Launching a new game and learning from Steve Jobs
I've been working on a new MUSH for a few years now - it's a side-project, and I've been busy with IRL stuff, so it's moving along slowly but surely. I think there are many unique, neat features and I'm hoping the game will be successful.
However, I'm deliberately keeping this project on "silent running" until I'm ready to go live. I have a website and the game is available to explore - but I haven't added the game to any of standard community advertising sites. I have 3 or 4 players who pop in and out, and help with testing. My connect.txt clearly shows the game is in alpha status.
My point? I only have one chance to make a first impression, and when I announce this game, I want it to be feature-complete, ready to play, and enjoyed. I note when Steve announces products, there is tremendous buzz, which creates excitement, interest, and engagement - a good way to begin a project.
While I certainly don't expect the announcement of my game to rock the foundations of modern civilization, I think a "big splash" is a neat way to start a game.
I'm curious what the community thinks about launching a game. Is there merit in "the big announcement" or perhaps a slow rolling start is better? Should there be a long beta test - perhaps that creates more buzz than a big announcement.
What do you all think?
- boris's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Click 
I agree with your general
I agree with your general idea that it's good to hit the ground running. The only thing I would be wary of is releasing a game that has not been playtested adequately.
Let me give a few examples, RL examples but I'll withhold the names. First is a custom-coded GoP (goal-oriented) PvP (player versus player) mud. The coder is well-known in the mud community. His game is nearing the end of a nearly two year beta test, with an average of about 20 players on throughout the day. Every week he adds new content, features, fixes bugs, etc. -- the game obviously is in development, but it is playable. By attracting a decent playerbase early he has created an invaluable testbed for not only the functionality of his code but the gameplay as well. He doesn't actively advertise but is listed on the mud lists, his players vote for him on the mud community sites, etcetera.
Second example is a RP mush, released pretty much feature-complete (with something of a beta test I believe, but not much). Unfortunately this mush fizzled out. Why? Lack of critical mass. For what reason? I believe it was because the staff didn't provide enough obvious conflict, obvious factions, etc. -- the players didn't really know what they were supposed to do. In other words, a failure to define one of the most critical elements of any game. Perhaps if there had been a serious betatest, the staff would have identified this structural problem. I think this is especially critical in a RP mush where code may not be center stage -- the staff tests what little code they have, CG, +compare or +roll, and think they're done, when they're not -- they haven't tested the gameplay, that is, the RP environment.
Boris, I think I know what your game is, and I think it's a great concept. I would strongly encourage you to assemble a real beta test, of at least a couple of months with at least ten players on average, preferably some of them with no prior knowledge of you or your game.
LARP for Recent History
Combining a few disseparate, but related, ideas...
I'd first agree with Ide about some playtesting, BUT...
There's no sense wasting good RP.
So, borrowing from Javelin's leadership in the LARP-on-MUSH arena, I would suggest a few 'RP/Gameplay Parties' over the course of several weeks (prior to 'grand opening' date), to establish two things...
1) Public awareness - There's nothing better than word-of-mouth advertising (both to promote a game, and to kill one). If you invite good players (I'm not saying limit it to 'elite dinos', but it'd be worth your time to try to get a few 'quality old-timers' to participate), set up a good scenario for them to play in, and present it in a well-organized manner... then, the odds are in your favor that they'll walk away from it with good things to say about your game.
2) Familiar History - Through these few 'introductory sessions of play', you can establish 'recent history' for the theme of your game -- you may have already written some of this in your news files, but that doesn't mean you can't go ahead and have parties to 'play them out'... who knows? a few unique twists may occur in the actual play of them that you want to include in that pre-written history to give it a classier touch.
Also note: If you decide to allow people to use 'historical feature characters' during any of these sessions, you need to be clear about them only being temporary for this unique pre-opening purpose. (e.g., it's perfectly acceptable to allow someone to play the King and Queen of Foobaria during these sessions, as long as everyone knows that Foobaria was conquered by the Bazmeeps in the year 4325, and your game officially opens in the year 5712).
Those are my thoughts.