I read an interesting, I may even say *insightful* post on a website recently. No wait! stop! I really did!

It was a debate about a new game, which had been released as ‘Free To Play’. There was some comment along the lines of how this was great because it meant there was no barrier to trying the game in this case, and that posters A and B would check it out. And then came the genius of poster C, who said something like this:

“So? Free isn’t a big deal any more. There are too many free / very cheap games. I have to weigh up whether the game is worth my time, rather than care about the cost”.

And I think this is going to be an increasingly popular view. I don’t blame people who put games on 90%-off sales. and I don’t blame people who immediately impulse-buy a game they haven’t even seen a video of, because it’s 90% off and sounds like it might be fun. I know how we have got where we are.

But where we are may not be sustainable.

A lot of gamers now complain about a huge game ‘backlog’. Games they bought for $1.99, which claim to have 30 hours of gameplay. There is this big thing of ‘backlog guilt’ where people try not to buy new games until they play all the ones from the past sales. It hasn’t happened to me, I’m very critical of games and only buy maybe 6 a year. The last two games I bought I played for maybe 8 hours combined. I do, however have absolutely no feeling that I *should* go back and *finish* them. I got my moneyworth, it’s not like I ‘owe it’ to the game makers to finish them. Most portals 2 buyers don’t finish the game, according to valve.

Clearly I’m a freak, and atypical, so going back to all these people with a big backlog of games and not enough time to play them, I think (hope?) we may see a change in mindset to this:

“I have limited free time. I enjoy games. I want to spend my limited free time getting the highest quality entertianment as possible. The fact that some games are very cheap is not an enticement, if I can afford to spend my limited free time playing the non-cheap stuff, and still have enough money to fill my free time in this way”.

It’s the way I think about food. I can afford to buy good food, and I know that there is only so much food I can buy, so I tend to spend more money than I have to on food. I don’t agonise about the economy / luxury decision when it comes to a chocolate cake (mmmm cake), because even if the economy cake is mega-cheap, there is only so much cake I can eat, so it may as well be good cake.

Do you think like this? or are you still drawn towards a game because it’s $0.99, even if you know it’s not as good as the game next to it, for $5.99…?

Bookmark to:

Why are so many games about destruction and breaking things?

In the real world, we tend to value creation and invention and construction. People are rightly proud if they built a house, less proud if they have demolished one. We feel good and get an emotional high from collaborating to create and build something, and making peoples lives better. There is nothing weird or boring or silly about this, it’s probably built into us, at some genetic level. Chimps that collaborated to help each other had an advantage maybe?

But in games, it’s all about destruction. Team A beats team B by kicking team B in the voolnerables,or blowing them up, or stabbing them. Team A rarely wins by creating a more impressive cathedral than team B, or by curing more disease, or raising life expectancy. This is unfortunate.

Obviously counter-examples exist, and I look upon the success of minecraft as being an example of a game where a lot of people enjoy working together to collaborate on building something impressive. It’s a game about working together, and making stuff, all very positive. However, the majority of big name games, like World Of Warcraft and Call of Duty are about destroying and killing, whther you are killing NPCs or other players.

Some Happy builders

I guess I’m as guilty as any game designer, GSB is about blowing the enemy up, for absolutely no reason at all. However, one positive thing that emerged from the game was a pretty busy, vibrant and very friendly modding community. In some ways, GSB bought some people together to co-operate on making stuff, and that’s just awesome. One day, I’d like to do a game based around that general idea. My own pet theory is that the lack of construction and positive games is due to the history of games emerging as a medium for teenage kids, especially boys. 13 year old boys are all about testosterone and puberty, so basically killing and having sex. Most countries have laws preventing selling sex to that demographic, so the games sell violence to them instead.

When those gamers grow up, lose their hair, get a mortgage and likely a partner & kids, they aren’t so focused on destruction, but on construction. Building a home, a family, a career. None of which is usually a zero-sum game. Where are the games aimed at this period in your life? (except mine).

What examples are there out there in PC gaming land of games which encourage you to do positive stuff? Games where it isn’t a zero-sum game, and you are encouraged to just ‘do better’ rather than  cause your rivals to fail?

