next »

[joulimousis]

I've just read the interview with Andy Moore at IndieGamePod.com http://www.indiegamepod.com/?p=2076 and it made me wonder about some stuff related to flash games sponsorship.

It says, many times, that :
"...if you just look at the state of the flash industry, the numbers are this. There’s a hundred new flash games a day. On average, they will generate $2,000 lifetime revenue. It’s OK, and then the average game takes two weeks to make."
"So, the average game makes two grand. So, the average game is a two week, unpolished, horribly thought out, bad graphics game."

And he goes on with this premise, that a crappy game will make 2k in its lifetime revenue. I know many indie devs who made pretty decent flash games that didn't make that much money from it (putting it up on FGL). The main discussion in the indie scene today is "How can we, at least, break even with a game in the flash market?"
Go to FGL, it's filled with really crappy games. Will you say that those games are going to make 2k or absolute zero?

What I want to ask is this (it would clarify things for me):
"Who around here has made, at least, 2k with a crappy game?"

Maybe it's true and I'm just living inside a shell.

[Mipe]

What is the cost of development of said crappy game? 2k... That is like three months of job.

[Nix]

What is the cost of development of said crappy game? 2k... That is like three months of job.

2k in three months? Full time? I don't know anyone who can (in America) live on that. I think that the economic viability of the "pump out crappy flash games" plan also depends on how you're doing it. Are you trying to make it with Flash games as your only source of income? Are you a student or do you have a full-time job already and you're just doing this in your free time? I'm also curious to see responses to this thread. What is the crappiest game that you've seen sell for the most money?

[joulimousis]

The question is not about how much does it cost to develop a 2week game (because it varies), neither is a competition to see who made the more money with the crappiest game.

It's a thread to find out the true behind the sponsorship deals. Andy had tremendous success in it and he claims certain things. It would be great to see the true behind those claims(not saying they aren't true).

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

2k in three months? Full time? I don't know anyone who can (in America) live on that. I think that the economic viability of the "pump out crappy flash games" plan also depends on how you're doing it. Are you trying to make it with Flash games as your only source of income? Are you a student or do you have a full-time job already and you're just doing this in your free time? I'm also curious to see responses to this thread. What is the crappiest game that you've seen sell for the most money?

there are plenty of people in the US who earn and live on less than $8000 a year. costs of living vary. with enough roomates and a poor apartment in an urban area it's easy to live on 8k a year. you can't live in a suburb and own a house on 8k a year, sure. but with food stamps, section 8 housing, roomates, buying cheap food in bulk etc., it's doable.

[GZ]

I read this earlier and that part caught my attention too. I don't know much about FGL deals, but I remember a while back the guy who did Fig. 8 posted about his experience. I believe he got around 8k after bonuses, but that seemed to be a game that had a lot of interest. So it didn't seem like a typical case.

It seems hard to believe that any crappy flash game would get 2k, but we might also be underestimating the long term effects of this as well as addition deals. As stated in the article:

It’s been about 40 grand now in secondary licensing deals, ad revenues, all that kind of stuff.

He might be referring to a long period of time, like a year or so, where you build up ad revenues. So maybe it's something like 1k for the game up front, then 1k in other deals and ad revenues over a year.

Either way, anyone who has experience with this and would like to share, I'm among those who would be interested in hearing about it.

[joulimousis]

At the other end. Does anyone knows of another deal like the one Andy got from ArmorGames?
We are talking about 25k for 1 week exclusive.

[OneMoreGo]

It's an average, applying it to the worst game doesn't make much sense 

[moi]

There are many flash games that get $25k or even more, but they are very polished games. Don't make plans on earning a living from flash games though.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

yeah, i believe desktop tower defense made over 100k in ad revenue. so if you have a "hit" it can make a lot. but i don't actually believe that the average is 2k.

for instance, streemerz (by mr podunkian) is a really really great flash game, but only made $700 or something on FGL. so it'd really surprise me if the average flash game, which is a lot worse than streemerz, makes 2k on FGL.

[bvanevery]

there are plenty of people in the US who earn and live on less than $8000 a year. costs of living vary. with enough roomates and a poor apartment in an urban area it's easy to live on 8k a year. you can't live in a suburb and own a house on 8k a year, sure. but with food stamps, section 8 housing, roomates, buying cheap food in bulk etc., it's doable.

Why bother?  I've been there, done that.  My software idealism drove me to it.  Then I changed my tune, got a consulting gig for a non-game job, and made enough money in 6 months to live for 2 years.  In the burbs, in a decent apartment.  I think people in the USA who think $8k/year is a practical way to make games aren't very good at math.  There comes a point at which your pay is so low, that you're better off working a non-game computer job, saving your money, then using that to fund your indie game habit.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

nobody does that by choice, obviously. i'm just saying that if that's all you make, survival is still possible. it just annoys me when people say stuff like 'oh, who can survive on x a year in the US!' when millions of people do survive on that in the US. it strikes me as very out of touch with the realities of poverty in this country.

[gimymblert]

nobody does that by choice, obviously. i'm just saying that if that's all you make, survival is still possible.

wrong!


Ok not i'm not in US

[Alistair Aitcheson]

nobody does that by choice, obviously. i'm just saying that if that's all you make, survival is still possible. it just annoys me when people say stuff like 'oh, who can survive on x a year in the US!' when millions of people do survive on that in the US. it strikes me as very out of touch with the realities of poverty in this country.

