Best Game for a solo indie developer: 1: Draw a square on the screen and get it moving with some inputs 2. A Short 2D Shoot Em Up 3. A Short 2D Platformer 4. A Short 2D Visual Novel 5. A Simple Fighting Game 6. A V-Pet 7. A Short 3D Platformer 8. A Short FPS 9. Whatever is trending DON'T DO 10. Whatever you think the industry is missing DO And most importantly, above all else - WHATEVER YOU HAVE FUN MAKING, DO THAT!!!
Of course the most important thing is having fun! And I wish I would've followed that 9th tip cause now I have to finish a game inspired by vampire survivors when everyone is tired of them, even if they introduce original elements/mechanics. I think it's better to go for a more stable formula that won't get flooded with thousands of games. I'll pin you for all the beginners that may be watching this video, because I think those are all indeed amazing beginner friendly projects (although you obviously don't need to create all of them)
@@AidanNieve My perspective is that when a game with a innovative and trending gameplay loop pops up the market tends to get flooded quickly and it makes it difficult to stand out for beginners and even more experienced indie devs. And I've formatted this list in a way that should gradually introduce new mechanics in a way that I've found expands on the previous - for example - going from a visual novel should get beginners thinking about interactive UI - the next step from there would be something like a V-Pet which is typically played through UI - this also introduces some basic RPG mechanics that can carry over into something like a simple Rogue-like where equipping items in menus and managing stats is more involved.
I definitely agree, it's important to understand the formulas that work to then create your own game formula instead of relying on the existing ones. Personally I don't like small projects, I think there are two types of people, ones that prefer a more step by step introduction and others that prefer to dive right into it. Personally I'm the second type, and that's how I learned Web development and got my job, but your tips will definitely be really helpful for those that prefer small well designed steps. Also if someone is like me and is reading this, you still need to have at least a vague plan! because over scoping is probably the biggest enemy of most gamedevs
I agree with not chasing the trend. It’s one of the worst investment style. A trend tend to die out quickly and with your one man limited resources to roll out a game in a few months, you will likely eating smoke.
Disagree with your take on simulators. There are two very different genres that each call themselves simulator. 1, the serious similator (such as MS Flight Sim), which requires huge resources to create the most accurate simulation possible, and 2, the niche and/or parody sim, such as Goat Sim and UGG, but these games are more about weird and quirky mechanics applied to a wacky or unconventional theme, and shouldn't be seen as the same as an actual simulation for a second. A solo develeoper can definitely make a niche parody game if the idea is good, but a good game designer head is essential to make sure the game flows well. Think Powerwash Simulator, a game where all you do is clean stuff, yet it did very well.
While I do generally agree, I think that there are so many examples of games where the line between parody and simulation is so thin, that we can group them together. Although I should've probably clarified that I was thinking about the serious simulators when I said you need tons of knowledge about the field, I actually had a joke in the script that would've helped making that distinction, but it was so unfunny that I had to cut it out. On the other hand, I feel like many of those parody simulators are born from a poorly designed simulator, and they go viral just because of how ridiculous they are. But there's no game design or anything holding them together, it's just a silly experience to enjoy for two hours before uninstalling. I'd like to know what your ranking for them would be though, I'm definitely biased as I tend to hate simulators
@AidanNieve well, you did place roguelikes as the ultimate starter genre which I would say definitely deserves to be below platformer due to the extra understanding of coding and mechanics, but I think we're all allowed to be a little biased 😂 Well, a serious sim is definitely a G. You want a team for those games and will need expert consultants, and it is definitely work for a studio for those reasons. As for the parody sim, I suppose that's almost impossible to quantify because it's just so variable. Untitled Goose Game I could see a solo dev doing if they have a lot of talent and time on their hands to commit. Powereash Simulator not so much. There are already lots of solo dev parody sim games out there, but that doesn't mean they're all good (see Grass Simulator).
Hmmm if we are talking about something as big as Farming Simulator then it's definitely a big no no... But looking at games like supermarket simulator, which would be a mix between serious and parody, I think it's possible for a single dev or small team to create that. But yeah maybe I should've gone with C or so
I think progress in simulators especially graphics light ones are more about logarithmic progress. First there is no visible progress for a long time as youre dealing with math and optimizing your code. Once you have your perfect earthworm simulator code building game and updating graphics on top of it is the easy part. In other words I think some simulators can be suitable for solo devs if one doesn't get depressed by the fact that most of development time isn't about decorating game world or making models but coding and learning math with only dummy numerical output in a worst case scenario.
I like how you answered the question of the video within seconds of it even starting, but then you watch the rest for your in-depth explanation. great video
Thanks a lot! I always try to keep it balanced, I don't wanna waste anyone's time but if I wanna reach a larger audience I need good watch time, so I try to offer value at the start and then build the script from there. I do have a huge drop in views because of that tho :/
So my first game can't be my dream PS1 graphics style FPS game with quicktime events and realistic animations and camera movement along with unecessary parkour elements and choices driven RPG element that leads to complete mind clusterfuck of dozen endings that leave you scared to even know what just happened
Believe it or not, the previous comment to yours was someone saying that making open worlds for your first game is easy and that with unreal engine you can make something like genshin impact. You'd be surprised by the amount of people who think they can make God of War alone and in a month hahahahah
@@AidanNieve my fav solo dev "open world" game was Witch Hunt. (He did have 2 or 3 helpers tho for some stuff but mostly it was single dev job). There is just one town and one hunting map. The map is kinda wide but full of easter eggs and treasures to find. If it was just walking sim it would be too empty and too big. If it was rpg or survival game the map would feel too small. But since it is about hunting these creatures and has night time and has small creatures being obstacles and has some horror elements it is imo the perfect size for the scope for the game. I suggest any dev that plans to make anykinda open world map to play that game just to learn about this balance. (Altho some may argue it isn't "big enough for open world". I feel like the size and scope argument still stands even if term "open world" could be debunked).
Multiple videos say the same thing about RPG's. I get why people say it but that mentality has almost dommed me in other fields. RPG's take an incredible amount of time and effort. Making a good video game RPG is not the same as making almost any other genre. IMO if you are getting into game dev and want to make RPG's do it. Especially as a solo dev as you are the only one holding yourself accountable. Do what you're passionate about. Just be aware of how difficult it is and failure is around every corner. I would only say don't do it if you can't accept failure or you are banking on making money asap. The first game I made was a simple turn-based RPG that took over a month. Around 10hrs a day, 5 days per week. It was basically a *far* inferior version of FF1. When the systems were coming together and working one by one it was so motivating. If I spent that time working on another genre I didn't care about then I probably would've just stopped trying game dev then and there. I wouldn't tell anyone to not try there hands at a genre. I'd just stick with explaining how difficult it is and the reality of the situation.
I mean there are exceptions to everything but I'd still not recommend RPGs to beginners in general. I have experience with them, and I have no problem with failure so I just ended up with a bit of extra knowledge and an abandoned project, but some friends of mine tried making them, failed as expected, and then quit gamedev altogether. In fact, two of my biggest references when it comes to gamedev and RUclips are spanish youtubers called Alva Majo and Guinxu (Alva usually includes English subtitles if you wanna check him out), and while Guinxu is a way better developer than Alva, he's been working on an RPG for 5 years or so, which he had to restart 2/3 times, and Alva has released 3/4 commercial games and 2 free games. Of course if you can keep it small then the genre itself is not a problem, To The Moon is a story focused RPG with close to no gameplay and no complex systems, and even a beginner could probably make that, the problem is that most people don't want that, they want a Zelda with the relationship system of Stardew Valley and the freedom of Elden Ring. I could've maybe placed it on D tier rather than "don't" for the first game if that's what you are into, but the risk of burning out is too high for most people.
@@AidanNieve This is why I said I get it lol. There’s way more stories of people trying, failing, and giving up than the opposite. Which like you said largely has to do with people dreaming too big at first. D tier is what I was thinking. Good video overall though, keep it up!
Why not ? everybody can make easy an open world game, just open in Unreal the third person template and use the world generation tool to make a big open world - that's all, nothing more and nothing less to make a simple open world game. I think "open world game" is not really a genre, it can be everything .... from a game like Genshin Impact, horror game, survival game, metroidvania or even just a walking simulator.
@@paluxyl.8682 if you want to create a good open world generally, the gameplay loop has to be stretched often leading people to lose sight of what makes the game fun and non-repetitive
Just because the world is open doesn't mean that you made an open world, you still need to design that world to be interesting, guide the player, etc. Also you mentioned Genshin Impact in both of your comments... You do know that those aesthetic asian gacha games are made by huge teams right?
@@nilolovesdirt Sure, but when it comes to indie games (or games in general) there are no rules ... for some could it be garbage for others a masterpiece. For example, you can make a very simple open world game in Unreal 5 with nice graphics ... a girl is wandering through the nature with a camera, and all that she does is taking pictures of wild horses, rabbits, foxes and other animals ... many gamers would call it boring as hell, but girls would love it and parents would buy it for their kids. lol
Before I've watched this, I've already made a roguelike, bullet hell game, named Rogueween, which is available on Steam. I've been a fan of roguelike games because of its replayability, randomness, and the combination of things you can do in every run. That's why when I've gotten a chance to make a game. I've already set my genre to this. Now, I'm so happy that I choose this genre because I know there's a lot of players who loves roguelike as well.
Always happy to help! And I think it may be easier to understand because as a non-native I quite literally cannot use complex words and expressions hahahahah
I'm someone who tends to dislike roguelikes. I prefer carefully designed environments with emergent gameplay elements. But I recognize it can have that feel if done right. I have yet to play Returnal or Hades, so my opinion might change 😅
I can understand that because when I was younger, like 14 or so, I hated them. I didn't understand why people played roguelikes or match-based games cause I liked games with persistent progress, it was only two years ago that I started loving them thanks to Nuclear Throne
My first game was a mobile release, my own unique take of a roguelite, where you participate in no combat but using a flashlight you fend off of creatures in caves while mining crystals which earn you score for a leaderboard *to compete on* and for gems to purchase upgrades in the forms of hats, its called DwarVein and i poured my soul into it for 5 months before releasing it! Having a finished game really helps set the requirements for future projects in check which helps avoid future failure. It also has a pc version on itch!
@@AidanNieve Oh thats incredible to hear, i wasnt expecting to find it reached people, I really appreciate it! Its fully released alongside its tropical dlc atm, currently taking a break from updating it as I learn UE5, and then planning to go back and do a code rewrite to optimise it with an added endless mode later this year. Everything based on developing the game was to learn what were all the steps within the process, from concept to release.
@@AidanNieve Im switching to learn since im going into college next year and the course uses unreal, while I will remain with godot for my smaller projects I am learning UE so I dont go in completely blind when it comes to using it.
you put RPG in DONT but RTS only in D with the exact same reasoning? didn't even gave RPG a little bump for after one has collected release experience like what you did for RTS. if you compare a RPG and a RTS with a similar level of scope and polish then the RTS is easily just as hard and time-intensive to build than the RPG, so a difference of 5 tiers seems preeeetty biased. like you lost your parents to RPGs or something. in terms of design and therefore required amount of playtesting, the RTS is probably even harder to do than the RPG. yes, the RPG will likely require more writing and content to explore, but RPGs can also have lots of replayable content - for instance where you need to go back into a previously visited area to get some specific monster loot, so adding a hour of playtime is not always this massive undertaking you make it out to be.
I'm obviously biased, everyone is, but I'll try to explain my reasoning a bit better. First we have the money, RPGs only make money when they are content rich, short RPGs make the same amount as platformers, meanwhile strategy games make good money even for smaller games as long as the execution is good. Things like making you go back to a previous area to pick a collectible are a really cheap way of adding "content" to the game, that's not necessarily a bad thing, I love One Piece and it has tons of filler stuff, but you want to cater to a wider audience, and many will leave negative reviews if you send them back and forth to force them to surpass the 2h playtime. Also i wouldn't think of it as a 5 tier difference, it's just a don't, cause even if you have the experience like with RTS, the median income is way lower, and the fan base too, i don't know anyone who plays every RPG release but many people play every strategy release, which means you'll require less marketing. I also wanted to emphasize even more the difficulty of RPGs because many people get into gamedev with the idea of making one, while no one gets straight into making an RTS, and I want to prevent them from quitting after getting overwhelmed by the amount of work needed for an RPG, something that happened to my friends and *almost* happened to me. Now, if making an RPG works for you then great! In fact I'd love to play it one day, I've always loved RPGs, especially JRPGs :)
@@AidanNieve that all makes good sense, yeah. just one more time with the idea that a good RPG ought to offer a non-stop stream of novel content. I am not sure where that is coming from. RPGs had backtracking in them since forever - they always used their game world a bit like a sandbox where you go back and forth between already explored areas. you can overdo that for sure, but I don't think people will start to complain because of backtracking in general. RPGs also have a number of things going for themselves. for example, people are absolute suckers for a sense of depths and variety. if you can show a bunch of screenshots of different environments, like a volcano biome and then a snow biome, then that will be huge for your Steam page. something like a card game where every screenshot looks basically identical may have a much harder time to be eye-catching. after having done a bunch of smaller games, sooner or later you'll want to challenge yourself and go bigger, and then I think a RPG can be viable choice as long as you manage to stick to a scope. I strongly agree with not doing a RPG as your first game though! not even as your first commercial release.
I mean it doesn't need to be a constant source of new content but the thing is that many of the basics are already super complex and require lots of depth, take dialogs for example, the entire game genre of Visual Novels is just one mechanic inside an RPG, and you can make boring dialogs if that's not the focus for your game, but you'll need some aspect, at least one, with a lot of depth, whether it's the combat, the social part or whatever. I actually didn't think about the multiple environments for the screenshots and that's such a good point that could pump it up quite a bit for the commercial release. And don't get me wrong I don't hate RPGs, my dream game is one and I hope to make it one day, but this was all oriented towards beginners since I'm far from an expert myself :)
@@AidanNieve There are actually visual novels that hybridize a little more with rpgs. And that essentially have JRPG combat but with out the semi-open world exploration. And rather have them be story driven when they occur. Which is a cool way of handling it. It's more common with the "princess raiser" type that add more character sheet/development elements.
