I wrote down a game. All the ideas are there and the math is done. Just not designed and on market. I have no experience in developing the game to put on the market. My question is, should I solo this on my own? Or should I try to find people to help me put it on market? Many people have ideas for games and it takes many things to make a good game that will generate good money. So to let you know a little about my game is that its like "Game of War", "Clash of Kings", "Lords Mobile", "Vikings", ect... So I'm basing this game off of other games that have made big bucks. But I added a lot of features they don't have. And I took the time to think of how hard it would be to make the game so I made it in a way that it doesn't have to be hard.

I did research on what makes a game successful. I studied "Minecraft" and how it became successful. They would advertise beta version on YouTube and have followers. The games basics are like legos and everyone likes legos. And eventually it became popular. I have never played this game. But I understand why it was a good game. Their followers gave them their ideas and they implied the ideas. Like the game I have, I played these games and spoke to other players about their thoughts and implied some of their ideas.

So I'm trying to decide if I should just go solo on the project, which if I do, I will need to learn how to build the game. I'm in hopes that I can speak to experienced people that have developed and marketed apps already. Their thoughts about how to be successful. So I joined this site.

About me. 30 years old. I've always had a passion for gaming entertainment. I have made a few board games and card games in my life. I currently have a job in sales but its not what my heart is set on. My brother Roy had me download "Unity" and I just barely scratched the surface.

Anyways, this is my email, stucker.lance85@gmail.com You can ask me questions about the game but I'll only share what I feel is appropriate for the answer.

I particularly liked where you wrote "I took the time to think of how hard it would be to make the game so I made it in a way that it doesn't have to be hard."

Start by reading this. Nobody else will make your game (for free).

From what you describe, your immediate options are to (1) do it yourself or (2) pay other people to do it for you. A longer term option is to (3) work through a game development career and attempt to pitch it.

Option 1 the only cost is your time. It will take several years based on your short description, so you'll probably need to reduce your scope significantly. Your list of comparable titles are mostly large teams likely ranging from 50-200 years of combined full-time work.

Option 2 will probably require several hundred thousand dollars at a minimum for something you probably won't be happy with. Your list of comparable titles are in the $5M to $50M range. If you have access to the funds there are plenty of contract companies who have experience and can build the game. Note that the cost of development typically only represent about 1/3 of the cost to successfully market a game.

Option 3 will probably take 15-20 years of your life, and follows a highly sought career path. Over that time your ideas and goals will almost certainly evolve to something radically different from what they are today, so you'll probably be making a completely different idea.

Also, this:

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JoshBycer/20160524/273299/Mistakes_Game_Developers_Make_Chasing_the_King.php

If all you have is "Game X, but better!"... think twice if it REALLY is worth your time. And read the article. It makes some very convincing arguments on why the me-too strategy does not work for games (well, its a weak strategy in any business, just even less viable in games), and why you probably should strive to design original games instead of furiously trying to replicate the success of others.

Another good read:

https://youarenotsosmart.com/2013/05/23/survivorship-bias/

Its a long read, but a very good one. Its basically what you suffer from when you look at success trying to replicate them. You might as well play the lottery. Of course there is a tiny chance your game is so much better because you found that one thing that could be improved the original dev missed (and all the other copycats before you). Then there is even a slimmer chance you have this vastly better game, AND manage to reach a big enough audience to actually survive in the marketplace even though most people just see a game "like game X" and klick away. Maybe you get some youtubers to like your game and sing songs of praises that will shift public opinion on your game.

As said, a lot of ifs.

Fact is, success is oftentimes a mixture of a good product (which you can replicate), that arrived at the right time (sorry, train left the station here, you are most probably too late), and had a ton of luck (you cannot replicate luck).

Instead, analyze failures and see that you avoid the pitfalls. Because THAT will certainly make your game fail.

Good luck finding a team. Unless you have enough money to pay one. Then you still need to be aware that all the money invested most probably is lost. Why? Because even for big, expierienced AAA studios, about 7 out of 10 game projects started are duds. Thus the chance your project is a dud failing during development, or in the market, is quite likely.

