Financing McCarthy.

[Calin Leafshade]

I was going to put this in the GiP thread but I didn't want to clog it with something only tangentially related to the actual game itself.

So here is my dilemma:

This chapter of McCarthy will be *far* longer than the previous one and it will contain a great deal more dialogue since the game will attempt to be quite non-linear with different choices/paths available to the player.

I can call in enough favours to get voice acting on a short game but i'm not sure if I could get VAs to work for free on a project this size (some characters might have in excess of 500 lines). Not to mention the fact that the quality of the voice actors that i know now is much higher than the quality of VAs I had back then. Now, I don't mind making mccarthy for free but I also don't really want to be out of pocket either. I also can't gurantee that my artists would be too pleased with the concept of VAs getting paid and them not.

So hypothetically how would you, the player, prefer I dealt with this problem.

1) Scratch voice acting altogether and stay 100% freeware.
2) Go commercial and increase the quality of the release. If I did go commercial I would provide more animations, more content and a higher quality product simply because I could justify asking my artists to go that extra mile. (for the record all my artists are already the hardest working people I have ever worked with.. except maybe 304 but i think he has some kind of brain disorder or is cybernetically enhanced)
3) Provide the voice pack as part of a 'special' edition which costs money but provide the non-voice edition for free. (I imagine the artists might have a perfectly justified problem with this option.)

If I'm honest I would rather *not* go commercial for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I did say in the GiP of the first game that I would keep the McCarthy Chronicles a free series supported by donations and secondly the pressure to deliver is much higher and "you get what you pay for" is no longer a glib joke you can fire at detractors.

Bottom line: Is high quality voice acting and more incidental content worth 5-10 quid to you?

Spoiler

I also promise no shitty writing.. or rather as good as i can do... but nothing over the top i swear!

[close]

[Wonkyth]

Dude, go commercial and rock this world.

[theo]

Personally, my opinion is definitely GO COMMERCIAL. Granted, it raises expectations, it's a lot more work, it will spread a lot less, and frankly, like my franchise, it most likely won't make you any real money. BUT it will allow you to do more interesting things AND it will all in all be better for the AGS community as it will help putting the stamp on AGS as a solid tool for making real commercial projects, not just some goofy toy for kid programmers.

I truly respect everyone who is bold enough to charge money for their indie projects, it's a very ballsy thing to do and it encourages entrepreneurship in others, including me.

Also, managing the commercial part of the project will most likely be a very good thing to have under your belt, for future ventures.

[PatientRock]

Commercial.  First part was great. 

[Igor Hardy]

It's a difficult decision. Charging money won't be enough to pay off the expenses I fear. You'd have to devote a great number of time into PR and marketing, and it might be really tough to market a game in b&w and low res that is also a sequel.

However, you could try financing the game via Kickstarter (or a similar service) before deciding to go commercial. Or you could do both. It has worked well for some people.

[Calin Leafshade]

Thanks guys, the input is very helpful.

It's a difficult decision. Charging money won't be enough to pay off the expenses I fear.

I wouldnt really expect to pay off all my expenses but rather just to lose less money than if it were free.

it might be really tough to market a game in b&w and low res that is also a sequel.

That might be true.

However, you could try financing the game via Kickstarter (or a similar service) before deciding to go commercial. Or you could do both. It has worked well for some people.

If I did decide to go commercial I might take a similar approach to VinceTwelve by offering pre-order perks. I know it helped him with Resonance but Resonance is a far more highly awaited project than McCarthy.

[mkennedy]

Option 3 is the my choice, but if that doesn't work out I'd prefer free. Voice acting can be nice, but it can also increase the file size quite a bit. If you went commercial you could possibly release the game on CD though that would most likely add to the production costs. At the very least commercial  games should have a minimum resolution of 640X400, with 800X600 the standard and maybe all the way up to 1280X960.

[Calin Leafshade]

At the very least commercial  games should have a minimum resolution of 640X400, with 800X600 the standard and maybe all the way up to 1280X960.

What about the blackwell series?

[Darius Poyer]

Selling adventure games seems like a fickle thing, and I honestly don't think that McCarthy could pull it off.

I really wish I had reasonable arguments beyond personal taste to fortify my position here but I don't, it's just based on my experience playing the first game, that if I did buy it I'd like my money back. That's not saying it's a bad game it just did well by being free, and while I know this is about the future McCarthy, its still be relevant since part one will be selling part 2 to a large degree.

I felt compelled to give my somewhat negative disposition, seems to be allot of irreverent positivity towards this so far. Take it with a grain of salt though, I can't even comprehend why the blackwell series sells at all.

[Calin Leafshade]

On reflection I think you are probably right. People are unlikely to want to buy a McCarthy game.

However I still want to deliver a high quality experience so I will combine options 1 and 2 and maybe make a bit of a loss.

I think, for the time being at least, McCarthy will stay free.

[Igor Hardy]

I really wish I had reasonable arguments beyond personal taste to fortify my position here but I don't, it's just based on my experience playing the first game, that if I did buy it I'd like my money back.

Shouldn't it depend on how much you needed to pay? Surely, a great number of freeware AGS games are polished and well-made enough that they could have a price tag attached - even though the reasonable approach would be to have the price more attractive than, say, Machinarium.

IMO the only games that wouldn't deserve to be sold are games that are broken in some way.

[Calin Leafshade]

My opinion is that it really depends on nothing more than enjoyability.

VVVVVV sold very well despite being low-res and with a tiny amount of graphical content. It was just fun.

[m0ds]

Calin, you could always opt for funding options like Kickstarter or Indiegogo. That way you could raise money for voice actors, you could offer donators incentives and then release the game for free. I'm more likely to donate than I am buy, but that's just me.

[Calin Leafshade]

I have no incentives to offer really and I don't like denying people content just because they didnt have the means to donate to something. It seems mean.

[tzachs]

If you ask me as a developer, I say, go commercial, for all the reasons already mentioned.

If you ask me as a gamer, however, my answer will be completely different. As a gamer, I almost never
buy stuff, because I already have too many free games that I want to play, and even for them I don't have
enough time, so if the game will be commercial I would probably not play it.
So option #2 is not an option for me, and I see no difference between options #1 & #3.
I would actually prefer hidden option #4, make the game for free with a 'lower' quality voice pack, made by people who are maybe not professional, but are willing to contribute their voices for free (and there are people like that to be found).

[Calin Leafshade]

finding people to do 30 lines for free is easy enough. Finding people to do 300 lines for free is more difficult. 300 lines take a lot of effort.

[Darth Mandarb]

I plan to keep any of my games (yes, they exist even though I've released nothing in 6 years) free for a few simple reasons:

1) if you charge for the project you'll have to offer 'support' of some kind (tech support, complaints, refunds, etc)
2) if you charge you need to report the income (which usually necessitates opening an LLC or similar (not sure how it works outside the states!))
3) if it's free, and you grow bored of the project, you can just walk away from it and, while people will/might complain, there's nothing they can do about it

There are other ways to generate some revenue from the game as opposed to flat-out charging for it. 

In-game Advertising is my favorite method.  Nothing that interrupts the game-play ... but think of a sign in one background that has an advert for Nike shoes (not practical for an indie game of course, as Nike isn't likely to be interested, but you get the point!)  Or maybe the character orders a Coca-Cola (again, Coke wouldn't buy into an indie game but again, just an example).  I had the notion at one point to have an area in a game that is repeatedly visited ... and there's big sign in the background that (through a connection to the 'net would pull in and place dynamic ad content on the sign) so there'd be different ads periodically as players played through the game.

Also, the website could have advertisements (paid or Google, etc).  Though please, no pop-ups or forced commercials before video(s).  Just normal side/top mounted ads are okay.

Donations (which you already have).  For some reason, as Mark eluded to, I am more likely to donate than buy ... because I feel I can pick the donation amount based on my own sense of what the game/project is worth to me rather than somebody else dictating that.

Just my thoughts!

[Calin Leafshade]

Well how about the "pay what you like" system that has been adopted by alot of indies?

That seems like a reasonable compromise. It's like donation except it gives people a little extra nudge in that direction.

[nihilyst]

finding people to do 30 lines for free is easy enough. Finding people to do 300 lines for free is more difficult. 300 lines take a lot of effort.

Depends, I guess. Aren't there some online communities out there with people who'd love to do some voice acting for free AND have a reasonable equipment to record it? I know that radio dramas aren't as popular in other countries as they are here in Germany. Here, finding some quite decent voice actors would be the least of my problems when making a non-commercial game. I guess there are some of these in England, too. Depending on how professional you want the actors to be, that would be one option.

I agree with Darth that making a commercial game would be more of an effort. At least I wouldn't like to do it. People have much higher expectations of a commercial game, which I honestly couldn't meet.

[m0ds]

Yes indeed, there is that massive voice acting community but damned if I can remember what its called. But from what I remember it has thousands of members all of whom seem eager. I tnink its this: http://voiceactingalliance.com/ (Members : 21,358)

Thats like 4 voice actors for every AGS member? :p Domithan has used something similar, perhaps its worth getting his opinion.