I'm actually researching that for my second game (which is still in the making), but as soon as I test different techniques myself, I'll share the results! I can tell you in advance that the most useful seems to be keymailer and emailing RUclipsrs, I got a small channel to play my game, it got 1.2k views and around 50 wishlists in an hour, which then pushed the game on Steam! Not amazing numbers, but better than the organic growth from Steam
I think designing a good roguelike is actually pretty difficult, copying other roguelikes is easier but I think to a point people will move on from that specific theme or genre of roguelike. I mean how many vampire survivor clones can/would you want to be playing? It is interesting to see the formula used in various game forms, but in the same way over and over? Sure is easy to remake
While I get what you mean, I don't really agree, in fact I think that we are much more harsh with roguelikes when it comes to originality and it makes no sense. All shooters are effectively the same, only difference being whether they use existing tech or futuristic one. All platformers are mostly the same game (with exceptions obviously), even the best ones like celeste, meanwhile with roguelikes we'll always call them a copy of whichever game they remind us of. It's really clear with deck building roguelikes, where every tcime one releases it's like "oh another slay the spire copy", but they designed 100+ unique cards for the game, seems unfair. And the type of design required to create a roguelike comes more from creativity than knowledge, many of the skills for my game were designed by my friend who has so much more creativity than me but no design or programming knowledge, so it's definitely possible for a noob to design a great roguelike :)
@@ItsChiliP I mean, if we wanted something easy we wouldn't even start gamedev, would we? But roguelikes are precisely the genre that I have most experience with, so I'm gonna have to somewhat disagree. While they are not as easy as a platformer, the only programming challenge I can think of would be all the procedural generation stuff, the rest is quite simple and easily recyclable as long as you structure your code efficiently :)
@@AidanNieve Well it's not just about originality but also the "how many of a type do you want to play" Your game can have 90% borrowed elements, so long as the core experience is fun, and it's main gimmick is interesting. But the most games end up being similar the higher the floor or quality to stand out gets. You can basically copy the game-play of vampire survivors 80-100% so long as you give it a different better art style. From my perspective, survivor-likes have already peaked, but there is still room in it for games that hit a higher quality standard. My instinct from looking at your stuff is that your art is unique enough for yours to work. In my view making a successful survivor-like comes down to art skill but not the sheer amount of art? If that makes sense. Most genres that rely heavily on art need a lot of assets, and vampire-survivor-likes don't. But understanding contrast, colors, how to make a unique and cohesive style does help a lot. I personally think it is easier to be unique/interesting with other sub types. Theme and art help a lot for uniqueness. As well core experience/interaction. I think there is a lot more room for slay-the-spire likes/roguelike deckbuilders than there is for survivor likes. I am still finding new really coold survivor like periodically but they are a minority. But I would say a smaller portion of the new ones are interesting than for deckbuilders. Part of that is because is it easier to make the theme actually shape the gameplay with deckbuilders. And even if you stick completely to fantasy dungeon crawlers, you can still use art style to differentiate. (Although art style on the fantasy ones is starting to get a little samey, It seems like there is a broader space of possibilities.) But I am seeing more derivatives that feel original there. A lot of the games on the cozy roguelites sub-genre borrow elements from that. Currently there is also a trend among in-development deckbuilders to base them off of existing card/boardgames or gambling games, but with rpg and progression elements added. There is the poker one you mentioned, and a blackjack one. (Dungeons and degenerate gamblers.) Slots (Luck be landlord, Which I think started it.) I haven't seen roulette yet, But wouldn't be suprised if it pops up soon. If someone were to get a little more obscure I wouldn't be suprised if something like rummy, skip-bo, or something also got one. But my guess is that there is at least another 1-2 dozen original games in that sub-genre waiting to be made. For cozy deckbuilders, There are at least 7 separate ones about farming. And honestly they all actually feel a bit different even though the core elements are the same and they have a similar theme. Some are more like a factory, others are more adjacency puzzles like islanders, etc. Even with slay-the-spire likes which stick to a direct combat focuse, there are hybrid games and multiple styles, sort of like how there are multiple styles of traditional trading card games. (There is a lot that can be mined from trading card games. and more potential sources of inspiration makes "originality" easier.) You have "card/item as an ability." Where you have action points and spend them to play cards that activate and are immediately discarded. (Slay the spire.) Then you have "cards as minions" Which is more like magic the gathering, vangaurd, etci. In between those you have "cards as equipment. with some a active abilities.) Often it has slots for different equipment types. (Like munchkin by steve jackson game, The computer game version of that is really cool.) Would love to see more of that type. Or like pokemon, Where you have a single main monster player down at a time and strategize moving things between what is in hand and in play, and using things to boost the smaller number of units you have. And often cards act as the currency to activate abilities, Cards may even have multiple abilities. You could get closer to magic by having like 2-3 creatures down. (While 6+ with both back and front ranks is more summoner style.) Magic is "Spend cards as currency." except the cards are played as permanent land/income that can be used every turn rather than being directly consumed like pokemon TCG. And magic generally has 1 maybe 2 abilities per card. Then there are the ones where cards abilities usually don't spend currency to use them, and often have 1 ability per card. But there may be a currency limiting how many you can play. Some forsake currency and just rely on limited spots and upgrade/tier rules. (Clear example of this is vanguard.) Another is the christian TCG Redemption. And that is without even getting into tabletop deckbuilders. The classic one is domimion. But splendor is also pretty cool. Those typically have "cost to buy card." but no cost to use card. And usually the currency cards take up space in the deck and you can buy cards every turn. so the game is mostly centered on buying cards. From another perspective, deckbuilders are essentially a sub-type of JRPG combat without any of the other elements of a JRPG. And theorestically you could take the same game structure and use it with some other sort of JRPG combat system as well. I haven't seen that as much yet. If I had the time currently i might do that. Kind of already working on a strategy rpg though for now.
"copying other roguelikes is easier". Why copy only roguelikes and -lites? Why not just pick another genre and make it a roguelite? Balantro is essentially just poker but with roguelite elements. Cursed to Golf is golf game but with roguelite elements. Solitairica is solitaire with roguelite elements. Enter The Gungeon is just bullet hell game with roguelite elements. U can quite easily come up with "unique" roguelite game by just slapping any other game and making it into roguelite. Here are some i don't think exist yet: - rail shooter but as roguelite - point & clicker but roguelite (this sounds like balancing nightmare tho as this genre is notorious for the items to have purpose & logic... but i guess maybe the items stay same but map changes? and different powerups just change how you approach problems?) - pretty sure this already exists but couldn't find but shoot em up (such as r type series) but as roguelite - wrestling game but as roguelite (some other sports games already have had their versions but i have not seen or heard about wrestling based roguelite yet) - god simulator roguelite (there are some town and city sims but i mean something more like black&white 2 where the citizen know you exist) - artillery game (such as worms) but as roguelite - car combat roguelite (there are some racing games with roguelite progression but this genre has mostly died.. now that twisted metal is potentially making somekinda tv series or movie maybe its time to bring this genre back with a bang!?) if you copy a roguelite you only make something that already exist and you will be called copy of that other thing no one calls balatro a copy of poker tho so it seems like you can quite freely combine 2 existing things together and get away from it - so why copy roguelites when u can "copy" other games and slap roguelite on top of it?
Hmm I think I'd give them a C. First of all I'm gonna guess that you mean 2D boss rush, 3D would be impossible for a solo developer, no matter how much experience you have. But even if it's 2D, it has a really big disadvantage, which is that it shares all the negative aspects of roguelikes and action games, without the advantage of highly recyclable content. Each boss you make is like creating a new game, with a different set of rules like all the states for the boss, their moves and attacks, etc. I'm now working on the bosses for my game and making 3 unique bosses was already challenging, a game based only on bosses would take a loooooong time. The main issue would be designing them, if you already have ideas for the bosses it becomes easier, you can find the common things amongst them and create categories to recycle things, for example a category for bosses that shoot lasers, one for those who spawn things, and create components that you can mix and match. But it would still stay on C or lower B at most. (Sorry for all the yapping and thanks for watching the video!)
This list is completely ignoring one important factor, the first suggested game for a new developer heavily rely on the developer history as a gamer, if the developer only played RPG games through his childhood you can't tell him to make horror game as the first game, it will be really easy for him to start with an RPG game and it doesn't have to be a 20 hour one it's going to be 2 hours long
I consider that to become a gamedev you have to like gamedev itself, not necessarily gaming. I'm actually designing my ideal RPG as the ultimate game I want to release, but I know how difficult it will be so I'm trying to design it perfectly and meanwhile I'm learning different things thanks to other projects. If you want to start making games just because you like RPGs, and you don't like gamedev itself, that's like becoming a chef cause you like eating but don't like cooking, I'd rather go to a restaurant. With that being said obviously it can affect your ranking a little bit, horror games are an F for me, I'd have a heart attack playing my own game, but I tried to be objective when it comes to that :)
@@AidanNieve I believe that you should be in love with the thing that you are developing to become a successful developer, of course loving the process is also important but you should have a deep connection with the end product
I definitely agree with that, but I think that's more for a dream project, which is important to have but doesn't necessarily need to be your first project (for the sake of learning) or your first commercial project (purely for the money)
The highest earners are towards the left, the blue bars are the amount of releases. So for every 3 games one is spicy which is already sad, but at least people aren't paying that much for them!
