Games to avoid as an indie game developer
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 06. 2024
- Wishlist Regulator City: store.steampowered.com/app/18...
Wishlist Gauntlet of Power: store.steampowered.com/app/23...
#gamedev #indiedev #programming
Music from: www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
CONNECT:
►DISCORD: / discord
► FREE eBOOK: www.orangepixel.net/signup/
► Business: support[ at ]orangepixel.net
SOCIAL MEDIA:
► Twitter: / orangepixel - game related
► Twitter: / orangepascal - everything else
► Facebook: / orangepixel
► IG: / orangepixelgames
► www.orangepixel.net
I'm Pascal a Dutch independent game developer since 2004 known as Orangepixel. I created various games including Residual, the Gunslugs series, Heroes of Loot series, Space Grunts series, Stardash and the Meganoid series released on PC, mobile and various consoles.
I'm currently working on a tiny MMO game, but I 100% agree with your points when you're actually trying to make a living off of it hahaha
As a hobby that could be fun for sure! Good luck with it 😎
@@orangepixelgames Thanks!
A 'tiny' MMO game already sounds like something that won't work though. People are looking for experiences that are huge, last a long time and keep getting bigger or have the dynamic online campaigns to hook players. Nothing about that is ever 'tiny'. Perhaps you're just making a multiplayer game. And I'm not knocking your efforts. But I just found it mildly amusing to see someone say 'tiny' and 'massive multiplayer' in one sentence.
@@PHeMoX Like I said, I'm not trying to make a living off of it, it's just a hobby project to learn more about client-server networking and to mess around on with friends
I've made 2 games with Steam's relay & lobby services. They can also be played solo. I wouldn't suggest beginners try this, but it's possible if you're up to the challenge. My games compensate for lag by using tile based movement and not using the physics engine, like the old Blizzard RTS games.
Interesting, certainly something to keep in mind if I ever try to add multiplayer to one of my single player games 😁
you are totally right, im only creating single player games for android right now. platformers, 2d shooters topdown, and metroidvania. there is nothing else to me to create.. cant compete with the large market we are in.. too much risks for nothing.. i have a family to take care of.. if i was like 18 years i could try, but at 38 we cant risk to lose time and money
At some point it all becomes (became) so serious! 😅 And yeah certain risks are harder to attempt
I think Steam has free lobby and relay servers, so that allows host-cliënt multiplayer without server cost (and no need to exchange IPs with people). Valve also allows users to create dedicated servers for more demanding games (so no cost to the developer). But the technical challenges are enough to keep me away from multiplayer at this time 😅.
Oh, did not know about this! Might look into it at some point. Altho not for a -only game 🙃
@@orangepixelgames If you're ever curious, can recommend checking out the Big 3 Cloud providers, as each has their own free/cheap hosting tier, with or w/o indie game support-services.
For my Masters I did a Google Cloud backend for our web game - not for the fainthearted, but the docs are solid, and you can test stuff out & tinker without paying or opening/unsecuring your setup. Have peeked into Microsoft/Azure as well, and done some training there thru my day-job - little less generous with the free tier (may be better if you're XBox), but similarly cool for messing around & learning.
Those big guys price for enterprise-scale, so the micro-scale that indies work in is usually free or a couple bucks a month. Doesn't negate the headache though!
Awesome topic today. I totally agree with you. It is already almost impossible as an indie dev to put on the hat of so many roles for a very simple game let alone a multiplayer game. My biggest challenge is creating content. Oh and I love the new setup.
Yup, content takes time! (Or a lot of money) So making a game that needs constant content updates is hard to pull off!
Lots of good points, and I would also add that micro-transaction-based games (like the mobile ones you mentioned) would make me feel very demotivated, because you'd no longer be trying to design a good core experience but rather a frustrating one. :P
Yes totally agree, I was developing not one but two small web based MMOs back in the mid 2000s! (Because I'm stupid and stubborn and apparently didn't learn the first time ;-) )
Even with the far less competition back then it was difficult to maintain for a micro team of 3.
Technology wise I don't think it's too bad to run a server especially these days. There are ways to keep the costs down (avoiding cloud services for starters!)
However, user acquisition is incredibly expensive and even worse now unless you can find a completely untapped niche
The biggest thing thing that devs don't realise is the time required to support even a smallish MMO player base is immense.
