This is it? I think I made a big mistake.

Marketing starts with product design. I broken even with my first game, here, and I'm gonna link this hilarious review although it's not exactly flattering (there are better reviews elsewhere but never mind)

For the record the spend on advertisement was < $500. Broke even means: I got paid for my work (beware: this was in 2010). With all the inevitable flaws of a first, burdened by the attempt at building my own engine etc... but so what? It appears to fit into a niche of sorts (not that I studied this extensively beforehand).

My latest (mobile) game, here:

No advertisement budget; some efforts at getting a little coverage and some player love. But in short I got discouraged pretty quickly from putting more $ into selling this. Although I believe that it's a better game than the first, the take-home message (to caricature) was that getting (a few) tweens hooked onto the first is a lot more effective than trying to get (even just a few) gamers to play the second. At the moment, this one's free - No IAPs, no ads - as I'd rather get 4-5 dls/day average than no sales.

As to the game you released I'm gonna go and download it right away : ) but from the video here is how I feel...

You're doing what everybody else are doing

(it's not about the lack of creativity, or technical skill... The lawnmower thing is a neat game idea and the game looks properly executed)

1. casual
2. colourful
3. 2D
4. free

So, the problem is that you're doing everything right. Except that, like others have mentioned, you have no marketing budget. Don't break your piggy bank though because companies who make the likes of candy crush spend humongous amounts of money to rub their products in the face of an audience that aren't exactly choosy, they just want "something fun".

So I don't know if it's very helpful but creating something a little more targeted than a zombie shooter or a colourful casual 2D game can help you cut marketing costs (without going extreme and doing something too obscure)

 

Sorry to hear my friend. Think of it as a learning experience, not a failure. For the record, i think your game looks super charming and original, and I think you have talent, and I would like to see more from you.

Don't be discouraged, and don't just make a clone for your next game. I've been failing (aka learning the hard way) for over 7 years now. Quit my job, went into debt, got another job, made another game. About to release another game shortly, and not expecting to make much off it. Hoping to get a job in the game industry next, while I start work on another game.

I figure its going to take me about 5 released games before it really becomes sustainable. Wish you all the best

 

OK that is a good start. Just one word of caution when it comes to exerting your efforts. Although you are into game dev, and click best with those who are as well, you may find that for marketing they are also a bunch of game devs with no marketing skills. Devs may buy your game as well but so far, some of your marketing efforts have been limited to the developer community. Advertising your project on the unity site is great to get feedback, but other devs are less likely to buy or download.

 

I do think showcase could be improved. Anything really good will make it to the gallery, but a gallery for community submitted apps would be cool too! Obviously it would need to be approved by someone, because no-one wants to see 10 flappy bird clones on there, perhaps a ranking system based on member likes to improve the display order of the app would be cool (would require minimum post to vote to stop spammers)

 

Good point. Still I think they know the local market better than I do and taking a walk never hurt

@JamesLeeNZ
You have my vote.

 

What are the search tags?
What are the probability that multiple searches are going to hit your game a few times?

This, is one of the most important factors I believe.

"Something" xyz simulator 20xx
XYZCraft
AngryXYZ
FlappyXYZ
XYZCrush.
ZombieXYZ
XYZCity
RPG
MMORPG

Though not the most important contribution to a game's quality,
I notice the biggest downloads are those that contains these terms.

 

Interesting. What tags do you suggest I use?

Right now I have only a few:
grass, mowing, arcade, retro, mower, hard, c64

 

You should have "simulator" as a tag.

 

It looks boring. You need to create your own characters like Lucy & Ethel (the wax tulip episode of I Love Lucy) or the Pink Panther (the Pink Pa

You can host simple game pages for free at Zoho.com but you might choose to have to pay a yearly amount of money for a domain name - try to keep it simple. I think now there are host names that end in .games but they cost more. I know there are host names the end in .llc; again they cost more. That's big business using John Sutter type profiteering off fads in adding these new domain name suffixes but it's still the cheapest way to advertise your game at a location that's only about your business.

You could easily skip all those expenses and create a YouTube channel and Zoho website (sans domain name) based on your game - with search engines - domain names help but relevance is the deciding factor. Use Everyplay as suggested by Aurora.

I think if you aren't a news or shopping site having your own website is way overrated and costs you money and time away from game development which is the only thing a one person shop should be concerned about.

Last game maker web site I visited (Unity doesn't count) was UE4's site and not to see their games. Other than that it's a couple of years ago I visited id Software's website - simply curious, and yes, Commander Keen, Wolfenstein, Doom, and Quake is all they've got still so I haven't missed much.

 

I really like arcade games and Microsoft way back in the 90's had floppy disks with some of my favorites. Small and fun and don't require I turn a game into a full time job.

 

Or be a professional douche bag like Phil Fish and have people love to hate you.

Truth is, street hustlers in Harlem know more about entrepreneurship and enterprise than most game devs. Marketing is a nice word. How about... getting people to pay attention to you, to hear what you're saying, to see what you're selling. How would you do that? If you had a free to download game you'd say, "HEY. THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER. IF YOU DON'T AGREE, IT'S FREE."

People like confidence, it gives them confidence. You have to close the deal for them. But to set up shop selling seashells by the sea shore and not to go bang on trash cans to get people to at least look your way... you can't really think that's what business is.

You can't fail if you don't try, but you can't succeed either.

 

Arcade and retro is a good terms as they hit a lot.

Grass, and mowing though..
You can't change it since its your game's name.

But I doubt some people would randomly search "Mowing" or "Grass" when thinking of games.

 

Arcade is actually a bad choice because there is a lot of noise in arcade. You are better to target the niche genres.

 

I think that the straight down perspective may turn people off.

Other top down games like Zelda or Gauntlet give it a skew:


I can't really think of a game that was 100% straight down that was successful.

 

Pac-Man, Metal Gear, Dragon Warrior, Sim-City, etc.

There were many successful games that used the Top-Down Perspective view for video games. At one point it was very common and a big selling point.

In comparison the 2.5D perspective or Isometric Perspective was considered horrible when it first appeared as many players were unaccustomed to the fixed point view. Later on it was felt to be superior to the top down look as it gave the illusion of 3D game play.

 

Mobile is suicide to bank on a living these days, that bubble popped around 2011 really, except for those who evolved: long marketing chains, finding out what people want, and using analytics. Unity goes a lot further here with various things to support you like video, advertising networks, analytics. All these are very necessary among a long marketing lead time and strong market focus.

Yes, a bunch of buzzwords but you'll need them for your next title (May I suggest mower 2, using 3D graphics instead of sprites, perhaps isometric slightly - same engine, just a few new twists to elevate it and give it a modern point).

Doing a sequel so soon is probably actually a good bet. Update the original to be free for android and iOS, tip off the press about why you're doing part 2 so soon and build up noise and interest in the coming 3D version. The original can be made to link to the new one.

Your game isn't necessarily bad at all, but you may have missed your audience completely, including their tastes. Probably they have no way of finding you since your title isn't immediate mainstream appeal.

Doesn't need a rewrite, it needs a new look & drive.

 

Wanted to answer but actually derf already said it: There are a lot of older games that were completely top-down and successfull.

 

Normally I would disagree with you needing to change the look of the game if targeting retro gaming players. Because that target market would be fine with 2D and straight top down view. They wouldn't want the game to look like everything else these days 3D and all that. But... it is possible any retro gamers who play games on their cell phones or iPads may want that. You probably should do some market research. Maybe take a poll someplace. Not sure here is the best place because I get the impression there are few retro gamers here based on the love of 3D graphics over anything else. Which is kind of anti-retro gaming. But you could still try.

Maybe make a thread in discussion asking Retro Gamers if they play games on their iPads and their cell phones. If so, do they expect their retro games to look like modern games. Really that just makes no sense to me but the best thing to do is take a poll.

 

Mobile gamers are not retro gamers, they're more like pop culture enthusiasts. PC is where the retro crowd lies, having been abandoned by mainstream long ago.

 

I agree with that. All of the retro communities I see focus on desktop. Windows, Mac and Linux. And web players too. Well and the consoles of course. Actually there are many mediums. Just not mobile or tablet gaming. In some of the retro communities where I hang out I have seen many posts expressing hate of cell phone games from player and dev perspectives. Which matches my views as well. I have no tablet and also do not play mobile games. Yet I buy many retro games ranging from remakes on Windows, new stuff made in retro style on Windows and PS3 as well as actual physical cartridges for NES and Genesis.

 

Smartest thing I've read yet on these forums.
There's a deep trench between mobile and desktop gamers, and can't be negotiated. You need to do strictly casual, or strictly in-depth -- or find yourself stranded above the trench.

 

Choose your controller "gamer":

 

This is so true and very, very sad. Kind of like all those who pioneered something back in the day or made something possible for the future, are than left behind as others make many break-through events based on the original pioneers dedication and commitment, but the new crowd lacks both and it quickly becomes all about the "Benjamins" and status.

