Which method of text-sim promotion works for you?

[Raiders Army]

This is really in reference to the text-sim football games that have been (un)announced. With DDS and Grey Dog announcing that they will make Pro Football games last year, but it seems as if it's a stand-still on development and the fact that Solecismic hasn't announced any new game yet, which method of promoting a game works for you? Would you rather know about a potential game only to find that it's vaporware (no offense since I'm willing to bet that DDS and Grey Dog both come out with their games) or would you rather not know about a game until its impending release?

Personally, I like the approach that DDS and Grey Dog have taken because it gives the community time to provide input into it. That being said, everything the community wants can't happen and there are negatives towards not meeting a self-imposed schedule.

Poll to follow.

[Big Fo]

I chose the first option, assuming "well in advance" meant several months and not like two years or something crazy.

[Scoobz0202]

I ended up going with option one. The big negative to that though is the increased risk of release delay.

[Neuqua]

I prefer the second option. Not really sure why.

[Danny]

I voted the first option, but I actually an option between the two. Once you have a solid, playable game in the alpha stages and beta looks like it could be coming up at some point soon seems like a good time to announce.

[Alan T]

Voted for option one. If a game I like or one I think I might like is expected out soon, I'll save game budget for it. If a company chooses to not mention a release at all, there is a good possibility I won't have saved any money for it in the first place. I am finding that I am to the point in my life with my family that I'm ok for money and would be able to afford it either way, but my wife and I try to remain dedicated to our budget so there have been several games that I chose not to buy simply because they were unexpected.

[rkmsuf]

I vote for the option where the developer is back in a cubicle.

[Cringer]

Personally, I like the approach that DDS and Grey Dog have taken because it gives the community time to provide input into it. That being said, everything the community wants can't happen and there are negatives towards not meeting a self-imposed schedule.

Poll to follow.

I voted for #1, the DDS/Grey Dog approach against what is clearly the Solecismic way, #2.

To defend Solecismic against the statement above though, I am sure Jim has gotten a lot of info/input/ideas from this community without even saying he is working on something and what (as long as it's not a non-football/sports game). He did the Developer's Corner a few times, guys post thoughts/ideas all the time. I don't think Jim's way hurts the development really.

[Young Drachma]

I like Jim's way better. For text sims, announcing a game before it's almost done is just bad news, because too much can go wrong given almost everyone in the market is a hobbyist. I mean, sure the boys who make Football Manager can announce way in advance because they're a big company. But for the little fry guys who predominate our world, it's just bad news and all it does it lead to sore expectations, annoyance and diverts their time away from actually making the game in my estimation.

[Groundhog]

I think both have their cons and pros. Option 1 gives people something to be excited about and can lead to feedback that can improve the finished product. It also gets people in a frenzy if it's not released on schedule, and can lead to people working up expectations over the months that aren't met.

Option 2 obviously allows the developer to work more at his own pace and gives him plenty of time to deal with issues that arise, but with nothing (known) on the horizon to the text-sim community, they can be left looking elsewhere. Maybe not such a problem right now.

[RedHawk00]

I find that building up expectations over a long can be a real bad thing for games. Somewhere in between would be nice, announce when going into Alpha or Beta would be great.

[samifan24]

I've had too many games offer promises and then never deliver. Surprise us and give us the info just before release. If the game is good, we'll do the marketing for you.

[Raiders Army]

I've had too many games offer promises and then never deliver. Surprise us and give us the info just before release. If the game is good, we'll do the marketing for you.

Ah, I think that's the true sign of a good promotion. While the question was more for prior to release, I believe what you say is true. It really doesn't matter about hype so much (unless you want to sell a lot the first week), but the best way to sell a bunch of copies over the long run is to make a great game that actually exceeded expectations...much like how really good movies do well week after week of release, while a bunch of $100M gross movies do really well opening weekend and then pitter out.

[SackAttack]

Why not do a mixture of the two? Finish the game, then do a little advance marketing, then release it.

The bonus there is that the game is done and you don't have to worry about missing your release date, but you can also build up awareness and excitement for the game's release instead of throwing caution to the wind.

[Atocep]

Why not do a mixture of the two? Finish the game, then do a little advance marketing, then release it.

