![]() ![]() When I ask these indie devs what they think about a hardcore gamer, their composite description is something like this: (by the way what hardcore gamer would want to wear a mask like that because it would probably block their ability to assess whether your game runs at 60FPS)Īnd hardcore gamers wear shirts that go hard like this Good for them! Yes I want these people to love the games I make.īy targeting “casuals,” indie devs think they can broaden their appeal away from the platonic “hardcore” gamer. The people in this picture are “casually” consuming a game. These people seem nice! In fact, I want to hang out with them!Ĭhris Zukowski speaking here… I personally identify as them! I don’t think of myself as a hardcore gamer despite my full-time job is in the game’s industry. They want their games to appeal to a crowd that would probably be more happy spending their Saturday evening at a golden-sun-dappled rooftop party among folks clad in well accessorized outfits holding solo cups (why are there so many in that picture?). Indie Devs who say they make “casual” games do so to appeal to people who aren’t 100% consumed by games and who aren’t self-identified gamers. This picture comes from the Nintendo Switch announcement commercial. In my conversations with Indie devs I always try to suss out who exactly they picture when they say they are trying to appeal to a “casual audience.” The composite of their responses is something like this picture: But first let me define casual vs hardcore In today’s blog post I want to explain why. I think trying to target a “casual” audience is a mistake for small indie game developers. It turns out my hunch was correct: 42.8% of indie games have the casual tag. I was afraid it was just some weird recency bias infecting my brain so I consulted my oracle: Video Game Insights. “We are making a casual strategy game.” “We are making a souls-like but for a casual audience.” If you've got time on your hands have a look and see what you think.I talk to a lot of indie game developers through my game marketing discord, I consult, I review funding pitch documents, I do lots of Q&As, and one weird thing that I see a lot of indies do is say they are making a “casual” game. They are evidence of gameplay that involves you going from A to B andīack to A again to get something to help you progress at B and then you go back to A and on and on and on add nausea.Ī game that had a chance to offer so much falls way back into the general pack of HOG games. I always find that maps are indicative of annoying too and fro gameplay. You also get a map which allows you to teleport to any location. One where theĬrutch of writing the story down for you in a diary is used to support the aimless wandering around a some random locations. All these standard UI features all generally point to a poorly crafted game. The diary also has a tasks section so again youĬan find out what you are supposed to be doing, just in case it's not obvious from the design of the game. ![]() The pointless diary recording your game play - just in case you forget the exciting story as it unfolds. It would be nice to see a different approachĪll the usual interface clutter is here as well. ![]() The white female protagonist, exploring a dark, spooky location is a tried and tested theme, but one that's getting a little tiring for us seasoned HOG 'fanatics'. ![]() But the new location is about as far as Dreamland gets at being original. Set in a spooky abandoned amusement park, Dreamland appears to try to set off along a path that hasn't yet been worn down by other HOGs. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |