Sign in to follow this  
Rob Zacny

Episode 276: Functional Cogs Only

Recommended Posts

The crew from Gaslamp Games talks to Rob and Troy about their upcoming (but available in early access) simulation game, Clockwork Empires. Daniel Jacobsen, Nicholas Vining, and David Baumgart answer questions about cults, cannibalism, fish people, and the fire alarm. I took out the fire alarm bit, though. Bad radio.

 

Listen here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fire alarm went off in their building while the show was recording. That's really all there was to it. Funny to me when I cut it out, but probably not funny to anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fire alarm went off in their building while the show was recording. That's really all there was to it. Funny to me when I cut it out, but probably not funny to anyone else.

 

Ah, ok.  The initial description made it sound like someone got tongue tied and there was a crash of awkward pauses or something.

 

I played the pitch movie of Clockwork Empires to my wife, and her reaction was: "Does the game have the narrator?  If the game has the narrator, you should get it.".

 

I'm not sure what to make of the game, myself.  It reminds me a little of Evil Genius, (presumably) without the oddly minimalist off-map mission board, and hopefully without some of the more glaring flaws.  The cults and other weird fiction elements sound like they'll bring a lot to the game once they're fully realized.

 

Is there nothing beyond building the colony, though?  It seems like if you have a weird fiction setting, especially one meshed with a steampunk setting where one might unironically refer to a colleague as a "Gentleman Scientist" or "Lady Engineer", there ought to be some sort of investigation going on.  Maybe this is me vaguely wishing the game was more like XCom Chthulu: The Colony or wanting to build a steampunk Ordo Xenos chapel, but part of the core of weird fiction is "The Written Account from the Doomed Investigator".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd totally play "XCom Chthulu: The Colony".

Tangent: I went on a Xenonauts kick lately; the X-COM strategic model really does provoke a lot of very cool ideas for research via dissection / plundering of alien artifacts to kick off production of, ah, non-human assets. It seems like it should be fairly easy to do, famous last words. That said, in order to be responsible: we want to do stuff with research but we don't want to talk much about it ahead of time. First we build the base game, then we add more exotic sprinkles on top.

 

 

 

(And oh, man, a narrator would indeed be brilliant. Didn't Dungeonkeeper do this back in the day? Though unfortunately it would take a lot of well-planned voicework - which I learned how to direct for the first time with that "Bureaucrat's Guide" trailer! - so yes, that'd be a rather lot of work I'm sorry to say. I will say that early on we did speculate wildly on what it would cost to get Christopher Lee to narrate just ten lines for us for 'act transitions'. "A lot", probably.)

 

`

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd totally play "XCom Chthulu: The Colony".

Tangent: I went on a Xenonauts kick lately; the X-COM strategic model really does provoke a lot of very cool ideas for research via dissection / plundering of alien artifacts to kick off production of, ah, non-human assets. It seems like it should be fairly easy to do, famous last words. That said, in order to be responsible: we want to do stuff with research but we don't want to talk much about it ahead of time. First we build the base game, then we add more exotic sprinkles on top.

 

That's fair.  I've always liked the XCom organization building/research model, and I'd love to see it applied in other areas; while it works just fine as the strategic layer to a tactical combat game, there's nothing inherent about that connection.  It could work just as well for a city builder.

 

(And oh, man, a narrator would indeed be brilliant. Didn't Dungeonkeeper do this back in the day? Though unfortunately it would take a lot of well-planned voicework - which I learned how to direct for the first time with that "Bureaucrat's Guide" trailer! - so yes, that'd be a rather lot of work I'm sorry to say. I will say that early on we did speculate wildly on what it would cost to get Christopher Lee to narrate just ten lines for us for 'act transitions'. "A lot", probably.)

 

Bastion is usually the example people point to for narration. It does take a lot of work, and it vastly multiplies the work to be done if you internationalize. Personally, I've fought tooth and nail to keep voice acting out of most projects I've been on; unless you're backed by a big publisher with deep pockets, it (IMO) sucks up too much time and money for the resulting payoff.

 

The other problem with narration is that you're going to hear the same quotes an awful lot.  There's only so many ways the narrator can tell you that you've run out of food.  Probably the only way to make it work sanely would be to only have narration at key points; maybe have some events take place with a Pathe News frame around them, running 50% faster in sepia, with the narrator saying "New Threat from The Deep!  Our brave boys hold the line as...".  I wouldn't pull that one out more than a few times per game (first encounters, disasters, major accomplishments).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the music in the opening from Clockwork Empire? It isn't in the trailer. Maybe it's obvious, and I'm just blanking.

 

 

It was provided by Gaslamp, and I believe it will be the Intro theme in the game. (If the file name is any indication.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After listening to the podcast I got very interested in the game and went on a little google hunt to see more of the game. I'd probably have bought it. Unfortunately there are a few things that were very offputting.

 

First of all: $30 for an early access title is insane. That's the price for a full release, not for an incomplete product of uncertain quality. Second: there is no demo. I understand that a demo is difficult to do for a game in active development, but I still need to get a feel for the game, and a youtube video doesn't cut it. And lastly, unless I looked in the wrong place, I haven't found a roadmap with long-term and medium-term development goals.

 

I'll be keeping an eye on Clockwork, but I'm not going to buy it, especially not this far from whatever you consider 1.0. The price, combined with the other unknowns, makes me very very hesitant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Monarchy Yeah, your hesitation is understandable; there have been a lot of high-profile project implosions lately. Holding off is a good idea until the game can prove itself to be at a place where you're comfortable.

 

Price is a weird problem. Some devs have gone higher as a sort of "special backer" thing like GalCiv2, Planetary Annihilation, etc, many go lower. We didn't want to do some special elite thing and we didn't want people to buy the game before they would want to actually play the thing just because it would be cheaper, so we said, okay, just make it the final price. Is this a good strategy? I'm not sure, we don't have enough data. Maybe we will know after launch and after comparing notes with other developers.

 

BTW our long "Development Progress" page is here: http://clockworkempires.com/development.html ; We should probably do a better job of featuring it prominently everywhere possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are multiple ways of looking at early access:

  • "get it while it's hot" (in which case their should be a significant discount to the final price)
  • "have a chance to play it early and give feedback", in which case you're not so much trying to raise early capital and the price should be the same as the final price
  • "be a patron", in which case people are paying *more* than the final price for the privilege of helping the game become a become a reality.

All three are reasonable approaches, but one has to be prepared for the fact that a moderate number of people looking at early access cannot imagine that there's any other reason for early access except the "get it while it's hot" strategy and will be somewhat put out that you aren't discounting.

 

It's unfortunate (how dare you not tailor your marketing to me!), but it is a reality and needs to be taken into account when developing one's marketing/pricing strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a fourth way people look at early access:

 

- That looks cool and I'd like it to happen, but it may never come together; should I gamble on it?

 

I think that's what bit the folks doing Spacebase DF-9, for instance; I know several people (myself included) who looked at it, and thought "Hey, that looks kind of neat... but it's $30, seems only barely functional, and if they don't get critical mass I'd wind up with the skeleton of a promising concept.  Maybe I'll wait...".  If everyone winds up waiting, the game tanks.

 

I'd own DF-9 now if it had been $10.  Quite possibly Clockwork Empires, too.  At $30, when the developer can just up sticks and declare the game done at any time if it isn't generating the anticipated revenue, I wind up keeping my powder dry.

 

Personally, I lean towards catering to everyone.  You want to appeal to the "FIRST!" crowd, you want the feedback, you want the people who will come in early for a discount, and you want the patrons.  So, I think what you do is:

 

- start at $10, raise the price slowly as you add features, go to your release price when you hit 1.0

 

- offer low-cost perks to people who test, like letting them name something -- it needs to be something that costs no money, doesn't need to be shipped, and costs little development time; you don't want the tail wagging the dog.

 

- offer a patron's pack for more ($50?) that gives them more (six?) copies of the game (they get a per-copy discount, but you just moved six copies...), and give them some similar low development cost perk -- maybe they get a special "philanthropist" supervisor?

 

- you've already shipped at $30, so give something low-cost but nice (maybe a particularly effective soldier or worker?  Maybe two extra copies to share?) to the people who've already bought in so they don't feel screwed when the price drops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hexgrid, I'd classify the fourth way as the "get it while it's hot".  The purpose in both cases is primarily to raise capital and you have to offer a discount in order to mitigate risk. 

