What is the best Unity 3D FPS I can play today?

What is the best Unity 3D FPS I can play today?

What is the best Unity First Person Shooter I can download and play today?

1) Which is the best?
2) Which is the best that I can buy and mod and own?
3) Which one has plenty of fun enemy characters coming at me?

Thanks!!

 

I havent seen any enjoyable fps game on unity yet, but i havent searched for one either.

If it helps, here's quite a list of unity games from which you can browse

http://unity3d.com/gallery/game-list/

 

Most Unity devs are kind of creatively minded or at least attempt to do. If they wanted FPS they would use one of the 7 engines that are primarily focused at that and save dozens to hundreds of hours

 

which engines might they use?

so you are saying that unity is not good for developing fps's?

i thought they had an fps tutorial...

and yet nobody has yet created an fps?

what is going on here?

if nobody has yet created an fps for unity, then what's the use of being able to export to xbox/ps3?

thanks!

 

100% Unity, unfortunately not finished yet!

http://www.interstellarmarines.com/

Try Bullseye, its a great shooting range.

 

This kinda begs the question of what is unity good for?

There are already dozens of engines for every game type imaginable.

So if you're interested in building games, as opposed to being creatively minded, why focus on unity?

 

Unity allows for quick game development.

Polish for any game requires a good amount of time. The more graphics oriented the game is, the more polish it will require.

My guess would be that most of the people with the time and resources to spend heavily for graphics end up spending their time with more widely known game engines.

Unity tends to attract developers that are looking for a more streamlined way of getting from start to finish.

I imagine that with 3.0, we might see more visually powerful things coming to Unity. But even then, we'll have to wait a bit. These things take time. And Unity still isn't all that well known outside of Indies.

 

Here's a good FPS you can download and play:

http://unity3d.com/gallery/live-demos/index.html#avert-fate

 

I don't think too many developers are interested in creating FPS. It's a genre that has simple gameplay but has HUGE asset requirements to pull off well and sustain interest.

With most of the big PC games having 100's of artists and a plethora of engines aimed specifically at FPS most developers will go else where. Having said that, getting a basic FPS running in Unity is pretty straightforward and once you have the basic assets for your game it shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to get a good basic framework with core functionality up and running for a single player game.

Most developers that use unity are not trying to compete with big commercial projects. I guess the higher price of Unity and its strong point being portability to web and handheld devices aims it more at experienced developers targeting smaller projects leaning more towards the casual player who may not even have a gamepad, mouse or keyboard.

 

This one always looked good... not sure what the current state of development is

http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=21334&highlight=fps

 

Here's a cool one:
http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=4163&highlight=shoot+glass

 

I'm not saying its not good for creating FPS
But it is a non genre focused technology so whatever you want to do, you have to do it from 0.

For an FPS, I would clearly go with UDK, C4 or Torque as they are pretty much focused at that, have fully existing sample games around that and have the networking fully implemented for this purpose.
In addition at least UDK and Torque have real dedicated servers which is a must have if you have multiplayer in mind.

For anything but FPS I would use Unity anyday on the other hand

 

hmmm, so unity isn't interested in developers who create fps's?

you say, "getting a basic FPS running in Unity is pretty straightforward and once you have the basic assets for your game it shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to get a good basic framework with core functionality up and running for a single player game."

if this is true, why aren't there tons of fun unity fps games if all it takes is 2 hours? do none of the developers have 2 hours or do they really just not like first person shooters?

you say, "Most developers that use unity are not trying to compete with big commercial projects."

so like first person shooters are not big commerical projects?

you say, "I guess the higher price of Unity and its strong point being portability to web and handheld devices aims it more at experienced developers."

so unity is for more experienced developers? then why not go with an engine which supports games like fps'.

you say, "targeting smaller projects leaning more towards the casual player who may not even have a gamepad, mouse or keyboard."

so unity is targeting people who don't have any way of controlling the game?

i am not nit-picking here, but i find your response contradictory, all over the place, and very confusing.

all i really want is to download and play a simple unity fps, which you tell me would take 2 hours to develop, and yet it seems there are none? hmmmmmmmmm.

thanks!

 

Unity has many tools at your disposal, so I think people use that freedom to go outside the standards

From what I've seen about unity, it'd be quite easy to develop a fps.