Where are the action adventures ? that's the genre I play the most and interested to make my own games. I think all indie developers should know that they should lern to make quality from the beginning ... make or buy the best 3d models that you think are good enough for the game, design the world/levels interesting, take care about the animations and most important thing: the main characters must look good. Very often is the main character the biggest selling point of a game ... just learn from asian games, they earn millions with selling awesome looking characters in gacha games.
I would never recommend working at the same time on really complex mechanics, a story, and 3D, all those things are already extremely complex to make on their own, so for a first game or first commercial release, action adventures are out of the question. And even if you have tons of experience... Cannot place them above C, way too complex, and the popular ones are AAA games, at least AA, not indies
Great list and good video. I agree most of these spots. But i have small issue with "rpg". You didn't specify what kinda rpg you meant. I do agree if you mean mmorpg, then it definitely is on right place. If you mean 40 hour jrp i'd put it on F tier. But there are other types of rpgs! There are even engines that help making these quite fast (rpgmaker cough cough) and have simple enough UI for absolute beginner game devs. Sure they can't be doing pokemon, final fantasy or fallout. But they totally can create 1-4 hour small story. It won't sell well so for commercial i'd put that kinda mini rpg to D tier but they don't take a lot of time to make so for first game i'd put mini rpg into A or B tier. Oh and i didn't like how you slapped serious realistic sims together with funny sims and then just told new devs to avoid both. I agree about realistic sims as you first need to be expert in the field you are about to sim AND also be able to make that into a game. But the funny sims are MUCH easier to do. You do need some physics most probably and some mechanics. But did you know that goat simulator mostly is the devs failing at the code, creating bugs and then deciding to leave the bugs in as it made game more fun that way? That game wasn't coded perfectly. I'd put fun sims close to where you put party games as these shouldn't be that much harder to make AND you absolutely don't need multiplayer (depends on what kinda sim it specifically is multiplayer can help but isn't mandatory). Other than these small gripes (and some genres missing such as adult games) awesome job with the video.
Thanks for the support! For RPGs I meant the ones on the graph, which only count content rich, that's why even though I LOVE short jrpg games like to the moon, which can definitely be made by a single person, I only considered stuff like final fantasy and other similar games. And the thing with funny sims is that for a commercial release they seem to be mostly about luck, for example I've seen many supermarket simulators that were really similar to each other, but one made millions and others hundreds, and it wasn't because of some genius marketing campaign, it was because a random streamer played it and gave them extra visibility. For a first overall game it's obviously much much more subjective, but I consider that you'll only learn stuff like interactions with objects, and basic physics, which you can learn with other genres while also learning extra stuff that you wouldn't learn while making a simulator. But once again if that's your passion you should of course go for it, there's even a youtuber (I can't remember his name) creating an MMORPG on his own so anything is possible :) As for the missing genres it was mostly because I've never either played nor worked on them, so I didn't want to just yap about stuff I don't know about (should've probably left out simulators out for this same reason, I've only ever played 3 or 4 of them)
Omg thanks for the reminder! I actually absolutely forgot, I'll change it now :) Just in case here's the link to the graph with the best selling genres: howtomarketagame.com/2022/04/18/what-genres-are-popular-on-steam-in-2022/
One note is that the vast majority of Visual Novel releases exist to serve an audience looking for porn. Those looking for regular visual novels are relatively under-served.
Although most are just a poor excuse to show waifus in underwear as you said, there are also way too many about teenage romance or highschool sports. I like visual novels but if someone wants to make one, they should definitely avoid that japanese highschool setting, there's just too many and the median income is not good enough
Obviously I'm biased, and I'd love to know which rankings you disagree with, different insights and opinions are always welcome :) (as long as they are not rude, some people got REALLY mad because of my rating for RPGs)
Unfortunately that big spike is for content published, not earnings. Which is sad because it means that a huuuuuge percentage of games are just softporn
For a first game I'd say A tier, you'll learn about pathfinding, resource management, grid placement, upgrades, etc. But as a commercial release, going higher than C is just wishful thinking. The average earnings are pretty low, although it's true that most are just copies of each other. In the last 3 years I've seen only 3 tower defense games going viral, so it's better than a platformer, but still not good
Goat Simulator and Goose Simulator are not simulating either of the things they advertise they are the exact same game and should be called "Mischief Simulators" the fact that the avatar you play with is a goat or a goose does not in any way effect the game save for a few arbitrary limitations. Seriously take the goose out of goose simulator and replace it with a small child and you have made no significant changes to the game.
They are a really really bad option, they have all the disadvantages of RPGs + you need to make them online + usually they are F2P and you need to trick players to pay for cosmetics and help, so it's a Z tier
The section about simulators is really confusing for someone who knows what they actually are. The type you highlighted are meme games you'd typically see a streamer 100% in a quick video. Very easy for one person to make. And then there are hardcore simulations, which have nothing to do with that.
Yeah I talked about this under another comment, I should've been more clear, I mean simulators like powerwash simulator or supermarket simulator, obviously farming simulator is out of reach of a solo dev, no matter how much experience they may have
"Never compare yourself with the top 1% of anything" 😮 terrible piece of advice, it's like Homer telling Bart to try to be as mediocre as possible not to get disappointed! I believe quite the opposite, you should always compare with the top 1% and try to be better, or else your game will be just another piece of shovelware lost in an ocean of garbage games nobody cares or remember.
I for sure am not in the top 1% worldwide, I don't want people to go into gamedev thinking "oh celeste went viral so I can make millions with a platformer", it's not realistic. You shouldn't think you are trash and will never make it, but being overly optimistic will lead to disappointment if you can't handle failure
@@AidanNieve Neither do I, but I want to get there eventually. From a learning perspective, I agree, your are learning and it shouldn't matter. But for a commercial project, working for months or even years with a "yeah, it's not the best but is good enough" kind of thinking will lead to a bigger disappointment, once your game is released and get lost among thousands of other games that didn't try to be any better than the rest. Just my two cents of course.
I'm not talking about not striving for the best possible result, but being realistic is important. 98% of indie games never make money, and 75% of indie devs will never publish a second game, meaning that the disappointment rate is extremely high. If statistically speaking your first game has close to zero chances of succeeding, I want my viewers to still do their best while being ready for a more than likely failure. For example my game is not gonna succeed, I worked a lot on it, but it's not what the market needs, and I have no problem with that, cause at least I learned from it, if I worked on it thinking "the graphics are really good and the skills are unique and interesting, I'm gonna make millions", I'd definitely get disappointed when it makes $1-2K
Best Game for a solo indie developer:
1: Draw a square on the screen and get it moving with some inputs
2. A Short 2D Shoot Em Up
3. A Short 2D Platformer
4. A Short 2D Visual Novel
5. A Simple Fighting Game
6. A V-Pet
7. A Short 3D Platformer
8. A Short FPS
9. Whatever is trending DON'T DO
10. Whatever you think the industry is missing DO
And most importantly, above all else - WHATEVER YOU HAVE FUN MAKING, DO THAT!!!
Of course the most important thing is having fun! And I wish I would've followed that 9th tip cause now I have to finish a game inspired by vampire survivors when everyone is tired of them, even if they introduce original elements/mechanics.
I think it's better to go for a more stable formula that won't get flooded with thousands of games.
I'll pin you for all the beginners that may be watching this video, because I think those are all indeed amazing beginner friendly projects (although you obviously don't need to create all of them)
@@AidanNieve My perspective is that when a game with a innovative and trending gameplay loop pops up the market tends to get flooded quickly and it makes it difficult to stand out for beginners and even more experienced indie devs.
