

Making Lean Startup Tactics Work for Games - davidtyleryork
http://gamasutra.com/view/feature/168647/making_lean_startup_tactics_work_.php

======
dvx
With all due respect, this article is dead wrong. For several reasons.

Agile development only works in very niche development circles. You couldn't
write an AGILE operating system, for example (or rather, shouldn't).
Similarly, writing an AGILE game is equivalent to setting sail for fail.

Consider this: a potential customer can purchase an older AAA title on steam
for 5-10 bucks. They can purchase a brand new AA title for about 15 bucks.
They can purchase an extremely polished indie title for 5-10 bucks. As a
developer, what's your bottom line here?

Games HAVE to be finished, debugged, and polished on day 1 of release. AGILE
development works for incremental software development, not for games. I don't
think you realize how many one-man development teams out there release
extremely polished and innovative indie titles and STILL don't make it on
Steam (or other marketing platforms). There is absolutely no way a half-assed
AGILE-released game will make it on the Apple Store, let alone Steam.

Furthermore, gamers in general are a cynical bunch. Release a bad/unfinished
game, and you're done. To reiterate, I completely agree with the prototyping
idea - i.e. hey this seems like a fun mechanic lets make a quick prototype -
but not releasing the prototype to the public (unless we're talking open
source projects here).

~~~
rcamera
I am affraid you didn't get to explain why games have to be finished, debugged
and polished on day 1 of release. There are many developers (indie) that have
been disrupting the industry by exactly not doing that and I am pretty sure
you have heard of Notch, as an example. Minecraft was full of bugs, sold
millions, 0x10c, his next game doesn't even got an alpha release and there is
already a community around it and many programs for the computer architecture
that will be implemented in the game.

The thinking that things can't change because they won't work without
explanation is pretty weak, so I wouldn't make such bold claim that the
article is dead wrong.

------
davidtyleryork
Any feedback on the ideas I present in this article? I'm especially interested
in the opinions of game developers, particularly the drawbacks associated with
this kind of strategy

~~~
soup10
The drawback is that for many games the most exposure and sales is going to be
when it's released, so you want to polish and perfect it as much as possible
to maximize that.

I think the strategy works better for games that are intended for longevity
and re-playability, like free to play games and multiplayer games. If it's the
type of game that people are only going to play through a couple times, then
it doesn't really work.

Another thing is that it's easier to get all the bugs out for a single release
than to have to QA again for every release(how much of an issue this is
depends on the platform/type of game).

Also "controlling the experience" is a big deal. Many games are just not going
to be good or worth playing until they are far into development and polished.

~~~
evincarofautumn
Exactly. I hate to drag Minecraft into this, but thanks to its multiplayer
nature, the release strategy was perfect. The open alpha basically said “I
know this game isn’t the greatest, but hey, it’s fun, and you guys can help me
make it better”. Not to mention the classic “get a discount if you buy now”
manoeuvre. But most games, especially with any kind of narrative, are easier
and safer to release as a whole.

Still, I’d like to make a game with new levels released weekly as episodes in
an ongoing narrative. Maybe after I gain some ground with my current
project…stupid reality.