The bonus there is that the game is done and you don't have to worry about missing your release date, but you can also build up awareness and excitement for the game's release instead of throwing caution to the wind.

I don't think this would be a bad idea. Especially right now. Text sims don't really seem to have the following they had when we could count on multiple releases per year. Typically I'd rather see #2, but giving some advanced notice right now probably would help recapture some the excitement and anticipation that has been missing in the community for the past year+.

[JimboJ]

I don't see any downside at all to option number one. You are not announcing a release date, just the fact that you are working on a sim. People will set their expectations based on your prior track record. If you have a good track record, they will be optimistic. If not, people will be sceptical.

There should probably be a third option, where you announce a release date in advance. That has the potential to cause disappointment, but it's also nice to have a general idea when a game will be released.

I think the bottom line is when it comes to independant developers, there is too much that can happen to interfere with a project. You should take any announcement with a grain of salt, and don't get your hopes up too high.

[Antmeister]

My answer is closer to option 1 so that is what I chose. Solecismic, for example, started a new blog and it would be great to see some sort of developer's diary to at least know that he is working on something. No release date is necessary. That way, he can get feedback and decide to keep and throw away what he thinks would work.

Because not knowing keeps the company out of mind when there are so many other options nowadays whether it is from a larger PC company, other competitors in the niche market, console games, etc. And because of this, I tend to wait a bit longer to see if it is worth a purchase, because I don't have any idea if the extra features are gonna be worth it.

[Eaglesfan27]

I think both have their cons and pros. Option 1 gives people something to be excited about and can lead to feedback that can improve the finished product. It also gets people in a frenzy if it's not released on schedule, and can lead to people working up expectations over the months that aren't met.

Option 2 obviously allows the developer to work more at his own pace and gives him plenty of time to deal with issues that arise, but with nothing (known) on the horizon to the text-sim community, they can be left looking elsewhere. Maybe not such a problem right now.

What he said. I don't have a strong preference for either option - I just want good text sims to play.

[wade moore]

I voted the first option, but I actually an option between the two. Once you have a solid, playable game in the alpha stages and beta looks like it could be coming up at some point soon seems like a good time to announce.

Yeah, there really needs to be an in-between here. Don't announce it the minute you decide you want to make a game, but announce it when a solid build is together and a realistic release date is established.

I chose option 2 over option 1 though.

[albionmoonlight]

I said 2.

I don't want the developer possibly putting out a bad product under pressure caused by having to meet the time frame established in the early announcement.

[MikeVic]

I think there's nothing wrong with saying "I'm working on blah right now." You don't have to even give a release date... just communicate what's going on with the company.

[sabotai]

I think there's nothing wrong with saying "I'm working on blah right now." You don't have to even give a release date... just communicate what's going on with the company.

The problem is that after several months of simply saying "I'm working on a football sim", everyone stats expecting a lot more. It's all Arlie has really said (outside of a few "developer diary" like posts) for awhile now, and you still see posts and threads started on the GDS forums by people who act like they are entitled to more. You can't just say that and then go to work and expect people to sit back and wait for something more because they always want more. And the if you don't give them more, they get angry and frustrated and start lashing out.

Almost like they are drug addicts going through withdrawal.

[Dutch]

Well there ya go, we've already proved that no matter which choice the developer makes, they are screwed.

[Anthony]

at some point the developer needs to say "we're not vaporware - we are still in fact working on something. we're not yet close to release for me to give any more details - details will be announced as we get closer to a release date that for the moment is not going to be disclosed".

you also don't want to create a game, say you're releasing it tomorrow and list the features only to find an overwhelming majority of your potential customers say "why'd you waste precious development time adding in [list feature here] when all along we've been asking for [list features here]?!?". its good to know what features your buying audience will find attractive instead of doing it your own way and making the game you want. when you're the only person who plans on playing your game, you can do it any way you want it. when you expect other people to spend money (during a recession, mind you) on your game, its best to keep them in the loop and implement as many ideas and features they want.

[MizzouRah]

I used to be an option #1 person.. but I like Jim's approach, ie.. option #2.

Let me know when the game is ready, then I can read up on the options, check out screen shots, visit the forum, etc...