It's a real eyeopener on how personality types interact and more often or not clash. You feel like a school teacher in a nursery/kindergarten ("he hit me, no she hit me", "I lost a couple of items due to this small bug I DEMAND COMPENSATION NOW NOW NOW", etc, etc).
I'd love to do it again though, I have a hunch that there is still space for smallish indie mmo type games if you know what you're doing.
Very like you do with smallish indie single player experiences in your own niches
but I really wouldn't bother unless I had plenty of funding behind me and a small team.
I think the point about user engagement analytics / marketing also applies to single player games cause of microtransactions, i.e. you're up against multi-million dollar projects anyway.
I totally agree! I would never want to tackle a game that involves needing servers. There is so much up front cost to get going and then you don't know if any players will show up to play your game. Not to mention...those kinds of games are never really finished. I would like to develop something that I can get to a point that I can call it finished and then move on to something new.
That's also a good point! I also prefer having a completed experience, and then be able to create something else
"Never really finished" This!! Multimillion dollar studios with hundreds of staff shut down MP/live games early on the regular, just because the burn-rate is higher than the revenue. No matter how low the player-count, ppl will still demand the same high level of service & support, fast matchmaking [with who?! 😂], and local/low-latency servers. The math just doesn't add up, but players won't wanna hear that 😣
It's a shame because multiplayer is a great chunk of emotions and experiences that we are just letting go. Also, multiplayer is a good way to make people actually buy your game and not download it from utorrent🥶. Another thing I think of is steam fee: we pay A LOT for steam services that we are not using, especially multiplayer api
There are some exceptions to the multiplayer hurdle.
Some multiplayer games can do fine with low player counts and you don't necessarily need costly servers (using peer to peer).
Agree with your points. Just found out about your channel & you have a new subscriber here😉. I want to ask you this, I also don't like to make gambling games but what about games created for Skillz platform which allows players to compete with other players in cash tournaments. Well it can look like gambling but one thing to note that its skill based too. Not just pure luck & we can replay how opponent played too. Google play doesn't have these games since they don't meet their some requirements but App store do have them. What's your opinion on that? Are they gambling games too? Also I suggest you to make another video on which genres should indie game developers focus more on.
I haven't read enough about Skillz to really comment on that. They contacted me in the past about getting my games on there, but I guess I'm just turned off by the fact that it somewhat sounds like gambling.. maybe? 🤔🙃
But! Welcome to the channel 😁 the genre's to make topic is a good idea and on my list!
i think making a multiplayer game that would be hosted on player side would be one id be interested in making but yeah the others i probably would never touch.
If it comes with a single player mission, then you at least avoid the problem of someone needing other players to play against
Happy gamedev is my hobby, create what im most passionate about, no worries about all these things.
Multiplayer is like "Impossible" level difficulty mode of game development. I've heard it being likened to making two full complete games in one. And one game is already hard enough to make >.>
If you do want to do it though, you could do what Klei did with Don't Starve. They made Don't Starve first, a single player game. Once they found that game was successful, they made a new game called "Don't Starve Together". So only make it after the game is successful.
Eventually I want to do multiplayer games, maybe not the huge ones that require a server but maybe small ones that can just use the player's computer as a server with up to 1-4 players. That being said I probably wouldn't make it until I have several successful games.
Backpack Battles also have a interesting approach, its Multiplayer PvP but its not.
Having a community from the single player game move to a multiplayer sequel could indeed be the way!
Peer-to-peer "friend co-op" (local/couch & remote w/ friends) could work for some games, but you still have to do a lot of testing and support. In the old days of LAN parties and Nintendo handhelds, that MP style was popular, but players then were more techie as a whole, and way more willing to tinker to make things work.
Thanks for you insight! In regards to Fortnite, its Creative Mode is a great tool to start understanding 3d game design, layouts, and experimenting. Fortnite also has a ton of user generated content where they have made 2d-ish games, different genres, blatant copying of AAA and indie games that you can try out. Networking/multiplayer features adds SOOOOO much technical, customer and network support costs, time and complexity. All that time pulls away time from actually working on the game creation. Market saturation is overwhelming. Being a survivor from the regular game industry, I realized it is better for me to make "lobby casual" or "hyper casual" games that I enjoy playing and others can play for 3 to 10 minutes and then go on with their day or other games. I do like developing local multiplayer than online.
On one hand having that creative mode is great, but it also means players will spend even more time in Fortnite and not try all the other games out there 😅
Hello, if you are reading here, I am a big fan of your games, and I especially loved the old version of meganoid (the difficult-ish platformer one). I used to play it so much when I was at university. It was simple yet challanging, the difficulty was just spot on. I really would like to play that again and finish it this time, but it is not available anymore. I occasionally check to see if perhaps you've decided to re-release it, but no luck so far :) I truly believe it deserves a spot on Steam alongside your other games. It’s such a wasted opportunity, man, also so much content (there were a lot of levels as I remember). I could even ask for a spare apk if you are not planning of publishing it again :D
Ah the lovely Meganoid 😁 did a video about it fairly recently. Problem with the original is that it's old source code, and simply doesn't run on modern Android or iOS versions anymore.
At some points, games really die 😭🙃
I agree that the genres you mentioned a basically impossible for solo or rock band size teams. I also think that asset heavy genres like RPG, RTS, turn based strategy and Adventure are very difficult as making assets is a linear process that soaks up time and artists. The mechanics of those genres are not directly the problem, as those games can be kept small and reuse and recombination may make the look bigger then they really are. Gamers and gamedev's have certain expectations of games in those genres, making feature creep a thing. Maybe you could share your opinion in a "Game genres that experience the most feature creep" or something video?
🤔 a video on how to avoid feature creep could be fun.. might have done one a few years ago, but I (and others) probably don't remember anyway 😁
Making a tactical RPG :) So far, the costliest player expectations in the budget are actually VA, localization, and testing/QA. Stores & commissions (or contractors) for art/music assets can be quite cost-effective, if you're careful about it.
But even a small RPG is often very "wordy", and there's a lot of quest-flag/playability to test. Plus, the places that would love your RPG might not match your native language. You can still skip full voice-acting as an indie, but even a few barks can lift you above the sea of samey-feeling indie RPGs.
@@orangepixelgames that and, a video about “efficiency”. Getting games done in a timely fashion is something I (and I think many others) find hard, feature creep but also perfectionism being 2 of the worst offenders. So a video about efficiency and how to get games done in time would be super cool
I think the biggest issue with any type of multiplayer game is that you need an active player base for a game to become successful. No players means nothing is there (or heavy reliance on bots). I remember a couple of years ago there was this amazing indie 2D basketball game. Amazing game. But zero players and online-only. That was so disappointing to see. And again, the game was really solid. Player base though was non-existent. That's perhaps the biggest risk here. A co-op experience might be more feasible. But rely on it too much and you'll end up with the same problem. Quite a few games are kind of DOA because of that, with no bot support for a singleplayer experience. I also think that in general people overrate all the multiplayer or even just 3D games. With modern tools and game engines it is seemingly more easy, but this is not really true at all. From a technical point of view it is really a lot more work, requires more content and even with clever procedural generation is a bigger hill to climb.
The amount of times players casually ask if a developer can add multiplayer is still scary! If it was only that simple 😁
I've worked on live service games as part of my job and I think I can say with confidence that any kind of live service or online game is something I'd stay far away from in personal work because the grind never stops. Once you release the game, its update after update on relatively small release windows because people will grind through the whole game in two days and claim there's not enough content. Then the game bleeds players, making it hard to maintain as a live service or multiplayer model--this is even worse if your game is free-to-play. It's a toxic cycle that will wear you down and burn you out much faster than any other project. Unless you have a team so large that you can split updates across teams with reasonable development time and deadlines...it's not worth it.
Exactly, I would probably go crazy having to work on the same game for that long and just to add new content
I'd be interested in the games that you cannot make technically (you mentioned that at the end of the video).
I’m curious what you’d think about the 3d action adventure genre? Atleast as a solo dev I feel like that genre would be incredibly hard to compete in. Since a lot of the key elements in those are flashy action sequences and generally pretty refined and polished combat(atleast visually).
I totally agree on the genres you listed. My general rule of thumb is where content generation is king AAA will come out on top, everything else is fair game for indies.
Look into "Blood Crisis". Sure the game isn't done and it will be smaller scale than AAA but the dude is attempting to make kingdom hearts like combat alone. Imo he is making mistake by doing this as his first game as he might had been able to learn faster if he did smaller games first to learn what he needs for his final "dream" game. But he seems dedicated. The progress already shows that it is possible but a huge task.
