The Pilot Paradigm

Now that we've discussed some (and I do mean "some") of the problems with the traditional model, let's consider the Pilot Paradigm. At its core it's a very simple idea, an idea that some developers and publishers may be on the path to adopting even now. I think it's important to identify it, so that it can be applied with purpose, as opposed to the random implementation that seems prevalent today.

To understand this model, we must consider 'pilot games', similar to 'pilot TV shows'; a proof of concept at final quality; released in order to gauge consumer interest. The idea is to release a series of smaller games via XBLA/PSN/Steam and Facebook, in order to establish a baseline with your audience. Since development cost for these platforms is orders of magnitude lower than developing for boxed retail, it's much easier to test your new IP.

Consider releasing three XBLA games in as many years, all high quality, and all set on the same IP. These pilot games will allow you to test wildly different mechanics and take big risks with design and genre. The resulting market reaction will allow you to get, and to review, feedback intensely; allowing you to refine your idea while being paid to do so (from purchases).

This allows you to perform market testing without the massive financial risks, or the limited results of focus groups. The market tells you what it wants, because you've offered your product up for scrutiny; and the best part is that failure provides a wealth of information for 1/40th the cost of a traditional IP launch.

So if failure provides information, what does success garner? Success with your pilot games is a green light from the market to try your triple-A smash game/IP. You've established a winning mechanic, a likeable game world, or some masterful execution, and now it's time to release wide. Your chance of success is dramatically increased by an installed audience, and the wealth of information gathered from a series of releases.

But once you've released wide, there are a few things to consider for continued success. First and foremost, if your triple-A game hits, know when to stop. Take three to four years before you even consider a sequel, have a disruptive release schedule. This not only prevents franchise fatigue (Lara vs Starcraft), but absence creates respect and honour in our market. This may be difficult if you have yearly numbers to meet, but investors are smart and will see the long term performance of your new stratagem.

Another great benefit of this is employee retention; I've seen too many amazing developers fired because there was no new project for them; or because the balance sheet needs to show specific results at fiscal close. But now, these developers can be rotated back to the pilot games. They've just spent three years working on a triple-A game developed from a pilot they were heavily invested in. Instead of being fired, they can break into smaller teams and go to work on another series of dramatically different, innovative, and creatively expressive pilot games.

Furthermore, there are a few marketing thoughts to consider. Stop chasing 'viral', instead, embrace 'stupid s**t'. Release a joke level of your game for free, poke fun at your own characters, or cross-market with something completely opposite your intended market; for example, Spiderman with Hello Kitty. Work to engage your audience with something other than 'cool, gun toting, silent, McAwesome guy' marketing. Stupid s**t creates joy, and joy is viral by nature.

Now, to really reach your audience, it's critical to choose a front-man, and stop hiding behind the corporate seal. Everyone knows that movies take hundreds of people to make, but Hollywood knows that large audiences don't really invest social capital in a company - they invest in people. Our 'Blizzard rocks' mentality is limiting. If you look, you'll find a larger audience willing to say "Chris Metzen rocks", or "Samwize Didier rocks".

Game developers should overcome their shyness, and consider a thoughtful approach to interacting with their audience; channel your inner Gabe Newell. It's possible to become publicly known without being forced into the cliché rock-star roles of 90's developers. And while we all know it takes a large team to make great games in many cases, your audience is more interested in identifying a few key people. if you're uncomfortable with that, join another species; humans are social.