Bookmark to:

Given that amazons hosting systems recently fell apart (who really knows why), and now we hear that sonys playstation network has leaked customer details, possibly including credit card information, to hackers I think it’s time to clarify something that I’m very pleased is the case.

When you buy a game from me, I don’t see your payment details. I never handle the payment, and I have no database with your payment information on it. Nor do I want one. It’s all handled by a third party, either BMTMicro or Fastspring. Both of them are US companies.

Positech can’t be hacked and broken into and put your payment details at risk, because I never even see them. A dedicated company that takes this stuff very seriously handles it.

But better than that, we don’t rely on one-click ordering or customer purchase accounts. Nobody can steal your positech account and take away your games. Nobody can prevent you from getting at your games, launching them or running them.

I bet there are a ton of people who are absolutely furious at sony right now. To be safe, they should all ask for new credit cards. There are 70 million accounts. This is like an entire country being victim to identity theft. Scary stuff.

Bookmark to:

My new game does more rendering-to-a-texture stuff than the others have done. I’m very pleased with it so far.

What am I talking about?

Say you have a sprite, and that sprite is a ninja hamster wearing a bullet proof vest and wearing a crash helmet. This is a character in your game, and an icon used in various places. To allow customisation, the player has chosen the helmet and the vest, and maybe tweaked their colors. This gives them a slightly customised hamster.

When you draw this onscreen, you need to draw 3 layers (hamster, vest, helmet). That means drawing 3 sprites on top of each other, and 3 times as many pixels as normal. That can mount up quick, and is called overdraw. It also means changing texture 3 times, and changing textures is sloooowwww.

The solution, before the game starts, is to create a new blank texture in memory, and ‘offscreen’ (while the player isn’t looking) you draw the hamster, with all 3 layers and colors. You then save that texture to disk, with a unique name, Later, in the game, you just blap that single sprite, already composed, in a single draw call. If you are really obsessed, you could, at run-time, stitch together all the units textures into a single sprite-sheet to make it even simpler, and faster.

I have no idea if people tend to do this any more. Most people make 3D games with little or no alpha-blending, where you don’t worry much about texture swaps because you sort by Z and use a Z Buffer. My games can’t be done like that because it’s all soft-edged alpha-blended 2D, so these things start to matter. The code to do all this is a bit fiddly, but I’m already massively glad I’ve got it working. It will let me do all kinds of cool stuff in the next game, and means it will run fast as a race horse wearing rocket-skates.

Bookmark to:

I have a problem. It’s the same problem most people selling stuff have. I cannot be sure that my adverts actually work. I can be *pretty* sure they do, but I really would benefit from some hard statistical data. Using technical means to track visitors and sales with cookies has failed me. I tried the google ecommerce tracking stuff, but frankly it was chaos.

One method, used in the newspaper industry, is to use coupons. You print a 10% off coupon on the advert, and then every customer who uses the coupon must have seen the ad (directly or indirectly). This could work, but of course it relies on people actually using the coupon. Because game demos are generally tried, and people play them for hours, if not days, the chances are people forget all about the coupon when buying. I suspect this method is as leaky as any other.

I could mitigate that by removing the game demo link entirely.  This is something I have never done, and am not keen on, but it would be possible.

Another method could involve having a special version of the demo which writes a file to disk. When the full game is first run, it could check for that file, and if found, report to my server that an ad-driven sale took place. Ideally, the demo installer would have the ad-click referer embedded in it somewhere, but at this point things start to get uber-involved.

I’m very interested to know other peoples experiences and tricks. How do you know whether an ad campaign, or a website review or link, or other traffic source is actually generating sales?

Bookmark to:

Me? I failed. But to be honest, it was an insane demand for me to go 24 hours. I did go the first half of the day without problems, but then I gave in and plugged my router back in. However, I hardly used the net for the rest of the day, and didn’t bother with instant messaging, any forums, or any non-urgent email.

So it was a partial success in those terms.

However, in productivity terms, it was pretty awesome. I got way more done in the first 3 hours of the day than I normally would. The fact that I had no email to answer,l share prices to check, sales to analyse, or  forum discussions / twitter chat to think about kept my mind 100% focused on some particularly evil bugs and getting some new features into the mystery next game.