And I've formatted this list in a way that should gradually introduce new mechanics in a way that I've found expands on the previous - for example - going from a visual novel should get beginners thinking about interactive UI - the next step from there would be something like a V-Pet which is typically played through UI - this also introduces some basic RPG mechanics that can carry over into something like a simple Rogue-like where equipping items in menus and managing stats is more involved.
I definitely agree, it's important to understand the formulas that work to then create your own game formula instead of relying on the existing ones.
Personally I don't like small projects, I think there are two types of people, ones that prefer a more step by step introduction and others that prefer to dive right into it. Personally I'm the second type, and that's how I learned Web development and got my job, but your tips will definitely be really helpful for those that prefer small well designed steps.
Also if someone is like me and is reading this, you still need to have at least a vague plan! because over scoping is probably the biggest enemy of most gamedevs
I agree with not chasing the trend. It’s one of the worst investment style. A trend tend to die out quickly and with your one man limited resources to roll out a game in a few months, you will likely eating smoke.
Disagree with your take on simulators. There are two very different genres that each call themselves simulator. 1, the serious similator (such as MS Flight Sim), which requires huge resources to create the most accurate simulation possible, and 2, the niche and/or parody sim, such as Goat Sim and UGG, but these games are more about weird and quirky mechanics applied to a wacky or unconventional theme, and shouldn't be seen as the same as an actual simulation for a second. A solo develeoper can definitely make a niche parody game if the idea is good, but a good game designer head is essential to make sure the game flows well. Think Powerwash Simulator, a game where all you do is clean stuff, yet it did very well.
While I do generally agree, I think that there are so many examples of games where the line between parody and simulation is so thin, that we can group them together. Although I should've probably clarified that I was thinking about the serious simulators when I said you need tons of knowledge about the field, I actually had a joke in the script that would've helped making that distinction, but it was so unfunny that I had to cut it out. On the other hand, I feel like many of those parody simulators are born from a poorly designed simulator, and they go viral just because of how ridiculous they are. But there's no game design or anything holding them together, it's just a silly experience to enjoy for two hours before uninstalling. I'd like to know what your ranking for them would be though, I'm definitely biased as I tend to hate simulators
@AidanNieve well, you did place roguelikes as the ultimate starter genre which I would say definitely deserves to be below platformer due to the extra understanding of coding and mechanics, but I think we're all allowed to be a little biased 😂
Well, a serious sim is definitely a G. You want a team for those games and will need expert consultants, and it is definitely work for a studio for those reasons. As for the parody sim, I suppose that's almost impossible to quantify because it's just so variable. Untitled Goose Game I could see a solo dev doing if they have a lot of talent and time on their hands to commit. Powereash Simulator not so much. There are already lots of solo dev parody sim games out there, but that doesn't mean they're all good (see Grass Simulator).
Hmmm if we are talking about something as big as Farming Simulator then it's definitely a big no no... But looking at games like supermarket simulator, which would be a mix between serious and parody, I think it's possible for a single dev or small team to create that. But yeah maybe I should've gone with C or so
@AidanNieve meh, it's all good. Opinions are good imo, it creates discussion. Like this one 😂
I think progress in simulators especially graphics light ones are more about logarithmic progress. First there is no visible progress for a long time as youre dealing with math and optimizing your code. Once you have your perfect earthworm simulator code building game and updating graphics on top of it is the easy part.
In other words I think some simulators can be suitable for solo devs if one doesn't get depressed by the fact that most of development time isn't about decorating game world or making models but coding and learning math with only dummy numerical output in a worst case scenario.
I like how you answered the question of the video within seconds of it even starting, but then you watch the rest for your in-depth explanation. great video
Thanks a lot! I always try to keep it balanced, I don't wanna waste anyone's time but if I wanna reach a larger audience I need good watch time, so I try to offer value at the start and then build the script from there. I do have a huge drop in views because of that tho :/
So my first game can't be my dream PS1 graphics style FPS game with quicktime events and realistic animations and camera movement along with unecessary parkour elements and choices driven RPG element that leads to complete mind clusterfuck of dozen endings that leave you scared to even know what just happened
Believe it or not, the previous comment to yours was someone saying that making open worlds for your first game is easy and that with unreal engine you can make something like genshin impact. You'd be surprised by the amount of people who think they can make God of War alone and in a month hahahahah
@@AidanNieve my fav solo dev "open world" game was Witch Hunt. (He did have 2 or 3 helpers tho for some stuff but mostly it was single dev job). There is just one town and one hunting map. The map is kinda wide but full of easter eggs and treasures to find. If it was just walking sim it would be too empty and too big. If it was rpg or survival game the map would feel too small. But since it is about hunting these creatures and has night time and has small creatures being obstacles and has some horror elements it is imo the perfect size for the scope for the game. I suggest any dev that plans to make anykinda open world map to play that game just to learn about this balance.
(Altho some may argue it isn't "big enough for open world". I feel like the size and scope argument still stands even if term "open world" could be debunked).
Multiple videos say the same thing about RPG's. I get why people say it but that mentality has almost dommed me in other fields. RPG's take an incredible amount of time and effort. Making a good video game RPG is not the same as making almost any other genre. IMO if you are getting into game dev and want to make RPG's do it. Especially as a solo dev as you are the only one holding yourself accountable. Do what you're passionate about. Just be aware of how difficult it is and failure is around every corner. I would only say don't do it if you can't accept failure or you are banking on making money asap.
The first game I made was a simple turn-based RPG that took over a month. Around 10hrs a day, 5 days per week. It was basically a *far* inferior version of FF1. When the systems were coming together and working one by one it was so motivating. If I spent that time working on another genre I didn't care about then I probably would've just stopped trying game dev then and there. I wouldn't tell anyone to not try there hands at a genre. I'd just stick with explaining how difficult it is and the reality of the situation.
I mean there are exceptions to everything but I'd still not recommend RPGs to beginners in general. I have experience with them, and I have no problem with failure so I just ended up with a bit of extra knowledge and an abandoned project, but some friends of mine tried making them, failed as expected, and then quit gamedev altogether.
In fact, two of my biggest references when it comes to gamedev and RUclips are spanish youtubers called Alva Majo and Guinxu (Alva usually includes English subtitles if you wanna check him out), and while Guinxu is a way better developer than Alva, he's been working on an RPG for 5 years or so, which he had to restart 2/3 times, and Alva has released 3/4 commercial games and 2 free games.
Of course if you can keep it small then the genre itself is not a problem, To The Moon is a story focused RPG with close to no gameplay and no complex systems, and even a beginner could probably make that, the problem is that most people don't want that, they want a Zelda with the relationship system of Stardew Valley and the freedom of Elden Ring. I could've maybe placed it on D tier rather than "don't" for the first game if that's what you are into, but the risk of burning out is too high for most people.
@@AidanNieve This is why I said I get it lol. There’s way more stories of people trying, failing, and giving up than the opposite. Which like you said largely has to do with people dreaming too big at first. D tier is what I was thinking.
Good video overall though, keep it up!
Thanks for the support! :)
Jeff Vogel made his whole career about creating RPGs as a solo dev.
Its really important to pick the right genre and idea before proceeding. Thank you
Always happy to help whenever I can!
Yeah, whatever you do, don’t create a open world as a first game
Yup, and that's true for every genre, the best thing you can do is to always keep it small
Why not ? everybody can make easy an open world game, just open in Unreal the third person template and use the world generation tool to make a big open world - that's all, nothing more and nothing less to make a simple open world game.
I think "open world game" is not really a genre, it can be everything .... from a game like Genshin Impact, horror game, survival game, metroidvania or even just a walking simulator.
@@paluxyl.8682 if you want to create a good open world generally, the gameplay loop has to be stretched often leading people to lose sight of what makes the game fun and non-repetitive
Just because the world is open doesn't mean that you made an open world, you still need to design that world to be interesting, guide the player, etc. Also you mentioned Genshin Impact in both of your comments... You do know that those aesthetic asian gacha games are made by huge teams right?
