So, you want to build a game, but all of that coding and leg work sounds too much like… well… work. Isn’t there another option?

The answer is a qualified “Yes.”

You’ve heard of this thing called “open source” which many penny-pinchers translate as free. While this is not the place for a deep discussion on what open source is or is not, one thing that must be remembered is that when you work with open source, you should honor the ideals of the original programmers.

Please either release your revisions with a similar license (whether or not you can release it with a different license is a question for a lawyer) and/or make significant contributions to the community whose work you are building upon.  A corporation/business taking open source code and repackaging it as their own is the antithesis of the open source movement (and possibly illegal). These are people, honor their contribution.

That being said, building on an open source game can keep you from reinventing the wheel. Even so, there’s still a lot of work to be done.

The greatest failing I have found in most open source programs is usability. Most of the time, programmers will program for programmers and will focus on functionality rather than usability.

This is great in that you can find a program like Gimp that has 90% (or more) of the functionality of Photoshop without the thousand dollar price tag. The down-side is that the interface isn’t very intuitive and can be really hard to use (particularly for someone who has no graphics editing experience).

Most of the open source games that I downloaded and played while researching this blog had great graphics and horrible gameplay and/or a poor user experience.

A Note About Me: The following reviews/thoughts will be tainted by three factors (at least).

1. I have a Mac so I only looked at games that would work on Mac (not all that rare considering it’s usually easier to port a Linux-based game to OSX than to Windows).
2. I have a fundamental belief that I, as a player, should not have to work to play a game. I can work while playing a game, but not in order to actually play.
3. I only have seven fingers. (This sounds like a joke but it’s true. I only bring it up because it affects my ability to hit certain key combinations. And, just because you’re wondering, the story involves a bar fight, a ninja, and an ancient prophecy).

N.B. I found all of these games using Wikipedia’s list of open source games.

Super Tux Kart: This Mario Kart style game was by far the best game I downloaded and the one that I often decided needed more “research.” I wasn’t a huge fan of the left-handed controls, but that’s probably more my lack of fingers than a fault of the game. Graphics –  were on the whole -pretty good although many of the tracks are textured with repeated and low-quality patterns.

Nexuiz: This multiplayer first-person shooter had some of the best graphics, but I’ve never felt more “pwned” than by the “easy” bots who riddled my character with bullets and various projectiles during the training level. I don’t tend to be a fps man, but I’ve held my own on Halo and its first sequel (no, not on Legendary). This felt overly hard to me, but I’m not 13 anymore with endless time to learn how to misspell “owned.” The controls were less than responsive and were difficult to use (especially for me).

Project: Starfighter This 2D shoot ‘em up had pretty good graphics, and an in-depth story.  But, the way they forced you to watch slow animations made me hate the game before I even played it. Gameplay was ok, but difficulty in precisely navigating the ship made it less fun than I wanted it to be.

Yo Frankie I’m not even sure what kind of game to call this. It has pretty good 3D graphics and a world you can walk around in, but little to no gameplay and lasts about as long as a blueberry pie in front of my Aunt Bertha. Load times are horrendous and there’s no explanation as to what you’re doing or why. This was probably built as a starting platform so that users could build levels and fill out the content (at least that’s what I’m hoping). They are in the midst of a level design contest.  But, from what I can tell there’s no overarching goal of putting out a “complete” game.

Which brings me back to the “qualified” of qualified Yes. If you want to use open source to give you a jump start on creating your game, great!   But, you must realize that there will still be a lot of work in developing a story, refining gameplay, creating graphics that are appropriate, and making the game something you’re ready to present to the world.

That said, using an established game engine might give you more time to focus on those things rather than starting from scratch and building every part of the game.

A word to the wise, taking an open source game, slapping your logo on it, and calling it done is worse than creating no game at all. In so doing, you’ll anger the programmers who made it, and – depending upon the game’s usability – you may also frustrate your customers/potential customers.  Please don’t do this.

Happy gaming and beware of skin sores!

So, you’ve decided to create a video game.  What do you do now?  How do you get started?

The decisions you make here can make or break your game.  At the same time –  this is a process.  If you treat it like an experiment (which it is), you’ll be able to make changes as development goes along and seek the best possible game/user experience rather than succumbing to other, perhaps monetary, factors.

Don’t get me wrong.  You should never throw money at a problem.  You just end up with money out of your hand and all over the floor.  But, you should also never decide to use an element/ingredient just because it costs a lot of money.  If the gargantuan-ly expensive element detracts from user experience and thereby the game overall, it will discourage users from the game and your product/service.  You’ll lose more money keeping it in than if you dropped it in the first place.

At the end of this grand experiment, you’ll either have invented the light bulb or learned something almost more important: how a light bulb doesn’t work.  Here are just a few of the decisions you’ll need to make on your journey towards play-marketing (as I like to call it):

1. Audience.  Just because you have a large audience for your product/service doesn’t mean you need to include all of them.  Just because you have a small audience for your product doesn’t mean you need to limit the game to their demographic.  Choose an audience that you want to target and build the game around them.  “Everyone” is not an option.  It’ll be much easier if you’re more specific, but you don’t need to say “women between 30 and 35 with cats named Stella.”  Hey, if that’s your audience great, but something too specific may be limiting to your creative process.

Once you’ve chosen your audience, learn about them.  Find out what they like and dislike and how you can better make a game that they will enjoy.  A gothic horror game probably wouldn’t go over well with the Hannah Montana-obsessed tween crowd.

