by date
Road to the IGF
Road to the IGF
| Name: | Andy Schatz |  |
|---|---|---|
| Date Posted: | Sep 09, 2006 | |
| Rating: |  Not Rated | |
| Public: | YES | |
| Comments: | YES | |
| RSS Feed: |  or Subscribe with  . | |
| Profile Page: | View profile page for Andy Schatz |
Blog post
Venture Arctic IGF build complete. Submitted. I can't believe it's awards submission season again. Seems like only minutes ago we were submitting Venture Africa.
That means it's time to reflect on IGF winners of the past and what the IGF means for our future.
2006- Darwinia cleaned up in most of the categories where it was nominated.
2005- Gish and Alien Hominid split most of the major awards
2004- Savage collected 3 prizes
2003- Wild Earth (finally released for download this year), the African photo safari game claimed 3 top prizes
2002- A number of smaller games split the prizes, with the grand prize going to a game called Bad Milk
2001- Shattered Galaxy cleaned up
2000- Tread Marks, created by Seamus McNally, wins many of the major awards
1999- A game called Fire and Darkness won the top prize
Clearly, the IGF has seen a rise in production values of the top winners. This year will probably be no different. While I don't see any clear front-runners in the competition this year (as there seemed to be in the past 2 years), certainly the following games are worth mentioning as possible nominees:
-Eets: Hunger. It's emotional. (like Professor Fizzwizzle but cuter and more innovative)
-Defcon: Everybody Dies (Introversion's next game)
-Cloning Clyde
-Minions of Mirth (need I comment here?)
-Possibly some other XBLA games?
Of course I'd like to put our own Venture Arctic on the list, but I think that's bad form.
The IGF and the Budget Complaint
The last few years have seen a number of entries with extremely high budgets. Many of these games were built on money raised from investors. This has led to many people crying foul, saying the playing field isn't level for the "true indies". They are wrong.
First of all, the IGF is about promoting games that are made outside of the publisher/studio funding model. Games that were made at a high risk to those funding them. The IGF supports exploration of new ways to develop games. That doesn't mean that the games need to be made on a shoestring budget.
Secondly, with all the press that indie games have been getting this year, we sure as hell better put forth some polished, kickass games or else people out in the mainstream will stop listening. I'd rather have a bigger budget "indie" game opening doors for us little guys, than have no one interested in checking out my game because the "indie" games the broader audiences were exposed to had low production values.
Lastly, the IGF isn't the only show in town. Slamdance has a budget restriction, and thus was filled with smaller, largely student made games last year. GameTunnel has yearly awards that skew towards a different audience. Since IGF is the big publicity and has big money attached to the awards (20,000 bucks for the grand prize!), one can only expect that it will also be the biggest show in town.
Where should the IGF go from here?
One of the reasons the Oscars are so big is the stupid TV broadcast. That broadcast sells DVDs. Of course, the IGF awards ceremony won't sell games, so how can the IGF help to promote itself and promote the games it selects as winners? The big problem, right now, is the IGF website.
The IGF website needs to act as a game portal. They should take a small cut from games downloaded from the portal, and use that money to continue to promote the IGF. The main landing page should be about selling games. A portal with the IGF pedigree could drive a ton of traffic and help to promote indie games tremendously.
Instead, what we get is a very developer-centric website that does not encourage browsing or playing at all. The IGF has already sold itself to me, it should be selling itself to the audiences that want to play these games!
I am confident that our IGF nomination doubled our online sales (though we still performed much better in retail with Wildlife Tycoon than online). We're still seeing sales from last year's nomination. I can only imagine what kind of sales we would have seen if we had won.
On the other hand, Josiah Pisciotta of Chronic Logic said that the IGF win for Gish hadn't done much to sales.
In any case, this year's competition looks like it will be intense, and to the victor go the spoils. I'm happy with the direction of the IGF, and I can't wait to start playing the games that were submitted!
That means it's time to reflect on IGF winners of the past and what the IGF means for our future.
2006- Darwinia cleaned up in most of the categories where it was nominated.