@@nilolovesdirt Sure, but when it comes to indie games (or games in general) there are no rules ... for some could it be garbage for others a masterpiece.
For example, you can make a very simple open world game in Unreal 5 with nice graphics ... a girl is wandering through the nature with a camera, and all that she does is taking pictures of wild horses, rabbits, foxes and other animals ... many gamers would call it boring as hell, but girls would love it and parents would buy it for their kids. lol
Before I've watched this, I've already made a roguelike, bullet hell game, named Rogueween, which is available on Steam. I've been a fan of roguelike games because of its replayability, randomness, and the combination of things you can do in every run. That's why when I've gotten a chance to make a game. I've already set my genre to this. Now, I'm so happy that I choose this genre because I know there's a lot of players who loves roguelike as well.
Your game looks cool! I'm also working on a roguelike and it's definitely the best option :)
I don't know how, but you manage to say things i've heard before.. in a way that i can understand. These are super helpful. thanks.
Always happy to help! And I think it may be easier to understand because as a non-native I quite literally cannot use complex words and expressions hahahahah
@@AidanNieve hehe maybe that's it. what ever it is, keep it up.
I will! Thanks for the continuous support :)
I'm someone who tends to dislike roguelikes. I prefer carefully designed environments with emergent gameplay elements. But I recognize it can have that feel if done right. I have yet to play Returnal or Hades, so my opinion might change 😅
I can understand that because when I was younger, like 14 or so, I hated them. I didn't understand why people played roguelikes or match-based games cause I liked games with persistent progress, it was only two years ago that I started loving them thanks to Nuclear Throne
My first game was a mobile release, my own unique take of a roguelite, where you participate in no combat but using a flashlight you fend off of creatures in caves while mining crystals which earn you score for a leaderboard *to compete on* and for gems to purchase upgrades in the forms of hats, its called DwarVein and i poured my soul into it for 5 months before releasing it! Having a finished game really helps set the requirements for future projects in check which helps avoid future failure. It also has a pc version on itch!
I actually watched a few of the devlogs a month ago or so, really interesting take on roguelikes, good luck with it!
@@AidanNieve Oh thats incredible to hear, i wasnt expecting to find it reached people, I really appreciate it! Its fully released alongside its tropical dlc atm, currently taking a break from updating it as I learn UE5, and then planning to go back and do a code rewrite to optimise it with an added endless mode later this year. Everything based on developing the game was to learn what were all the steps within the process, from concept to release.
Why did you decide to switch engines though? I think Godot offers more than enough for your type of game, which is similar to mine in many ways
@@AidanNieve Im switching to learn since im going into college next year and the course uses unreal, while I will remain with godot for my smaller projects I am learning UE so I dont go in completely blind when it comes to using it.
Oh that sounds interesting, good luck with college! I'm also starting a new degree now but I don't know which software I'll use
you put RPG in DONT but RTS only in D with the exact same reasoning? didn't even gave RPG a little bump for after one has collected release experience like what you did for RTS. if you compare a RPG and a RTS with a similar level of scope and polish then the RTS is easily just as hard and time-intensive to build than the RPG, so a difference of 5 tiers seems preeeetty biased. like you lost your parents to RPGs or something.
in terms of design and therefore required amount of playtesting, the RTS is probably even harder to do than the RPG. yes, the RPG will likely require more writing and content to explore, but RPGs can also have lots of replayable content - for instance where you need to go back into a previously visited area to get some specific monster loot, so adding a hour of playtime is not always this massive undertaking you make it out to be.
I'm obviously biased, everyone is, but I'll try to explain my reasoning a bit better.
First we have the money, RPGs only make money when they are content rich, short RPGs make the same amount as platformers, meanwhile strategy games make good money even for smaller games as long as the execution is good.
Things like making you go back to a previous area to pick a collectible are a really cheap way of adding "content" to the game, that's not necessarily a bad thing, I love One Piece and it has tons of filler stuff, but you want to cater to a wider audience, and many will leave negative reviews if you send them back and forth to force them to surpass the 2h playtime.
Also i wouldn't think of it as a 5 tier difference, it's just a don't, cause even if you have the experience like with RTS, the median income is way lower, and the fan base too, i don't know anyone who plays every RPG release but many people play every strategy release, which means you'll require less marketing.
I also wanted to emphasize even more the difficulty of RPGs because many people get into gamedev with the idea of making one, while no one gets straight into making an RTS, and I want to prevent them from quitting after getting overwhelmed by the amount of work needed for an RPG, something that happened to my friends and *almost* happened to me. Now, if making an RPG works for you then great! In fact I'd love to play it one day, I've always loved RPGs, especially JRPGs :)
@@AidanNieve that all makes good sense, yeah.
just one more time with the idea that a good RPG ought to offer a non-stop stream of novel content. I am not sure where that is coming from. RPGs had backtracking in them since forever - they always used their game world a bit like a sandbox where you go back and forth between already explored areas. you can overdo that for sure, but I don't think people will start to complain because of backtracking in general.
RPGs also have a number of things going for themselves. for example, people are absolute suckers for a sense of depths and variety. if you can show a bunch of screenshots of different environments, like a volcano biome and then a snow biome, then that will be huge for your Steam page. something like a card game where every screenshot looks basically identical may have a much harder time to be eye-catching.
after having done a bunch of smaller games, sooner or later you'll want to challenge yourself and go bigger, and then I think a RPG can be viable choice as long as you manage to stick to a scope. I strongly agree with not doing a RPG as your first game though! not even as your first commercial release.
I mean it doesn't need to be a constant source of new content but the thing is that many of the basics are already super complex and require lots of depth, take dialogs for example, the entire game genre of Visual Novels is just one mechanic inside an RPG, and you can make boring dialogs if that's not the focus for your game, but you'll need some aspect, at least one, with a lot of depth, whether it's the combat, the social part or whatever.
I actually didn't think about the multiple environments for the screenshots and that's such a good point that could pump it up quite a bit for the commercial release.
And don't get me wrong I don't hate RPGs, my dream game is one and I hope to make it one day, but this was all oriented towards beginners since I'm far from an expert myself :)
@@AidanNieve There are actually visual novels that hybridize a little more with rpgs.
And that essentially have JRPG combat but with out the semi-open world exploration.
And rather have them be story driven when they occur.
Which is a cool way of handling it.
It's more common with the "princess raiser" type that add more character sheet/development elements.
You should make a video about ways to get a game noticed. That whould help people a lot 😅
I'm actually researching that for my second game (which is still in the making), but as soon as I test different techniques myself, I'll share the results! I can tell you in advance that the most useful seems to be keymailer and emailing RUclipsrs, I got a small channel to play my game, it got 1.2k views and around 50 wishlists in an hour, which then pushed the game on Steam! Not amazing numbers, but better than the organic growth from Steam
@@AidanNieve i hope everything goes well, im also making a game and i recently realized i may require marketing for stuff i make in the future
Good luck with your game! And yeah, marketing is definitely a fundamental aspect that you should master, or at the very least learn about
I think designing a good roguelike is actually pretty difficult, copying other roguelikes is easier but I think to a point people will move on from that specific theme or genre of roguelike. I mean how many vampire survivor clones can/would you want to be playing? It is interesting to see the formula used in various game forms, but in the same way over and over? Sure is easy to remake
While I get what you mean, I don't really agree, in fact I think that we are much more harsh with roguelikes when it comes to originality and it makes no sense. All shooters are effectively the same, only difference being whether they use existing tech or futuristic one. All platformers are mostly the same game (with exceptions obviously), even the best ones like celeste, meanwhile with roguelikes we'll always call them a copy of whichever game they remind us of. It's really clear with deck building roguelikes, where every tcime one releases it's like "oh another slay the spire copy", but they designed 100+ unique cards for the game, seems unfair. And the type of design required to create a roguelike comes more from creativity than knowledge, many of the skills for my game were designed by my friend who has so much more creativity than me but no design or programming knowledge, so it's definitely possible for a noob to design a great roguelike :)
@@AidanNieve nah roguelikes are hard as shit, speaking from experience
@@ItsChiliP I mean, if we wanted something easy we wouldn't even start gamedev, would we?
