So I think I will go ahead with the parkour action game and make it for mobile. I think there is too much competition on desktop with AAA studios, but I feel I could compete better on mobile. I'm trying to go for realistic graphics, sort of like a Mirror's Edge thing. It will be based in Eastern Europe (just went there last week) and be a little rough with graffiti and stuff. This is the concept piece I put, will need to work more on the style with my own artwork.

I've been playing this game Dead Trigger 2 on my new tablet, and I like the format of the game. Short levels, limited controls (the gun shoots automatically) and similar kind of graphics (maybe a little better as this game is a few years old).

Still have 2 months left of school, but I want to make this a shorter project. Like 8 - 16 months maximum. Would also be nice to be a Godot 4.0 launch title. I plan to make the game free, but more of the shareware model like the original DOOM. So there may be like 12 levels, you can play the first 4 for free, and then either grind to unlock the others or pay a small fee. Still have some time to figure out the specifics, but I think I have a general idea of what I want.

Also, not sure if many of you were around, this was the demo I put together 2 years ago when I first started using Godot. The video is from the desktop, but it worked on mobile with touch controls, so I have some stuff figured out already. Probably start from scratch, though, as I've learned quite a lot about Godot in 2 years.

I disagree completely, I don't think you should shy away from a desktop parkour game at all, their might be a lot of 'competition' in games for the parkour genre etc. but most of it is cancer that's to say nothing of the shameless asset flips that are lurking about, internal or otherwise. To give you an example Dying Light 2 is game I was quite looking forward to because even I thought "Oh, open world zombie sandbox style parkour game where you can kick zombies off rooftops, that sounds like fun".

They managed to butcher even a basic concept like that in terms of gameplay, sure, the world 'looked' amazing but the gameplay was nonsense. I bought the game and everything but I just couldn't bring myself to play it anymore up to a certain point, the parkour itself wasn't terrible but it was a typical ubisoft affair of jump along the carefully choregraphed paths when you were on the main story. Even the open world areas just felt very tightly controlled. What really got to me though was the bullet sponge enemies and possibly one of the most egregious things they put in possibly to hit their 80+ hour gameplay time claim is they even made the most basic functions into horrible QTE events where you had to button mash just to turn a stupid wheel. The game wasn't challenging, it was cheap in their difficulty and scenario design and most of what they did revolved around QTE and making generic enemies but especially bosses into bullet sponges with a lot of health or in the case of Dying Light 2 melee sponges.

Don't sell yourself short as an indie developer because I've been thinking about this a lot as well. Yes they have an amazing graphics engine and sometimes okay physics, but AAA studios have been rapidly going downhill lately in terms of quality. More often than not they're just doing glorified clones of previous games and giving it all a new coat of paint. Under the hood though it's rubbish or you can literally get the same game for free on epic games now and it's just the previous title they were selling £40+ when it first released.

Don't be fooled by the smoke and mirrors of the big studio marketing. What's very interesting though is even in the steam reviews I've noticed that other people have been noticing even for games like Total War Warhammer series that the big studios have started to completely ignore 'Actual gamers' ( And I do think there's a difference ) and targeting normies which is why they focus so much on big flashy graphics rather than any gameplay of substance or a game that even works properly. The way big studios are doing this, it doesn't matter then if gamers who realistically are in the minority complain, they can just keep raking it in because they'll be getting sales from people who don't know any better.

I'm having a rant I know, but the point is I don't think even a lot of people in indie circles necessarily see what's going on with these studios. I wouldn't even call what they make games anymore they're often either glorified interactive movies ( Which is great if you don't know how to code and just want to impress normies/investors ) or level editors.

Yeah, good point. I actually liked Dying Light 2, even though it wasn't as good as the first one. I have liked 60 hours in the game, and it got pretty interesting at the end when you unlock all the moves. In any case, I thought Mirror's Edge 1 had really good design and controls, a little more free than the sequel. I honestly would prefer a PC game, since I know more about the market and I could do better gameplay with a controller. It's just that it seems a lot of PC gamers look for this 80 hour experiences, and no way I can make that. The game will likely be around 6 hours, if I'm lucky, since I'm working alone. So releasing on mobile I thought would help, because it would be high end for mobile and people don't necessarily expect 80 hour experience. It might also work better as a free game, cause I want to get the maximum downloads over just charging money (though I want to make some money too). I guess I could do both, maybe release on PC first and make a cut down mobile version later. I know most of the parkour games are crappy, aside from a few, basically Mirror's Edge and Dying Light. There are some abstract art games that use parkour, but that's not what I'm going for. Severed Steel was also great, and probably closer to what I will do in scope as an indie. So I still have time to figure this out, as I have a lot of design and art tasks to do before I get to figuring out the marketing aspect. Thanks for your support.

    I think limiting scope at least initially to just the one platform is a good idea. Sets yourself up to success, or at least lowers the barrier for initial release success. Ports can always be made if it proves successful enough. And mobile definitely has that potential. I think genshin is a good example of that, though obviously the difference there is that it has a big studio behind it.

    cybereality It's definitely good to be realistic, I think I'm in that boat too a bit with these templates I'm potentially looking to release for Godot, it's a major problem for indie developers even getting people to download your stuff never mind buy it.

      Megalomaniak has a point there. Limiting yourself to one platform can be a good idea. Mobile sounds like a good idea for a game that will have a few free episodes, and then the player can unlock the rest. Plus it may be good to have those limits in hardware, since more can be done in a short amount of time with limited hardware specs.