Probably very hard to do, but maybe not impossible? I know a few devs who started such a project, they did eventually grow into a team, but if that becomes an option.. then why not!
Great advice... Thanks a lot
I cannot even IMAGINE making a (successful) multiplayer game in today's climate. There's just absolutely no way
Only game I thought of (after editing the video) is Among Us .. which was a very tiny team, and had the "luck" of Covid happening, maybe, a bit
I am thinking of a 2 player game but the players need to be in the same room, like husband and wife or brothers, using bluetooth connection in Unity but there is like no documentation for setting Bluetooth in unity.
Guessing you mean on mobile? Cause on console or PC you could just make it a shared screen experience
When it comes to multiplayer, don’t forget the anticheat. So many games bomb out because they can’t keep up on the cheating problem and their playerbase gets frustrated and leaves. It’s just not worth the effort to take on such a massive undertaking only to have a handful of unpleasant individuals derail your game overnight.
Oh that's another good one!
Would you consider making a pixel art rpglite with possible DLC something feasible and somewhat lucrative for an indie game dev?
Yeah RPG is generally a great genre, only downfall would probably making sure the scope/size of the project is manageable for the team you have. But I'm sure there are smarts ways to have content that requires less work/hours to make
@@orangepixelgames Yeah scoping as been in my mind since the start. For every feature I want to add, I always think about the reusability and scability of the asset. I feel its really is to scope creep with an rpg.
Thoughtful response, I liked it.
Woohoo! 😎
I made a pvp multiplayer (though without a dedicate server), it's just been a struggle to get the players in. I don't have a marketing budget, so that makes it even harder. Had to create a single player to try and get a player base but sadly it's rare when they'd go and play multiplayer. So it's not really worked out for myself but I learned a lot. I think if I do it again I would make the game free & only focus on multiplayer (in hopes I could make it more appealing).
Brave dev, and good luck on sticking with multiplayer 🫡
You sure you can't market it? I know a half a decade ago I could get 1000 impressions on facebook for $5. What about making some youtube ads, targetting them at audiences who consume content akin to the genre of your game and keeping the game free until you have a playerbase of 1000 or so? Put $5 or $20 a day into the ad and monitor, maybe try a few different audiences that could be promising. Then you can start charging money after you have an active playerbase. I don't know if it will work but $100-$200 can't hurt to try if you've already made a whole game.
Can you create a video where you explain which game genres should focus on as a single indie game developer?
Putting it on the video idea list 🙃
Can you make a video and share your inspiration for games that you already created?
Putting it on the video idea list
My project has all the red flags :)
Niche (but very dedicated) audience
Multiplayer, turn based + realtime at the same time
World state uses an external / physical source of truth, where the server operates on a computed estimate of the world state
Cross platform - win, Mac, Linux, android, iOS
Needs to function fully when offline, where 1 player acts as the server
Zero dependencies- no 3rd party libraries, no frameworks
Written entirely in Zig, which isn’t even 1.0 yet :)
Getting there
I had to look up Zig.... 😅. Good luck with all of that!
@@orangepixelgames ha, yeah, not that mainstream yet. It’s just C with modern tricks. Works fine for what I’m doing.
The really hard part is synching the physical tabletop state with the server state .. without completely ruining the game experience
It’s been quite a long process so far - easily gone way over my initial “double the estimate” estimate :)
Games for adults also one interestring genre, with low cost to enter... What your opinion about that?
Don't think I'd ever make those 🤔 but I honestly have no idea how or what they exactly are.. so I even forgot that they existed until just now 😅
Interestingly enough, this is a real, viable path *with caveats.* Regulation & reputation are the big ones. Over in visual-novel land, otome games [romance games for girls/women], are having a great time - low cost, fast turnaround, happy/eager playerbase.
But most of the "adult" content on Steam doesn't overlap with that market. An indie team with good writing & art, and an understanding and respect for the market could probably do well with it.
For my the only gernal off game's i don't have plans to create is the following
Mmo, pay to win, pay to play, scription service, gabilng
My first playble video game it's local multiplayer but with this i realized it's very hard to find people to play with the same computer,
Because of that i dispaid that next step is to find how to make networking game
Because i already know how to make local multiplayer if find how to make networking game i will easily able to combine those 2 system and make i game that works in both system at same time.
one other thing i have personally grow up with the raise off multiplayer games i like tha fact that in old games you able to make host with your own rules and you able play with lan as well but offcores online is important as well.
And i hate the fact most the newer game don't give you that option lan any more most of them relay on one server i understand games like battle royal and mmo need servers to faction,
but what is the excuse for games like over watch paladins cs2 need relays in servers instead to be self hosts or at least give the option off self host ?
And i have say to myself if make multiplayer game i will do it right no matter for how much time i will take.
If I'll work in a multiplayer game, probably will be something like Battleship or Trivia crak that handles from two to four players and is turn based. I think multiplayer action games are to expansive for an indie game developer. Maybe if it is a team, but still is too much work and expensive to maintain
Technically a great idea, but you'd still need players to compete against 😏
my last game "tenement" was fully multiplayer. I could not get a single person even good friends to test it with me. Let alone test all day and try things, so it went bot only (impossible to test without players). after a while i did not miss the pesky humans as the bots did everything I wanted, so it stayed one player only. I also personally want games I can show off in a decade without going oh it was good when the server was up! irony is internally it is full multiplayer.
😅 so that's exactly the problem : finding players!
So no Orange Fortnite? damn, yeah making a multiplayer as a solo indie game dev seems crazy waste of time, making a good solo player game is hard enough, ofc having the ability to add a second player sure (like you mentioned) but depending on player population for success as a solo indie game dev its just waste of time imo, the setup looks cool !
Orange Fortnite Solo adventure is in the planning stages 😁 (it's not)
🤣@@orangepixelgames
I needed to hear this. I think you're right.
I've been right before, in 2013 😜
"What would success/failure cost?" "Is this a Red or Blue Ocean genre?" "Will I be able to sleep at night if I make this?"
Sounds like your "Genres to run from, fast" checklist is similar to mine 👍 And yes, the new setup is cool, but I heard business and immediately thought "we're gonna see the cats" lol
Haha yeah the cats haven't been seen for a while now 😅 (on video that is)
What about simulation /tycoon ?
Nothing wrong with those genre's in my opinion. Just might be hard to make? But that can be learned!
Damn dude, I was gunna hit you up and see if you fancied a colab on a game idea I've had for a live service multiplayer gambling game 😏
Then I'm glad I made this video and stopped you from that plan 😅
Ahh, if only it had genAI! Or NFTs 🚀😂😂
Gambling games don't sit well with me either. Same goes with Gatcha games. They literally use the same Gambling algorithm for the Gatcha. I stay away from those game as far as possible. Gatcha games are gambling games hidden behind the veil of cute anime girls lol
Which might even make them more harmful!
The cuteness isn't an accident 😡 [US] Casinos do a lot of research into what kind of branding works best for slots & in-person games. Stuff based on pop culture, like movies, and cute, colorful characters works best, esp for casual/newcomers and young people. Basically, it not only draws you in, but makes you relax your guard. Honestly, I put it in the category of dr*g dealers who make their "product" look like candy. Special place in hell...
I wouldn't do serious simulation game either. Firstly I don't think i know of any topic deep enough to make it deep and detailed enough. But then i need high graphic assets and make immersive game around that. I think it is easier to make goofy "simulation" game such as "goat simulator" instead since these do not need knowledge, accurate details, real-life-like physics nor same level of immersion to be engaging. I strongly feel like making fun sim is easier & cheaper to make (especially since bugs can be turned into features as player isn't expecting real life rules to apply to everything) and most probably more interesting for player than making serious simulation game.
But even a fun/non realistic simulation game is a simulation game 🙃 so that genre isn't really impossible!
@@orangepixelgames i see your point if we just slap same genre on both of them... but to me they are way different games with different approaches and goals and the genre probably should even be divided into two or more sections. For example if we compare there 2 types of games into movie genres then one would be more like documentary trying to show real life realistically and the other would be wacky comedy. Hmm.. or a mockumentary? (Which i believe still doesn't fall under "documentary" genre).
Okay I get your point but still trying to make multiplayer fps
As for have plan to fix the server isuouse I already have plans for this
The multiplayer game I tried to make it's not mmo it ssm (small scale multiplayer) wean say small I don't mean I will need 2 or 4 players to I will not be this small scale i mean i will be indeping host for the players and I will only need to find room system to connect with each other.
What have in mind is the following
1. Split screen multiplayer that the option to play up to 4 players from the same computer.
2. Lan game the option for player's to play with same network with multiple computers.
3. Host game that means the Player I will able to make the own host and play online.
4. The split screen system I will work with networking that means teknly I will able to play up 8 players with 2 computer's.