But roguelikes are precisely the genre that I have most experience with, so I'm gonna have to somewhat disagree. While they are not as easy as a platformer, the only programming challenge I can think of would be all the procedural generation stuff, the rest is quite simple and easily recyclable as long as you structure your code efficiently :)
@@AidanNieve Well it's not just about originality but also the "how many of a type do you want to play"
Your game can have 90% borrowed elements, so long as the core experience is fun, and it's main gimmick is interesting.
But the most games end up being similar the higher the floor or quality to stand out gets.
You can basically copy the game-play of vampire survivors 80-100% so long as you give it a different better art style.
From my perspective, survivor-likes have already peaked, but there is still room in it for games that hit a higher quality standard.
My instinct from looking at your stuff is that your art is unique enough for yours to work.
In my view making a successful survivor-like comes down to art skill but not the sheer amount of art?
If that makes sense.
Most genres that rely heavily on art need a lot of assets, and vampire-survivor-likes don't.
But understanding contrast, colors, how to make a unique and cohesive style does help a lot.
I personally think it is easier to be unique/interesting with other sub types.
Theme and art help a lot for uniqueness. As well core experience/interaction.
I think there is a lot more room for slay-the-spire likes/roguelike deckbuilders than there is for survivor likes.
I am still finding new really coold survivor like periodically but they are a minority.
But I would say a smaller portion of the new ones are interesting than for deckbuilders.
Part of that is because is it easier to make the theme actually shape the gameplay with deckbuilders.
And even if you stick completely to fantasy dungeon crawlers, you can still use art style to differentiate.
(Although art style on the fantasy ones is starting to get a little samey, It seems like there is a broader space of possibilities.)
But I am seeing more derivatives that feel original there.
A lot of the games on the cozy roguelites sub-genre borrow elements from that.
Currently there is also a trend among in-development deckbuilders to base them off of existing card/boardgames or gambling games, but with rpg and progression elements added.
There is the poker one you mentioned, and a blackjack one. (Dungeons and degenerate gamblers.) Slots (Luck be landlord, Which I think started it.)
I haven't seen roulette yet, But wouldn't be suprised if it pops up soon.
If someone were to get a little more obscure I wouldn't be suprised if something like rummy, skip-bo, or something also got one.
But my guess is that there is at least another 1-2 dozen original games in that sub-genre waiting to be made.
For cozy deckbuilders, There are at least 7 separate ones about farming. And honestly they all actually feel a bit different even though the core elements are the same and they have a similar theme.
Some are more like a factory, others are more adjacency puzzles like islanders, etc.
Even with slay-the-spire likes which stick to a direct combat focuse, there are hybrid games and multiple styles, sort of like how there are multiple styles of traditional trading card games. (There is a lot that can be mined from trading card games. and more potential sources of inspiration makes "originality" easier.)
You have "card/item as an ability."
Where you have action points and spend them to play cards that activate and are immediately discarded. (Slay the spire.)
Then you have "cards as minions" Which is more like magic the gathering, vangaurd, etci.
In between those you have "cards as equipment. with some a active abilities.)
Often it has slots for different equipment types. (Like munchkin by steve jackson game, The computer game version of that is really cool.)
Would love to see more of that type.
Or like pokemon, Where you have a single main monster player down at a time and strategize moving things between what is in hand and in play, and using things to boost the smaller number of units you have. And often cards act as the currency to activate abilities, Cards may even have multiple abilities.
You could get closer to magic by having like 2-3 creatures down.
(While 6+ with both back and front ranks is more summoner style.)
Magic is "Spend cards as currency." except the cards are played as permanent land/income that can be used every turn rather than being directly consumed like pokemon TCG.
And magic generally has 1 maybe 2 abilities per card.
Then there are the ones where cards abilities usually don't spend currency to use them, and often have 1 ability per card.
But there may be a currency limiting how many you can play.
Some forsake currency and just rely on limited spots and upgrade/tier rules. (Clear example of this is vanguard.) Another is the christian TCG Redemption.
And that is without even getting into tabletop deckbuilders. The classic one is domimion.
But splendor is also pretty cool.
Those typically have "cost to buy card." but no cost to use card.
And usually the currency cards take up space in the deck and you can buy cards every turn. so the game is mostly centered on buying cards.
From another perspective, deckbuilders are essentially a sub-type of JRPG combat without any of the other elements of a JRPG.
And theorestically you could take the same game structure and use it with some other sort of JRPG combat system as well.
I haven't seen that as much yet. If I had the time currently i might do that.
Kind of already working on a strategy rpg though for now.
"copying other roguelikes is easier". Why copy only roguelikes and -lites? Why not just pick another genre and make it a roguelite? Balantro is essentially just poker but with roguelite elements. Cursed to Golf is golf game but with roguelite elements. Solitairica is solitaire with roguelite elements. Enter The Gungeon is just bullet hell game with roguelite elements.
U can quite easily come up with "unique" roguelite game by just slapping any other game and making it into roguelite.
Here are some i don't think exist yet:
- rail shooter but as roguelite
- point & clicker but roguelite (this sounds like balancing nightmare tho as this genre is notorious for the items to have purpose & logic... but i guess maybe the items stay same but map changes? and different powerups just change how you approach problems?)
- pretty sure this already exists but couldn't find but shoot em up (such as r type series) but as roguelite
- wrestling game but as roguelite (some other sports games already have had their versions but i have not seen or heard about wrestling based roguelite yet)
- god simulator roguelite (there are some town and city sims but i mean something more like black&white 2 where the citizen know you exist)
- artillery game (such as worms) but as roguelite
- car combat roguelite (there are some racing games with roguelite progression but this genre has mostly died.. now that twisted metal is potentially making somekinda tv series or movie maybe its time to bring this genre back with a bang!?)
if you copy a roguelite you only make something that already exist and you will be called copy of that other thing
no one calls balatro a copy of poker tho
so it seems like you can quite freely combine 2 existing things together and get away from it - so why copy roguelites when u can "copy" other games and slap roguelite on top of it?
I would like to know what are your takes on boss rush games.
Hmm I think I'd give them a C. First of all I'm gonna guess that you mean 2D boss rush, 3D would be impossible for a solo developer, no matter how much experience you have.
But even if it's 2D, it has a really big disadvantage, which is that it shares all the negative aspects of roguelikes and action games, without the advantage of highly recyclable content. Each boss you make is like creating a new game, with a different set of rules like all the states for the boss, their moves and attacks, etc. I'm now working on the bosses for my game and making 3 unique bosses was already challenging, a game based only on bosses would take a loooooong time. The main issue would be designing them, if you already have ideas for the bosses it becomes easier, you can find the common things amongst them and create categories to recycle things, for example a category for bosses that shoot lasers, one for those who spawn things, and create components that you can mix and match. But it would still stay on C or lower B at most. (Sorry for all the yapping and thanks for watching the video!)
This list is completely ignoring one important factor, the first suggested game for a new developer heavily rely on the developer history as a gamer,
if the developer only played RPG games through his childhood you can't tell him to make horror game as the first game, it will be really easy for him to start with an RPG game and it doesn't have to be a 20 hour one it's going to be 2 hours long
I consider that to become a gamedev you have to like gamedev itself, not necessarily gaming. I'm actually designing my ideal RPG as the ultimate game I want to release, but I know how difficult it will be so I'm trying to design it perfectly and meanwhile I'm learning different things thanks to other projects.
If you want to start making games just because you like RPGs, and you don't like gamedev itself, that's like becoming a chef cause you like eating but don't like cooking, I'd rather go to a restaurant.
