He retracted his statement on Twitter that it isn't a solo dev game but a "solo project". By any definition, multiple people developed every part of the game from code to art and animation, and therefore cannot possibly be labeled as "solo developed". It was a marketing strategy, and it worked. In my opinion, a solo developer isn't someone that created *everything* from scratch, but all logic that is specific to the game are created by a single person. So you can use a game engine or buy general assets and be a solo dev, but hiring programmers would be completely out of the bounds of the definition. He definitely should've been more honest and called it a "solo project" from the beginning.

@Mendogology

Ай бұрын

exactly

@WyMustIGo

Ай бұрын

Your definition is wrong.

@Mendogology

Ай бұрын

@@WyMustIGo We all have access to dictionaries, go and check the meaning of words like "develop", "developer", "solo".

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

Marketing is the big issue here. Games need anything they can to distinguish themselves, and labeling yourself as "indie" or "solo-dev" when you're really AA or AAA is like fighting in a lower weight-class.

@Furfire

Ай бұрын

Honestly it probably was a solo dev game for years and years and that's just how he always thought of it, without realizing it changed along the way.

The way I see it is if you buy an asset from a store - something that's available to everyone - and use that in your game or project, then it doesn't take away from you being a solo dev. However, if you hire or get assistance from someone to do something for your game in a more custom basis, then yes, they are directly helping you develop your game and you are no longer a solo dev. For instance, if I wanted to draw a picture and bought pencils to draw with, it doesn't mean I didn't draw the picture myself. However, if I wanted to draw something but had someone help me draw or paint a part I didn't have time for or struggled with, then I can't claim that as something I drew myself.

@snooksv3172

Ай бұрын

It depends on the asset. A few textures is no big deal. Models and actual art, and or any script then you’ve just pieces things together

@hermes6910

Ай бұрын

If you're not hiring for a full-time position, you're still on your own... Asking artists or even senior developers (short freelance contract) for help sometimes (how course if it represent more than say 20% of the total workload, it change a bit...), doesn't change the process much... 2:13 is the most important part... It seems you have no idea how heavy the load is of being a totally solo developer nor just making a game is (real commercial game, not hobby small project).

@BananaDynastyX

Ай бұрын

@@hermes6910 By literal definition you stop being a solo dev the moment someone else does development work on your game. What's the point of this braindead debate?

@hermes6910

Ай бұрын

@@BananaDynastyX So, hundreds of people are working behind Unity, Unreal and Godot. Using a game engine developped by hundreds of people, you are not a solo dev if you are not developping your own engine by your definition.

@damonfedorick

Ай бұрын

pretty sure the definition of "Help" means you are no longer alone. i could be wrong...

I love how even-handed and exploratory these videos are.

I personally think the line is drawn when you start to commission artwork or hire Freelancers to make specific things for your project. It's one thing to take acid store assets and bend them to your will. It's completely different if somebody is making a one-off piece of art or code for your project. Same thing can be said for game engines. It's one thing to use the game engine as it is publicly available it's another thing to tell epic or Unity that you need a specific feature that's not in the engine and they develop it for you

@Konitama

Ай бұрын

So by your definition if you do 99.9999% of the game solo and then hire a person to do art for the title screen, you're not a solo dev on the game? I think CodeMonkey has it right that it's a spectrum and not just black and white "you are" or "you aren't".

@Hietakissa

Ай бұрын

I'd say publicly available assets are fine. Contracting is also fine *as long as* you've still made at least around 70-80% of the assets yourself. So getting contractors to make a handful of enemy models and environment/vegetation assets for your MMORPG is fair game.

@puretrack06

Ай бұрын

@Konitama your argument here is disingenuous. You're telling me somebody's going to make an entire game and then Farm out the title screen. They've already done the work by making the UI before. That means the title screen is within their skill set and ability. However, to follow your argument, I would say that the game is still solo developed because the title screen can be changed by anyone and not have a big effect on the entire game.

@puretrack06

Ай бұрын

@Hietakissa for me it comes down to the characters. Are these random PCS that are just running around or major characters and bosses in the game? We know that visual sell game so are these characters as selling point of the game?

@BananaDynastyX

Ай бұрын

@@Konitama Yes? If you do 99.9999% of the work and somebody else does .0001%, by definition you didn't develop the game solo lmao.

