Game Design, Programming and running a one-man games business…

Mp3 vs CD’s

Posted on January 4, 2011

Ok, so we all know that I am older than Elrond*, so I’m more likely to be ‘un-cool’ and buy stuff on an older format anyway, but having just bought a CD, I think my reasoning is pretty sound.

First, I have a partner with a car that has no mp3 player, so having a CD means I can play it in her car.

Secondly, I still have 2 CD players in the house. (maybe 3, now I think about it), and this way I can play the music in those, as well as on my PC.

Thirdly, I can always rip the CD to mp3 format anyway, and get all the benefits of mp3 playback.

Fouthly, I’m an ex-muso-snob with good hearing, and CD’s sound better than most mp3s.

These are pretty specific to the CD vs MP3 format, but one of the other reasons was more applicable to buying anything online, and even applicable to indie gaming.

Basically, I heard some music on a TV ad or show (can’t even remember) and it was by a guy who I heard sing news year eve on TV, and pushed me over the edge into thinking “yup, I’l; get that album”, While I thought this, I had a laptop, and a cat sat on my legs, preventing movement. The laptop didn’t have itunes installed, and frankly installing itunes annoys the fuck out of me.

Itunes wants to be in charge of me. I am the humble customer, and it knows best. It will insist on running all the time, as a windows service, whether I like it or not. It thinks it’s desire to run 24/7 is more important than my desire to have my machine setup slimmed down and reliable. Fuck that.
So I don’t have itunes on this PC. I do, however have a web browser, so I went to amazon and ordered the CD. It was easy, done in 2 clicks, and I didn’t have to install any clients, or run any software in order to get what I paid for.

In a sense, I just did the music equivalent of buying a PC game direct and getting a direct .exe link in return. It was way less hassle, and very satisfying, and also very encouraging, because obviously, this is what I do with Positech, as opposed to inflicting a ‘client’ on people, and it’s good to see that it has bonuses for the buyer.

Plus it was only £2 :D

*41

Ecommerce tracking. Oh shoot me now…

Posted on January 2, 2011

One of the really boring bits of my job which doesn’t involve explosions (all the best bits involve explosions), is the tedious process of working out which people who saw an advert or website coverage bought a game. Big companies have an army of calculator-brained accountant/web developer geek hybrids to worry about this nonsense, while the game designers do more important stuff like eat canapes and quaff champagne. In my case, I have to do it.

Bah.

(The sales tracking, not the quaffing)

Double Bah.

People who know me well, will realise that peversely, I love this sort of stuff. However, getting it working properly is a nightmare. I use google as my analytics provider, and BMT Micro as my payment company. I’ve been spending a lot of time trying to get it all to work properly. In theory this is what happens:

  • Visitor comes to the positech site from a google advert, google analytics drops a cookie on their PC.
  • Visitor buys the game(yay!) and is redirected to the BMTMicro site.
  • Javascript on BMTs site notifies google all of the data about the transaction, and who made it
  • Analytics ties this together and lets me congratulate myself on a l33t advert.

In practice, this is what currently happens:

  • Visitor comes to the positech site from a google advert, google analytics drops a cookie on their PC.
  • Visitor buys the game(yay!) and is redirected to the BMTMicro site.
  • Javascript on BMTs site treats all transactions as UK Pounds, regardless of currency. Lets hope nobody in zimbabwe buys the game or the stats are useless,
  • Analytics denies all knowledge of the fact that it’s the same visitor, convinced that everyone who buys the game must have appeared magically on BMTs website by beaming there direct from Tatooine.

I may have fixed this, by completely re-doing all of the javascript for the analytics on all the pages on the site I’m tracking, but it will take a few days for me to see if that’s really the case. To add confusion, I don’t have access to the code on the actual post-buy page, because that’s a secure page hosted by BMTMicro, so debugging this takes longer than usual. Google have written dozens of articles on how it works, almost all of which is contradictory. Thanks guys!

To really hammer home how clueless I am at that, I have picked up a stalker.

My stalker is an advert for an iiyama monitor that I looked at once, which follows me everywhere. It’s the digital equivilant of a girl you smiled at in a bar once who then follows you everywhere for the next 30 days. Creepy, and annoying, but more importantly, it’s evidence that everyone else has their customer tracking down to a fine art, and I’m still acting like some newcomer blundering about in clown shoes wondering who buys his games.

Bah.

G4? FOUR? Eh?