2005- Gish and Alien Hominid split most of the major awards
2004- Savage collected 3 prizes
2003- Wild Earth (finally released for download this year), the African photo safari game claimed 3 top prizes
2002- A number of smaller games split the prizes, with the grand prize going to a game called Bad Milk
2001- Shattered Galaxy cleaned up
2000- Tread Marks, created by Seamus McNally, wins many of the major awards
1999- A game called Fire and Darkness won the top prize
Clearly, the IGF has seen a rise in production values of the top winners. This year will probably be no different. While I don't see any clear front-runners in the competition this year (as there seemed to be in the past 2 years), certainly the following games are worth mentioning as possible nominees:
-Eets: Hunger. It's emotional. (like Professor Fizzwizzle but cuter and more innovative)
-Defcon: Everybody Dies (Introversion's next game)
-Cloning Clyde
-Minions of Mirth (need I comment here?)
-Possibly some other XBLA games?
Of course I'd like to put our own Venture Arctic on the list, but I think that's bad form.
The IGF and the Budget Complaint
The last few years have seen a number of entries with extremely high budgets. Many of these games were built on money raised from investors. This has led to many people crying foul, saying the playing field isn't level for the "true indies". They are wrong.
First of all, the IGF is about promoting games that are made outside of the publisher/studio funding model. Games that were made at a high risk to those funding them. The IGF supports exploration of new ways to develop games. That doesn't mean that the games need to be made on a shoestring budget.
Secondly, with all the press that indie games have been getting this year, we sure as hell better put forth some polished, kickass games or else people out in the mainstream will stop listening. I'd rather have a bigger budget "indie" game opening doors for us little guys, than have no one interested in checking out my game because the "indie" games the broader audiences were exposed to had low production values.
Lastly, the IGF isn't the only show in town. Slamdance has a budget restriction, and thus was filled with smaller, largely student made games last year. GameTunnel has yearly awards that skew towards a different audience. Since IGF is the big publicity and has big money attached to the awards (20,000 bucks for the grand prize!), one can only expect that it will also be the biggest show in town.
Where should the IGF go from here?
One of the reasons the Oscars are so big is the stupid TV broadcast. That broadcast sells DVDs. Of course, the IGF awards ceremony won't sell games, so how can the IGF help to promote itself and promote the games it selects as winners? The big problem, right now, is the IGF website.
The IGF website needs to act as a game portal. They should take a small cut from games downloaded from the portal, and use that money to continue to promote the IGF. The main landing page should be about selling games. A portal with the IGF pedigree could drive a ton of traffic and help to promote indie games tremendously.
Instead, what we get is a very developer-centric website that does not encourage browsing or playing at all. The IGF has already sold itself to me, it should be selling itself to the audiences that want to play these games!
I am confident that our IGF nomination doubled our online sales (though we still performed much better in retail with Wildlife Tycoon than online). We're still seeing sales from last year's nomination. I can only imagine what kind of sales we would have seen if we had won.
On the other hand, Josiah Pisciotta of Chronic Logic said that the IGF win for Gish hadn't done much to sales.
In any case, this year's competition looks like it will be intense, and to the victor go the spoils. I'm happy with the direction of the IGF, and I can't wait to start playing the games that were submitted!
Recent Blog Posts
| List: | 01/08/09 - Dinosauria concept art and IGF analysis 01/06/09 - Announcing Dinosauria 01/02/09 - Free Arctic Results 12/31/08 - Top Ten Indie Stories of 2008 12/29/08 - Qatfish returns 12/24/08 - Venture Arctic is free until New Years 11/09/08 - Nine Things I Wish I Knew 08/02/08 - Game Guide Released |
|---|
Submit your own resources!| Prairie Games (Sep 09, 2006 at 08:36 GMT) |
| Andy Schatz (Sep 09, 2006 at 08:59 GMT) |
| Andrew Douglas (Sep 09, 2006 at 14:06 GMT) |
My problem now is trying to come up with an excuse for my wife since it's inevitably going to cause a lot of late nights (including last night) over the next few weeks as I try to polish the submission. I hope you don't mind me blaming it all on you... "But Baby, Andy Schatz said I should!"
