Btw, in the video I mixed up supply and demand. I meant supply. I told you all I'm a dummy ► Learn how to make money from your indie games (free webinar): www.fulltimegamedev.com/opt-in-how-to-make-six-figures
I disagree with you on an early point there mate I'm 38 yrs old I remember PlayStation 1 games being £30 That was for a top studio game back then Most were around 25 or even 20. Nowadays I can go into a second hand store and pick up a relatively.old game for that price The newer ones Maaaaate £70 brand new game out now I don't know what it's like over the pond but I can't imagine a ps1 game from the 90s cost you the same as a ps5 game today Inflation happened yes And I agree by those standards games should be closer to £200 each brand new now So I have some sympathy for the point But it's really not as you said over here at all
you are on the right track but I would like to add - be a publisher from the start design the game with a recognizable style. even if you dont get netflix show you will make it easier to make recognizable trailers. and even if you dont publish book based on the universe you will improve worldbuilding
im sick and tired of these 5-10 hour game play games i would much rather have a game i enjoy playing over and over not something i through away after beating it in a afternoon stop pushing for this garbage already its clear you "make games" and want to push these garbage through away games WE HATE THEM
@@bobshagit errm, i don't understand what you are saying. in my experience, people can't face even a small old-school game because it's too difficult, the attention span is laughably short now.
Using your idea it can be applied this way: 1) You build a framework with a lot of systems and mechanics with minimum amount of assets in each just to show that they work well and are cool 2) You make a playable alpha version that is interesting for the players and release it for free as Demo on stem during Steam Fest 3) Start a Kickstarter that should launch at the same time as the Steam Fest (End of the Year) and build a UI at the end of the demo that allow people to view the kickstarter. In the kickstarter explain what other things you can add to your project and promise to make them based on monetary goal reached. Even if you need only 20k to make the small version of the game make a list of feature that you will be willing to implement even if it reaches several millions 4) No matter if your kickstarter will succeed or not continue developing the alpha to make a playable experience for at least 5/10 hours and release the beta on steam before the Summer Game Fest or the next Steam Fest trying to get more media attenction 5) If you manage to sell enough copies in beta you can continue developing it until you will reach the minimum required to launch the 1.0 release and do so also during one of the major game fest 6) Then start expanding your game world further and new content release as DLC's or expansions so you can make more money and bring to the table more content. 7) If the game will be successful and your DLC's and expansions will sell well you can invest it in a small team to make the sequel and make a saga like Ubisoft did with AC
I want to say that for all those people who haven't even made their first game or anyone who isn't part of a huge money making company, focusing on all the marketing and stressing about your game fitting into all these different molds is not what you want to be doing. Honestly, the best thing you can possible do, is simply make sure you are having fun. That's most important thing. Just make the game that you want to make, go out and explore! Best of all, if your enjoying it, you'll stay consistent and keep coming back to finish the game. But with that said, I do agree with Thomas here, when starting out, start simple, especially if you want the game to be big. That may sound contradictory. Regardless of the size of your game, my golden rule is to plan it simple, focus the whole thing around one idea, and branch of from there. That is what works best, the simplest premises lead to the greatest potential, and hence the most fun. This is for people who just wanna enjoy making something they can be proud of!
Few thoughts. First, the fantasy books part was a weird thing to say. Fantasy was built on Trilogies for a long time, sometimes with a larger shared universe spanning multiple trilogies (see: Shanara by Terry Brooks). A few series went longer like Chronicles of Amber but those books were so short while Corwyn's arc was 5 books it was more like 3 books worth of story spread across 5 books. That started to change after Wheel of Time kept growing and growing and selling well. Second, on the genre stuff this worries me slightly because the Steamworld developer tried doing it with a lot of different genres and it has not gone well for them.
Hey mate! I'm an Indie dev, I'm all on my own, so needed to cover all the roles in a development team, first I thought it will be easy but after starting I came to know I'm lacking in some area, I need the knowledge about 3D modeling and needed my own textures which I'm currently learning in Blender. it's hard, but I like it, I like to do this, I LIKE THIS PROCESS a Person told me, think 100 times before starting but never question your decision or think to go back after you started
My games are in the same universe. I'm designing the sci fi galaxy first. with rules and plotlines. then I design games around that galaxy. First I make them small, with the ability to expand (Never have a "I beat the final boss" type game). I love the "Grow each game at will" mentality. When I add a new plot or or storyline to the galaxy I add it into each of the game designs. Eventually the entire portfolio of games will connect to a larger story. (Maybe even turning it into a book or comic). I fully support the idea of sequels and characters. (BTW: I'm the Designer, I have Freelance Developers working on my small games.)
Absolutely agree with this and it is my strategy for my games :) I released 3 small projects that are in the same universe and am expanding it in new releases. It is a very fun way to approach indie game dev!
Oh, some months ago I've decided to scale back a little, release a early version and if there's demand, then I keep on releasing more content further! My dream project would be a bigger one out of the gate, but with the current financial landscape, I think it will be better for me to self fund a smaller game, with potential to growth, and then see what happens next. Despite being for a while in the industry with a shipped game, this is the first time solo. Well, let's see how it will unravel Thanks for the video!
I think it's a good concept and I also believe there is a wave slowly approaching of new era of gaming that will be small in size but giant in details. Imaging a GTA3 size map but with details of destractibul and enterbal buildings and advanced AI behavier etc that could be AMAZING.