2. Genre.  Many people like to hold their nose up and say, “My game transcends mere Genre.”  That may be true, but I feel the genres exist for a reason.  We should definitely try to break out of genres with new and interesting games/books/movies/stories, but it’s the true artist who creates a new genre without telling anyone.

If you’ve already got an idea that doesn’t fit neatly into a genre, great!  Go ahead and pursue it.  But if you’re strapped for ideas and don’t have the next flOw up your sleeve, it’s best to just pick the genre you feel would appeal most to your audience.

3. Tone.  Although many genres have a built in tone, putting a new spin on the genre by using a different tone e.g. a World War II comedy or a dark puzzle game could help set you apart from the crowd.  Sean of the Dead, for instance, mixed zombie and comedy to a moviegoer’s delight.  Don’t make this choice lightly.  A comedy WWII game done poorly could at best not create any interest, but it could also offend veterans and military personnel in general.

4. Gameplay.  Determine how the game will be played.  Is it a 2D side scroller, is it a 3D shooter, is it a click-and-match puzzle game?  How will the user interact with your game?  This covers both the buttons a user pushes as well as how the character/avatar/block/thing reacts on screen.

Of all the decisions you make, this is probably the most important decision because it is the crux of the game.  Your game would not be a “game” without it.  A great concept with awesome graphics and a good story will fail if the gameplay is clunky or difficult.  A mediocre concept with mediocre graphics and a mediocre story that has great and interesting gameplay will do much better.

5. Platform.  Choosing a platform often will come down to money.  If you have gobs of money you might want to consider one of the high end platforms like the Wii, Xbox 360, or Playstation 3.  But then, you also have to deal with game publishers and many other headaches.  Other platforms like the iPhone, Flash, or Silverlight have a much lower cost of entry.  Your choice of platform will help determine your revenue stream i.e. if you can monetize the game directly (probably inadvisable) or use advertising/licensing to defray costs or simply give it away as a freebie.  It can also determine development costs, and will most of all determine where and how your game will be viewed and played.

6. Goals.  Set realistic, measurable goals for how you (and your boss, and his/her boss) will classify this experiment as a success or failure.  Do you want to increase traffic to your site?  Do you want direct revenue?  What does your boss want?  Answering these questions on the front end will save lots of headaches (and possibly your job).

So, go ahead and get started making your game.  If nothing else…Solitaire can now be classified as “Research.”

Video games are the new Cadillac of mass marketing.  I’m not really sure what that means either, but video games can be a great way of promoting your brand and creating a devoted following. They can also be a disastrous waste of time, money, and customer goodwill.

This four part series will discuss To Play or Not to Play i.e. whether you should embark on this perilous yet rewarding journey (Part 1); those who have gone before i.e. companies who have succeeded and failed at this endeavor (Part 2); What do I do now? …or the types of decisions you need to make on how your game is going to look, feel, play, operate, and perform (Part 3).  And finally, The pitfalls (Part 4)…or the things to look out for along the way.

So let’s get down to it: is this a good idea?  Here are seven things to consider:

1. Know your audience.

Rolex should probably not make a video game.  Why?  Because their target demographics are generally not the type that would be interested in games.  Worse yet, a Rolex game would probably be a catastrophe as it would juvenilize their brand - making it irrelevant to the high-end customers they cater to.

So, make sure that your audience is one that would be interested in a game.  At the same time, do some research before assuming that your audience wouldn’t be interested.  The Entertainment Software Association in their 2008 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry states that “women 18 or older represent a significantly greater portion of the game playing population (33%) than boys age 17 or younger (18%).”

2. Know your product.

Not every product should have a video game based around it.  Mortuary services seems to me a rather bad idea for a game.  Cotton swabs too seem like a bad idea.  But, if you can build a character or story around the cotton swabs, then it might be the perfect way to add depth and interest to a dull product. (No offense to any cotton swab makers who might be reading.)

3. It’s expensive.

Even with advent of Flash, Silverlight, and other technologies that vastly cut costs on design and development, it’s still no cheap beast to tame.  With artwork, programming, and interactive design, even the smallest of games will take time and money to produce whether you do it in-house or have an agency do it.  That being said if customers enjoy the game, it’ll be worth it.

4. Don’t expect direct revenue.

Directly selling the game is generally a bad idea.  Although, if you go so far as to create a console game, there’s probably room for a low-cost price tag to help reclaim some costs.  The best idea is to give this game away to your customers and perhaps, more importantly, to your potential customers.  This push of authenticity and good will can pay dividends for years to come.

5. It will be fun.

The whole point of this is to inject fun and entertainment into your brand/company.  If you don’t have fun making it, no one will enjoy playing it.

6. Thinly veiled marketing sucks.

Don’t make a game so you can stuff your product/service down your customers’ throat.  You seem manipulative and customers feels used.  No one wins.

7. They’re already interacting with you.

If customers take time to play your game you’re – by the nature of gaming - interacting with them.  Slap on a forum or game player blog and you’ve got a community of engaged people who are loyal to your brand.

***Warning*** Do not just tack on any portion of this experience.  Everything must be intelligently measured and decided on before you take any steps toward adding features.  Blundering through a campaign adding every Web 2.0 buzz word you can think of only makes you look bad.  Promise quality and deliver quality – just like you do with your products and services.

So, you’re cautiously optimistic about creating a video game.  Good.  Next time, we’ll discuss the trials, travails, and triumphs of marketing games in Those Who Have Gone Before.