If you don't have so much money to waste, don't waste your time trying to find a team. People working for free will most probably only work on opensource projects. The few that are ready to help on a non-opensource project most likely are not dumb enough to fall for shady profit-sharing schemas... because even if the intentions are good, most of the time this will blow up at some time (people leaving without signing over the rights to their work, people not happy with their shares, or no profit being made at all).

And before someone shows up telling me how it worked for him/her, or company X, or that one hobby project... yes I know there are examples on how profit sharing worked out just fine. Its just the exception, not the rule.

Your best bet is:

1) Learn programming. Without programming, there is no game. Unless you can pay a programmer, you need to do that. And don't waste your time finding a tool that lets you build a game without programming knowledge. There is none.

There are some tools that ease the load a little bit by using a simpler syntax, like the RPGMaker or Visual Scripting tools. You can buy ready made games and swap the art assets. Still, if you want to customize the code, you need to be able to code.

2) Learn to create art. Game art does not need to be overly complex. Given that you mentioned mobile titles, and the current 8-bit craze among Indie devs, you could go with a simplified art style. Still, you need to learn to use the tools of the trade. 3D Modelling if you want to go 3D, and 2D Drawing apps anyway.

Again, if you can pay an artist, you can skip that.

3) Pick an engine and learn to use its tools. Modern engine editors are quite complex. You will need to invest some time into learning it. But if you master it, you can design your levels efficiently. Being able to program will help your tremendously, as most modern engines allow you to write custom tools for their editors which will make you even more efficient.

4) After some years, you will be able to build a (hopefully) Kickass prototype to showcase your game. That might allow you to seek funding over Kickstarter or a publisher... or maybe at least gives you more chance finding help for free than just a Design paper.

A slightly less time consuming approach is to create a rough prototype without final art, and skip step 2. You still need the programming skills and engine editor knowledge, but you can forget about the art for now.

Use placeholder art (cubes and spheres), or free / cheap stock art from around the internet to build a rough prototype of your game.

You will certainly not set Kickstarter on fire with it (wouldn't show my face without polished art on kickstarter really), but it might be good enough to test your idea and see if the game you are planning here actually deserves an art pass. At that stage you might be able to approach a publisher, or use your knowledge to build a better game should your current idea turn out to be not as good in practice as it sounded on paper.

Oh, and the last link to read:

http://www.gamedev.net/page/resources/_/business/production-and-management/never-team-up-with-the-idea-guy-r3088

Don't be the idea guy. You already put that idea on paper and made a design out of it, good. Now make it a prototype, and nobody will msitake you for the idea guy anymore.

I'm not going to quote the above posts (way too long) but they are spot on.

I was at a gamedev meetup a few months ago, and everyone was going around the table, showing their latest prototype, talking about the problems they were having, or getting a quick playtest with someone else in the group. At this point, the next person to go stood up, and introduced himself. There was a used-car salesman tone to his voice, and way too much aftershave.

"My name is [I don't remember]. I have an idea for the next great game. Here is my card." He placed a stack of cards on the table. "Of course, you will have to sign a non-disclosure agreement before I can tell you about my idea, because it is so awesome I can't have you stealing it. Who would like the honor of making this great game?" He seemed surprised buy our blank stares. We all looked around at each other, some of us smiling, and some of us (me included) trying not to burst out laughing. He sat back down after a few second with no response, and left in the middle of the next presenters demo, presumably because he had so much work to do convincing others to turn his idea into millions of dollars.

At the end of the session, someone remarked how we had come up with four different prototype ideas just from our discussions of the other games. That was two hours of discussion, and four ideas that we worth pursuing. We, the ones who make stuff, who think of a good idea, and then try it out, only to find it isn't as fun as we thought, knew that the idea isn't what makes a great game. That is just the seed. With lots of time, energy, and patience, it can grow into a beautiful flower, or a weed. You can't tell from the seed.