 

Are you saying it is becoming all about me?! Awesome!! I guess. lol

 

That pretty much sums it up. I use my cell enough as it is between visiting websites and... you know... actually using the phone as a phone. The last thing I want to do is spend more time on it playing games. In dead time that is when I visit this forum.

 

Well, I just wanted to make a fun game that I like. I don't really care what kids think they want and I hoped that the challenge and fun factor and unique feel of the game were enough to persuade people to try it. I don't really want to change the look, since I really like it and I feel it wouldn't play as well in 2.5d.

I don't think retro games are PC only. PC owners have phones as well, but maybe they use Android. I am going to try that platform first after the IPhone version has bee approved. Too bad I won't be able to use any of the Unity Pro features I need without paying another 1500 dollars.

 

That silence... that's you disagreeing with everybody on this thread.

 

I guess you could work on that market research, AND pop culture trend research as well. Again, it would help with sales.

I like your game, though it's basically a remake of Hover Bovver, an early 80's desktop staple from Jeff Minter.
The bleached blonde teenage iOS owners have probably a hard time relating to it.

 

People who commute on trains/buses/subways use mobile phones quite often to play games(including retro style ones). I use my PC for gaming 100% of the time when at home but my phone 100% of the time while commuting.

 

I'll bet when you say retro, you don't mean action/platformers. You mean retro graphics.

 

That's cool then. So there are retro gamers out there who do retro gaming on their cell phones! I can see that. Personally, I do not get into mobile games at all. I use my dead time to check this forum and facebook or just think and plan.

Now I am wondering if there may be two breeds of retro gamers... so the other important question is do you expect your mobile retro games to look like actual classic games or do you want them to look like modern games perhaps even 3D?

 

True, I don't think action games are suited for phones at all. There seem to be a lot of them out there so somebody plays them I guess.

 

I don't think you understand what I said one bit.

I said there isn't a game that I can think of that is a completely straight down view. All those games you mentioned skew the characters and show them from the side.

Also, I did think of one, and only one, exception. Hot Line: Miami


My point isn't to be cynical or mean though. I'm pointing this out as something to consider for the OP.

 

There are not a lot of good ones that I have found, but they do exist here and there. For awhile I was even playing some text based adventure games when on the train. I'm not a fan of mobile games either but when faced with staring out the window or the guy drooling next to me, I'd rather stare at my phone and play a game.

 

That makes great sense. And I get what you mean. I get tired of people making simple games and then calling them retro games. It's like they make something that has very little programming involved, make very blocky graphics and then say this game is very retro style!! In reality, the AI in their games I would say is much less than that of the ghosts in Pac-Man or the enemies in Defender.

Text adventures were cool. I used to play the Scott Adams and Infocom adventures a lot.

 

Some people go to furry conventions. Some people do everything. But I'm not banking on paying for my child's college education on a game marketed to a demographic that I know nothing about, or that I maybe suppose exists.

And that's why I think I'll succeed, I'm aiming at a target that's big enough to score a decent shot. Using that metaphor, you can get an idea of what goes wrong... your target is too small or you're aiming wrong. Or you keep taking the same shot over and over, or you miss one shot and go... I think this whole thing is one big mistake.

 

True. I challenge anyone who thinks lightly of the phrase "retro" to program Pac-Man.

 

Just curious what out of the Pro only featureset did you use on this title? As someone who's first title was Unity Free (mobile game) I actually didn't find that I ran into too many issues that needed Pro. I realize for photo realistic PC games its pretty much needed but in the mobile space you can do a lot with free.

 

Arguably, this game is top down only to parody GTA for PC. Hello, I'll be your guide to gaming culture.

 

The optimization offered by the iOS package was huge. Especially the size of the game and the frame rate.

 

- Gauntlet II? (oh sorry... you really consider that is a skewed angle...? Okay then)
- Hunters Episode 1 and Warhammer Quest?
- A few racing games that I forget the name of...

Although I'm not a big fan of straight top-down orthos, popular games using it have been around for a bit.

Okay not directly answering this but hey it's weekend and I said I would download the game, which I did. Without forcing we played 5-6 times and it would get a few more hits if it stays on device. Core gameplay works well, the only major disappointment is that I don't really understand at which point I'm done mowing, it feels like a job half done every single time.

What I have an issue with (maybe a repeat and sorry if it is) is the monotonous screenshots in the app store. In my opinion, a game however small or short needs to present 5 varied screenshots (different visual feel and/or dominant colour). You stop at 4, and they are all... green. imho just re-colouring the grass every 5-10 levels well, may not fix lack of variety in gameplay if that is that(?) but may with dls.