What is truly sad, is how when I did relent and checked news sites, forums, twitter etc…. I hadn’t really missed much. There had not been any major events that I was missing out on, I just got to read a few emails 6 hours later than usual. Given the pretty significant boost in my productivity, i think this shows there is something in this.

As some have noticed, my self-declared no-inetrnet day also took out amazon and the PS3 network. Such is my POWER.

I think what I may do is try to implement no-internet mornings on Monday-Friday, when I am at my most productive. This is certainly worth an experiment. On the downside, that means American customers emailing me while I’m asleep get their replies 6 hours later, but they are asleep till then anyway.

I’m at the ‘proper production’ stage in my next game, which is no longer code-named ‘LB’. It might be code named ‘GTB’, or ‘OTT’ or something else. I haven’t decided 100% yet. Proper production is when I’m putting final art assets into the game, and coding big chunks of it. It’s too late for major design changes, but releasing screenshots is still a long way off.

Bookmark to:

Business innovation and quality thrives on feedback, and messages. Capitalism is basically just a system a signals from consumers to producers, to optimise production processes. Generally, capitalism works on the crude buy/don’t buy and price systems. If your pies taste crap, sales fall. If you still sell pies at £10 each, your pies kick-ass. etc…

The problem is, unless there is constant iteration of new products, or constant price tweaking, it’s tough to get decent feedback on products over short periods. The signal is binary, either buy, or don’t buy. Cancel, or renew.

Games, especially online-games have far better possibilities for sending signals back to their makers. They generally don’t bother, but they could do. Gratuitous Space Battles attempted this is a fairly crude way, with challenges. At the end of playign a challenge, you could choose to rank that challenge for both quality and difficulty. Other players, can sort challenges by those criteria, and hopefully the best challenges rise to the top. Obviously the idea was that new players of the game would choose a ‘fun’ challenge, rather than randomly ending up playing against a hardcore, spammy or even cheating fleet.

That’s not bad, but it could go much better. I know if someone rates a challenge as difficult, and high quality, but do I know if they really enjoyed it? Maybe the challenge was fun, but the games performance was bad, or they thought the enemy fleets ships looked crap, or there is something else that is suboptimal. Ideally, I’d be able to look at a dashboard right now, and see 100 people are playing GSB, 64 of them are loving it, 12 are frustrated, 7 are bored etc…

Games don’t ask for feedback, but they should do. Would you reply if they did? If, as the next battle was loading in Battlefield 3, it asked you to rate that last game, by 4 or 5 different criteria, would you do it? Would you do it if it happened as you went to quit the game? ( I suspect not). Would you do it if there was some sort of reward (extra XP or whatever…).

I think this is definitely worth an experiment, at some point. If everyone thought that GSB was awesome, but the challenge browser was crap, I’d like stats on that, not just relying on the self-selecting sample of forum posters. (I know… people filling out surveys self select too).

Bookmark to:

So many programming, and technical things are bodged, not just in games or software, but everywhere, because the ideal best-case academic method is totally useless given that we are always working from an imperfect base.

The railway network, telephone infrastructure, road network, sewers and god-knows-what-else here in England are all rubbish. Why? Because we got these things very early in history due to being economically and technologically quite advanced, esp during victorian times. As a result, as pioneers, we have what I guess is ‘first-mover disadvantage’. Our countries infrastructure is like excite vs today’s google

I definitely find this problem in my own code, my own methods of working etc. I have an engine, it doesn’t really have a name, the folder is called ‘Positech Engine’. I save my imagination for the actual game… The engine isn’t like the unreal engine or other fully-featured thing, but it has all my library code which handles stuff like directinput, rendering, vertex buffer and texture management, file loading and so on. Bizzarely, 90% of the my UI code is NOT in the library, I copy it to each new game. How sucky.

Not only that, but I have a bunch of long standing balls-ups that I am now stuck with, pending a major rewrite for the next game. I should have done them for this one, really… Here are the ones that spring to mind.