There aren't a whole lot of fps games made in unity, but that doesn't mean there are none. Although with so many possibilities, why make the same ol' things?

"Why there aren't tons of fun fps games made with unity?" My guess is because coding the game easely in unity is one thing, but making all the 3d art (characters, levels, weapons) also you need sfx and music, that takes a lot of time, and maybe money.

 

@sevenseasgear
Because a good FPS can't be done in two hours.

Not because Unity wouldn't be capable of building the basis for a good FPS but because making something good costs time and talent in a) the art (geo, tex, sfx, ...) and b) the code department (making it slick, AI, scripted events, tweaking physics, ...) - on a sidenote i have to say that this can be art as well.

It's a llittle bit like with those MMOs. Most people who are new to game dev are dreaming of doing exactly this but don't see all the work behind it and those who know what they are doing are more developing smaller games which they also can finish and where a market exists (you know games like Half Life 2 exist as well).

If you want to create a FPS in Unity you'll have to build quite some functionality which you otherwise (like for instance in specialised engines or other general purpose engines which ship with more core functionality) might get for free on your own.

So it will take you more time but it's doable.

 

I am a bit shocked and saddened that there is no unity 3d fps game i can download and play today...

I guess we'll go with unreal like you guys recommend.

Unity seems cool in that it can export to every platform but exproting nothing to all platforms leaves something to be desired.

 

The point of unity is to make your own games from scratch, it's easier to use than most engines, but it doesn't do all the work for you. For many of us, that is it's big selling point. That we aren't constrained by someone elses predetermined ideas and can develop our own systems and gameplay ourselves.

I'd recommend looking at the FPS tutorial, if you know the absolute basics of coding then you should be able to pick Unity up pretty fast and will learn a lot more doing it yourself.

If you haven't got the time or inclination then your best bet is to go elsewhere.

If you do decide to have a go yourself the FPS tutorial can be found here:

http://unity3d.com/support/resources/tutorials/fpstutorial

You might actually find Unreal and torque harder to use if your not familiar with game dev. Both those engines are powerful and geared towards FPS, but you have to invest quite a lot of time sifting through a lot of separate systems and utilities that take some getting used to. But you should be up and running within a couple of weeks.

You might also want to look at the 3rd preson shooter example project

http://unity3d.com/support/resources/example-projects/3rdpersonshooter

It should be quite easy to combine techniques from both projects, and other resources like the detonator project and I recall a banana FPS weapon pack being released recently.

the hard part may be getting your own character models and animations in. You haven't mentioned much about what your expecting to do except play a FPS.

 

What? I just gave you 2 links. Did you miss them or something?

 

I believe "Forgotten Plaza" has some shooting in it...bombs, missle launcher and machine gun.

http://www.geartechgames.com/GearTech_Games/Free_Download_Games.html

The demos here are absolutely fantastic.

 

What exactly are you looking for? Are you trying to see if Unity is capable of making a cool FPS from a technical standpoint? The best way to resolve that is to actually use the engine and play around with prototyping, not playing a finished game.

There isn't an easy or simple answer to the questions you've asked so far. Unity is an engine targeted toward indies. It's cheap, incredibly flexible and has a workflow that is about as fast as you can get. Indies usually don't have a dog in the FPS race. The costs are just too high and, in order to compete, you need dozens and sometimes hundreds of people on staff to keep up with the status quo. At that point, you're definitely not an indie anymore.

Up until a year ago, Unity could only be run in OSX. That kept away the majority of the hobbyist PC game community and also had an effect on the types of games most Unity developers were interested in making(ex: typically not AAA style PC games). The demographics are just now starting to adjust with much more people using the technology. PC mod teams usually stick to existing games because so much of the work has already been done and they can just change what they need and add everything else on top. Many of the people in these teams and communities are also making their mods for the purpose of trying to get a AAA game industry job. It makes more sense to use an engine that's used in that part of the industry, of which Unity isn't.

If you want to see what a great team can do with Unity, go look at the Interstellar Marines stuff. Unity can do whatever you want. Take a look at this page to see the same assets in Unity and UDK: http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=49393&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60

 

Thanks! You write, "Are you trying to see if Unity is capable of making a cool FPS from a technical standpoint? The best way to resolve that is to actually use the engine and play around with prototyping, not playing a finished game."

Well, if there are no finished unity FPS games, what are the chances that I am going to find one by "play around with prototyping" with the unity engine? ?How long should I be prepared to play around?

You write, "Unity is an engine targeted toward indies. It's cheap, incredibly flexible and has a workflow that is about as fast as you can get. Indies usually don't have a dog in the FPS race. The costs are just too high and, in order to compete, you need dozens and sometimes hundreds of people on staff to keep up with the status quo. At that point, you're definitely not an indie anymore. "

so unity is "cheap, incredibly flexible and has a workflow that is about as fast as you can get," unless you are trying to create a standard fps game or commerical game. Again, if the workflow is fast, how is that of any use if the workflow does not take one to a completed, commercial game? On the box of the game will we write, "Boy was the workflow fast in designing this game!" Even though the game doesn't work?

Thanks for the interstellar marines link. It seems to be another unfinished unity game but this time with a big team. Perhaps the team should have followed your advice? "Many of the people in these teams and communities are also making their mods for the purpose of trying to get a AAA game industry job. It makes more sense to use an engine that's used in that part of the industry, of which Unity isn't."

This thread has given sooo many contradictory messages that I think it illustrates some serious questions the unity design team needs to consider about the direction of the company. I hope this helps!! It seems their #1 concern should be to create and provide a simple working FPS which other people can mod. That will drive their sales up, up, up!! Thanks!

 

I think you came here with the wrong attitude to game development. Or are a producer looking for a game thats already done for you. In either case, perhaps you should do your homework better.

If you want to make an FPS from scratch the tutorial is a good start. Most people don't make FPS games because its a saturated market mostly filled by the big boys. Like everyone already said. The art asset requirements are ridiculous for a modern FPS. Take those away and your left with a pretty basic point and click game. If your lucky you may even get more than simple AI. But most FPS these days are 90% visual and aural extravaganzas like a blockbuster movie. But ultimately quite shallow and simple underneath.

If you follow the tutorials that come with unity you can have a Basic FPS in a few hours, or days if you don't know programming. The hard part is probably going to be creating the assets and getting your character up and running in the game unless you used found assets too.

 

Why should this be their #1 concern?

Unity is a great game dev tool and if you put the work in, you can make any genre.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand why you'd want a finished game you can just 'mod'? UDK does this well, but since it's release, lots of people are asking for the UDK UTGame base game to be somewhat removed, so they can have a clean slate to work on... they don't want a finished game to mod either.

Like i said, maybe it's just me.

Regards,
Matt.

 

Thanks Tysoe,

Again you are saying that I can have a basic FPS "in a few hours" (last time you said it would be two hours), while also saying that "Most people don't make FPS games because its a saturated market mostly filled by the big boys." why do only the big boys create games that take a couple hours to make with one developer?

You also state, "But most FPS these days are 90% visual and aural extravaganzas like a blockbuster movie. But ultimately quite shallow and simple underneath."

Does that mean that we musn't create and develop deeper FPS's? What if I came here seeking to create a deeper FPS? Should I not use unity to create a deeper or FPS?

I think Unity's great and vast potential is allowing indie innovators to mod and create games which transcend the shallowness of the industry. But you are telling me that Unity does not want us creating deeper FPSs because a) FPSs are by definition shallow and b) FPSs are domintaed by the big boys.

Well, every other type of game is do0minated by the big boys too.

So perhaps Unity's message is that game design ought be left to the "big boys" and that FPSs must remain shallow? Even though you also say that with unity one can design a working FPS in 2 hours.

What would be wrong with Unity providing a working FPS game and then selling the tools to let us mod it and make it deeper?

I hope this helps unity in focusing on delivering a working FPS that can be easily modded, thusly letting us improve upon the "big boys' shallowness."

Or perhaps Unity believes that commercial games are strictly the province of Big Boys and that Unity is expressly for those interested in a fast workflow which lets them ship an incomplete project to multiple platforms....

I mean it seems to me that your saying it would take me 2 hours to build a working FPS, when there is a scarcity of working FPSs out there that I can buy, seems to be false advertising for the capabilities of the unity engine. Blaming it on the "big boys" doesn't make a whole lot of sense either, as I thought the whole idea underlying the $1,500 unity price tag was allowing one the hope of creating shippable, working games to compete with the majors. Perhaps I read the PR wrong?