I say if u use assets it's solo dev, when you start contracting out, now the line is blurry. So if it's more than a small part of the game, it isn't solo any more. If you just have an artist make you mc for example thats still solo dev imo

@smokinjoe9415

Ай бұрын

and you are wrong

@tykeno

Ай бұрын

@@smokinjoe9415 ok.... saying that without elaborating isnt very helpfull and make you seam like a douche. But hey I am probably wrong like he said in the video it depends what you consider solo dev, and this is my opinion.

@playaaaLV

Ай бұрын

Well, it's pretty simple IMO. If you only buy generally available assets, regardless of the numbers, you are still within the definition of "solo". However, the moment you hire anyone to specifically work on even the smallest thing of your product - you're off the charts.

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

​@@playaaaLV Not so simple. If you make the whole game, but hire someone to make the key art / capsule image, how's that figure? Or you find an asset, but pay extra for some custom tweaks by the creator? What about contracting a localization service? They don't work for you, but it's not exactly an off-the-shelf "asset".

@playaaaLV

Ай бұрын

@@mandisaw if this is a question, then I've already answered that, see above. If this is a statement, then I'm in no mood to argue - just stick with what you believe in.

"I don't think it really matters in the end." I think that's the takeaway here haha.

@puretrack06

Ай бұрын

It matters simply because a lot of Gamers don't understand the amount of work that goes into developing a game. This can create a toxic environment between the developers and gamers. If this is a solo developed game, it becomes the golden standard of what all games should be. Now you get newbies that get burnt out trying to recreate the success in level of game on their own because they didn't understand that 200 plus people worked on it. People that stopped working on passion projects because they get compared and ridicule to something that's not a solo developed game

@unrighteous8745

Ай бұрын

@@puretrack06 Gamers creating a toxic environment is nothing new. Games are always going to get compared to other games, regardless of budget, team size, etc... The best thing to do is educate the ignorant people, exactly as the devs of Farthest Frontier did. Not everyone will listen, but some do. Telling the dev of Manor Lords that he can't call himself a solo dev anymore isn't the right direction I think.

@puretrack06

Ай бұрын

@@unrighteous8745 so I was on the first Reddit post when this first came out. Most of us have been talking about just how predatory the marketing is and applauding the developer for the incredible work he's done. But asking people to look behind the curtain and see how much work is actually been done by other people

@JesseTheGameDev

Ай бұрын

@@unrighteous8745 I think calling people out when they are bullshitting is usually the right thing to do.

@unrighteous8745

Ай бұрын

@@JesseTheGameDev Agreed.

'Solo Director' makes sense, since his definition would technically apply to basically any small to midsize studio CEO that is managing all the funding but not making games at all. I think we should be a little bit protective of the actual labor involved in games and be true to how many people made art or code for the game.

@ivvo7002

28 күн бұрын

you're technically right but I'm still with him that if you're a solo director you have a right to call your game solo dev's game. Before you hire a bunch of contractor you have to design it thoroughly, in that sense they are but tools to achieve the objective. everything needs that 1 guy approval = solo dev

pretty sure the definition of "Help" means you are no longer alone. i could be wrong...

It feels a bit like the wooden boat question. If you slowly replace each plank of your boat, when does it stop being the original boat and become an actual new boat ? ML's dev is directing the boat construction, but whenever he hires someone, he replaces a plank.

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

It's the _Ship of Theseus_ conundrum in philosophy :)

We want tight little boxes and labels, not everything fits nicely there.

"Why can't you make this game multiplayer?" "For the same reason your car can't fly or go under water, it wasn't designed to do that. But I will keep it in mind for the sequel!"

@luckyboy5nu

Ай бұрын

Not necessarily the same thing, Under your assumption that means no singleplayer game can become a multiplayer game But i can think of many Singleplayer Campaign focused games that weren't built with multiplayer in mind but got a Multiplayer Mode later on after release.

@estranhokonsta

Ай бұрын

One common advice in the top game industry was to decide right from the beginning if the game will be multiplayer or not. Trying to add multiplayer to a single player game is either a sign of masochistic tendencies or or a sign of inexperience.

@BoltRM

Ай бұрын

​@@estranhokonstaAvoid _scope creep_ !

@RockyMulletGamedev

Ай бұрын

@@luckyboy5nu probably through sweat and tears. Making an online multiplayer game forces you change a lot of things, since your client just receive information about the state of the game and is no longer updating the game in real time. It completely changes how you handle your game logic, this means reading a lot of things that could've been done "right" the first time if the game was expected to be a multiplayer game. The original comment has the perfect analogy really, maybe your car could go under water if it was designed to go under water. If you want it to go under water when it wasnt designed to do that, you'll probably have to redo a lot of it. Multiplayer is not just an addition, it's a refactoring.

@BananaDynastyX

Ай бұрын

Online multiplayer sure, but adding local multiplayer, of course depends on the game itself, but definitely isn't challenging from a general view.

Thank you for your content. If anyone's interested into some solid historical background to titles like these, also for future suggestions, I recommend Schwerpunkt's manorial warfare and society content. Keep up the great work

I think, at the moment you start to hire/contract people for a part of your project, you are not a solo dev anymore. You are a project manager who also develops.

@WyMustIGo

Ай бұрын

You are 100% right.

@Sim2322

Ай бұрын

So, a lawyer hiring an expert witness is not a lawyer anymore? A doctor seeking a specialist's opinion not a real doctor? The ONLY thing it does it improve your game and prove you're not delusional with your skills

@WyMustIGo

Ай бұрын

@@Sim2322 What does that have to do with it? The lawyer is still a lawyer, but he REQUIRED the assistance of an expert witness to do the work - which by definition means he did not work solo, he managed a team that included expert witnesses. You seem very uneducated.

@Loki_Dokie

Ай бұрын

Never seen a climber go solo with 25 people with them

@Sim2322

Ай бұрын

@@WyMustIGo Yea, me and my poor Master's degree... Go make some parrot videos, buddy, you're making a fool of yourself.

no it was not created by a single person. I could design a game and hire a bunch of freelancers to create a game, but it was not created by a single person, it was just managed by one person. or basically an indie team.

@stefanfyhn4668

14 күн бұрын

Still no. Solo Developer - he was the only one developing the game. His freelancers created assets but they did not develop on the game. They just supplied assets as instructed. By definition he was the only one developing the game - the freelancers did not develop on the game. It's more about the team as you say. But the freelancers are not his team. If he hired someone to work WITH him, that would be his team, and he wouldn't be a solo dev anymore

@oldshiloh9061

10 күн бұрын

@@stefanfyhn4668 wrong

Once you hire someone for x amount of work or time, the game is no longer made by a single person. What is so difficult to understand here? Manor Lord had a crazy amount of resources, that almost no solo dev have. Saying Manor Lord is solo dev made game is just crazy.

@disobedientdolphin

Ай бұрын

Bro did you even watch the video and listen to CodeMonkey before making this comment? That definition of a solo dev is just nonsense.

@Mendogology

Ай бұрын

@@disobedientdolphin I watched the video, but did you ever read the definition of "developer"? "a person or thing that develops something." I think you need this. Did other people participated developing the game? If yes, it's not solo dev. If no, then is solo dev. Simple. And obviously Manor Lords had tons of people who participated in the game's development, even if Slavic magic was the main dev.

@oldshiloh9061

Ай бұрын

you are right, it was not developed by a single person.

It's like using assets, except that you order them to be made in such a way as to achieve the effect you want ;)

It made a lot of buzz = more exposure = more sales.

I'm doing your Visual Scripting tutorial which I got years ago. I'm half way through the platformer part and having a blast. If you're ever going to make another Unity Visual Scripting course, I'd buy it in a heartbeat

I think solo dev means how many people actual had their hands on the game in the editor itself. Hiring contractors to make art and sounds doesn't disqualify you from being a "solo" dev since like ML dev said, if he stops working on the game, it ceases to be made. Makes sense

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

I would mostly agree, but an entire orchestra is hard to swallow 😂

I do want to say I think contractors and free assets are very different cases. A contractor can have context and direction to what you need, they can converse and come to a "answer" to apply to your project. They work with you in a pseudo temporary partnership. Free assets are what they are, you as the dev need to find out how to make them work which assets will work, what modifications the assets may need, etc. You are working alone with someone else's parts. So id say for manor lords if he was working collaboratively with contractors for a large portion of the project, calling it solo dev is a bit disingenuous. Of course its still a spectrum, you could work with a contractor for a few parts and still be mostly solo, but I think its unfair to compare the two. Kind of like getting a new book shelf. If you buy a Ike bookshelf, sure your getting all the parts and you didnt make the parts but its up to you to put them together yourself, but if you commission a carpenter to make the specific bookshelf you want I wouldnt call that a solo endevour. Just how I feel about it, I agree with your points and this is a neat video!

My personal definition for: Indie game: A game that has been created by an independent Studio/Developer meaning that this studio will developer and publish the game on his own and no other party(shareholder, other publishers, studios) has anything to do with the game. Indie Studio: a Studio that it not public(meaning it's been owned by a single person) and it's not a sub studio like Rockstar that it's owned by T2. now when the game/studio lose it's independents that's when other party's are involved in the studio and other project produced by the studio.

@Konitama

Ай бұрын

I would say you can still be an indie game if it's published by a third party... If the publisher has no creative input/control, they are really just marketing and creating physical copies or porting. The developer still has independent control of the game. Indie to me = Independently developed.

@unrighteous8745

Ай бұрын

@@Konitama Yeah, loads of obviously indie titles have publishers. However, massive companies like Valve and CDPR independently develop their games. There's always going to be a least a few studios that ruin every definition haha.

Just look at the 7 min credit scene of Manor Lords in youtube and you would know this is definetly not a solo dev game

Well, I don't know if that particular case could be defined as "Solo (Indie) Game Development". But I do believe it really is (at the very least): "Solo (Indie) Game Programming"... meaning that there's only one Programmer writing the Code and Designing / Implementing the Architecture of that Software. Asking one man to do the work of a team of programmer? It is possible (with the aid of ChatGPT or any similar A.I. Software)... but Asking the same man to do the work of Artists: 3D Art, Animation, VFX, Technical Art, Audio and Music: for 3D games it's too much. I would consider this case a generic "Solo Indie Development" if the same guy hires Artists only, but he assembles / puts everything together in the end (plus doing all the programming duties by himself alone). 🤷🏻‍♂️

I remember having the argument with a colleague of mine about this game when it first became popular. She was showing me the gameplay and saying it was single dev project. I was like ... NO WAY ... but at the end believed her, because I was too lazy to research. Now it is clear - lol :D Thanks for sharing.

if you make 'your own electricity, you are a true solo dev' - that one was outstanding :))

Regarding the term Indie studio, I take it to mean that, regardless of budget, funding sources, or number of employees, the studio is not beholden to any outside company or entity and can operate without influence from an outside source. That means being funded by a publisher and receiving funding from them in return for their services could negate "indie" status. As you are literally no longer independent. You must bow to publisher influence and demands, or go to court if you're breaking a contract

@Konitama

Ай бұрын

Only if the publisher legally has creative control of the project, otherwise, still indie. Even getting money from a publisher can still be indie as long as the publisher isn't saying "add this to the game" or "remove that from the game" and you're forced to do it.

Indie is really just a short form version of the word independent. So you can either be an indie developer or an indie studio, but by definition both imply that there is no outside help during the lifetime of the project. If you get a publisher that counts as being no longer indie, because you are receiving help from another entity that is already involved in the industry. If you hire people yourself you can still be indie, but you wouldn't be an indie developer you'd be an indie studio.

I don't really care about it, I just want to have fun.

In the end, I guess it doesn't matter. But for me solo developer is someone who just writes pretty much all of the code themselves, like all of the game mechanics themselves, and isn't part of a team, but may use store-bought, free, or even AI assets, and make it all work together. What formed my opinion is that I see many jobs in the industry that consider Game Developers and programmers as the same. So "solo dev" to me, sounds like a solo programmer who is a lone wolf. I would consider myself a solo dev, but If I start contracting people on a project, then I would no longer consider myself a solo dev of that project. Since I hired people to work with me temporarily on that project to make content.

Chill. Studios also hire contractors. I doubt there is a single project that was completely done inside the studio - without contractors or 3rd party assets.

I think its pretty clear for me. Let's compare it to a carpenter, if one carpenter makes a table by themselves you dont attribute credit to their tools, or the store they got the wood for. It's a solo built table because he shaped every part, put it together and polished it to its final state. However if the carpenter got help to get the wood cut in the exact shapes they needed it and the carpenter just put it together and painted it, then no, they didn't make the table solo. Same with games, you can use tools(engine, software), buy materials(add-ons, premade assets) and still be considered a solo. Because those who did assets and sold it on a store wasnt working to make it for specifically your game, and the dev had to adapt those resources for their own needs. But if you hire someone to "cut the wood", meaning doing something especially designed and built for your game, then no, you're not a solo.

@AttractiveClock

Ай бұрын

I like this analogy.

I think the words we use do matter because it influences how both gamers and developers think and talk about the industry.

I think it would be a good marker as an indie game if the revenue is shared amongst a small set of individuals (freelance/contract work that are paid upfront once for work i.e. you paid an artists for art, musician for music, but not further payments) would be a fair definition, and solo dev would be just an indie team of one... but could hire a fleet of one off work. (I don't have art or music skills so I'd outsource that, one time payment for work)

This is easy: If you're hiring people you are not a solo dev, I mean hiring with a salary for full-time or part-time. If you buy assets or hire contractors e.g. Fiverr, you are still a solo dev.

@MisoInBowl

Ай бұрын

That's correct! It's weird to hear that the big studios like 11 bit are calling themself "independent („indie”) developer" with millions of budget.

There's a very large difference between a developer, who will focus on the same project for a long time and improve it incrementally, and a PROGRAMMER who will do what they are told and then sit around with their thumb up their arse waiting for someone to tell them what else to do. Just like there's a difference between a QA engineer and a tester. As a QA engineer, I develop the suite of tests that will tell you how good the project is and how close you are to marketability. A tester, on the other hand, will run the tests and tell you whether they passed or failed - filing bug reports as necessary. Both sides of this equation are necessary, because if you put two developers or QA engineers on the same feature, they will consume themselves with petty squabbling over whose interpretation is "correct." This is a problem for a LOT of open source projects, because over time any feature that will attract ONE developer is eventually going to attract ANOTHER developer. Then you get stuff like someone submitting a pull request for "fixed progress bar to more accurately reflect remaining time for operation" and someone else rejecting the request with the explanation "better before." Then the mailing list explodes and the community polarises and ultimately you end up with a menu option for the user to choose between "accurate" and "bullshit" progress bars. (Hey, guess what happened to me once.)

The only "true solo" Dev I can think of on top of my head is Zun from Touhou. Dude made the game's engine, art, music, and gameplay for all mainstay touohu games. The goat

If the asset is available to everyone and you use it: solo if an artist makes or programmer makes things specifically for your game and you did not just download it: not solo

I call my self for "Solo Game Dev", but im not sure where the line stop for being a solo dev, that I'm doing is 3D Models, Programming, UI / UX + Particle effects, but that I dont make is Music and sound effects, I using free assets for that (sound effects).

Id say depends how long the contractors are on board. If he received funds to long term employees/contract people thats not solo anymore. If one just self funds one or two art pieces here and there its hard to say that its a group project because the full time commitment of the contracters is non existent

i heard somewhere that an indie game is where a few people (max 4) working on putting the game idea together

@GameDevBox

Ай бұрын

yeah but nowadays a company with 30 people and high budget tries to claim that we are indie studio cause they want to get some advantages from players

A "true" solo dev is pretty rare but we use words rather loosely today. In reality even a solo dev is almost certainly using things like game store assets (Unity or Unreal) which were made by other people. Many times people think of "solo dev" as one person did all the programming but hired other people for the rest, but that seems odd to me, because what if one artist does all the art but hires programmers to do the code? No one would consider THAT to be a "solo dev". Like everything in today's modern society people seem to like to pick and choose that applies to what and how rules are applied so that it fits whatever narrative they want to sell. There's also the stupid argument "well if one person could do all this, why can't your TEAM do this?". It's stupid in many ways but you can just start with the fact that "man hours" are not linearly additive. 2 people don't produce the same output as two individual people on different projects.

@disobedientdolphin

Ай бұрын

An artist who makes all the art but hires programmers to make the game is not a solo dev, since he or she didn't do any devoloping. It's just in the word - solo dev(eloper). But he/she may be a solo artist.

@JohnVanderbeck

Ай бұрын

@@disobedientdolphin But that really seems unfair to artists :) I mean I'm a developer myself and have to rely on artists, but seems unfair the other way around.

@reessoft9416

Ай бұрын

@@JohnVanderbeck it's not really unfair though. Art assets by themselves don't amount to anything. A game only really exists because of the code. A good coder can make use of assets (models, textures, audio, etc.) and integrate everything via code to make a game. The other way round doesn't really work, although an artist may be able to make games using something like blueprints in Unreal or Bolt (Unity Visual Scripting)

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

​@@JohnVanderbeck It's a double-standard, because ppl over-estimate how hard coding is, while under-estimating how hard art is. In truth, anyone can learn either to a basic/mid level if they put in the work, but to the untrained, code seems more esoteric than art [incl music & acting]. I know both, so can appreciate the challenges inherent in either 😅

Hideo Kojima is a solo dev then. He just hires everyone to realize his vision.

indie dev stands for "Independent Developer". There are many large studios that are technically independent so company size has nothing to do with this term. Solo dev - I would consider someone a solo dev as long as they don't hire someone to do anything for them.