STRINGS: I can’t decide if I like char* buffers or std::string. I pretty much use std::string, but because historically I know functions like sprintf and strcpy really well, I still use them in places. As a result some of my library stuff is designed to accept either std::string or char* as input. I can type ‘.c_str()’ so fast now it’s scary

UNICODE: I don’t use unicode. This means a Japanese GSB is not going to happen any time soon. I should probably use unicode, but I don’t

TOOLTIPS: I know this seems minor, but my tooltip class isn’t integrated with my window class. This means if I create a new window, and it needs a tooltip, I need to add a tooltip object, and call a destructor, and make it respond to the mouse and get drawn. This sucks. I should have defaulted to all windows having tooltip functionality

BUTTONS: Buttons should be a subset of windows, but mine aren’t. Both windows and buttons at least derive from the same class, but a window thus now derives from a buttonlist. That means a window has a list of buttons, and a list of child windows, and they are handled seperately. THIS SUCKS.

I know this all sounds crap, and if you are a coder writing a new engine, or a student, it sounds like I’m a n00b, but the thing is, you wouldn’t start from here. Unfortunately I have, and re-using my existing engine saves me hundreds if not thousands of hours for each game, so it’s tough to make a business case for changing a lot of this. Both big studios I worked on had code that was at least as messy as this, so I know it’s not just me…

Next game I’ll fix it all, sure…   maybe…

Bookmark to:

How productive would you be if you didn’t have

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• RSS readers
• Instant messengers
• *Insert name of timewasting website here*

I reckon VERY productive. I get increasingly distracted by this stuff myself. So I propose a solution. Let’s make a pledge, readers of this humble blog. let us declare next thursday (21st April) as NO INTERNET DAY. On the day before, you will unplug your router/modem, and it will not be touched for the whole of NO INTERNET DAY, and can be re-connected on the friday morning.

Whether you are a software developer like me, or a student, or anyone who doesn’t 100% rely on day to day usage of teh web for your work, you are likely to get more done on NO INTERNET DAY than a typical working day. What have we got to lose? If you are going to join me in this experiment, reply, and say what you do for a living that you hope to be more productive at. or maybe you will be doing it to spend mroe time with pets/children/significant others. Then on the friday we can all see how we did, and how long it took before you gave up

Spread the word, lets see how many people can go cold turky webwise on April 21st…

Bookmark to:

Here is a question for you. For how long after the release of a game do you think there should still be support for online features to that game?

I’m not talking MMO games here, obviously that should continue all the time any sort of subscription fee is being charged. I’m talking about games where you buy it once, and you own it, but part of the game is online. Like Guild Wars (although that’s all online) or, to a smaller extent: Gratuitous Space Battles.

Gamers are rightly angry when they suspect the servers for a game get shutdown just to encourage you to buy this years copy. EA are great at that, as I recall. The thing is, we can probably agree that if a game hasn’t sold a single copy in ten years, turning off the server is just fine. It’s silly to suggest otherwise. We also all know that most evil EULAs indicate the servers can be turned off when they fancy it, so it’s not a legal issue either.

What we lack, as an industry, is any sort of expectations or standards for this. If I buy Guild Wars today, and the server is turned off in 6 months time, is that just tough for me arriving late? Or is it understandable?

We could argue that as long as one person has bought the game in the last six months, the game should still be running, but what if that person bought the game in a steam sale or pay what you want deal for just $0.10. Still reasonable?

I guess to me, one benchmark would be profitability. If the server costs $100 a month to rent, and the game isn’t bringing in $100, it seems fair to axe it, although even then, what if 8 people bought it yesterday for $10 each?  It seems right now a long way off for me to worry about that. GSB made much more than $100 yesterday, let alone this month, and as a fraction of the server costs, it probably doesn’t cost $100 a month to run anyway. Also, the server is busy:

New challenges posted in last 24 hours: 48
Challenge victories in the last 24 hours: 143
new survival mode scores in the last 24 hours: 6
challengevictory: 170

This will not last forever though. When sounds reasonable to you as a gamer?

****Note: I can’t see the GSB server being shutdown deliberately before 2015 at this rate, so don’t panic ****

Bookmark to: