"Making your game good for streaming"

I was reading a bit on gamasutra when I've read this phrase : "Making your game good for streaming". I have then started to think about it but didn't reach anywhere. If anyone in here knows, would you mind explaining how to make a game good for streaming? What I can think of is that it's the same effect a game would have to have if we were considering to have a friend watching someone play and enjoy to watch it. So, how could we as developers make a game good for watching?

 

Some games just aren't fun to watch. I think of Civilization actually. micro-managing, down-time between turns, repeating visuals- units all walk through terrain the same, most battles are very similar, and even visually exciting stuff like dropping a nuke isn't that big a deal. If you uploaded a video of a game of Civ without any frills, commentary ect. it just wouldn't be entertaining.

Youtubers, streamers, they're looking for something that will attract viewers to their channel. If you plan on making them a big part of your marketing- you need to cater to that. Watch a few streams that have high view count- pay attention to what makes the game they're playing attractive to them.

I've seen a lot of horror games that make a pretty good show- they provide ample time for talking and personality, interspersed with a few very exciting visual moments.

Having moments of downtime where the host can interject his two cents seems to be important- if the action never lets up, their viewers might as well be watching anybody play.

 

Biggest thing that stands out to me in games for streaming is the replayability. If the game is like your typical RPG with a set storyline that has one outcome then people are only really going to want to watch that once. Not much can be gained from seeing another streamer or the same streamer play it again. Add other ways of getting that goal, alternate paths etc and it gains something extra but not a great deal.

Meanwhile a game that has a lot more random elements (e.g. most rouge-likes, rogue-like-likes etc) has much more replayability and is easier for streamers/youtubers to play through a few rounds on stream or record separate rounds for multiple videos. Take The Binding of Isaac - a YouTuber called Northernlion has over 900 episodes in the original game and around 700 in the remake posts 2 videos per day and also streams an hour of the game three days a week.

 

I actually put regular thought into streamers.

For me, it's really helpful. Thinking about a streamer playing your game is really the same as thinking about any player playing your game but since I've actually watched streamers, it's much easier for me to imagine them playing than it would be "the average gamer". Some of the small decisions I've made to help improve 'streamability' will really just help most players enjoy the game more.

The questions I tend to ask myself when dealing with content is:
- "Is there something interesting to say about this bit of content"
- "Is there something that could cause an emotional reaction?"

These things don't need to be big, the comments can just be a sentence, and the emotional reaction could be nothing more than the chance at a coin toss and not every moment needs something like this. But it's definitely helped me flesh out some improvements to content.

 

Like the question, don't necessarily like the concept of making a game for streaming thought, but that may just be me. I feel like their are some smaller companies that make games for streaming / you tube bate. Making small half a**** (rude word for donkey) attempts at games, shove a youtuber name in there and fingers crossed that they show it, and hope that the viewer may be impulsive enough to actually buy it.

I believe that when it comes to something like streaming that their is audience for everyone, some people like to watch videos of the best players to learn techniques, some like to watch and support teams in e sport, some wanna check out the game before buying and there are some who dont care about what game they watch and just like the host.

So to sum it up, I wouldn't advise making a game for the soul purpose of streaming it.

 

I don't think anyone here is suggesting to make a game for the soul purpose of streaming (although those do exist). It's more what devs can consider in the design process, what can be tweaked/added/removed to make it a bit better for streaming. In all likelihood if it's good for streaming then it'll be more fun to play anyway. A large part of gaming is sharing your experience with others whether it's a single player game or multi. Make it better for streaming and it'll be better for sharing between friends too.

In terms of what makes a game better for it...to me I tend to watch a lot of games that have random elements, those are the one's I'll watch multiple streamers/youtubers for. Other, less random games I'll watch just one person if and that's more because their content shows up when I'm looking at other stuff.

Also in terms of "random" I don't necessarily mean RNG, it can also just be multiplayer. Something that makes it so that it's not the same experience every time no matter who is playing.

 

Considering the answers you guys gave, I would like to add that I'm not tralking regarding money/sales. I'm rather focusing on gameplay features and mechanics that makes people not just want to play, but also watch it.

For instance, I know that GTA 5 has a lot of good content to create very distinct and funny videos for the internet. But on the other hand, ( I am not a constant stream watcher ) I see my classmates watch hearthstone streams during class all the time, but this time, it does not have the fun factor anymore. In this case, do people watch it because of the streamer, because of the game, or both?

Another example I can give is : when I was watching a league of legends championship, I didn't even know who was playing, but for some wierd reason, I wanted to cheer for one of the teams, while in this case there is no fun factor, there is still a very interesting thing going on.

 

Ability to name stuff in the game funny or after followers/subscibers I imagine is a good way for the streamer to engage the viewers. And make viewers feel part of the game.

 

Even though you may not be looking to turn a financial profit, bear in mind the streamers you are targeting are.

The streamer wants people to come back to his channel to see him- the game is more of a draw. Some people tune in because they're fans, and others tune in because they're interested in the game being played, but his goal is to turn them into regular attenders. He might aim at a particular genre, or type of game to establish his brand.

Competitive games appeal more to people who understand the game already- I might be curious enough to watch baseball every now and then, but if I understood what was going on, I'd enjoy watching a lot more. they might be tuning in to see competition on a higher level than they can play at, or just to follow the saga of the streamer as a competitor.

Freedom games like gtav, minecraft, skyrim- are probably more accessible. Ive only played a couple hours of minecraft and seeing a sheep canon fire is still every bit as fun. Streamers inject themselves into these world's, and entertain their audience with their own brand of humor and ingenuity, and all the freedom these games afford them.

 

Basically games that don't stream well are

1) text heavy
2) not action oriented
3) not replayable in any way (there are notable exceptions here)

Games that stream exceptionally well

1) Make people scream, yell, shout, or do anything else that would end in a !
2) Are online co-op.
3) Are open ended in the way they can be played.


In short the genres that are getting the short end of the streaming revolution stick are: text based VNs/other games, Adventure Games, Puzzle/Logic Games (non-physics based).

This is not a hard rule, just means those types of games require something extra special to really get good coverage on streaming/youtube.

 

It's worth noting that there are a few different kinds of 'streamer'.

There's the actual Twitch streamer, these are generally guys who play competitive games at a high level. They're almost always centered around Esports.

There's the pewdiepie style youtuber, who is at core an entertainer.

Then there's the "let's play" video. Which is more of a game review as game play with commentary.

The pewdiepie model and streamers get the most attention because of the massive audiences, but I think the "let's play" videos are very important. Usually when I buy a game, the first thing I do is search for a let's play on it, take a look at the actual game play and decide if it's something I want to try out.

 

There's also different casters (I prefer this term than Streamer) for different genres. Some will focus entirely on slow turn based games, others on the above adventure games I say you have trouble getting.

The problem with them is they tend to command significantly lower audience counts than the people who focus on the 'popular' genres to stream.

As far as classifications there's actually a few more @frosted -

Here's my rough list:

1) Entertainment Personalities (where their playthrough is more focused on the caster than the games usually, pdp, Markiplier, etc)
2) Lets Players w/commentary (Traditional style, like TB)
3) Lets Players w/o commentary (Tend to be very small)
4) Game specific players (Mostly Minecraft and certain e-sport gamers such as LoL, Counterstrike, etc)
5) True Creative Channels (Channels that do more than just play the game to entertain, but create complex compelling content about them, like JonTron)
6) Actual reviews of products (Ironically extremely rare, but ZPR is a good example)

And inside nearly all of those is a certain preferred genre or genres individual to each caster.

I will say that I don't think the type of caster changes your strategy of wanting all 6 types to cover you

 

Twitch actually has an API for games.

 

While I don't currently have any intention of making a stream-friendly game, I do find the question very interesting from a design perspective.

The real question you should be asking, though, is "What Makes a Game Good For Spectators?" Most "streaming" of games on-line is simply a matter of passive observance on the part of the viewer. In many ways, it is similar to sports fans viewing their favorite games being broadcast. And just like those games, often times the design for the game needs to be altered to make it more entertaining to watch.

One point I'll throw into the discussion is that streaming games works better with smaller play sessions. Games that can have a play session between 10-15 minutes work better with this format than games that require lengthier play sessions. This does not necessarily mean that the game can be "beaten" in such a time frame. It just means that the game would have natural lulls in the pacing around such intervals.

 

I think, the most important aspect of a game that is good for streaming is, it has to be competitive. Of course you can have single player games, that you can stream, but I made the experience, that those games are rather short lived on plattforms like twitch, whereas competitive multiplayer goes on and on.

 

I disagree with the premise. I think there is a very narrow subset of games where making your game streaming friendly is important, but there are entire categories of games that no matter what you do, they will not be good for streaming.

I think overall it is a red herring and something not worth chasing. Make your game fun, and if it is ´streamable´ then that is great. I would never change a gameplay mechanism just to make it more streamable.

There are just going to be games that are better at steaming than others, but I don´t think there is much you can do with your game to change it.

 

Here's how I look at it. I'm working on a game with no presence, no media, no buzz. If I can get someone to make a video of them playing a game and they drive 10 sales, that's worthwhile. If I can get 10 of those guys to drive 10 sales each, that's a pretty significant portion of my total goal.

Fantasies about getting big names or striking it rich is madness. But when you're dealing with small numbers and very small streamers, it's kind of silly not to give the subject at least a bit of attention. Especially when, in practice, you're literally just imagining a player talking through the screens - and you're trying to make sure that the player has some positive stuff to say about it, some kind of interesting decision to make, or something to emotionally respond to.

I'm not talking about pewdiepie, or anyone you've heard of or watched. I'm talking about a guy who makes video recommendations that his friends watch. Another guy who posts it to a message board he's a long time member of, etc. If you're being serious, and you're small time, not giving thought to these things is kind of silly.

 

Think if you made a game like "running man" you got a "host", and a live "audience" now rather than trying to figure out ways to simulate having a "real audience", for things like being bored, entertained you could allow there live stream audience to do it for you.

Another that was popular was spelunky's 'death roulette' where you could actually bet on how the player was going to die, you could win "fake gold etc".