5. My game I will be Mach making that means I will not have to make server I will only need to find option to connect those servers each online and each other room system.
6. If my game is end up to be free to play and need account servers for the items even if those servers is down my game still will playble with out those items.
To be honest I have 0 idea how to make networking game 😅 and my game dasn't even have the besicly but I still trying to make this game
I know this project is very hard and for solo developer like my self but I still trying my best.
But you don't have to wory if my game is free to play that is very likely to be,
I will be cosmetics only I hated wean pay to win pay to play ECT.
It may be Wong but in my experience I don't know Many people that have more 20 friend that wants to play at the same time
My point is even if multiplayer game isn't not massive like forline and 10 to 20 players max like old fps it's still plany off player's especially wean the are respawn and have smaller maps like the I have plan to create.
The problem is that it's already hard marketing a single player game and getting people to play it. If it's a multiplayer game, you need other people to always be available at the same time wanting to play the game.. that makes it harder to make the game interesting to people.. if it's just a hobby project, go for it! But if you need to make money from it, it's very risky 😁
@@orangepixelgames I agree with you I need to have players to play and yap it's hobby not job
As for how to make money there is 2 option
1. seling cosmetics and make the game Free to play
2. Seling the game and have every right away
The most likely senay it's too be free to play cosmetics only,
because it makes sense in both in the fact that this game I will update over the years and for player's prospective free to play games have more Player's most of the times
And for shomene that makes the own 3D models make like myself make cosmetics it's probably very easy.
As for how I will find player's to play if getting there I don't think I will be this hard in my game I will have multiple ways to play this multiplayer.
1. Local multiplayer play with other people on the same device.
2. Lan play with other people with the same network
3. Online play with other people all over the world
And make things even easier the split screen system I will work in both online and lan game as well that means you will able to play up 4 players from your device and connect online or with lan and play with other people at the same time and top of that my game dasn't need a lot of people in the order to work if have at least 1 enemy Player you able to play and have fun offcores I will be more fun if have more Player's but the minimum number of people my game needs is 2
I hate everything from "Game as Service": NFTs, locked content dlc, crypto, gamepass, season pass, lootboxes, gachas, (hundreds of) paid skins, pay to win, free to play (but almost everthing you have to pay), barebones games (hundreds of paid dlcs, but the basic game is paper thin), everything that makes a game looks more like a Casino than a actual game... I hate it all.
I won´t put any of these on my games (maybe free dlcs and of course, update patches and bug fixes, the only ones that I enjoy as a player).
That's a lot of 'hate' ! 😅
Yeah, modern gaming looks more like spending your money with microtransactions, paid dlcs, skins, season pass, gacha (lootboxes with other name)... and I barelly started.
Just look at games like Sushicide* Squad (*I don´t want to be blocked) and the first AAAA game, Skull and Bones failing hard.
What I really care is a good gameplay and a great experience, characters that have a nice story and leave a impact on you.
Modern gaming is ditching most of it to focus on making money first before making a nice gameplay.
I want nice cool games for the players and I´m trying to make it with the indie games that I´ll develop.
same here, same reasons I will never touch the ones you mentioned
We agree way too often! 😁
@@orangepixelgamesperhaps because we develop small games and not AAA titles :)
Prob. The beat genre is shooter games FPS. Am sure if you get not so decent 3d models and above average VFX and good sounds and awesome controls. It will selll and selll and sell some more. Thats my next type of game. Will probably use Unity or maybe Libgdx
Good luck! You will be up against a lot of polished and great games 🙃
@@orangepixelgames yea I know. Seems like everyone goes for the violent shooter games. So do you use Libgdx exclusively for your games?
Just the core part of LibGDX, input handling, audio and rendering. I write all other code myself, so it's still 'easy' to port to other stuff if needed (like the console version is a Monogame port)
@@orangepixelgames So you use Libgdx as a core cause you can deploy it to Windows, Android and IOS. But, what do you use to write the actual game mechanics such as animating sprites and the physics and collisions? Never knew you can just use parts of Libgdx.
I write my own code to handle those things. That way I know what's happening under the hood, and I can optimize or tweak things for each game. Generic code like LibGDX has isn't always the best or fastest way to do things, just easier to use
True, But Unreal Engine built in networking makes creating multiplayer games a lot easier especially shooter games.