@op

I happen to be in the same boat as you although I haven't finished my GDD yet. I'm working on another kind of game as you but there are lots of similarities. Like you I am not a coder or artist and I'm not even working in the industry. For a long time I've had my ideas but for a long time I had that kind of realization that most likely it would not lead to a finished game due to all the hurdles I saw in front of me (development cost / how to find an interested party / how to approach big companies / and so on).

Over time, many pieces of the puzzle started to fall in place for me and I started to look at the whole idea more seriously because I'm sure that I'm onto something good and unique. I think that's the important thing, you must be convinced you're onto something good and unique, something that sets your game apart from the other games you mentioned or lifts it to the next level.

I believe it is possible for players who have played a certain type of game long enough to come up with meaningful improvements or even new directions that the original devs are unaware of. Especially in games that allow for a lot of customization by the players.

Looking at big game companies, they pay "community managers" to interact with the fans and to sniff out what makes the fans tick. Because the devs themselves don't seem to know or, they have no time for this. They pay story writers. They pay people to develop new game ideas / game systems. I think the issue is not that they wouldn't welcome a bundle of good ideas. I think the problem is that there are just to many people bringing in ideas that are just not good enough. This thing I can understand. What I don't understand is that big companies seem to have a severe case of tunnel vision where they seem to think good ideas can only come from people who are already working in the industry.

To set yourself apart from the idea-guy mentioned by the other replies above and to have a defense against this issue when you approach someone with your ideas. You must be able to convey that your ideas have not come over night. If you are able to present a complete package including a good game title, story, new and unique game systems, a marketing strategy and business plan than you have something solid. To people who don't take you seriously because you can't code and beforehand complain they will have to do all the work I would tell them strait in their face how long it has taken to reach the point where you're at and that you are miles ahead of them in terms of work that has gone in to your project.

Other bits of advice I can give you, for what it's worth

• Make sure you've checked the game communities behind those games you mentioned and do your research if you haven't done that already. But I'm pretty sure you would have done that.
• If you approach a big company and they reply your ideas are unsolicited then I probably wouldn't bother with them. They try to put you in a position that's not any good for you.
• It could be a good idea to hire a stand on a game show if you have enough material to present. I believe it doesn't need to be something playable as long as it's interesting enough for people from the industry to start asking questions. Hiring a stand for a few days wouldn't be to costly.
• Make sure you can present everything in detail. Think in terms developers would think like how approachable is the stuff for the players and things like that.

@op

I happen to be in the same boat as you although I haven't finished my GDD yet. I'm working on another kind of game as you but there are lots of similarities. Like you I am not a coder or artist and I'm not even working in the industry. For a long time I've had my ideas but for a long time I had that kind of realization that most likely it would not lead to a finished game due to all the hurdles I saw in front of me (development cost / how to find an interested party / how to approach big companies / and so on).

Over time, many pieces of the puzzle started to fall in place for me and I started to look at the whole idea more seriously because I'm sure that I'm onto something good and unique. I think that's the important thing, you must be convinced you're onto something good and unique, something that sets your game apart from the other games you mentioned or lifts it to the next level.

I believe it is possible for players who have played a certain type of game long enough to come up with meaningful improvements or even new directions that the original devs are unaware of. Especially in games that allow for a lot of customization by the players.

Looking at big game companies, they pay "community managers" to interact with the fans and to sniff out what makes the fans tick. Because the devs themselves don't seem to know or, they have no time for this. They pay story writers. They pay people to develop new game ideas / game systems. I think the issue is not that they wouldn't welcome a bundle of good ideas. I think the problem is that there are just to many people bringing in ideas that are just not good enough. This thing I can understand. What I don't understand is that big companies seem to have a severe case of tunnel vision where they seem to think good ideas can only come from people who are already working in the industry.