-Andrew
| Joshua Dallman (Sep 09, 2006 at 17:54 GMT) |
I don't agree that the IGF site should be a portal. to do so would discredit it in my eyes. IGF has its purpose and it's already a full-time job just to fulfill that purpose. it's the responsibility of developers and publishers to connect with audiences. IGF just helps that along, it's not an end-to-end solution.
sans IGC, see you at the show - and good luck.
| Andy Schatz (Sep 09, 2006 at 19:03 GMT) |
| Vashner (Sep 10, 2006 at 04:28 GMT) |
| Anton Bursch (Sep 10, 2006 at 07:45 GMT) |
Why are you submitting your game to the contest when you are already going to have it sell in stores? Why not leave room for teams who haven't caught a break yet? Give them a real chance. Isn't that what an indie game contest is about?
| Luke D (Sep 10, 2006 at 08:17 GMT) |
Developers should just enter to share their accomplishments with their peers, maybe make a few friends/connections, and for the thrill of having the fruit of your efforts played through by some pretty upstanding gamedev citizens. Anything else is just icing.
Congratulations Andy! I too poked through the ftp directories and smiled when I saw Venture Arctic. Good luck!!
| Logan Foster (Sep 10, 2006 at 16:05 GMT) |
I agree that the IGF needs to do more. Having this once a year event is nice, but if it wasnt as a prelude to the bigger AAA game industry awards I doubt many people (media or gamers) would take much interest. IMHO IGF should be doing what GameTunnel is doing right now, review indie games, make an indie game magazine and promote it as a healthy and viable alternative to the AAA industry for both gamers and developers.
I also agree that the IGF should sell various games online through a portal they own or control. Their CD compilation is getting hammered in the retail channels right now because its tough to market it, at least online they could keep the selection fresh and ensure that both they and the developers of the games that they are selling, marketing and promoting get their fair cut of the profits (ie. more than $1 per sale). I also think its important for them to become an online game portal to help better promote the IGF as well as give indies a chance to have a market in e-distribution that isn't going to screw them in the ass like the retail box market does by taking between 90% and 75% of the revenue or giving up when the going gets tough.
| Andy Schatz (Sep 10, 2006 at 18:54 GMT) |
@Luke- what entry number are you? What's the lucky number? :)
@LFoster- Yeah, the retail compilation isn't actually done by the IGF, it's another publisher and it has sold like crap if I understand correctly. And it seems to me like it's a bad choice to be involved in that anyways since it kills your chances for finding a retail deal with other publishers. I haven't had very kind words for Manifesto so far, but I think they would increase their credibility if they could have a major IGF event on their site or come up with some sort of partnership with the IGF.
Edited on Sep 11, 2006 02:14 GMT
| Luke D (Sep 10, 2006 at 21:11 GMT) |
| Phil Carlisle (Sep 10, 2006 at 21:46 GMT) |
I actually like thier next game Defcon a far sight more than darwinia as a concept, so I can see them winning some money back there, but its scary that they blew the profits of 100k direct sales on a single game.
| Andy Schatz (Sep 11, 2006 at 01:38 GMT) |
| Jonathon Stevens (Sep 11, 2006 at 20:59 GMT) |
| Logan Foster (Sep 11, 2006 at 22:37 GMT) |
The only electronic distribution company that I know that divvies out 50% is GarageGames. Most other companies you are lucky to get 25%, usually its more like 10 or 15% if you are lucky unless you are some big shot company with a hot game and are willing to do an exclusive.
As such I doubt that the developer of Darwinia have racked in anywhere near a million dollars in revenue. Probably more like a couple of hundred thousand on the high side if I were to guess.
| Andy Schatz (Sep 11, 2006 at 22:57 GMT) |
| Magnus Blikstad (Sep 12, 2006 at 00:02 GMT) |
www.igf.com/php-bin/entries2007.php
| Josiah Pisciotta (Sep 13, 2006 at 20:29 GMT) |
Edited on Sep 13, 2006 20:30 GMT
You must be a member and be logged in to either append comments or rate this resource.