Multiplayer games might be time consuming and challenging to make yet some random people quit their jobs to become full time game devs that end up creating hits like PUBG, Palworld or a scam like The Day Before. Love to see them talking about their success and how they have no idea how to code or use a game engine yet sell over 20 million copies 😅
It's not about the technical aspects tho, but about finding players to occupy the game world.. seen many AAA devs split up to create a multiplayer/arena type game, and then fold the company after bad install base..
ha ha those "huge time waste games"; another great video, thank you!
Thanks for watching again! 😜
interesting, make a part 2.
I only just wrapped up part 1 😅
i know, but we want to hear more from you on this@@orangepixelgames
Do you realise in every country
Everywhere possible and on every device I can
I really like this ♫♪♫♪
You can't like it, you're a bot
what about Facebook games?
Not a genre is it?, more another platform. Could do different type of games for it. I just have no idea how big the audience is and what kind of audience it has 😅
Woo, I'm early this time!
Someone had to be early!
Servers = headaches
Agreed
I don't know sir.. I feel like, yes sure, most of your points are completely valid, but this sounds more like you're telling us what your personal preference is and less of what might be a good or bad idea for everyone else... I think idies, especially "rock band size" teams are proving exactly how much better they can do multiplayer games, beating the hell out of AAA studios, and I feel like maybe you're taking the AAA studios' experiences as your yardstick.. Sounds like a bad idea to be using the loser's experience as a yardstick, don't you think?.. Just my thoughts..
The problem is getting players to your game (if it's purely a multiplayer experience). That had nothing to do with my personal preference, that's a real problem that developers of all sizes have struggled with. But yes of course, all my videos are my opinions and views and experiences 😁
I can't do online multiplayer code to save my life so I'm out already. Lol.
Haha it's hard, but there are solutions that do a lot of the hard work! So technically it could be do able... Maybe.. 🤔🧐😅
@@orangepixelgames I remember looking into quite some years ago and was like "nope". Haha. Things have changed over the years but still not even sure it would be something I’d be interested. Not a fan of gambling either.
What about devloping games within fortnite. Then you have servers and a community of players hungry for a good experience.
That IS a way to go right now for sure, yeah, same with Roblox for example. You are bound to that ecosystem of course, but for short term at least, it could be a great starting point!
Lethal company made by one person
Palworld a team of amateur
Unturned by a 16 yo
Etc...
There are hit games in the genres made by small teams.. but most are big failures never to be heard of again (even from various AA and AAA studios). So if making games is your business and only means of making money, then you can bet on becoming such a rare hit game.. or maybe it's better not to try .. or if you're 16 and living at home, you can go for it! -And calling Palworld devs amateur is a bit silly, they had millions pumped into the game.. no amateur I know has that much money for building a game.
@@orangepixelgames palworld dev didn't knew what a rig was, that's amateur, with money yes, but amateur. The rest is a matter of strategy, the guy who made lethal company made a lot of small games, sometimes single room, released to test ideas, lethal company is basically the best compilation of everything learned in these projects, sometimes done in an afternoon and released in their white box form. being fun in these quality is one hell of a validation.
We are in an age where microgames are possible, and we have many avenue to test ideas before a well formed product, like sharing and showing concept art and ideas on social media to see which works best. If you only do full project you are missing out opportunities. Break down big ambitious projects into small experiments, potentially monetize at the coffee level, turn them into tutorial or any performance game dev format, slot them between serious project, and keep quality and dev time low until you are ready to upgrade them into a serious project. Else you create by fear and has to run just to stay in place...
Games are not made about other game. Games are Art
also they are a business
I have no idea what that means, but it's a very arty comment!
@@orangepixelgames thx for replying i love your videos, u are art too!
I think this is great advice but I am a no lifer dedicated to spending the next 5 years to port my favorite old warcraft 3 'Parasite' style game into a 3rd person multiplayer experience. Honestly I am happy to lose money on this game and will definitely lose years of time but I'll be happy even if I have an active playerbase of 50 people after its built. Even to create it and realise it will be cool whether or not it gathers dust.
There are so many unique things you can do with games and mobile now though, and new things that haven't been done yet. I have a lot of ideas that would probably be better for my wallet but I really like the one I'm working on now and as long as I have a day job and food to eat I'm ok.
Loved parasite. Got a website or anything for it yet?