 

One danger is that if you are operating in a niche (i.e. limited) market, you may indeed substantially fulfil that market at the discounted rate, reducing over-all revenue.  Truthfully, for something as odd as Clockwork Empire, that might be my concern.  (One can dream big, but what's the 90th percentile sales for a game like that?)

 

Honestly, if they're not hurting for cash, I'd have taken their route.  You want some -limited- sales to get a little more feedback, but only from those who are *truly* keen about the idea (and are likely to play an incomplete game).  It keeps the game in the news, which is important, and it avoids the problem of people giving up on the game if they missed the discount window because the lower price has decreased the anchor price for the game.

 

(Using pre-sales to explore market acceptance seems a pretty shoddy thing to do, as that implies cancellation if it's not pre-selling well.  I would doubt any reputable indy designer would operate that way.)

 

[Edited to add that last line]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hexgrid, I'd classify the fourth way as the "get it while it's hot".  The purpose in both cases is primarily to raise capital and you have to offer a discount in order to mitigate risk.

 

Somewhat; I'm differentiating here between the "If I get it now, it's cheap!" crowd, and the "Must have now!" crowd.  Not all of the latter crowd is interested in giving feedback, and not all of the former understand the implications of early access.

 

One danger is that if you are operating in a niche (i.e. limited) market, you may indeed substantially fulfil that market at the discounted rate, reducing over-all revenue.  Truthfully, for something as odd as Clockwork Empire, that might be my concern.  (One can dream big, but what's the 90th percentile sales for a game like that?)

 

I'm with the Frozen Synapse guys here; indie games never reach their market potential (the occasional Minecraft excepted...), so do everything you can to spread the game around.  FS gave a free second copy with every purchase, and it seemed to work out very well for them, for example.

 

Honestly, if they're not hurting for cash, I'd have taken their route.  You want some -limited- sales to get a little more feedback, but only from those who are *truly* keen about the idea (and are likely to play an incomplete game).  It keeps the game in the news, which is important, and it avoids the problem of people giving up on the game if they missed the discount window because the lower price has decreased the anchor price for the game.

 

I'm pretty sure almost any developer using early access is not as solvent as they'd like to be.  Most of us would like to disappear into our offices, craft our perfect works, and loose them on the unsuspecting world.  Doing the part-time carnival barker routine diverts time and effort from development.  When it's a necessary evil you do it, but I'd bet even Tim Schafer (who's pretty damn good at it...) would rather just make his games rather than be out hawking for funding throughout the process.

 

You can tell the developer's motivation from the state of the game.  If the game is feature complete and (more or less) release quality but needs tuning or balancing, the devs will call it "beta" and do a limited early release, probably with a signup list.  If it's not feature complete and it's still slightly (or very!) buggy, the devs will call it "early access", and they're doing it to keep the lights on, or at least to push out the date when their burn rate catches up to their bank balance.

 

(Using pre-sales to explore market acceptance seems a pretty shoddy thing to do, as that implies cancellation if it's not pre-selling well.  I would doubt any reputable indy designer would operate that way.)

 

I don't have a problem with using pre-sales to explore market acceptance IF two criteria are met:

 

- the developer needs to be very up-front about it

 

- if they pull the plug, you need to be left with something of worth

 

The "something of worth" could be a working game that doesn't have all the features they were hoping for, as long as it's still fun; that was a risk you signed up for when you bought in, as long as the developer made it properly clear.  "Something of worth" could also be a discount on one of their other titles, or premium access to whatever they tackle next.

 

The other way pre-sales can be used ethically to explore market acceptance is the Kickstarter model, if used as it was originally intended.  You establish what you actually need for the project, ask for that much, and if you don't get it you refund everyone's pledge and everyone moves on.

 

The problem, of course, is that many video game projects on Kickstarter have treated it as "first round seed funding" rather than "here's my budget".  Or have fallen victim to the auction mentality and expanded the scope of their project in response to funding, such that the original careful plan is replaced with an adrenaline and cash fueled fantasy plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this