To set yourself apart from the idea-guy mentioned by the other replies above and to have a defense against this issue when you approach someone with your ideas. You must be able to convey that your ideas have not come over night. If you are able to present a complete package including a good game title, story, new and unique game systems, a marketing strategy and business plan than you have something solid. To people who don't take you seriously because you can't code and beforehand complain they will have to do all the work I would tell them strait in their face how long it has taken to reach the point where you're at and that you are miles ahead of them in terms of work that has gone in to your project.

Other bits of advice I can give you, for what it's worth

• Make sure you've checked the game communities behind those games you mentioned and do your research if you haven't done that already. But I'm pretty sure you would have done that.
• If you approach a big company and they reply your ideas are unsolicited then I probably wouldn't bother with them. They try to put you in a position that's not any good for you.
• It could be a good idea to hire a stand on a game show if you have enough material to present. I believe it doesn't need to be something playable as long as it's interesting enough for people from the industry to start asking questions. Hiring a stand for a few days wouldn't be to costly.
• Make sure you can present everything in detail. Think in terms developers would think like how approachable is the stuff for the players and things like that.

You make some good points, ARPG, but some are showing a slight misunderstanding of matters at hand.

1) "You must be able to convey that your ideas have not come over night"

that certainly shows you are already more than the average idea guy. Still, your idea WITHOUT execution has almost zero value.

The single best way to show a) your are more than the idea guy, b) that you really believe in your idea yourself, and c) that your idea has value, is to actually execute your idea, and be it just as a rough prototype.

IF they are actually listening to peoples pitching ideas (most studios nowadays aren't, unless you want to hire them and pay all the expenses yourself), they will listen to the guy whos has not only what you listed, but also a cd / memory stick / laptop with a playable prototype showing his idea COULD be worth something in practice. As the studio, you are taking a considerable risk even when going into pre-prod with an idea. You are starting to invest real money into the project, no matter how small the project is.

2)"To people who don't take you seriously because you can't code and beforehand complain they will have to do all the work I would tell them strait in their face how long it has taken to reach the point where you're at and that you are miles ahead of them in terms of work that has gone in to your project."

With the caveat that they can create a game just fine without you... you cannot without them. Being arrogant when talking to your programmer might be the biggest mistake you make as a shoestring Indie dev that cannot code and cannot pay real wages. If he leaves, you risk starting at zero again.

The better position to be in is to be at least somewhat competent in programming so you can cover that base if needed.

It also doesn't matter really how true the fact you are stating there is. You might have worked your ass off for years to produce that GDD. I as the programmer approached by you cannot really judge how much work went into that document. Given it is long enough, I might also not read everything. Not unless you sold me your idea very well. Even then, how long does it take you to produce 100 pages of GDD? A year? Maybe you worked 4 years on it? I don't know.

All I know, as long as you don't pay me, you need me as a programmer more than I need you as a Designer.

Then there is the fact that a GDD is totally unproven theory. You worked your ass of for 4 years to produce that. I will now tell you straight in the face that you wasted a good portion of that time, because you should have written a quick draft, built a prototype (and be it a paper prototype), tested the idea, iterated over it, built another prototype (by now hopefully digital), iterated over it, and so on.

By now, you should possess more than an idea. If you don't, and you worked as long on it as you say, you wasted your time. Because no matter how great the idea sounds, its unproven, and chances that it will need at least as much work to get it to be fun in practice are pretty high.

3) "If you approach a big company and they reply your ideas are unsolicited then I probably wouldn't bother with them. They try to put you in a position that's not any good for you."

Don't approach a big company... not unless you are a big name in the industry already. They will not be interested... even if they were (and given most companys have more ideas inhouse than they could build in 100 years), they wouldn't read your idea for the single fact that if they did, and they happened to be building something similar, you might accuse them of stealing your idea without paying you.

So you will usually get a polite response telling you that they don't have the time/interest/need to even READ your idea.

4) "t could be a good idea to hire a stand on a game show if you have enough material to present. I believe it doesn't need to be something playable as long as it's interesting enough for people from the industry to start asking questions. Hiring a stand for a few days wouldn't be to costly."