That's why there are a ton of roguelikes, and even with that we still have successfully launched new ones. Quick games, small runs, perfect for playing while on bus or train. That's my go-to too... Small games, bringing quality over quantity.
@NinjaGuidesHQ well... Mobile Single-Player Games are a nice thing to, however, the Google Play Store and Apple Store are not that nice. You can make these type of games and release on Steam, Epic... I think the best idea would be the format that Thomas usually say: make a polished game (not extra small, just not so big that you can't finish in a hyper polished version), try to find a publisher (I think that Kickstarter is not good for someone without social media relevance) and sign a deal. Nintendo Switch and Steam are the cradles of indie games, so maybe having the support of a publisher would be great on those.
Great vid! I've been working a small game, I have it planned out as two small games, then a slightly more bigger game in the future once I'm more comfortable & experienced. I've had trying to make a game since 2017 but I just never really dived in enough, and found the right setting. So many ideas I scrapped until this year. 2025 is the year!!
When you see games like Balatro, Vampire Survivor, Crab Champion, etc etc etc that are small and cheap but outsell massive games... it becomes harder to justify making big games unless it's your dream project and you don't care about money
My first game 'Lockes The Thief' was a big, ambitious game. I should've let it cook longer and grabbed more wishlists. But, the design of it was excellent, 90% positive reviews but very little visibility. My second game 'Orange Soul Brother' will be much, much smaller. But I will market it and try to secure funding. Basically doing the things I didn't do with LTT. It will potentially be more successful!
awesome points. I think, concerning your final point, the Kingdom series (sidescroller one) has done an excellent job of creating small and then expanding. As a loyal fan, I can't wait to immediately buy and test out the new game, features, biomes and etc every time. They've got a winning formula and I'm ready to go along for the ride. :)
they want to push out garbage constantly, get you to buy the crap, then through it away and buy their next thing instead of working on a quality product they just want quantity and its clear this clown is one of these devs
I TOTALLY agree with the whole premise of this video, and I’ve been saying for years more devs should consider games that can be released episodically, or expanded upon in a gradual, natural way over time. You don’t HAVE to make a tiny game, and you don’t have to make an MMO (please GOD, people, do not think you are going to make an MMO. You‘re not lmao). But you can make a reasonably sized game that can be added to over time.
im sick of that when I buy a product I want it to be FINISHED im tired of AGILE management... we test and design their games FOR FREE this cycle must end
tbh making an mmo today is not as complicated as it used to be, but yes, it's usually a bad idea for solo devs or small teams, running the servers obviously costs money too.
@@TerribleTomy the problem is everyone and their dog thinks they can make a game now because AI is there.... this is why we have THOUSANDS of games each month... and all of them look like they were made in the 90s
The latest Hitman game where it was episodic felt like a good "bunch of balloons" examples. Set all in the same universe and each episode was a different location in that universe. I thought that that approach to game development was genius.
Another great Thomas Brush video to keep me going. today i have gotten my game design document into a new draft of 102 pages of greatness. thank you for the inspiration and information!
I think it’s a good idea, and I’m not a super big fan of applying it to early access, for lots of different reasons (some pros some cons) But you look at a game like stardew valley, it was released, massive success, and he is still putting out updates, the most recent 1.6 is a whole free extension, bringing people back and in turn buying it on new consoles / devices. The subreddit loves it
I have a good analogy for Big game vs Small game development. Let’s say you are a farmer. In time you have to sell the crops to make money. So you can plant a Tree which only grows apple after 2-3 years, or plant berry Bushes, each year a different. After 3 years you have one type of fruit that may sell, may not. Or 3 different types and quality of berries. Maybe I talk bs, I don't know. See game dev like planting and harvesting. But if you just like taste of apples, and can't “plant” a smaller fruit then go for it.
Great concept but you didn't get into the negatives for the audience. A lot of people have been complaining about live service games id be interested in hearing how this differs to that introducing live service to indie games a place where people go to escape it might be a bad idea even though profitable
I think the idea of making a small game which inflates into a bigger game overtime is a solid concept my only question right now though is what constitutes a small game? is the number of mechanics, the number of levels, the expected playtime, the amount of dev time, or all of the above?
The genre of Vampire Survivors, bullet heaven, horde survivor, it has many names and subgenres. Could a game in that genre that a visual hook and a gameplay twist in mechanics as a hook, be something that falls under the umbrella of the balloon model. Or at least be the first balloon in the list?
Big games are in more direct competition with each other, since they demand more time from their players. Sometimes they even want _all_ your time. For smaller games, the player can get a complete, satisfying and cathartic experience (that hopefully provides something unique) over a couple of days or a week, and then they can quickly find their next small game.
Just finish your game and release it. Its much harder so stay motiviated and have the time for a big game (things are changing over years, like i became father 2 times the last 7 years, i dont have the time anymore). Just start doing small games and be able to finish and release them.
2:30 I somewhat disagree with this point. You forgot that games used to be distributed in physical forms like CDs or DVDs, along with printed advertising posters. The costs of producing and distributing these physical media across the country and worldwide were factored into the final pricing of a game. Physical media had to be manufactured and printed, including the advertising materials. Today, most of this is digital. Adjusted for inflation, the prices of those games would likely be much higher today. Creating a digital poster that can be easily copied and shared is far less expensive than printing posters with minimum order quantities (MOQs) and shipping them to distributors around the world. Additionally, I think game creators made less money in the past compared to today. Gaming devices and the industry as a whole were not as mainstream as they are now.