 

I think there's a bit of misunderstanding here. There are some things that are going to take a long time and require a lot of people regardless of what engine you use. Art is a huge time-suck. It's going to take forever to create a game full of AAA assets no matter if you're using BlitzMax or the Cryengine. There are lots of other things, stuff that's annoying or inefficient, that could be improved in other engines. That's one of the things that Unity does really well, but it's not going to cut your staff down greatly or take a game that would take 1.5 years to create and reduce that to a couple months.

When I mentioned prototyping, I'm suggesting you actually use the engine to try out the things you want to do in your game, not pick apart someone else's work. Get your artists to bang out a test scene and see what the asset workflow is like. Drop in the standard FPS controller and see if it meets your needs. Take a look through the code and see how much work it would take to add or adjust the features that are specific to the game you're trying to make. Get your coders to see what kind of work it would take to implement the AI and pathfinding and stuff they're going to need for NPCs and enemies. Compare that to what they know about doing the same in other engines. You can technically do whatever you want in Unity. It's not a matter of whether it lets you do something or not, it's about what engine fits your team the best.

You keep saying that the lack of full, polished FPS games is a fault of the engine itself or the company that makes it. It's not. You can make whatever you want assuming you have the time, talent and $$$. It's just that not very many people who use Unity are interested in making those kinds of games.

 

When he says "basic FPS," he means basic. This means no real AI, no super destructable environments, no anything other than running around and shooting things. To get these things at a top quality level expected of today's FPSes, you need loads of artists and programmers.

Go for it. But don't expect to be able to make it on the level of games that have millions of dollars pumped into them. If you just want to make a Halo/Call of Duty clone, there isn't any point, because there's no way you would be able to make something with those kind of production values.

Well, every other type of game is do0minated by the big boys too.[/quote]

No. There are lots of genres out there that don't recieve the same level of attention by the "big boys," or have the same production values.

Because there's lots of engines out there that already do this, like Source or Unreal.

Unity is not here to make games that can be modded, but provide developers with tools that speed up the process of building a game from scratch.

A fast workflow would let you ship a more complete product.

You can create a full FPS. But why would you? Odds are, unless you plan on redefining the genre, it would be fairly similar to Halo, Call of Duty, or whatever the flavour of the week is. And odds are, you wouldn't be able to compete with them in the sense of overall features, and then what would the benifit of your game be? Why would people buy it instead of Modern Warfare?

Unity, also, does not cost 1500 dollars. It's free. Don't bother buying it until you actually have built a game and realize that the pro features would enhance it.

 

thanks defmech,

you say "You can make whatever you want assuming you have the time, talent and $$$."

yes--and starting from scratch with c gives one the most flexibility, and they can make anything they want.

you write, "You keep saying that the lack of full, polished FPS games is a fault of the engine itself or the company that makes it. It's not."

well I am responding to the posters here saying that i can have a functioning fps game in a couple hours if i use unity.

if that is so, that it takes 2 hours, wouldn't unity spend 2 hours making a working game we could mod?

please forgive me, but i find it disingenous and rather insulting to hype obvious falsehoods. it seems a simple fps with actual enemies shooting back at you seems more and more like it is going to take not two hours, but hundreds of hours.

and too, from the vibe here, it seems unity is not interested in supporting fps games, but only "creative" games, implying that one cannot make creative fps games, which, would, in fact be easier to do, as there is a vast and proven market for fps games.

i am trying to help unity out here!

if they wanted to drive their sales through the roof, they would spend the 2 hours they claims it takes to make a working fps, and they would then let us mod it. perhaps they could even spend 3 hours on it and polish it. after all, tehy have spend tens of thousands of hours on the engine and millions of dollars, so why not spend 2 hours on a working fps game?

just asking....

 

May i ask why you're still here?

 

No. There are lots of genres out there that don't recieve the same level of attention by the "big boys," or have the same production values.

Because there's lots of engines out there that already do this, like Source or Unreal.

Unity is not here to make games that can be modded, but provide developers with tools that speed up the process of building a game from scratch.

A fast workflow would let you ship a more complete product.

You can create a full FPS. But why would you? Odds are, unless you plan on redefining the genre, it would be fairly similar to Halo, Call of Duty, or whatever the flavour of the week is. And odds are, you wouldn't be able to compete with them in the sense of overall features, and then what would the benifit of your game be? Why would people buy it instead of Modern Warfare?

Unity, also, does not cost 1500 dollars. It's free. Don't bother buying it until you actually have built a game and realize that the pro features would enhance it.[/quote]

Thanks for that!

You write, "You can create a full FPS. But why would you? Odds are, unless you plan on redefining the genre, it would be fairly similar to Halo, Call of Duty, or whatever the flavour of the week is. And odds are, you wouldn't be able to compete with them in the sense of overall features, and then what would the benifit of your game be? Why would people buy it instead of Modern Warfare?"

Yes, I understand now.

Unity is flexible, fast, and ports to any platform. One could create a racing game, or a puzzle game, or a rock band game, or exercise game, or a frogger, or a shooting game, or running game, or MMORPG, or FPS, or RPG, but why would you? After all, such games, even though they would only take a couple hours to build with the unity engine, would be fairly similar to existing games. The shelves of the app stores and major retailers are filled with quality games. Why would anyone wish to buy your silly, little unity game?

I think serious developers will wise up and use other engines with communities supporting the creation of actual games, as opposed to hyping the workflow, coolness, and flexibility of game engines; while also stating that the big boys' fps games mustn't be improved upon.

 

well at first i was lured in to believing your hype about it taking 2 hours to develop a functioning fps.

now it turns out to be thousands of hours.

i wish you would have told me this in the first place.

perhaps this thread will help others.

thanks!

 

I don't want to rehash the responses that have already been listed (great responses btw), but I do think you are in the wrong place if you are looking for a pre-made game.

If you want to mod unreal or halflife, you can do that with a set of tools designed to take care of it. If instead you want an empty game environment that will allow you to do whatever you want... then Unity is the tool for you.

It's not a simple cookie-cutter model where you click a few buttons, tell the GUI you want zero-gravity, machine-rail-guns and headshots and hit the "build" button. You will have to build the game from the ground up...whether it be an FPS, or an RTS, or a platformer, or one of literally dozens of genres. Unity is not a platform made for FPS's specifically. (Though tbh with the FPSWalker asset that comes stock with Unity...even the free version, it certainly does make an FPS extremely easy to approach).

You may be interested in checking out a simple project that explores Unity's workflow towards an FPS game. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/01/23/rock-paper-shotgunity-part-13/

This blog has been covering a journey to create an FPS with unity. It's not looking to make Modern Warfare 2, or Unreal Tournament, or Halo or Halflife... it was just a step into the world of FPS game design. You will likely find it useful.

If you are looking to make Modern Warfare 2, you'll first need some extremely skilled artists, sound techs, programmers and game designers. If you were ready for that though, you wouldn't be here and you wouldn't be showing attitude towards those who are trying to tell you what Unity is and what it's not.

Unity IS:
- A quality and freely available (non pro version) tool to allow game developers freedom to develop their games from the ground up

Unity IS NOT:
- An engine where you click buttons and drag-n-drop premade FPS assets to create a fully fledged AAA FPS.

We can debate whether or not the 'big boys' have a strangle-hold on the FPS genre till the cows come home, but if it hasn't been made by an indie yet, it means no indies have been serious enough about bringing their ideas to the genre. Though this will likely change when Interstellar Marines finishes. If you have the answer to how an indie can do an FPS, by all means pick up unity, create a quick terrain, drop a FPSWalker asset in the scene and have some fun figuring out how to bring your ideas to life.

 

@sevenseasgear
I never said that it will take two hours.

Actually i said quite the opposite for a good fps which makes people say wow, woah and whatever.

If you're familiar with the engine you certainly can fire up something more or less ugly and incomplete in that time but i guess that's not what you were asking for.

I just was wondering why you're investing so much time into Unity after you noticed that the engine isn't the best tool for your purposes already.

 

What you are really asking people to do is explain game development to you from scratch.

If you feel happier with another engine, go for it.

But I think you'll find that no matter what you use, you'll eventually have to know what you're doing.

No game engine is going to do it for you. And modding an existing game isn't as easy as you try to make it out to be. Well, if you are really making big modifications as opposed to switching out assets.

The questions you ask about development time are pretty basic, but when people give you an answer you twist their answers to mean something else.

My best advice for you would be to buy a game development book. A basic one.

Know what kind of work goes into game development.

While an FPS prototype could be created by some people here within a few hours, it is not a game. And mixing up the two purposely just so you could complain about wanting someone else to do all the work for you is annoying.

 

A "functioning" fps could be made by a good programmer in 2 hrs.

Your character will be a capsule. Your enemy will be a capsule. Your enemy will have no real AI.

If you shoot your enemy he will explode.

That's "functioning".

If you want anything that actually resembles a real game, prepare to put in thousands of hours in any game engine.

 

thanks for that!

does anyone else think this is a true statement: "Having said that, getting a basic FPS running in Unity is pretty straightforward and once you have the basic assets for your game it shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to get a good basic framework with core functionality up and running for a single player game."

2 hours for a good basic framework with core functionality up and running for a single player game?

but then now you say it would take thousands of hours?

the reason i am still here is that the 2 hours got me excited.

but now you guys are telling me it will take thousands of hours, while also adding that the "big boys" have already made all the cool games, so that actually finishing games is stupid, and that is why unity is good, as it is so hard to finish a game.

hmmmm, does nobody else find this funny?

 

No actually... I'm not sure if anyone is.

I'll try to state this plainly so that it's clear.

To develop a PROTOTYPE FPS in Unity:
- Would take about 2-4 hours once you know what you are doing.

To develop a GAME FPS in Unity:
- This can't be estimated. It depends on your team, ,knowledge and dedication.

Please re-read the responses that have been posed to you, you'll find the answer to your questions stated several times.

 

He said a couple of hours for basic functionality. He didn't say 2 hrs for a game.

You purposely misstated what he said.

The only thing I find funny is how you're playing dumb. What are you really trying to do?

 

@DavidB
You also can't define the prototype beeing a 2-4 hours job unless you made some specifications.

 

Yeah, it seems like there's some missing information here or an ulterior motive or something.

 

Even without the missing informations its not possible.
A complete game thats more than some basic casual "template with different theme style game" is hard to impossible to estimate an an FPS that requires AI for example is so by definition as you can spend months on a solid, smart, performant AI without any problems

 

Ulterior motive? Was that directed at my post? If not, sorry misread!

As for the prototype, I defined it above... Terrain + FPS walker essentially. Nothing fancy. Enough to get a beginning game-dev excited though.

 

*sigh* this thread makes me sad

 

Guys, he's totally screwing with your heads.

 

The only other place he's posted is on his own thread wanting to hire someone to add 10 - 30 existing voice samples to a simple FPS game, each up to 1 minute long fading out with distance.

I'm not sure if that meant he wanted the game created too, or added to an existing game. I assume he want's the game done too.

http://forum.unity3d.com/viewtopic.php?p=302732&highlight=#302732

 

Thanks dreamora,

Finally a simple, honest, reasoned and straight-forward answer.

This thread is cool as it says a lot about the current state of the industry.

I hope unity's upper-level management reads it and takes care to build a functioning fps or at least provide the tools to allow others to do so. This will bring them millions as well as everlasting glory.

Just trying to help!

 

Ahh. From that thread it looks like he's not really interested in developing a game. He just wants to make some changes to an existing game and call it his own.

 

hahaha! Yeah, he's just crazy...

I can't decide if he truly wanted unity to be a "FPS maker" or he was just trolling :roll:

 

Why reinvent the wheel?

I thought the whole point of unity was providing tools to make a game so that you didn't have to reinvent the wheel.

I thought unity was a functioning game engine, but it seems to have more in common with a c compiler than with the UDK.

And the customer service seems to be, "Oh that will only take a couple hours to make a functioning fps--just use the man pages at the command prompt and you will have everything you need."

 

No need for ad hominem attacks.

They'll likely scare people away from the "community," but it seems that unity is not interested in supporting developers, but rather luring people here with false promises to make fun of them. Well, at least we can now point to a fun unity game! Made in two hours!

 

I'm not sure if you really know what a game engine is.

You're getting game engines mixed up with sandboxes.

From the sound of it, you're not interested in developing a game. You're interested in someone else developing a game and you putting in little bits and then calling it your own.