No, and no again. You will waste your money, unless you can show SOME progress on the execution of the idea. Professional concept art, Screenshot mockups, whatever. Even then, who are you again? Without a big name known in the industry, the interest is most probably small.

IF you have something to show, you could try an Indie con and see if you could get fellow Indie devs interested. They will certainly not develop the game for you, but they could support you in other ways. Be polite, be helpful, be part of the community.

Still, make sure you show up with more than just a 1000 pages of GDD.

5) "Make sure you can present everything in detail. Think in terms developers would think like how approachable is the stuff for the players and things like that."

Developers YOU pay are only interested if you can pay them when the milestone is reached. Developers who pay YOU to hand over your idea will most probably not be interested at all... if they would be, they are interested in market research (yes, you got that part right), costs (you will need a TON of expierience to even give a vague number), and risk (again, with just the GDD being written, your idea is a HUGE risk).

Developers ready to work with you for free... don't really exist.

6) "I believe it is possible for players who have played a certain type of game long enough to come up with meaningful improvements or even new directions that the original devs are unaware of. Especially in games that allow for a lot of customization by the players."

Yes, it is very possible. Its called modding, there are a ton of people doing that as a hobby, and for some lucky few, it was an entrance point into a career as game dev, or they might even have started a real spinoff game with a mod (see Counterstrike).

The emphasis here is that this guys had an idea, learned the tools of the trade (and be it only mod tools), and executed their idea within the constraints of producing a mod (thus being limited somewhat in how much their idea could veer off the path of the original game). They did EXECUTE on their idea!

Guys, I get that you are both super excited with your idea, and if its one thing I can appreciate, its people being excited about an idea and ready to stick to it for a long time.

But nevertheless, it is pointless to close your eyes to reality just to not have to step out of your comfort zone.

Reality is, execution is everything in game development, the idea is just the nucleus, but not the real meat that makes a game successfull. If you are not able to execute on your idea, are not in a position were you can execute your idea with someone elses money (and then you most probably will not make the call alone, it will not be your idea alone), or are rich enough to pay others to execute your idea, you are not doing much more than daydreaming.

Go and build your game... gather enough money to do it. Stop talking about how awesome it would be if someone would do the hard work for you (hint: its not the idea)... or worse, how awesome it would be if somebody paid you for your ideas. Nobody will until you show the world how awesome your ideas are by executing upon them YOURSELF!

There are possibilities of working in the Indie space as non-coder, non-artist. There are some freelancing Game Designers frequenting these forums. They might shed some light into how you work yourself into a position where you are able to find work as a game designer outside of the AAA industry.

There might be some who already have some funds to spend who concentrate on game design, and outsource art and coding.

But be aware that there is more to game design than just writing a GDD and handing it off to others for implementation. If you do that and expect to be paid, good luck. If you do that and pay others, way to waste some money on a subpar result.

@Gian-Reto

Thx for replying. I'm not here to clash with you in this debate about every point I said in my previous post but I give my reaction from my point of view as a person who has spend considerable time, indeed years, to work out my ideas.

It's not arrogant to have some self esteem about your ideas if you worked long and hard to put it all together. If it's a case like the guy in Glass_Knife's example above then I agree that's like the worst example of how to present ideas. It isn't clear what this guy was presenting but that sounds like a guy who just wants to CASH on an idea. In my case, I want the GAME because I want to play it myself too. Also my idea is not just an idea. It's a bundle of ideas that lifts this type of game to the next level because it has stuff not seen before as far as I know. Furthermore, I have indeed iterated over my ideas and came back to scrap stuff that I first thought was great but later on got replaced by another version because I saw it could be done better. I didn't need to build a playable version to see that.

If you have played and interacted with fellow gamers for a long time and worked out ideas for at least 5 years then you're going to attach a value to that. Then, if you are going to look for interested parties you are interested in like-minded parties who actually agree with your ideas. If I would meet someone who starts telling me I'm the idea-guy and basically treats the whole thing from a perspective where I'm the one who needs him and my ideas mean nothing that's up to him. I would immediately lose all interest in him because I believe in my ideas, I don't see it as being arrogant.

Also I consider it poor policy if a company cannot even have someone interview potential candidates for 15 minutes or so to see if there might possibly be a gem in the basket. It wouldn't take an experienced interviewer very long to flick through a GDD and decide if it's worth further investigating or not. But again, that's up to them and if it happens I would carry on.

About the stand at a game show yes of course I agree there must be material to show. That's what I also said in my previous post. What I meant when saying "it doesn't need to be something playable" is indeed some artwork or screenshots. I think it must be possible to attract interest by presenting some eye catchers without having to present a playable version of the game which would be huge task in my example. I am thinking like presenting important features or game systems as isolated things to get your idea across to the other person. This is much easier to do and I would certainly consider paying someone experienced to help me create that.

@Gian-Reto

Thx for replying. I'm not here to clash with you in this debate about every point I said in my previous post but I give my reaction from my point of view as a person who has spend considerable time, indeed years, to work out my ideas.

It's not arrogant to have some self esteem about your ideas if you worked long and hard to put it all together. If it's a case like the guy in Glass_Knife's example above then I agree that's like the worst example of how to present ideas. It isn't clear what this guy was presenting but that sounds like a guy who just wants to CASH on an idea. In my case, I want the GAME because I want to play it myself too. Also my idea is not just an idea. It's a bundle of ideas that lifts this type of game to the next level because it has stuff not seen before as far as I know. Furthermore, I have indeed iterated over my ideas and came back to scrap stuff that I first thought was great but later on got replaced by another version because I saw it could be done better. I didn't need to build a playable version to see that.

If you have played and interacted with fellow gamers for a long time and worked out ideas for at least 5 years then you're going to attach a value to that. Then, if you are going to look for interested parties you are interested in like-minded parties who actually agree with your ideas. If I would meet someone who starts telling me I'm the idea-guy and basically treats the whole thing from a perspective where I'm the one who needs him and my ideas mean nothing that's up to him. I would immediately lose all interest in him because I believe in my ideas, I don't see it as being arrogant.

Also I consider it poor policy if a company cannot even have someone interview potential candidates for 15 minutes or so to see if there might possibly be a gem in the basket. It wouldn't take an experienced interviewer very long to flick through a GDD and decide if it's worth further investigating or not. But again, that's up to them and if it happens I would carry on.

About the stand at a game show yes of course I agree there must be material to show. That's what I also said in my previous post. What I meant when saying "it doesn't need to be something playable" is indeed some artwork or screenshots. I think it must be possible to attract interest by presenting some eye catchers without having to present a playable version of the game which would be huge task in my example. I am thinking like presenting important features or game systems as isolated things to get your idea across to the other person. This is much easier to do and I would certainly consider paying someone experienced to help me create that.

Look, I really don't want to marginalize yours or anyone elses ideas. It might very well be that your idea is as brilliant as you think it is, maybe even more than you know.

BUT: Reality is, that this doesn't matter. Not unless YOU work out your idea into something that shows its values. This has nothing to do with arrogance or anything. You believe your ideas to be the best in the world. Everyone does. You want others to believe in them more than their own... you need to do a LOT of legwork.

The best position to be in is to have a working, FINISHED game that is as awesome as you say. The second best is to at least have a working prototype showing potential... from there, its a steep downward slope. Of course good artwork is cool... but then, good artwork =/= good game. Every cheap 2 bucks game on Steam paid some pro to create an awesome thumbnail to drive some traffic to their store page. If you look at the game screenshots afterwards, it looks not half as high quality as the thumbnail that made you click on it.

That might sound negative, but I am just trying to give you some perspective...

Now, you can try to create an awesome elevator pitch, good concept art and get into your best salesman act. You MIGHT get some people interested on Steam or on Kickstarter to back you. Given your idea is not only good, but touches with your newfound audience (either nostalgia or an underserved genre) you might get some response.