With that being said obviously it can affect your ranking a little bit, horror games are an F for me, I'd have a heart attack playing my own game, but I tried to be objective when it comes to that :)
@@AidanNieve
I believe that you should be in love with the thing that you are developing to become a successful developer,
of course loving the process is also important but you should have a deep connection with the end product
I definitely agree with that, but I think that's more for a dream project, which is important to have but doesn't necessarily need to be your first project (for the sake of learning) or your first commercial project (purely for the money)
My faith in humanity died a little seeing that "spicy" content has the highest medium earnings per release
The highest earners are towards the left, the blue bars are the amount of releases. So for every 3 games one is spicy which is already sad, but at least people aren't paying that much for them!
Not me making a 2D roguelike survival craft ALL IN ONE with Samsung fridge screen compatibility :D
Damn that's next level, can't wait to play it on my oven's screen hahahahah
Where are the action adventures ? that's the genre I play the most and interested to make my own games.
I think all indie developers should know that they should lern to make quality from the beginning ... make or buy the best 3d models that you think are good enough for the game, design the world/levels interesting, take care about the animations and most important thing: the main characters must look good.
Very often is the main character the biggest selling point of a game ... just learn from asian games, they earn millions with selling awesome looking characters in gacha games.
I would never recommend working at the same time on really complex mechanics, a story, and 3D, all those things are already extremely complex to make on their own, so for a first game or first commercial release, action adventures are out of the question. And even if you have tons of experience... Cannot place them above C, way too complex, and the popular ones are AAA games, at least AA, not indies
Great list and good video. I agree most of these spots. But i have small issue with "rpg". You didn't specify what kinda rpg you meant. I do agree if you mean mmorpg, then it definitely is on right place. If you mean 40 hour jrp i'd put it on F tier. But there are other types of rpgs! There are even engines that help making these quite fast (rpgmaker cough cough) and have simple enough UI for absolute beginner game devs. Sure they can't be doing pokemon, final fantasy or fallout. But they totally can create 1-4 hour small story. It won't sell well so for commercial i'd put that kinda mini rpg to D tier but they don't take a lot of time to make so for first game i'd put mini rpg into A or B tier.
Oh and i didn't like how you slapped serious realistic sims together with funny sims and then just told new devs to avoid both. I agree about realistic sims as you first need to be expert in the field you are about to sim AND also be able to make that into a game. But the funny sims are MUCH easier to do. You do need some physics most probably and some mechanics. But did you know that goat simulator mostly is the devs failing at the code, creating bugs and then deciding to leave the bugs in as it made game more fun that way? That game wasn't coded perfectly. I'd put fun sims close to where you put party games as these shouldn't be that much harder to make AND you absolutely don't need multiplayer (depends on what kinda sim it specifically is multiplayer can help but isn't mandatory).
Other than these small gripes (and some genres missing such as adult games) awesome job with the video.
Thanks for the support!
For RPGs I meant the ones on the graph, which only count content rich, that's why even though I LOVE short jrpg games like to the moon, which can definitely be made by a single person, I only considered stuff like final fantasy and other similar games.
And the thing with funny sims is that for a commercial release they seem to be mostly about luck, for example I've seen many supermarket simulators that were really similar to each other, but one made millions and others hundreds, and it wasn't because of some genius marketing campaign, it was because a random streamer played it and gave them extra visibility. For a first overall game it's obviously much much more subjective, but I consider that you'll only learn stuff like interactions with objects, and basic physics, which you can learn with other genres while also learning extra stuff that you wouldn't learn while making a simulator. But once again if that's your passion you should of course go for it, there's even a youtuber (I can't remember his name) creating an MMORPG on his own so anything is possible :)
As for the missing genres it was mostly because I've never either played nor worked on them, so I didn't want to just yap about stuff I don't know about (should've probably left out simulators out for this same reason, I've only ever played 3 or 4 of them)
you should provide links in the description to websites you talk about in the video
Omg thanks for the reminder! I actually absolutely forgot, I'll change it now :)
Just in case here's the link to the graph with the best selling genres: howtomarketagame.com/2022/04/18/what-genres-are-popular-on-steam-in-2022/
@@AidanNieve thanks
One note is that the vast majority of Visual Novel releases exist to serve an audience looking for porn. Those looking for regular visual novels are relatively under-served.
Although most are just a poor excuse to show waifus in underwear as you said, there are also way too many about teenage romance or highschool sports. I like visual novels but if someone wants to make one, they should definitely avoid that japanese highschool setting, there's just too many and the median income is not good enough
nah nah nah gotta go with hyper specific hardware dependent vintage computing! bust out a good ol pdp11 and get to assembling
I so wish I could agree with you, and its a very interesting video, but so many of your ranking is wrong in my opinion (and yes, its just my opinion)
Obviously I'm biased, and I'd love to know which rankings you disagree with, different insights and opinions are always welcome :) (as long as they are not rude, some people got REALLY mad because of my rating for RPGs)
great video, keep it up
Thank you so much! :)
ok, so I have to make a se**al visual novel, noted!
Unfortunately that big spike is for content published, not earnings. Which is sad because it means that a huuuuuge percentage of games are just softporn
What about tower defense
For a first game I'd say A tier, you'll learn about pathfinding, resource management, grid placement, upgrades, etc. But as a commercial release, going higher than C is just wishful thinking. The average earnings are pretty low, although it's true that most are just copies of each other. In the last 3 years I've seen only 3 tower defense games going viral, so it's better than a platformer, but still not good
Goat Simulator and Goose Simulator are not simulating either of the things they advertise they are the exact same game and should be called "Mischief Simulators" the fact that the avatar you play with is a goat or a goose does not in any way effect the game save for a few arbitrary limitations. Seriously take the goose out of goose simulator and replace it with a small child and you have made no significant changes to the game.
Where are the MMORPGs?
They are a really really bad option, they have all the disadvantages of RPGs + you need to make them online + usually they are F2P and you need to trick players to pay for cosmetics and help, so it's a Z tier
subscribed
The section about simulators is really confusing for someone who knows what they actually are. The type you highlighted are meme games you'd typically see a streamer 100% in a quick video. Very easy for one person to make. And then there are hardcore simulations, which have nothing to do with that.
Yeah I talked about this under another comment, I should've been more clear, I mean simulators like powerwash simulator or supermarket simulator, obviously farming simulator is out of reach of a solo dev, no matter how much experience they may have
"Never compare yourself with the top 1% of anything" 😮 terrible piece of advice, it's like Homer telling Bart to try to be as mediocre as possible not to get disappointed! I believe quite the opposite, you should always compare with the top 1% and try to be better, or else your game will be just another piece of shovelware lost in an ocean of garbage games nobody cares or remember.
I for sure am not in the top 1% worldwide, I don't want people to go into gamedev thinking "oh celeste went viral so I can make millions with a platformer", it's not realistic. You shouldn't think you are trash and will never make it, but being overly optimistic will lead to disappointment if you can't handle failure
@@AidanNieve Neither do I, but I want to get there eventually. From a learning perspective, I agree, your are learning and it shouldn't matter. But for a commercial project, working for months or even years with a "yeah, it's not the best but is good enough" kind of thinking will lead to a bigger disappointment, once your game is released and get lost among thousands of other games that didn't try to be any better than the rest. Just my two cents of course.
I'm not talking about not striving for the best possible result, but being realistic is important. 98% of indie games never make money, and 75% of indie devs will never publish a second game, meaning that the disappointment rate is extremely high. If statistically speaking your first game has close to zero chances of succeeding, I want my viewers to still do their best while being ready for a more than likely failure. For example my game is not gonna succeed, I worked a lot on it, but it's not what the market needs, and I have no problem with that, cause at least I learned from it, if I worked on it thinking "the graphics are really good and the skills are unique and interesting, I'm gonna make millions", I'd definitely get disappointed when it makes $1-2K
@@AidanNieve Fair enough!