I typically see this as trying to find niches that game giants or other popular games do not cover.

Like don't build an RTS that has only a subset of features as Starcraft, but instead focus it around things they don't have, such as underwater, and underground uses, or long range rockets, or AI based robot attacks, where you set a mission, but then lose control of the robot until it completes its task and returns.

But the general idea is to make sure that you'll be able to market your game by focusing on these differences, instead of advertising things that someone else already does.

That is my take on it, what else is there? As a David, what are your concerns with Goliath game giants as competition? How do you deal with that?

Thanks

I guess this could be more generalized as suggestions on how to make a David Survive and Thrive?

buy goliath's game-engine, it 'll be a lot cheaper then creating it yourself.

But the general idea is to make sure that you'll be able to market your game by focusing on these differences, instead of advertising things that someone else already does.

This is cruel and painfull reality of game making business. You are supposed to have at least one unique feature in your game, no matter how small. If you don't have something like this your game will fall in generic pile of games. In my oppinion today you don't really have much space to maneuver and make something unique, but you should.

Sure you can buy goliath's game-engine to get you started but, unique feature problem remains. Sometimes it is enough to make your game fun in some way to distinguish your self from the others.

In case of StarCraft 2 marketing, where you could see only CGI trailers and no actual gameplay, that shows something unique. There isn't much originallity in the game but it is fun to play anyway.

As long as your game appears fun people will buy it and play it.

Hi Dan. I think you're almost there, but rather than focus on a niche feature, you should probably focus on a niche audience. You can do this for example by setting your game in a particular village or making the game about a particular hobby or niche group activity. I'm convinced that this is the key to being a successful indie. See more details in my blog post how indie developers market their games.

You can do this for example by setting your game in a particular village or making the game about a particular hobby or niche group activity

This is a good point, and I could see it working. I also skimmed your blog, and saw this:

Tell that group about the game on their forums, their niche news sites, and their hideouts. Just to make this clear - these are NOT gaming groups or game genre groups. These are just niche hobby or niche interest groups - because remember pretty much everybody is a gamer now.

While I think thats a great idea, I don't think its very effective for fictional basis that has little or no real world related hobby. For instance, Dragon based RTS. How would I market that? Well, Perhaps the dragons are Steam Punk Dragons, and then I can discuss on steam punk forums. Even get people involved early by asking them for ideas about what they would want to see in a game. Or feature/character related things that can have real life comparison discussions, like costume/appearance of characters.

Perhaps it can be really effective. But lets pick a current/popular game like Star Craft, and here, how would I have associated this with real life hobbies?

While I remain unconvinced that this is the key to being a successful indie, I do think it is a very valuable idea, and certainly a good one to consider.

But lets pick a current/popular game like Star Craft, and here, how would I have associated this with real life hobbies?

You wouldn't. Blizzard is a Goliath, and doesn't have any need to play to niche audiences (more niche than "competitive RTS", at any rate).

But lets pick a current/popular game like Star Craft, and here, how would I have associated this with real life hobbies?

You wouldn't. Blizzard is a Goliath, and doesn't have any need to play to niche audiences (more niche than "competitive RTS", at any rate).

Touche'! And then we compete in the Genre, but find a niche'. It occurs to me that my latest game falls in this. Where it is not relying on previous popular tropes; the ideas really are not to far from real life hobby areas and could be modified slightly to cater to that area better.

Well dang-it, I guess I have to reply to this topic considering my name and all.

As an indie currently, I try to hold my head up knowing that I have more creative freedom in my games and that I don't need anywhere near as many sales as a "Goliath" to be considered successful.

For instance, lets say a mid-sized studio has 100 people. Their publisher is giving them 4 million dollars to complete a game in a year. Each of the employees makes 30k with expenses for equipment and software at 10k, which isn't great. Once the game is sold, the studio doesn't see money from that project again (usually), and the publisher needs to recover 4 million dollars and more to cover licences, advertising, and distribution to turn a profit. So basically double their initial investment to make it 8 million to turn a profit. Now their games are about $60, minus retail costs and all that, so lets call it $50 to make math easier for me.

So ... 8,000,000 / 50 = 160,000 copies need to be sold just to break even.

In order to help gain more sales, they need it to appeal to a wider market, meaning less innovation due to uncertainty in the market. That's why we see the same FPS games come out year after year and the same formula time after time.

For me as an indie, say I have to cover my cost for my Adobe Master Suite, whichever engine I'm using, and then any kind of cost encountered when publishing, which the total would be around $5,000, and I kinda need that before working on the game, so I work as a freelance to get cash-money. Then I assemble my team of 10 people and we work on our game for a year, busting our buns because we have to sell it to keep going. Say we sell a game on Steam for $12 that I made with a team of 10 people total.

Well, lets look at the numbers. Everyone works for free, using their own money to live for now, and they all get a fair cut of the profits from the sale, minus Steams cut, making it $10 even and say we sell 160,000 copies just like the big guys.

160,000 X 10 = 1,600,000. Now everyone on the team makes 160,000, minus our own expenses and we're good to go to work on another title with freedom of design and some real money in our pockets. Heck, we'd be in a better position (in my opinion) than the Goliath employees even if we sold 40k because we're still making the same money as them and we aren't waiting to be laid off because some other title we had nothing to do with lost money.

I guess I don't know why these big development studios are still just throwing money at their problems and failing. They could take a more controlled and deliberate approach by spread the bets a little wider out and quit paying CEO's stupid amounts of money for just sitting on their bums and throwing buzz-words around.

But yeah, that's just the opinion of one David on the matter of Goliaths.

To extend the 'David vs Goliath' analogy: You are beneath the enemy's notice, using weapons he doesn't care about and isn't defended against, and you are unencumbered by armor allowing you to move faster.

So: niches, innovation, rapid exploitation of new markets or changing interests seem to be the indie modus-operandi. Not always all three, but any combination of one or more seem the mark most indie games (apart from the clones).

@DaveTroyer: Might be significantly less than $50 - this article is a few years old, and I don't know if it's accurate or not, but it implies closer to $35 for the developer and publisher. $30k average per employee is probably under-estimating as well. I also hear that the marketing budgets are almost equal to the development costs.

On the indie side, though, selling a game for $12, Steam is likely to take $3.50 or more, so we'd get $8.50 out of $12, not $10. Steam's take isn't public, and might vary in negotiations, but with most other digital distributors it's a 30/70 cut with the developer getting 70%. Still good for indies though!

@Servant of the Lord - I know I was flubbing numbers but that's 'cause math-a-magics aren't my strong suit. (That's also why I draw stuff instead...)

I was just trying to give an idea of how a larger developer/publisher throws so much more money around and yet there isn't a significant amount of security or return to the developers themselves along with a much higher operating cost.

But thanks for the link, its a good read and the clarification I think is good.