Just don't expect it to be easy... by now Kickstarter is nothing new anymore, people got burned many times, and a lot of professional devs are now also competing for backers money... devs that come to the platform with an ALREADY FINISHED GAME just needing some additional cash for release (or just wanting to test the community reaction on it).

And Steam Greenlight is no sign of "having made it" nowadays. Many games get on Steam just to Bomb afterwards.

Don't expect the bigshots in the industry to even look at your idea. Really, don't take it personal. As said, they will not take those 15 minutes to flick through your GDD, because finding new ideas is the least of their problems, but mostly because they don't want to pay you and they don't want to get into a legal battle should your idea be similar to theirs. Just scratch any big studio noticing you as a nobody, ever, off your list of things that MIGHT happen if you are lucky. You might as well bet on the lottery.

That is nothing to be bitter about, its not the fault of these people, nor are they trying to be mean to you or to marginalize your ideas. They just have limited time, enough ideas, and are in the business to make money, thus need to minimize all risks.

You have 3 options left: build it yourself, pay someone else to build it for you, or spend time to build a reputation by going through a game dev career until people might listen to you.

You can try to get outside help or funding, but don't expect too much. Nobody has really waited for you, you need to show them first what they have been missing until now.

Also I consider it poor policy if a company cannot even have someone interview potential candidates for 15 minutes or so to see if there might possibly be a gem in the basket. It wouldn't take an experienced interviewer very long to flick through a GDD and decide if it's worth further investigating or not. But again, that's up to them and if it happens I would carry on.

Some companies do accept concept submissions, but only after the submitter has signed a contract indemnifying the company from legal action should the submission resemble something the company has already worked on. If you want to know more about the submission process, I wrote about it at http://www.sloperama.com/advice/lesson21.htm

Also, you mention "candidates" and "interviewing." It sounds like you're talking about a job applicant - not a game concept submission.

@Gian-Reto

I understand the reality, I wouldn't pursue this if I hadn't thought it over. I've said above that for a long time I had a realization my ideas would not lead to a finished game because of all the hurdles I saw in front of me. Now my reality is that I fully believe in my project because everything has fallen into place over time.

Now if things are so grim that I won't be able to find someone interested to even look at what I got then I might let it be. No harm done, just my time investment to write it all down and work it all out. But I feel that would really be a wasted opportunity to bring the next big ARPG to life and quite possibly a new franchise. My title is not a strait copycat ARPG, it has it's own unique universe and unique elements and improves the issues that the big ARPG titles out there haven't solved so far. At the moment I still feel positive.

None of those 3 options you list at the end of your last post work for me.

1) Build it myself. Impossible even if I could code. We are talking a full blown ARPG. Including all the features these type of game pack.

2) Pay someone to build it. Not an option. This game is going to need a team of people to build it. It's big. It requires secure servers for the multiplayer component. Not MMO but a huge task still. I have money in the bank but nowhere near enough to do this. The only thing that I could do is pay people to help me create stuff like isolated game systems and art such as to "illustrate" my GDD in the hope to attract attention. Or, possibly, approach it in a similar way Crate Entertainment did with their recent title Grim Dawn on kickstarter but I haven't worked that out for now and I know requires a playable early version to pull the backers in. For Crate it worked they raised over half a million dollars but it's worth noting they don't have secure servers. They informed players on their forums that adding this feature would require a complete overhaul of the game and cost another 500K - 1 million dollars.

3) Going through a game dev career. To go through the usual game dev career is not an option. I'm 43 years old. My education is not in this direction.

What do I have then? A long time experience in ARPG as a player. A lot of knowledge what players seek in this kind of game through interaction with players. I've always played it legit, never touched bots or cheats. This means I can think like a casual player, what they want in the game but at the same time I'm hardcore to the bone. I have many solutions to bring to the table on things like anti cheat, boosting multiplayer and making it work better, endgame content, trading, PvP and more. The game will be for BOTH the casual and the hardcore players that's a focus point.