next »

[jamesprimate]

"And the sun sets..."

http://tale-of-tales.com/Sunset/blog/index.php/and-the-sun-sets/

The blog post is slashdotted for me, so here is pics: https://imgur.com/a/QHuMd

Very sad to see, they were pretty much legendary. And I know Michaël Samyn was TIGS too. If you are reading this, good luck on future endeavors! 

[Armageddon]

Reading that it's pretty easy to understand why they were unsuccessful.

Loved their games though, they had a good run.

[gimymblert]

[s0]

i never personally liked their games but still sad to see them go. they were the sort of weirdos we need more of in videogames.

[Capntastic]

My feelings about this are complex, and self opposed in many ways.  I've never played any of their offerings, though I've read about them.

On one hand, it's pretty much a loss when someone with the intent to create Art feels that they are ignored and unwanted, and is on the ropes of giving up.  If the world were a better place, someone wouldn't have to choose between Doing What They Love and Having a Livelihood.  Game development is hard, and it's a shame that they didn't hit a groove where they could do what they want and get well paid for it.

My cynical side looks back at their games (some of which I'd wanted to try) and thinks that, well no, I wouldn't really want to pay 5 or 10 dollars for an interactive experience that might only last an hour or a day or two.  Certainly they would be interesting, and enriching, on some level.  Even if I didn't like them, I'd be able to cognize what I disliked and how I felt.  That is a valuable thing, to me.  But, like the developers, I need money to survive, and have to carefully weigh my purchases.  My spare time is also at a premium, so my entertainment dollars tend to be spent on what is going to give me the most easily accessible fun I can get into- be it a book I can read through without having to pause and reflect upon, or a game I can pick up for an hour and discard.  Beauty is great, but it can take energy to appreciate.

Economically, my thoughts are that they might have had more success by lowering their prices.  Not many people are going to gamble their cash on a game they may not get much out of when it's ten dollars.  That's what's kept me from ever buying any of their games, even if I had them on my Steam list to know when they were on sale.  Are the games worth the asking price?  Probably.  Would pricing the games at a more impulsive-buy price point help them get sales they would never get otherwise, and would those sales make up for the reduced margins?  I feel they would, but can't say with certainty.  Their games don't exist in a vacuum, they exist in a marketplace, and there is intrinsic competition taking place.

It's hard to say what they should have done, or what they should do.  It's a loss, if they cease to make games.  Hopefully they continue creating something.

[s0]

My cynical side looks back at their games (some of which I'd wanted to try) and thinks that, well no, I wouldn't really want to pay 5 or 10 dollars for an interactive experience that might only last an hour or a day or two.

this is kind of a bad argument. you have probably paid more for things that lasted you less than an hour.

[Boreal]

Rational or not, if that's what your market thinks you have to deal with it.

[JWK5]

My cynical side looks back at their games (some of which I'd wanted to try) and thinks that, well no, I wouldn't really want to pay 5 or 10 dollars for an interactive experience that might only last an hour or a day or two.

this is kind of a bad argument. you have probably paid more for things that lasted you less then an hour.

The value is relative.

A meal at McDonald's will probably run you $5 to $10 but you already know it will be suspiciously tasty and give you bad flatulence. This is weighed against "What else is around here, and are they tastier and cheaper? Can I get out and roam the grocery store or wait till I get home or does my snack monster demand instant gratification and a sacrifice must be made now? What I am willing to pay for what depends on how hungry I am, how much time I have to spare, how much enthusiasm I have for trying something new, etc. We don't make rational, logical choices. We primarily make choices that will satisfy our inner demons.

There are plenty of other games out there between $5 and $10, and or just a few dollars more at $15 and $20. In that range, I've got a pretty good selection on the PSN, for example. That's a lot of competitive instant gratification right there. Why spend $5 or $10 on a 1 to 5 hour game I might enjoy when right at my finger tips there are a bunch of games for the same price that I know I will enjoy for much longer. Now there are all kinds of good arguments that could be made at this point, however, my inner demons don't want to hear any of it. My inner demons have checklist of demands that must be met or another hostage gets it...



...and this is why I own a collection of 20-50 hour games I've only ever played for 20-30 minutes while eating fast food that is slowly killing me from the inside out. Moral of the story: people are fucked up.

[s0]

that said i think you should absolutely bow to market demands and make your stuff as cheap or expensive as it needs to be to be profitable, because monetary value doesn't matter.

so uh i actually agree with capntastic even if i argued against him lol

[Capntastic]

My cynical side looks back at their games (some of which I'd wanted to try) and thinks that, well no, I wouldn't really want to pay 5 or 10 dollars for an interactive experience that might only last an hour or a day or two.

this is kind of a bad argument. you have probably paid more for things that lasted you less than an hour.

Yeah, I bought Watch Dogs.

But I'm not trying to make a broad argument that covers every base- I'm just going through my own thoughts.

I bought Watch Dogs with the knowledge that a bunch of my friends were also gambling on it maybe being a decent game, and that we could have fun together.  I think two of my friends uninstalled it in under a week and I never went back to it myself.

The point is that it's not always easy to rationalize dropping ten bux on a game that has limited entertainment/social utility.  Especially when, in terms of games that border on simply being interactive art exhibits, there are a multitude that are free.

[Capntastic]

so uh i actually agree with capntastic

The ultimate sin

[gimymblert]

They have change the industry forever with their experimentation, that's quite an achievement

[JWK5]

The problem is to sell something first you must have something people actually want, and you have to know who those people are and have a realistic idea of about how many of them you expect there to be. Then you have to figure out what they'd realistically be willing to give you for what you're trying to sell them. It doesn't matter how much labor went into what you're selling them, it doesn't matter how much material went into what you're selling them, it only matters how badly they want it and what they are actually willing to pay for it.