Posted on January 1, 2011

I keep blathering on about G4, as my next game. It’s the working title, obviously. I have a title in mind, but I’m not announcing anything until I am 100% sure this is the design that I’m going with. I thought I might as well explain why I’m calling it G4, when obviously I’ve made loads of games, not just three.

The thing is, a lot of the games I’ve made have been pretty amateurish hobby efforts, and have been about me learning to program, not how to design games. You can have the best game idea in the universe, but if you try and make it your first game, you are likely to ruin it through inexperience. I reckon it takes four or five games before you finally find your feet and can do a decent game idea justice.

I know people might think that if they do a course in games programming, or get a great degree, or go to a few game jams, or read a lot of books, that this counts for the first four or five games. It does not.

The experience you need, is the complete full game lifecycle. The picking of an idea, and a name, choosing the technology and coding the engine, the play balancing, artwork, marketing, selling, promotion, and the tech support.

Anyway…

I’ve only really made three really good games. Three games where I did justice to the idea. Some of the other games are good *ideas* but the presentation and implementation is lacking.

Those 3 games are:

Kudos 2

Democracy 2

Gratuitous Space Battles

I’m determined that G4 earns a place in the list.

Conjured enthusiasm

Posted on December 30, 2010

I’m a bit of a fan of Neuro Linguistic Programming. One of the ideas within NLP is you can effectively ‘reverse’ the way behavior and emotions work. Generally, you think that if you are sad, you look sad, you slouch, you look down, you speak low and slowly, your face has certain expressions, etc.

NLP suggests you can reverse that process. You can effectively ‘act’ happy / enthusiastic / confident and so on, and by adopting the posture / voice, actions of someone who feels that way, you actually *do* feel like that, genuinely as a result. I am 100% convinced this can work. I’ve used in hundreds of times, probably thousands. I can assert to the world that I am motivated and energized, and magically it works. If you get the hang of it, it’s an amazing technique.

It’s also something you really need when you start work on a new game, which is what I’ve been doing lately. It’s very easy to look at a few blobs on a screen, with missing text, missing functionality and tell yourself that this game will suck, and you should abandon it. It really doesn’t help if your last game looked nice and shiny, and I think mine did :D.

Apart from weird freaky new-age NLP nonsense, I also find that explaining the game to someone else works wonders. I strongly recommend drawing a diagram on a big chalkboard in your office, and waving your arms about a lot whilst pointing at squiggles and saying how awesome it will be.

The plan is to keep that sort of thing going until you have enough of a game to *really* know if it is going to work or not. My usual strike rate is one in three, meaning there is a 66% chance o me dumping this idea for another one before it goes into full production with artwork etc. I do have an especially good feeling about this one though.

How playing computer games makes you smarter

Posted on December 26, 2010

Occasionally I have the pleasure of spending time with people who are not internet-savvy. People who are not tech-savvy. People who are certainly not geeks. I think I’ve spotted a symptom of non-gameness…

Those people, when presented with information they do not immediately have, for example ‘how to turn this on’ or ‘how do you change the channel on this?’ or similar, will, if at all possible, ask the nearest ‘tech savvy’ person. They will not, under any circumstances, unless the situation is desperate, try to solve the mystery themselves. They definitely will not press a button to see what happens, or go with a hunch.

In short, they are wary of experimenting and exploring.

Gamers, I suspect are not like this. Games are safe environments in which you can explore, investigate, and try out new ideas. With console games, it’s even more true. You can’t accidentally format your console by pressing wrong buttons. You can blindly press things and see what they do. Often, you will guess correctly, and get a nice dose of dopamine for doing so. Hurrah, you learn to associate experimentation with success, and reward.

Compare that with earlier, passive forms of entertainment, such as books, movies and the theater, where there is nothing expected from the audience. They are certainly not encouraged to participate. In fact, any sort of noise from a theater audience can result in anger. Non tech-savvy friends often express barely contained fear that they might press the wrong button and a gadget may explode, possible resulting in the death of millions. Maybe that’s also a generational thing. Health and safety obsessions mean me live in a world that practically has corks on forks. It was not always so.

I think these different approaches lead to different mindsets. The passive entertainment form is great for factory workers, the military, or any career where you are supposed to follow orders, and not step out of line. The interactive form is far better for careers that involve experimentation, creativity, critical thinking, design and originality. As technology marches on, less and less people will be doing simple, assembly line jobs. If your kids are 14 today, they are much more likely to have creative and expressive jobs than people from 50 years ago.

In summary, encourage your kids to play computer games. It’s good for them :D