I see what you mean, but I think it's missing the question that indie developers are asking themselves. Game developers have a very strong set of skills and could probably afford a very decent living standard if they used those skills in a game studio, and even more in other sectors. Is it worth giving up the opportunity for a much more comfortable lifestyle, with considerably less financial risk, in order to develop your own video games? I think it's perfectly valid to ask "how big is that difference?" and "how much more difficult would my lifestyle be?"

[Alistair Aitcheson]

Just read the article, and it's a very interesting read. I would be interested to find out if $2,000 is a reasonable estimate for a simple flash game.

I think one of the reasons these simple unpolished games could sell better than polished intelligent games like Streemerz is the simplicity and recognisability.

Streemerz takes a little bit of explanation - you can't jump but you can use the grappling cord on the walls to drag yourself around. Games with a premise like "catch the falling stickmen" or "stickmen football" are much easier to explain. All you need is on the title. That's enough to attract people to the site, and if they don't like the game there's a strong chance they'll click on another one instead while they're on the portal site.

With more ambitious games, often with more ambiguous titles which need a bit more explanation, they'll only find buyers if the sponsor believes it'll be a big deal. It's worth investing in if people will come to the portal specifically to play that big game. But with ridiculously simple titles, people will visit the portal out of curiosity, even if they don't stay on that one game for long.

For that reason, I don't think it's unreasonable that small unpolished flash games can earn more than polished complex games via sponsors.

From a developer's point of view, it depends on what you want to get out of it. I would not try to scrape a living from small unpolished games for the rest of my life. I would love to experiment with Flash Game License, but ultimately you need a big success if you want to live off your own games. Unambitious and unpolished games are no way to build up a strong brand image, and if you're thinking of running a serious full-time business you need to think of your brand.

[bvanevery]

Is it worth giving up the opportunity for a much more comfortable lifestyle, with considerably less financial risk, in order to develop your own video games? I think it's perfectly valid to ask "how big is that difference?" and "how much more difficult would my lifestyle be?"

It's a false choice.  Game developers don't have to live in poverty in the USA, except perhaps during dire recessions.  There's nothing stopping anyone from working 3..6 months out of the year on something non-game that pays well, and the rest of the time on your own stuff.

I will offer the following words of wisdom about running off to the National Forests so that you can pay $0 rent though:

• on major holidays, when there are lotsa campers in the woods, there are also lots of thieves.  I got a lot of my stuff stolen on Labor Day weekend.
• there are survivalist gun nuts out there.  One of 'em pointed a gun at my dog.  I won't show up to the NFs during hunting season, as that experience was bad enough pre-season.

[jrjellybeans]

Game developers don't have to live in poverty in the USA, except perhaps during dire recessions.  There's nothing stopping anyone from working 3..6 months out of the year on something non-game that pays well, and the rest of the time on your own stuff.

I think it's a bit harder than that...

It's not like there are a bunch of GREAT paying jobs that just anyone can waltz in and get.

The better the job, the more people want it.  Do you know how many people would KILL to work only 3-6 months the year?

I'm not trying to say that it's not possible.  But... well, since, I'm looking for a job, it's kind of frustrating that you feel like there are just shit tons of great jobs lying around for anyone somewhat qualified...

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

"There's nothing stopping anyone from working 3..6 months out of the year on something non-game that pays well, and the rest of the time on your own stuff."

there are a lot of things stopping that, depending on the person. some indie game devs have no high school degree, some have mental or physical handicaps, etc. -- not every indie game dev is employable, let alone employable in a job that pays well. that statement still strikes me as the talk of someone who has never lived in poverty. but this is really off topic

i don't really agree that the reason streemerz made little money is because it was 'too intelligent'. it had derek yu's head exploding, and broken english, and phil fish falling to his death from a cliff. it's a fun game, but it isn't an art game and doesn't take mental effort to get or anything, it's a great joke game. i just think that that article is outdated; there was a time when 2k$ was the average paid for a flash game, but that seems to have gone down due to a flood of flash games.

[Zaphos]

The podcast is from Sept 6th this year, so I don't think the article is outdated ... the number might be though.

Why not just ask Andy where/when he got that number?  His about page invites people to ask him about business or whatever -- http://www.andymoore.ca/about/

[bvanevery]

"There's nothing stopping anyone from working 3..6 months out of the year on something non-game that pays well, and the rest of the time on your own stuff."

there are a lot of things stopping that, depending on the person. some indie game devs have no high school degree,"

If they're young enough that they're supposed to be in high school, then they can jolly well stay in school.  If they're too stupid to have a high school diploma, then I'm not going to lose sleep over their computer industry pay grade.  If they're too smart to need a high school diploma, I'm sure they'll find their place in the free market.

some have mental or physical handicaps, etc.

Then if they're old enough to be living on their own, they'll be getting government assistance and we really don't have to worry about them.  I've had friends in that circumstance.  I would not trade places with them, because generally they had something pretty seriously wrong with them.  I'd rather be poor but able-bodied.

-- not every indie game dev is employable, let alone employable in a job that pays well.

The cases you have explicitly listed are not relevant.  You'll have to do better if you expect a "learned helplessness" sales pitch to be compelling.  I say there's no excuse, short of no job market at all.

that statement still strikes me as the talk of someone who has never lived in poverty.

Ha.  The level of poverty I haven't done is homelessness.  I've done the other stuff.