Left a review, liked on FB, rated in UK store.

 

Alien Breed I + II would come to my mind when asked about successfull top down games

 

Thanks for trying it. The amount of grass needed is indicated by the gauge in the bottom. It might not be clear enough. You are absolutely right about the screenshots and I think those were my biggest mistake. I am already working on better screenshots with a little text in them and more action/ views of the game.

Against, thanks for the support. Hope I can return the favor soon

 

I stand corrected. I did not think of those.

At any rate; Fluxing, you need to buck up and get on your next project. Wash, rinse, and repeat.

This is partly a numbers game.

And when that one game does get a splash, the others will get wet too.

 

Next game is already in the works, but I want to learn from my mistakes. The project we are working on is a bit more advanced and I don't want it to fail because of the same mistakes.

@eelstork
I have revamped the screenshots.

This is the one people will see first in the new version, once it is reviewed by Apple:

 

I didn't look before, but that's a nice and dynamic opening image. Thumbs up!

I definitely agree with whomever mentioned having variations in dominant colour. You're rearranging the same graphical elements in ways that have nice gameplay implications, but which don't make for varied looking images. I'd look at having different sets of grass, bushes and other props for different styles of back yard, and using different styles of level design with each to get some consistent theming going on.

 

Mowing the lawn is something I do not want to do.

Watching your gameplay, it's very interesting and unique gameplay actually. I as a developer can recognize that.

But mowing the lawn is something I not want to do.

I imagine that was most people thought. Who in their right mind would want to mow the lawn for fun? Mowing the lawn is a chore, brings up memories of parents yelling at me to mow the lawn. Makes me think of all the lawns and the "American Dream" with the white picket fence and the lawn. Which makes everyone think they need to have a lawn, when in reality if they grew vegetables and produce in that same space it'd be much more intelligent, and the entire archetype of the American Dream and the "Lawn" is really something that needs to do die. So I most certainly don't want to be doing the chore of "Mowing" an archetype that is dumb, and should not exist, in a game for "Fun".

I am being purposely harsh here though because you ask. Just thinking up the most negative thing I could possibly do, just to get deep into the minds of the audience that you potentially deterred away. In creative efforts I think it's good to do that. Typically the best creative people are just god damn hard on themselves, and will actually induce a bit of emotional and psychological breakdown from radically overanalyze and tearing apart their work. It is something thats good to learn to do.

Again though, I can recognize that it's interesting and unique gameplay. Probably fun. But really mowing the lawn? Does not register as fun archetype in most peoples minds.

I bet if you took all you had there and changed it into a 'Mischievous Lawn Gnome" game where you control a lawn gnome sneaking around the yard having to steal and rearrange things, and avoid capture by the humans. That would probably register as a more fun archetype to most people. "Play" and "Fun" in this culture currently I think is a bit inter bound with "Clowning About" and "Rebelliousness".

In all honesty. I would take your game and approach a lawnmower company, or some lawncare company and offer to sell it to them and brand the game with their logo and products.

 

Likewise for me and being in WWII trenches and/or fighting off a zombie apocalypse.

 

All of these colors? They don't make an attractive palette.


Black and yellow are gorgeous together. The green matches well, too. So your splash image is nice. The blurriness of the grass and the obvious fuzzy shadow effect on the outline, however, are generally regarded as bad moves from a digital art point of view. The tire, on the other hand, looks crisp and very nice. I'm surprised if it was all done by the same artist.



The flowers don't mash well. They remind me of colorful vomit.

===

You probably are like "What's this have to do with anything?"

Well... I'll tell you. If it looks unpolished, people are going to assume it is unpolished. There is no one magical trick that works universally. But the visual style is not cohesive and that's something that anybody can clearly see, whether or not they have any background in art. It's all very square, as well, and rendered in a variety of different perspectives.



See? Less pixels, but done properly, all colors fit a very beautiful palette of soft, almost pastel colors, the grass has a touch of blue to it, and everything in general just melds together to create a very soft, attractive visual style. That's what they were aiming for. It fits the game, because it's a jovial, celebratory take on fantasy and adventure. The game's music also matched this. Nintendo has a history of "cohesive" games. If you notice, they are consistently good throughout the years and even when approaching a variety of different game styles and subject matters. There's a reason for this, and it isn't luck.

It's not that hard to learn, it just takes time and there's a reason why people suffer and much of it can be corrected with the right touch.

 

+1 for link to the past having a wonderful palette.