Also avaible in Portuguese (Portugal)

If all goes well, this will be the first part in a short series of articles documenting my thoughts on the problems indie games face in regards to gamer perception, market penetration and media coverage, along with some other more general notes I’ve written over the past two years.

 

The Indie Challenge
- notes on indie games, journalism, marketing

Garage programmers. What the Sex Pistols would have done if they had Commodores instead of guitars. These and other terms have tried to define indie developers over the years, from the anonymous enthusiasts releasing demos on ZX Spectrum magazines to the Minecraft phenomenon. What started out as a hobby with low budget visual and aspirations has grown to influence the casual, social and iOS gaming landscape. From business to publishing models, indie games have also changed the industry, but they still remain divisive among “hardcore” gamers. Yet, some parts of the gaming press still turn a blind eye to them, favoring bigger, louder, shinier titles instead. Shouldn’t every game deserve equal treatment regardless of size, platform and money invested into it? What’s wrong with this picture?

 

 

The relationship between journalism and advertisement, to start with. During the mid-1990s, publishers and advertisers started taking advantage of game magazines as communication channels with gamers – and in more ways that an increase in ad pages. In 1995, Future Publishing premiered the PlayStation Official Magazine (OPM) in the UK. Magazines devoted to a particular platform weren’t exactly new; Super Play, focusing on the Super Nintendo, and PC Gamer, covering all things PC, were also under Future’s editorial wing, and predated OPM. Now, a reliable source of information seems fairly harmless if not for the overt claims of authority. If the competition was not “official”, what could it offer to readers? The appearance of magazines dedicated to specific brands and platforms which for themselves the mantle of legitimacy caused a rift in information structures – becoming centralized and less critical, respectively. It shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that OPM went on to become one of the best-selling magazines in Future’s catalog.

When the popularity of magazines died, the internet became the logical next step for consumer reviews and news. Much has been made of the world wide web’s democratization of public space, although the reality is a bit different. While it’s laudable that gamers have erected communities to discuss the medium, these are mostly ivory towers that promote consensus rather than welcome criticism and discussion. New platforms paved the way for an increasing number of people to speak their minds, but some, like blogs, are still islands spread out wide and far. Even the authority of gaming sites analogous to official magazines has shifted considerably too. How? The economics of videogame journalism during the magazine era, much like those of traditional journalism in newspapers, depended on readers. The unwritten contract was that for a price readers would receive useful information and critical insight. But readers are no longer the main economic force: advertisers and publishers are.

Precisely what indie games don’t have.

Game journalism no longer holds the power it did; brand awareness, brand loyalty and viral marketing have become much more important than reviews. Compare with the current climate of movie criticism, for instance, which is largely frowned upon by a readership unwilling to read negative comments about their favorite movies. Game criticism now finds itself in a similar position, where gamers constantly undermine those in a position of critical insight, marginalizing opinions that don’t fall in line with their consensus. Just as no amount of criticism can destroy a Michael Bay film, no four out of ten could ever compromise Uncharted 3‘s success. Small wonder, then, that Metacritic has become so popular: it separates the critic from the criticism, and exonerates the consumer from evaluating opinions about a game beyond some arbitrary score. The moment readers were no longer willing to financially support their sources of information, giving preference to fast and free information, sites turned to industry relationships for their new business model. Readers no longer “owe” anything to game journalists – but the opposite is also true. If their content betrays the relationship with their advertisers, they risk their existence. And this will continue to happen while their duty remains to their owners.

 

 

The promiscuous relationship between journalists and publishers has gained severe scrutiny over the years. One example was Ubisoft’s horrendously named Driv3r, released in 2005, and largely panned by game sites. Other than being an example of critical voices having almost no penetration in consumer consensus – the combined PS2, Xbox, PC and GBA versions of the game went on to sell over two million units worldwide – it was adorned with controversy when two magazines under Future Publishing gave it a 9/10, a score that gamers began questioning after playing the game. Suspicion of corruption and outside influence began rising, especially when it was found that two employees of Babel Media, a marketing company with ties to Driv3r’s publisher, Atari, had been posting on Future’s forums, trying to undermine criticism of the game. The forum thread was erased some time after (though backups are still available thanks to Stuart Campbell).

More recently, following a less than favorable review of Kane & Lynch in November 2007, Jeff Gerstmann was fired from GameSpot, precisely at a time when Eidos, the game’s publisher, had heavily advertised the game on the site. For a while the entire layout of GameSpot referenced Kane & Lynch, even in pages unrelated to the game. Both the site and its parent company, CNET, dismissed any connection between Gerstmann leaving and his review, but four other editors resigned in protest against what they felt was the site caving in to advertiser pressure. Even if there wasn’t any pressure, the damage had already been done in the public eye.

These examples aren’t meant to suggest widespread corruption in the sector, but to highlight the complicity between journalists and publishers. It’s easy to say that every journalist wants his or her paycheck at the end of the month. I agree. But whatever mutual benefits this relationship provides, they’re growing harder to justify. Are promotional events furthering the process of criticism in reviews? Are announcements of announcements of announcements meaningful reportage that serve the reader? How do consumers tell the difference between honest criticism and rampant advertising? Yet, both gamers and journalists have done nothing but feed the self-perpetuating cycle, and now anything from rumors to sensationalist barbs between studios is not only constantly published, it’s in high demand – even more than reviews. Here’s a speculative exercise. Name one highly popular and successful website that only publishes reviews and rarely bothers with news. Now, the opposite: name one highly popular and successful site that only publishes news and rarely bothers with reviews. I can name VG247, out of similar sites, in the latter case; while I’m not keen on their policy of turning every bread crumb into a news post, they’ve got an audience and it works for them.

In the former case? I’m still thinking.

 

 

This is a challenge for indie studios because by operating outside publishers’ sphere of influence, magazines and sites simply can’t afford to be as committed to them. Independent creators can barely pay for their projects, let alone advertisement space. Designer Brian Green recounts on his blog the experience he had promoting the MMO Meridian 59 in a print magazine:

“(…) I’ve told the story before about how part of our team drove 2 states away to give a demo of our new graphics engine for a special MMO issue of a print magazine. We even bought a high-end laptop to make sure we had something quality to show off the game with. Yet, when the issue came out we got the same tiny blurb everyone else did, no screenshots of our new engine, and the magazine called Meridian 59 a “throwback”. EQ2 got plenty of pre-launch coverage in that magazine, and I’m sure it wasn’t a coincidence that there were about 5 full-page ads for EQ2 in that magazine. (…)”

These situations aren’t exclusive to magazines. Browse any considerably popular videogame site to see their indie coverage. Indie games are defined as “trends” when they’ve been a constant for years; the newest indie releases are usually shoved into review round-ups, given much less space per game than mainstream releases; there are dozens of articles that point readers to a selection of the cheapest indie games currently available, while efforts to announce price cuts on their bigger commercial rivals are strangely fewer. This generates a certain mediatic blackout, thankfully countered by sites exclusively devoted to, or at least regularly showcasing, budding developers and their projects.

But is this an optimal solution? On one hand, the proliferation of sites dedicated to independent games can raise consumer awareness towards less mediated games; plus, a specialized take on videogame news provides less noise to filter, unlike generalist sites. On the other, does it risk becoming an “us vs. them” scenario in the long run? Any effort towards a bigger indie game coverage is applause worthy, but traditional videogame sites are still the entry point for many types of gamers. Indie games are, above all, games; their presence shouldn’t be marginalized nor seen as a lesser alternative, and exclusive sites might contribute to what indie creators fear – exclusion rather than inclusion.

 

 

My intention isn’t to paint a hopeless situation but to point out the kind of battles indie developers usually find themselves against. Not everything is bad news, after all; indie games have received considerable attention over the last years and there’s no sign of that stopping. But for every Minecraft, Super Meat Boy, World of Goo and Braid, there are still many aspiring indie artists and programmers left in the dark. And despite the success of social games and iOS titles, many still see these as little more than time wasters. Is there a way to reverse this?

Maybe. The videogame press still has certain needs, and it shares one of them with indie developers: attention. “All” it takes for an indie dev is to send word of their game – or a copy of the game, or a demo, for that matter – to the right person. Some time ago, Kieron Gillen talked about Introversion, a British studio that sent him a copy of Uplink while he was working in the UK version of PC Gamer. The premise of the game, that of espionage and hacking, immediately convinced him to try it out. Gillen enjoys it, proceeds to talk to people at Edge, PC Format and Gamesmaster, and after a series of positive reviews, word of mouth and a growing fanbase, a downloadable title that probably wouldn’t get noticed is released in retail and profits enough to fund the studio’s development costs for the next four years.

Introversion is a case study for several reasons, but to me the most important one is they cared about one thing that most indie devs don’t – they gave as much emphasis on promoting themselves as they did creating their game. Why aren’t you doing the same, indies?

Obviously, the “right person” depends on your interests. If you’re just making a game for the sake of it, you probably aren’t interested in an audience beyond your immediate circles. Fair enough. But if you’re in it to prove your ideas are commercially successful and want to test your game’s possible audience, you need to reach out. TIGSource, Rock Paper Shotgun and Play This Thing, among others, give extensive coverage to the exploits of bedroom coders and are always eager to promote new talent. But you also need to be aware of your audience: RPS is a very popular but PC-centric site, which means your PSN or XBLA title won’t get mentioned there if it remains a console exclusive. Also factor in the particulars of your project. Let’s say it’s a download only title going for the $15 price tag or less. Well, you’re in luck – that’s precisely what the recently inaugurated Hookshot Inc. aims to focus on. Consider looking for sites focused on genres as well: RPGWatch will look at your role-playing game regardless if it’s called Skyrim or Age of Decadence. And of course, there’s always IndieGames.com. And whether you’re going for print or online media, rest assured that coverage will get easier once it starts. Journalists know each other, and when they don’t, they at least know their competitors. If your game is featured in a magazine or a site, attention will come – because others will want to look at your game to see why it was worthy of attention in the first place.

For all the benefits of Twitter and Facebook, your strongest social asset is your community. Seth Godin would call it “unite a tribe”, though I’ll add the recommendation that you should also lead it into battle (chanting Patapon is optional). A development website or blog are obvious ways to start, with social networks a logical next step. But trailers, podcasts and screenshots are no less important – even for unreleased games. Fez is an indie game that’s been in development for five years but continuous interaction with fans and trailers that highlighted the core gameplay, along with improvements to the game engine, went a long way to maintaining curiosity about Phil Fish’s game.

 

 

But disseminating information isn’t about waiting for things to happen, it’s also about making them happen. If you want press coverage, take the initiative of contacting magazines or sites. Your first email to either should avoid looking like a typical press release. Don’t bother with terms like “cutting edge” – you’re supposed to be talking about games, not fax paper. Focus on the strengths of your game. If it sports a concept never seen before in videogames – a very rare thing, mind you – extol those virtues. If it uses traditional play mechanics with a novel twist, don’t be shy about making comparisons. “All the action of Gears of War with the ovine satisfaction of Sheep!”. If you can’t quite describe it, a useful method is to have a select number of friends play your game, taking notes of what they think about it. Sending an announcement email with a link to a video where gameplay speaks for itself is also encouraged. There’s a chance you won’t be replied to, at least initially. Assume your email might have slipped through the cracks, then proceed to improve your press materials. If you don’t get replies after a couple of attempts, move on to the next site or magazine. Be persistent but not annoying. News aggregators are slightly different, in the sense that the entry barrier is friendlier but visibility is trickier. Blue’s News and GamesPress will publish just about anything sent their way but info about your game will compete against a constant stream of similar news.

If you’re not sure your game is capable of gaining press attention, at least initially, other ways to handle self-promotion and exposition are to be active within your field. Follow and interact with other devs to find out how they’ve been handling their projects, their marketing, their fan bases. But also keep an eye on game conventions, events and competitions such as the Independent Games Festival and the Global Game Jam. The advantages of these and similar portals are obvious: they’re good and free marketing tools, you can keep up-to-date with the indie scene and also test your own game against other dev projects. Dream.Build.Play is another example, and in 2012 they’ve expanded their competition to include Windows Phone titles. Lastly, there’s also Ludum Dare. Three friends of mine entered the competition with Alone I Art, and their post-mortem has some insights about their game’s development cycle and self-marketing:

 

“We wanted our game to be different. For that, we decided to keep an eye on the other participants. We didn’t want to steal other’s ideas, we wanted to avoid them, so we set up our Twitter clients to follow #LD hashtags. Eventually we started talking with other ludum darers, giving support and sharing links.

This lead to mutual interest and hype between projects. We can’t be certain of this, but hopefully they remembered to rate our entry as we did theirs.

Our updates at the Ludum Dare blog were also well spaced between to avoid spamming people and getting pushed by other posts. The Tumblr blog we made last time wasn’t forgotten, and we tried to use Facebook and Twitter in a controlled manner. (…)”

 

Otherwise, be inventive. Instead of global, think smaller. International traveling exhibits, like Videotopia and Game On, give an historical view of videogames from the early arcade days to the present day. The current economic climate isn’t inviting, true enough, but a similar traveling exhibit of your game, or of several games by a group of different devs, shouldn’t be too expensive to arrange and maintain if kept at a more local level. In the past, a good promotional venue were small computer stores, now considerably less in number thanks to larger brand outlets. Some still persevere, though, and why not negotiate some manner of distribution with them? Akalabeth, Richard Garriott’s first game before he began working on the Ultima series, was initially distributed in Ziploc bags in a computer store before he got a publishing deal. Now the man is doing space tourism. Which is to say, you won’t be riding rockets around Venus anytime soon, but it’s an example of small scale entrepreneurship that can pay off in the short and long term.

 

This isn’t meant to be a definite guide to indie self-marketing or a manifesto against game journalism. But in a medium where its main cultural guardians are more concerned with who signs their paychecks then those who read their content, I guess we could use a little bit of both.

 

Relevant reading:

Stuart Campbell: “How 9/11 Killed Videogames Journalism”
Kieron Gillen: “How To Use And Abuse The Gaming Press And How The Gaming Press Wants To Use and Abuse You”
Sell More Games: “Interview with Cliff Harris (cliffski) from Positech Games”
GameJournos: Not safe for work and seemingly now closed, but a guide through the excesses of game news