4:30 I like the idea of working on a game to make it good and refined regardless of the time it would take - I feel like in the long run it would make a much better and lasting impression. For example, in my youth I loved a game called Freelancer (essentially the predecessor to Star Citizen) - the scope of that game is so insane it was delayed several years to add as much features and refinement as possible within the given budget. Did Chris Roberts get to fully implement every feature that he wanted to put into Freelancer? No. Did he need the money? Probably. Did he give up on his dream of making the game he planned on making? Nope - hence why Star Citizen has been in development for so long and has racked up an insane amount of money in the process in doing so pushing the absolute boundaries of detail, scale and dedication in computer games that has only been seen previously within the Crysis games(only my opinion). I'd personally say that if your dream game is something you want to make and that you think it's really genuinely good (like Stan Lee would say about his Comic Books) - I reckon it would be good to pursue it if it's genuinely something so close to your heart. Anyways, not ranting - defs think a good financial strategy is key and logical to stay alive and keep making games if it's your only source of income and/or if you have a busy social life, family etc. but I reckon it's better to follow through as that gives you better credibility as a high end game dev + it builds more skill and character anyways :) Circumstance is a thing of course - it's all relevant depending where you are at and what your goals are but I reckon your dream game can and will potentially be something unique that could stand out on the market when marketed well.
With AI becoming more and more useful I would suggest greener devs to build multiple small games and incorporate new tech as much as possible. Experiment with new frame works and work flows. Keep the projects small and heavily invest in getting a good understanding of features that will becoming main stream. Skyrim Mantella would be good inspiration for what I mean. Skyrim now has AI NPCs but you can bet elder scrolls 6 won't. Larger games need to have much more set in stone from an earlier date. If your working on a smaller project and you miss out on a feature who cares. Put it into your next project. Learn how to use chat and get involved with cursor along with learning multiple game engines. Nobody knows where the industry is going. It's getting crazy and won't be slowing down. Lace up.
Hey thomas! I was trying to make a suspension system for a car using Raycasts and everytime i try to do it, it just doesnt become stable at the end. Would really love if you could do a tutorial on just the suspensions while properly stabilized.
7:00 that's indeed my strategy XD. It's harder at the beginning cuz you gotta create a lot but eventually I will have a lot of reusable content and will be fine cuz the games are a diff experience etc. Edit: The bunch of balloons strategy is indeed what I aim for, and I remember talking about it with friends long time ago, indeed, but sadly I didn't release a single game yet cuz lack of time haha full time job and 12+h a week gym and other reasons. Hopefully soon...
It's very dangerous, Steam might have the same fate as mobile stores, with millions of low effort small apps, and the only way to make money there is to invest a couple of millions in the first place.
Hey mate, what is the size of a 'small game' in your argument here? I know it's just B roll but it looks like ~50% of the games in the list at 2:29 are by teams of 15+ people and most devs would consider in the "III"/"AA" size range (ie: "Big" for an indie.) Not trying to call out here, just genuinely curious.
I would personally look at it in terms of development time. So for example, you set a 4 month limit, and tailor your games design around something that can be finished in that time. And on the plus side, this will force you to rely more on innovation than content variety
Hello, just a quick question. If a fundraiser the money for my game, does that money get used specifically on the game or can it be used for my personal use as the sole developer?
I personally believe the reason big studios aren’t pushing up prices is due to micro transactions, I can’t remember the source but they make more money from the micro transactions then they do from game sales now.
Awesome, this was actually my plan, to release chapters of games almost level by level. Im interested in seeing how it goes, though for me games arnt profit, they are just art…
Since I have developed boardgames and gamification projects for some companies, I have ideas for games and a basic understanding of unity development, I lack on C# coding though. What website or platform is recommended to connect with people to join in and to develop indie small games?
What would your idea of a small game be? Anyone serious about making a game usually doesn't want to make the next MMO/MOBA or Skyrim. I don't want to fall into the trap of making another clone of something already out there but worse. Fresh ideas are difficult to come by, I wouldn't say because of market saturation but when you look at what has been made you don't know what else you could do. I don't even think fresh ideas are important but what is important is for each developer to be able to differentiate what they are making compared to what's out there. Cultic for example as compared to previous boomer shooters.
It's a big idea But a small game currently Hopefully in a week or so I'll have enough down to secure an audience. From there I do hope you get a chance to look at the game and at the least mention it We shall see.
About games not raising their prices, you are wrong on 2 fronts. Firstly, to get the full game you need to pay upwards of $120 -> $140. For most AAA games, the $60 price point only gets you a bare minimum product, with large pars of what used to be included in most games, cut off to be sold separately. Often with bundles that are purposefully made confusing. Secondly, with wages having not kept up with inflation since the 80's, publishers HAVE to offer a shell price, or people would be priced out of the market. Unlike food or medicine people don't technically need games.... they are also much easier to get a hold of via other means
First of all, how do you define a big game vs a small game? Let me explain my question: I’m working on a 3d horror game. The only thing that I consider “Big” about that game is the graphics, which we are aiming to look alike a AAA. (And we are doing it because it has the second goal to serve our art portfolio). But we have a short but meaningful story, a small single environment. Too simple gameplay mechanics and no cinematics. Yet, some people would consider just for the art scope this is a big game.
I think he was talking about length of loop, not Level of Detail. If your game can eventually have more levels and mechanics, then the LTV (Long Term Value) will make it big. So I would argue that your game is small ("Single Environment").
Hey Thomas! Could you cover multiplayer games please? Is it worth making them opposed to single-player? For example, I see AmongUs as itself a pretty small game, though in my opinion any multiplayer game requires constant updates, otherwise people will get bored or just the game would stop making money (if it's free to install), and the servers fee might still grow over time...
Games could also be cheaper also because advertising in cheap/ free games, loot boxes and other micro transactions, and games just being updated for decades Vs brand new, finished games each time.
I think Hyper-Realism has become stale for a lot of gamers too (The every UE4/5 games looks and feels the same comments you see) - so there is a natural reversion to older art styles - since those older art styles co-existed with simpler game experiences, there is a kind of association/halo effect were people, when they see simpler art, naturally accept simpler core gameplay.
The reasoning for game's prices is very wrong here. It's not only demand, higher demand with the same number of supply drives prices up not down. The big increase in supply is what's keeping indie and small game prices down, because AAA titles are give or take the same price. With smaller games in a much higher supply and given the fact that they cost less money and time to make a lower price is achieved. But game prices don't have an inverse effect on inflation at all. It's cheaper to make games now than what it was back in the day. Now you may see project's total cost and think that that's not true but again that's not a correct metric. You need to think cost to scale, games now cost more total because they are bigger in scale. Pac man today would cost about 2 days of work to get done but the actual game started development in early 1979 and released in mid 1980 so it's safe to assume it cost 6-12 months, 90-180 times more ! Also games back in the day did not have digital versions like they do now, no microtransactions, no dlcs, no subscriptions. Cost of development for the same scale has been reduced ( thus making small games cheaper) and cost per unit for AAA games has also been reduced because of digital copies, top that with the hundreds of extra income sources, up selling, microtransactions etc. that games now have, it's not that inflation didn't affect games, it's that on top of inflation, many other reasons made the cost lower or the total demand higher thus cancelling each other out. But ultimately yeas, demand for smaller games is up so for sure a point for small games!
Wow, well... I'll finish my current small game in a few months and I've planned already to start a medium-sized game in 2025, which can be inflated endlessly until it bursts. :) Of course, I won't wait for it to burst, because there's no way I'm going to become a slave to one game, and I'll move on to the next more exciting and bigger "balloonable" (Inflatable) project. Yes, I know, it'll be hard to work on big project, but who cares if I don't care?
I just realized you are mainly talking about indie games on "Steam/Consoles" I don't see this applying in the platform of mobile game development 🤷🏾... Because a big mobile game = a small "Steam/Console" game
I may be not normal....I don't care for the early access games. I've bought 3 or 4 over the years and it gets very disappointing when the devs make a huge deal about their updates, but it's just one little thing you may encounter once.
I think it’s more about scope, like game features rather than play time But obviously something like a platformer would be a small game compared to an mmo
Dummy or not the last 2 videos were awesome. That’s your cult calling man. The only reason ever I would ever build a game is how much I hate working with randos… people I did not chose. Imagine this we have to spend our working lives with people we hate, or at least don’t like; what on earth…
I agree 100 percent. That's why I am the Designer, not the Developer. I work with freelancers that I chose. They make my small game designs, and I deal with everything else.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Btw, in the video I mixed up supply and demand. I meant supply. I told you all I'm a dummy
► Learn how to make money from your indie games (free webinar): www.fulltimegamedev.com/opt-in-how-to-make-six-figures
Hey Thomas Brother, When Twisted Tower Coming, I can't anymore,can you clear the release date soon, 🥺 please
I disagree with you on an early point there mate
I'm 38 yrs old
I remember PlayStation 1 games being £30
That was for a top studio game back then
Most were around 25 or even 20.
Nowadays I can go into a second hand store and pick up a relatively.old game for that price
The newer ones
Maaaaate
£70 brand new game out now
I don't know what it's like over the pond but I can't imagine a ps1 game from the 90s cost you the same as a ps5 game today
Inflation happened yes
And I agree by those standards games should be closer to £200 each brand new now
So I have some sympathy for the point
But it's really not as you said over here at all
you are on the right track but I would like to add - be a publisher from the start
design the game with a recognizable style. even if you dont get netflix show you will make it easier to make recognizable trailers. and even if you dont publish book based on the universe you will improve worldbuilding
im sick and tired of these 5-10 hour game play games
i would much rather have a game i enjoy playing over and over
not something i through away after beating it in a afternoon
stop pushing for this garbage already
its clear you "make games" and want to push these garbage through away games
WE HATE THEM
@@bobshagit errm, i don't understand what you are saying. in my experience, people can't face even a small old-school game because it's too difficult, the attention span is laughably short now.
Using your idea it can be applied this way:
1) You build a framework with a lot of systems and mechanics with minimum amount of assets in each just to show that they work well and are cool
2) You make a playable alpha version that is interesting for the players and release it for free as Demo on stem during Steam Fest
3) Start a Kickstarter that should launch at the same time as the Steam Fest (End of the Year) and build a UI at the end of the demo that allow people to view the kickstarter. In the kickstarter explain what other things you can add to your project and promise to make them based on monetary goal reached. Even if you need only 20k to make the small version of the game make a list of feature that you will be willing to implement even if it reaches several millions
4) No matter if your kickstarter will succeed or not continue developing the alpha to make a playable experience for at least 5/10 hours and release the beta on steam before the Summer Game Fest or the next Steam Fest trying to get more media attenction
5) If you manage to sell enough copies in beta you can continue developing it until you will reach the minimum required to launch the 1.0 release and do so also during one of the major game fest
6) Then start expanding your game world further and new content release as DLC's or expansions so you can make more money and bring to the table more content.
7) If the game will be successful and your DLC's and expansions will sell well you can invest it in a small team to make the sequel and make a saga like Ubisoft did with AC
I want to say that for all those people who haven't even made their first game or anyone who isn't part of a huge money making company, focusing on all the marketing and stressing about your game fitting into all these different molds is not what you want to be doing. Honestly, the best thing you can possible do, is simply make sure you are having fun. That's most important thing. Just make the game that you want to make, go out and explore! Best of all, if your enjoying it, you'll stay consistent and keep coming back to finish the game. But with that said, I do agree with Thomas here, when starting out, start simple, especially if you want the game to be big. That may sound contradictory. Regardless of the size of your game, my golden rule is to plan it simple, focus the whole thing around one idea, and branch of from there. That is what works best, the simplest premises lead to the greatest potential, and hence the most fun. This is for people who just wanna enjoy making something they can be proud of!
1:42 wtf that took me off guard
same
I had to watch it again. I found him. lol
11:21 too
Came looking for this comment
Few thoughts.
First, the fantasy books part was a weird thing to say. Fantasy was built on Trilogies for a long time, sometimes with a larger shared universe spanning multiple trilogies (see: Shanara by Terry Brooks). A few series went longer like Chronicles of Amber but those books were so short while Corwyn's arc was 5 books it was more like 3 books worth of story spread across 5 books. That started to change after Wheel of Time kept growing and growing and selling well.
Second, on the genre stuff this worries me slightly because the Steamworld developer tried doing it with a lot of different genres and it has not gone well for them.
Hey mate! I'm an Indie dev, I'm all on my own, so needed to cover all the roles in a development team, first I thought it will be easy but after starting I came to know I'm lacking in some area, I need the knowledge about 3D modeling and needed my own textures which I'm currently learning in Blender. it's hard, but I like it, I like to do this, I LIKE THIS PROCESS
a Person told me, think 100 times before starting but never question your decision or think to go back after you started
Agreed! Its very exciting and enjoying to learn new things all the way.
My games are in the same universe. I'm designing the sci fi galaxy first. with rules and plotlines. then I design games around that galaxy. First I make them small, with the ability to expand (Never have a "I beat the final boss" type game).
I love the "Grow each game at will" mentality. When I add a new plot or or storyline to the galaxy I add it into each of the game designs.
Eventually the entire portfolio of games will connect to a larger story. (Maybe even turning it into a book or comic).
I fully support the idea of sequels and characters.
(BTW: I'm the Designer, I have Freelance Developers working on my small games.)
Bro the ending omg i jumped i swear that was epic ! Great video
Absolutely agree with this and it is my strategy for my games :)
I released 3 small projects that are in the same universe and am expanding it in new releases. It is a very fun way to approach indie game dev!
And do you make some money from these games?
Oh, some months ago I've decided to scale back a little, release a early version and if there's demand, then I keep on releasing more content further! My dream project would be a bigger one out of the gate, but with the current financial landscape, I think it will be better for me to self fund a smaller game, with potential to growth, and then see what happens next. Despite being for a while in the industry with a shipped game, this is the first time solo. Well, let's see how it will unravel Thanks for the video!
Many, many balloons but also love behind what you do💯
No limits.
I love videos like these, Thomas. Hope you post similar videos in the future!
11:21 wtf 😂
Bro had his ear on the door waiting for him to say his famous last words 🤣
I think it's a good concept and I also believe there is a wave slowly approaching of new era of gaming that will be small in size but giant in details. Imaging a GTA3 size map but with details of destractibul and enterbal buildings and advanced AI behavier etc that could be AMAZING.
That's why there are a ton of roguelikes, and even with that we still have successfully launched new ones. Quick games, small runs, perfect for playing while on bus or train. That's my go-to too... Small games, bringing quality over quantity.
so your talking about mobile related games on the go?
@NinjaGuidesHQ well... Mobile Single-Player Games are a nice thing to, however, the Google Play Store and Apple Store are not that nice. You can make these type of games and release on Steam, Epic... I think the best idea would be the format that Thomas usually say: make a polished game (not extra small, just not so big that you can't finish in a hyper polished version), try to find a publisher (I think that Kickstarter is not good for someone without social media relevance) and sign a deal. Nintendo Switch and Steam are the cradles of indie games, so maybe having the support of a publisher would be great on those.
Excellent, VMT. I especially liked the advice about growing your universe and building each game with key elements from the previous game(s). Thanks
Great vid! I've been working a small game, I have it planned out as two small games, then a slightly more bigger game in the future once I'm more comfortable & experienced.
I've had trying to make a game since 2017 but I just never really dived in enough, and found the right setting. So many ideas I scrapped until this year. 2025 is the year!!
Minecraft, Binding of Isaac, Geometry Dash are great examples of small to big (inflated balloon). It is a great approach!
Lethal Company may be there too, i mean, one guy made it over a few months, and he's made $100m before Steam's cut
@ freaking wild. I’m def sticking with smaller scoped project. Increases your chances in every perspective
When you see games like Balatro, Vampire Survivor, Crab Champion, etc etc etc that are small and cheap but outsell massive games... it becomes harder to justify making big games unless it's your dream project and you don't care about money
What an ace of a video! Never seen this eternal question answered with such pragmatism and wisdom 👏
My first game 'Lockes The Thief' was a big, ambitious game. I should've let it cook longer and grabbed more wishlists. But, the design of it was excellent, 90% positive reviews but very little visibility.
My second game 'Orange Soul Brother' will be much, much smaller. But I will market it and try to secure funding. Basically doing the things I didn't do with LTT. It will potentially be more successful!
awesome points. I think, concerning your final point, the Kingdom series (sidescroller one) has done an excellent job of creating small and then expanding. As a loyal fan, I can't wait to immediately buy and test out the new game, features, biomes and etc every time. They've got a winning formula and I'm ready to go along for the ride. :)
What in your mind constitutes a "small game"? Is it a game that takes you a year to develop or less?
A small game is one that has a tight loop and takes less than a year to make
they want to push out garbage constantly, get you to buy the crap, then through it away and buy their next thing
instead of working on a quality product they just want quantity
and its clear this clown is one of these devs
I TOTALLY agree with the whole premise of this video, and I’ve been saying for years more devs should consider games that can be released episodically, or expanded upon in a gradual, natural way over time. You don’t HAVE to make a tiny game, and you don’t have to make an MMO (please GOD, people, do not think you are going to make an MMO. You‘re not lmao). But you can make a reasonably sized game that can be added to over time.
im sick of that
when I buy a product I want it to be FINISHED
im tired of AGILE management... we test and design their games FOR FREE
this cycle must end
tbh making an mmo today is not as complicated as it used to be, but yes, it's usually a bad idea for solo devs or small teams, running the servers obviously costs money too.
@@TerribleTomy the problem is everyone and their dog thinks they can make a game now because AI is there.... this is why we have THOUSANDS of games each month... and all of them look like they were made in the 90s
The latest Hitman game where it was episodic felt like a good "bunch of balloons" examples. Set all in the same universe and each episode was a different location in that universe. I thought that that approach to game development was genius.
Another great Thomas Brush video to keep me going. today i have gotten my game design document into a new draft of 102 pages of greatness. thank you for the inspiration and information!
I think it’s a good idea, and I’m not a super big fan of applying it to early access, for lots of different reasons (some pros some cons)
But you look at a game like stardew valley, it was released, massive success, and he is still putting out updates, the most recent 1.6 is a whole free extension, bringing people back and in turn buying it on new consoles / devices. The subreddit loves it
Excellent advice! Thanks for the tips!
All of my games are in the same Universe, set in different times, and the stories are told from different perspectives.
It's ironic because making tiny games is actually EXTREMELY DIFFICULT.
Small games aren't easy to make. 100%. I think that's why they should be made :) Less supply.
Making tiny games is difficult, making bigger games is difficult times X...
There's no easy way.
They're difficult in the sense that your game design needs to be so good that it can hard carry your game without a lot of variety or content.
I have a good analogy for Big game vs Small game development.
Let’s say you are a farmer. In time you have to sell the crops to make money. So you can plant a Tree which only grows apple after 2-3 years, or plant berry Bushes, each year a different. After 3 years you have one type of fruit that may sell, may not. Or 3 different types and quality of berries.
Maybe I talk bs, I don't know. See game dev like planting and harvesting. But if you just like taste of apples, and can't “plant” a smaller fruit then go for it.
Great concept but you didn't get into the negatives for the audience. A lot of people have been complaining about live service games id be interested in hearing how this differs to that introducing live service to indie games a place where people go to escape it might be a bad idea even though profitable
I think the idea of making a small game which inflates into a bigger game overtime is a solid concept my only question right now though is what constitutes a small game? is the number of mechanics, the number of levels, the expected playtime, the amount of dev time, or all of the above?
This is exactly what im hoping to do with my new game - building first small step for the universe.
Thomas this was a super informative video man. Some fresh perspectives. Thank you thank you.
The genre of Vampire Survivors, bullet heaven, horde survivor, it has many names and subgenres. Could a game in that genre that a visual hook and a gameplay twist in mechanics as a hook, be something that falls under the umbrella of the balloon model. Or at least be the first balloon in the list?
Big games are in more direct competition with each other, since they demand more time from their players. Sometimes they even want _all_ your time.
For smaller games, the player can get a complete, satisfying and cathartic experience (that hopefully provides something unique) over a couple of days or a week, and then they can quickly find their next small game.
Just finish your game and release it. Its much harder so stay motiviated and have the time for a big game (things are changing over years, like i became father 2 times the last 7 years, i dont have the time anymore). Just start doing small games and be able to finish and release them.
Well about pricing there is also the fact that games is digital now and not cd/cartridge. Lower cost etc 3:14
2:30 I somewhat disagree with this point.
You forgot that games used to be distributed in physical forms like CDs or DVDs, along with printed advertising posters. The costs of producing and distributing these physical media across the country and worldwide were factored into the final pricing of a game. Physical media had to be manufactured and printed, including the advertising materials. Today, most of this is digital. Adjusted for inflation, the prices of those games would likely be much higher today. Creating a digital poster that can be easily copied and shared is far less expensive than printing posters with minimum order quantities (MOQs) and shipping them to distributors around the world.
Additionally, I think game creators made less money in the past compared to today. Gaming devices and the industry as a whole were not as mainstream as they are now.
Great tips!
Very good video, always thought the same about the bunch of balloons model :)
4:30 I like the idea of working on a game to make it good and refined regardless of the time it would take - I feel like in the long run it would make a much better and lasting impression.
For example, in my youth I loved a game called Freelancer (essentially the predecessor to Star Citizen) - the scope of that game is so insane it was delayed several years to add as much features and refinement as possible within the given budget. Did Chris Roberts get to fully implement every feature that he wanted to put into Freelancer? No. Did he need the money? Probably. Did he give up on his dream of making the game he planned on making? Nope - hence why Star Citizen has been in development for so long and has racked up an insane amount of money in the process in doing so pushing the absolute boundaries of detail, scale and dedication in computer games that has only been seen previously within the Crysis games(only my opinion).
I'd personally say that if your dream game is something you want to make and that you think it's really genuinely good (like Stan Lee would say about his Comic Books) - I reckon it would be good to pursue it if it's genuinely something so close to your heart. Anyways, not ranting - defs think a good financial strategy is key and logical to stay alive and keep making games if it's your only source of income and/or if you have a busy social life, family etc. but I reckon it's better to follow through as that gives you better credibility as a high end game dev + it builds more skill and character anyways :)
Circumstance is a thing of course - it's all relevant depending where you are at and what your goals are but I reckon your dream game can and will potentially be something unique that could stand out on the market when marketed well.
very valuable thoughts tbh, its pretty well strategy actually
With AI becoming more and more useful I would suggest greener devs to build multiple small games and incorporate new tech as much as possible. Experiment with new frame works and work flows. Keep the projects small and heavily invest in getting a good understanding of features that will becoming main stream. Skyrim Mantella would be good inspiration for what I mean. Skyrim now has AI NPCs but you can bet elder scrolls 6 won't. Larger games need to have much more set in stone from an earlier date. If your working on a smaller project and you miss out on a feature who cares. Put it into your next project. Learn how to use chat and get involved with cursor along with learning multiple game engines. Nobody knows where the industry is going. It's getting crazy and won't be slowing down. Lace up.
@4:15 text book AAA 🎉
Hey thomas! I was trying to make a suspension system for a car using Raycasts and everytime i try to do it, it just doesnt become stable at the end. Would really love if you could do a tutorial on just the suspensions while properly stabilized.
7:00 that's indeed my strategy XD. It's harder at the beginning cuz you gotta create a lot but eventually I will have a lot of reusable content and will be fine cuz the games are a diff experience etc.
Edit: The bunch of balloons strategy is indeed what I aim for, and I remember talking about it with friends long time ago, indeed, but sadly I didn't release a single game yet cuz lack of time haha full time job and 12+h a week gym and other reasons. Hopefully soon...
It's very dangerous, Steam might have the same fate as mobile stores, with millions of low effort small apps, and the only way to make money there is to invest a couple of millions in the first place.
Why not using Agile Development in Game Development? Start with MVP and evolve after feedback in Controllable Chunks!
Hey mate, what is the size of a 'small game' in your argument here? I know it's just B roll but it looks like ~50% of the games in the list at 2:29 are by teams of 15+ people and most devs would consider in the "III"/"AA" size range (ie: "Big" for an indie.)
Not trying to call out here, just genuinely curious.
I would personally look at it in terms of development time. So for example, you set a 4 month limit, and tailor your games design around something that can be finished in that time. And on the plus side, this will force you to rely more on innovation than content variety
Hello, just a quick question. If a fundraiser the money for my game, does that money get used specifically on the game or can it be used for my personal use as the sole developer?
I personally believe the reason big studios aren’t pushing up prices is due to micro transactions, I can’t remember the source but they make more money from the micro transactions then they do from game sales now.
Awesome, this was actually my plan, to release chapters of games almost level by level. Im interested in seeing how it goes, though for me games arnt profit, they are just art…
2025 I’m coming for you.
I thought there will be another Jumpscare at the end of the video 🤣🤣😂
1:42 ah sir your videos are becoming scary you sure your house or computer are not haunted.
Make a simple prototype for a big game, shelve it then finish a small game
Since I have developed boardgames and gamification projects for some companies, I have ideas for games and a basic understanding of unity development, I lack on C# coding though. What website or platform is recommended to connect with people to join in and to develop indie small games?
Okay that was really smart and insightful
Disney's franchise model is relevant here!
What would your idea of a small game be? Anyone serious about making a game usually doesn't want to make the next MMO/MOBA or Skyrim. I don't want to fall into the trap of making another clone of something already out there but worse. Fresh ideas are difficult to come by, I wouldn't say because of market saturation but when you look at what has been made you don't know what else you could do. I don't even think fresh ideas are important but what is important is for each developer to be able to differentiate what they are making compared to what's out there. Cultic for example as compared to previous boomer shooters.
It's a big idea
But a small game currently
Hopefully in a week or so I'll have enough down to secure an audience.
From there I do hope you get a chance to look at the game and at the least mention it
We shall see.
WOW !, this is the answer i was looking for !
About games not raising their prices, you are wrong on 2 fronts. Firstly, to get the full game you need to pay upwards of $120 -> $140. For most AAA games, the $60 price point only gets you a bare minimum product, with large pars of what used to be included in most games, cut off to be sold separately. Often with bundles that are purposefully made confusing. Secondly, with wages having not kept up with inflation since the 80's, publishers HAVE to offer a shell price, or people would be priced out of the market. Unlike food or medicine people don't technically need games.... they are also much easier to get a hold of via other means
You might've mixed up demand with supply. Both have increased but it is supply that has skyrocketed. I think.
That's right! I got it wrong, apologies!
Is there examples of the stradegy of making a bunch of games in the same world, I like the idea but am struggling to get inspiration of it.