      Thanks @Ertain . That was the idea. With mobile I can target lower spec graphics, that will be easier to make, and I think the shareware model will do better on mobile. Plus, like I said, the game will only be a few hours long, and I think I will get bad reviews for a short PC game, while on mobile that would be expected (outside of RPGs or online games). I'd prefer to have the best game on mobile, versus an average game on PC, that people may not notice. But I can always port later, or do an HD remaster for PC or something, that would not be difficult.

      a month later

      • [deleted]

      • Post #8
      • Edited

      If it's side scrolling it could help with judging distances between obstacles. I may be thinking of it all wrong though.

      I'm a skateboarder and heavily into street sports, so I'm already a customer based on your former work too.

      subbed, followed, addicted

      EDIT: or if you think about it, it could be like the Trials series but with multiple fixed camera angles: side, top, i dunno.

      I wanted to do first person similar to Mirror's Edge and Dying Light.

        • [deleted]

        • Post #10
        • Edited

        cybereality Gotcha.
        There's this thing on running on an even earlier Godot 4 version: Wander

          Wow, that looks amazing. Haven't seen that before.

          @cybereality as a former video game store manager of some-odd years, you'd be surprised how much people (still) like simpler games. I've met plenty who could care less for a Skyrim, Souls or Zelda game no matter how enthusiastic I am for it. Do hardcore gamers buy long, (sometimes) bloated 80-hour plus experiences? Of course. But they are not the "whole" gaming market. Most people I see playing mobile are playing Apple Arcade stuff or microtransaction-based hellscapes. Masahiro Sakurai says the more "game essence" a game has (the more it caters to gamers), the less accessible it ends up being. I would consider at least releasing on PC as well. As someone earlier said, AAA studios put out plenty of crap. At absolute worst, you have a great portfolio piece to show off later.

          Also, I like the world style you're going for - it's different and it's dirty and i dig it.

          Yeah, I'm leaning toward desktop PC right now. Mostly cause I want to use Godot 4.0 and it's pretty solid for desktop currently and not as mature for mobile. I do want to do some mobile stuff later, maybe once Godot 4.1 comes out and it's production ready. I could always to a lite version of the game with the same assets or lower quality later for mobile and this would be easier than porting a mobile game to PC.

          Lethn summarize it all in his/her first post, games has become more a visual experience than actual game with challenge and stuff, I wonder how they dare to sell their crap at the price (like EA NFS stupid racing games, Code Masters which made worth games now than in the 80s, list is very long).

          Competitions would be seen as a blessing more than a curse, as what they do, don't do, the choices they made, gamers' reviews, what they want, don't want, they like and don't like, just could help you in your design choices.
          And as you're alone, if you're not good in 3D arts, you still could made levels like the prototype and make kind of Metal Gear Solid (PSX game) VR misssions (which was such a great success they release extra levels), this could be the free levels. Payments can be justified to get enough funds to pay for one or more 3D artist to make better levels for instance.

          Finally, the worth things I experience in 3D games is the lack of sense, I mean we don't "feel" anything and there is no "substance" except collisions detection between player and objects/scenery. But Parkour and all those physical ninja like sports rely a lot on our own perception of the surroundings with all our body (our weight on one foot when jumping, the little slip of the shoe, the loss of balance then the need to do something to avoid falling down... all that kind of thing + more or less damaging injuries in some cases. If you can find something to make the character feel all those things, you may be far over competitors.

          Games are all about design mostly but this big part has been left over by those AAA over funded companies, leaving the true root of video games in the void. IMHO, I like more a "basic" game like Putrid Shot Ultra or Nuclear Throne, than a 60 $ or more recent game I cannot play without spending thousands dollars on hardware. For instance all GTA/Far Cry are all the same at the end, just a bit more each time, full price each time. That's a shame. (FC3 & FC4 have even the exact same starting story ! What a hard work they've done there.)

          Good luck with your project.

          Thanks. I did want to weave in some story elements, mostly just like text messages or video clips on a phone. My idea is that you would be running drugs and guns and other illegal stuff, and that you could double or triple cross people. Like lets say one of the runs is a briefcase of drugs. Halfway through the mission, a cop would call. Say he had information on you, but he would "forget" about it if you did him a favor. He'd ask you to plant a tracking device in the briefcase. If you declined, your wanted meter would go up. If you accept, the wanted meter goes down (alliance with the cops goes up) and you'd have to pickup the tracker, and also purchase a lock-pick level 3 or whatever. Then plant the device and finish the mission. However, there would be a slight percentage chance that the drug dealer notices the device, and then tries to kill you, or your alliance with that gang goes down. Or you could tell the dealer, have him pay extra for the information and switch the tracker to a fake briefcase, in which case there is a small chance the cops find out. Sort of stuff like this, I think would be really interesting. It was sort of like this in the Shadowrun pen and paper game and also the Genesis game, and I think these sort of dynamics are kind of lost in modern games.

            cybereality I did want to weave in some story elements, mostly just like text messages or video clips on a phone. My idea is that you would be running drugs and guns and other illegal stuff, and that you could double or triple cross people.

            It's a very ramified and complicated story. There are a lot of twists and turns, and you have to work them all out carefully. It's hard work.

              I like the idea of double cross people, like a visual novel where you can choose your own path. But Tomcat is right, there are extra scenes to make for doublecross already so I think Triplecross might be too much to do (for one person).