Tale of Tales invested into all this PR but it doesn't sound like they really knew much about who really wanted what they were selling. They might have advertised to a much larger audience but in doing so they may have inadvertently damaged relations or lost the interest of the smaller word-of-mouth audience they did have.

They have change the industry forever with their experimentation, that's quite an achievement

You definitely can't knock them for trying.

[gimymblert]

They didn't really want it, what they wanted was sustainable income from it, two different things, they kinda got it half way because what really is important to them is not the market it's the game, teh stuff they put in wazs just to appease the market, and the market was so appease it didn't works nor attract attention, it was too tame, too safe, also the market already have champion in the walking in mundane setting genre, they didn't offer more than a game like gone home. In fact I heard less of this game than their previous one, the path and graveyard was more relevant in context of the market.

[JWK5]

Their popularity came as much from the conflicts caused by their works as the works themselves, their new project lacks a notable conflict surrounding it. Their early works were like bullets being fired at the gaming community, this one was a friendly Nerf dart bouncing off its target.

I didn't like their games, really, nor did I buy into their dialog but they definitely managed to make a splash and shake things up. Giving themselves a gag order was about the worst thing they could do. Well that, and trying to sell to an audience that already rejects them (rather than working to expand the audience that accepts them).

[TeeGee]

Economically, my thoughts are that they might have had more success by lowering their prices.

So tired of this argument, as it only shows that the person using it knows very little about actually selling games.

No, they should not lower the price -- that would only further lower their income. Niche games especially need to be aware of this, as their audience is both limited and dedicated. If someone wants the unique experience ToT games bring, they can shell a few more bucks to support the dev. On the other hand, cutting the price by half wouldn't suddenly push Sunset into mainstream territory.

Of course, there are always the undecided and those who could give it a try at lower price. But that's what sales and bundles are for. And the higher the initial price, the more wiggle room and more profit you generate even if you go for a significant discount.


So really, they failed for other reasons. In my opinion:
- Their games simply weren't good enough in conventional terms. I like them a lot and they are always interesting, but often flawed technically and design-wise. Sunset actually has a pretty low review rating on Steam for a fan-favorite.
- They overspent on PR and production. PR is mostly pointless these days, especially when you're already a rather notable developer who won't have trouble securing press. RPS ads won't suddenly make the game appeal to zombie-shooting crowds, too.
- Surviving on external grants may not be the best business model. It basically means you have no sustainable income and financial independence. One bigger failure or a program you were in ends, and you have nothing to fall back on.
- A bit of a broader issue: we don't really have platforms for more ambitious games. Selling Sunset on Steam is a bit like putting a Sundance flick into a mall multiplex and then being surprised that it doesn't sell as well as Transformers 3 or whatever.

Either way, I'm sad to see them go. They've always been a huge inspiration for us and one of the reasons I decided to go indie. Gaming world just got a bit worse (again) and that's surely a loss.

[joseph ¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

Complicated thoughts -- I worked on Sunset and contributed a bunch of art assets. (To clarify tho: I'm a fan of ToT and proud of what I made, but I should note I was separate from the design/art decisions/day to day work, it's very much not 'my' game.)

In a sense, you can argue that it's not surprising the game didn't sell well, because games are a tough market and much of the userbase is fundamentally not interested in narrative experiences. That's not a really substantive argument though. I don't think anyone expected it to sell like GTA5.

The reality is that they are inside of a much smaller market than 'videogames', and we should discuss that market.

If the market for artistic/interesting experiences that don't have a strong mechanical hook is so small that a company like ToT can't survive, that's super troubling and we should be taking notice and discussing it.

• Is the only solution empowering developers who want to make artgames to add mechanical hooks and systems and 'gameplay' that don't fit their product?
• Is there an untapped market that could have been better reached?
• Is there a way to develop games which is even leaner than a 2 person studio drawing tiny salaries + affordable freelancers?

Also: I Echo TeeGee's sentiments about the lack of platforms for sales (the recent itch.io reports on monthly revenue on the platform vs number of games are very ,) and the lack of relevance of cutting price. Most of these sunset sales were at a cut price.

[Capntastic]

Economically, my thoughts are that they might have had more success by lowering their prices.

So tired of this argument, as it only shows that the person using it knows very little about actually selling games.

Yeah I guess I am ignorant about prognosticating something as complex as the "indie art game market" which is why I qualified it with a big "might" and went on to explain my reasoning and how even lowered prices isn't a silver bullet.  If you want to couch my post as an "argument" to springboard off of, that's fine, but maybe don't point to my post and say "people like this don't know what the fuck they're talking about" unless you're going to actually respond to what I said directly?

[gimymblert]

gone home, ethan carter, and various other sell enough to sustain themselves, also telltale break through using sheer persistance at finding a model, they didn't give up at jurassic park and walking dead use very similar mechanics, they improved between the two game. It's more of a culture things, tale of tales is not interested in "selling out" to begin with nor they are interested in reaching a "market" they care about their art first and foremost EVERYTHING else is just an annoying afterthoughts. If there is a market for them they need to really want it and nurture it and deal with the surrounding annoyance. They won't. But then they wouldn't be tale of tales.

[ｂ∀ ｋｋｕｓａ]

Sunset :the story is poorly written and overall the game was boring for me.

When i play Tale of Tales games, even though i enjoy em (The path especially), i get the feeling of its pretentiousness poking but somewhat it's okay, thanks to imaginative and creative visuals.

But for Sunset. the concept and the settings are great .... but  so ...  boring.

As i felt disappointed after purchasing the game. This topic doesn't suprise me at all...

Most of the youtube videos i've seen about were complaining about technical issues. wich i supposed backfired.