1:42 Okay that's scary
hey guys! should i start directly on game dev? or like go another language like python untill im good at the logic and basics?
What is better? Making a bunch of games with the same world or making a bunch of games in the same genre? Which will retain the same audience?
1:43 Is that... Gavin? From Two Star? Are you safe? 😆
inflation has skyrocketed but wages have not kept up with inflation.
First of all, how do you define a big game vs a small game? Let me explain my question: I’m working on a 3d horror game. The only thing that I consider “Big” about that game is the graphics, which we are aiming to look alike a AAA. (And we are doing it because it has the second goal to serve our art portfolio). But we have a short but meaningful story, a small single environment. Too simple gameplay mechanics and no cinematics. Yet, some people would consider just for the art scope this is a big game.
I think he was talking about length of loop, not Level of Detail. If your game can eventually have more levels and mechanics, then the LTV (Long Term Value) will make it big. So I would argue that your game is small ("Single Environment").
With small games on Steam, is there any worry today that players will refund if the gameplay isn't 2+ hours?
People can always pirate... If people pay it's because they want to.
very insightful❤
but what exactly is a small game. Which point traces the difference in scope between something small or large.
You know what is small for you
Hey Thomas! Could you cover multiplayer games please? Is it worth making them opposed to single-player?
For example, I see AmongUs as itself a pretty small game, though in my opinion any multiplayer game requires constant updates, otherwise people will get bored or just the game would stop making money (if it's free to install), and the servers fee might still grow over time...
I make small games. Week-long dev cycles. Maybe I should make slightly larger games.
Helldivers (top down) to Helldivers 2.. AAA third person...
I don't remember games costing more than $20 in the 90s -- Doom and Hexen cost me 19.99 as I recall.
Those were both not average games. Average games, the majority of games, were not 20 bucks and not shareware like doom originally was.
Games could also be cheaper also because advertising in cheap/ free games, loot boxes and other micro transactions, and games just being updated for decades Vs brand new, finished games each time.
I think Hyper-Realism has become stale for a lot of gamers too (The every UE4/5 games looks and feels the same comments you see) - so there is a natural reversion to older art styles - since those older art styles co-existed with simpler game experiences, there is a kind of association/halo effect were people, when they see simpler art, naturally accept simpler core gameplay.
ok I had to watch this twice because I was anticipating a jump scare the first time... -_-
What is this horror film you posted? All these jump scares. I'm just tryina be a cozy game dev here
Thanks buddy Thomas brush
The reasoning for game's prices is very wrong here. It's not only demand, higher demand with the same number of supply drives prices up not down. The big increase in supply is what's keeping indie and small game prices down, because AAA titles are give or take the same price. With smaller games in a much higher supply and given the fact that they cost less money and time to make a lower price is achieved. But game prices don't have an inverse effect on inflation at all. It's cheaper to make games now than what it was back in the day. Now you may see project's total cost and think that that's not true but again that's not a correct metric. You need to think cost to scale, games now cost more total because they are bigger in scale. Pac man today would cost about 2 days of work to get done but the actual game started development in early 1979 and released in mid 1980 so it's safe to assume it cost 6-12 months, 90-180 times more ! Also games back in the day did not have digital versions like they do now, no microtransactions, no dlcs, no subscriptions. Cost of development for the same scale has been reduced ( thus making small games cheaper) and cost per unit for AAA games has also been reduced because of digital copies, top that with the hundreds of extra income sources, up selling, microtransactions etc. that games now have, it's not that inflation didn't affect games, it's that on top of inflation, many other reasons made the cost lower or the total demand higher thus cancelling each other out.
But ultimately yeas, demand for smaller games is up so for sure a point for small games!
Lean Game Development love it
Wow, well... I'll finish my current small game in a few months and I've planned already to start a medium-sized game in 2025, which can be inflated endlessly until it bursts. :) Of course, I won't wait for it to burst, because there's no way I'm going to become a slave to one game, and I'll move on to the next more exciting and bigger "balloonable" (Inflatable) project. Yes, I know, it'll be hard to work on big project, but who cares if I don't care?
*AI is gonna make game development as easy as fruity loops made beat production* 👌
unreal is good for indie devs?
It must be a small game like rimworld that you can play for hundreds of hours.
I just realized you are mainly talking about indie games on "Steam/Consoles"
I don't see this applying in the platform of mobile game development 🤷🏾... Because a big mobile game = a small "Steam/Console" game
I may be not normal....I don't care for the early access games. I've bought 3 or 4 over the years and it gets very disappointing when the devs make a huge deal about their updates, but it's just one little thing you may encounter once.
انا متحمس جدا ولكت حاليا لا املك وقت بعد ٣ تشهر انشالله سوف اشترك شكرا جزيلا لك انت مبدع
Lots of youtubers defend a small game, but what is a small game in terms of gameplay time?
I think it’s more about scope, like game features rather than play time
But obviously something like a platformer would be a small game compared to an mmo
You know what is small for you
Nobody is along 5 small games in a year, not polished at least. Probably at the level of game jam++
Dummy or not the last 2 videos were awesome. That’s your cult calling man.
The only reason ever I would ever build a game is how much I hate working with randos… people I did not chose.
Imagine this we have to spend our working lives with people we hate, or at least don’t like; what on earth…
I agree 100 percent. That's why I am the Designer, not the Developer. I work with freelancers that I chose. They make my small game designs, and I deal with everything else.
Remake all the popular games?
What's with the creepy dude in the background?
A great example is Mario, look at where it started and where it's at now.