at how IndieGoGo compares to Kickstarter.
And IndieGoGo seems to be in a stalement.

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=kickstarter%2C%20indiegogo&cmpt=q

Are we better with Kickstarter's new huge popularity than we were before Maybe, I am not sure.
Is it a good thing that the most popular crowdfunding website is also available to very few countries? I think not.

It was just an example of how the massive popularity of one thing can also have bad side effects and is not living inside a vacuum.
Perhaps it also did good, but it is possible it is also bad in other ways.

The humble bundle did bring attention to indie games, but it also made it so people don't buy full priced indie games that much anymore. The PC might also be dead for a lot of indie developers nowadays, more than it used to. Unless you go to steam or humble bundle(or kickstarter), not many other options really. (But I am not sure about the PC thing)

I think there are a lot more gatekeeper nowadays than before, and it is a lot less likely to be successful on your own without using the service of one of the gate keepers.

Christian, a simple though "mechincal" example of how supporting Kickstarter is indirectly bad for other indies.
Kickstarter only supports projects from the US and UK. Hence, the popularity of kickstarter draw the most "high profile" developers into it making it even more popular.

Other developers do not have access to kickstarter, they can only use IndieGoGo but IndieGoGo is less popular and less beneficial to them.

Hence, by suporting projects on Kickstarter you make it more popular which in turn make the other crowd funding websites less relevant.

It proves that those supporters are uninformed of the many other indie developers which make good games and just put money in the site they are used to go to.

It has a connection, how can you say there is no connection between failed indies and
successful ones? There is a connection even if it's not a direct one. We are not living in a vacuum.

Christian, the proof is that some of those kick starter projects gets loads of money eventhough the project is just in its first steps, and on the other hand there are many indie developers with great games that are struggling or making a very modest living out of their games.

Chrisitan, well I fixed myself to say that people who donate more than the value of a pre order are irrational.
The reason is that they choose to invest in a very early stage project which is not obvious what will be the result of it, instead of investing in other existing games of indies who don't do well enough.
It's like Kickstarter is the ultimate hype website.

I am not sure you read the whole thread, an example of what you actually want?

Edit: I sent back the 5$ to this guy.

Please point to examples of this instead of using strawman arguments.

My point is that any person who makes a game he intends to sell and it generates a decent amount of sales had to put effort\thought\design decisions to make the game sellable.

Take any of your favorite indie game that sold a lot and it is likely the developer put a lot of thought and effort in the business side which were also reflected in the final result of the game.

I don't want to enter the charity discussions right here... anyway...

Paul, what I ment is when people criticize other people who admit to do research and do decisions in selecting a game\genre or other decisions that they know are more likely to make the game sellable.

They try to portray some indies as if they only make the game they want with all the creative freedom, and art and whatever, and others are just money grabbers.

I try to say that those "Artistic" indies who sell their game, are not likely to be more artistic than someone who choose to do "Android racing game" because he saw those are in demand.

Even the guy who does the racing game chose a game he wants to make, he only chose a game he both want to make and knows it is more in demand.

If you really want artistic freedom, then get a job and do indie games on your free time. Sure, you will have less time for this hobby, but you will have greater artistic freedom.

Edit: A game is not likely to sell well without the developer investing time and thought about how to sell\market it(in the design process as well).

Well that was a while ago and a mistake, that's all... I don't work on that game anymore. I should remove this page.

 

Does any one of these rich people donate to some indie guy who already made a game and isn't doing so good? Or do they only donate when they get perks or when they are being told to donate?
If that is the case then we can disprove that it's just people who want to help others. There are many ways to help other indies. And I would think that helping indies who already made a game and didn't do so well is more "helpful".

So my guess it's mostly for the perks. Is a small model or poster worth $100 or $1000 because it's exclusive? Maybe, though it is most likely some rich guy's love with fancy glittery stuff, kind of like a shiny unique diamond or whatever. Only diamond is actually as valuable as it costs if you want to sell it.

Also, all the people who preach me that thinking about profit is evil\non indie\non artistic.
Unless you give all your games for free and don't ask for any donations, don't preach me about thinking of making a profit of a game. It makes you look hypocritical and dumb.

The whole "I am pretending to not making games for the money, though I secretly hope that if I make the game I want to make money will follow in abundance" BS.