My opinion, solo dev is the one who program the game, basicly who is the director, but can also buy or hire arts from others.

@FirstActuality

Ай бұрын

agreed, the programming is what makes it a game and not a bunch of animated artwork.

Even an experienced solo player can develop such a game for 10 - 15 years!!!

I think that as soon as you start collaborating with other people outside of just buying their assets or using their tools, it’s no longer solo dev. To me it’s like having a group project then asking people to join to help out on specific parts and at the end saying it was only me doing it…

For me yhe guy that made cavestory was a solo dev. And argueably the same for undertale,even if he got feedback from friends.

On indie games I think the recent use of III indie game is a useful term. Most people saying indi are referring to small team/lower budget games. However, for independent studios with bigger budgets (often based on past success), they don't fit in AAA or the classic indie definition so calling them III is a nuanced way to describe them. As for "Solo Dev" I don't think it matters to much because it doesn't tell you a lot about the game (as compared to Indie, III, or AAA which come with expectations). It is a good marketing buzz word though, so if you can justify it at all, you probably should say you are a solo dev. If you get enough traction that people complain about it, you are probably doing pretty well!

@noskill1374

Ай бұрын

Source: Manor Lords

Solo dev != creating everything from scratch by your own hands Solo dev is about how many decisions was made by one person (from coding to writing music etc) There is no difference between buying asset from store or hiring someone to create an asset - it is still just an asset. For example you need 3d red car in your game. You can buy red car that 60% fits your desires in the asset store, or you can hire 3D artist to create red car that will fits your desires for 100%. If hired person doesnt affect your decision - it doesnt matter

I think if you hire people for "custom" work for your game, at least for that game it stops being a solo dev game. Yes you could argue that there is only one guy keeping it up, but I don't really see how is that relevant to the fact that game was created with one more than one person. If that was the case, I would argue that because I am the sole maintainer and bug fixer of a game that was built by 100 people, I am the solo dev if I go nothing will be fixed. That doesn't make too much sense imo.

If all the code was done by one man, I think it's fair to call it solo dev. There's definitely a distinction between a developer and an artist.

My opinion, a solo dev at minimum does all engine work, scripting/coding, and game design. Paying for pre-made assets is ok in my book. Once we get into contracting though it definitely gets into a gray area and I'm really not sure what a good metric would be for that. Perhaps if a certain % is made by other people then it no longer counts? >25% of game? Honestly assets are hard, so as long as they are doing everything else maybe its fine.

Solo = you made everything yourself (all code, assets, sounds, music etc). Stardew Valley is a solo game, he set the bar and it's what many people think of when they hear the term. And developers obviously put value on the term if they're willing to throw it around for market value - so it's best to not water down the term. A solo game could be complex or simple - it's not about the effort involved, it's about whether the output represents a series of decisions all made by one person.

Overall budget is the only way to differentiate solo/indie/AA/AAA these days

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

💯 Having more devs release numbers, even just approx / ballpark ones, would go a long way to set reasonable expectations. Solo or not, this game was clearly expensive to make for the genre & team size/experience. Impossible without that cash, even if he'd had friends helping instead of contractors.

@darkmattergamesofficial

Ай бұрын

@@mandisaw He received a lot of funding. Must have cost in the hundreds of thousands I would guess. An orchestra alone could be 100K

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

@@darkmattergamesofficial Eastern Europe staff with a US budget [Epic Mega grant, not sure where his publisher is based]. That goes a long way. Being in the States means everything is more expensive.

wohoooo this is interesting...

I think manorlord's dev tweet nailed it down: if he quits, the game's development stops.

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

Sure, but you could say the same for the Creative Director in a company, or for any key member of a small team. Plenty of small indies only have one coder or one artist - those projects also couldn't survive losing them. We've seen cases where the publisher wrests control away from the developers, and go on to release the game (or sequels) anyway. Everyone is replaceable 😢

I like the comment about building a house. Production stops when you stop paying the builders as well, but you haven't built the house "solo" by yourself, and if it ever came down to a legal dispute about the house being built "solely by you" then that should be self-evident. I think a decent definition of a solo developer is someone who does almost all of the development work themselves. People don't like this definition because it's basically impossible to do everything yourself on a large project, and well duh, that's why actual solo developers are so rare. People want the title of being a solo dev for marketing but they don't want any of the responsibility of actually being a solo developer. It's insulting to those who are really developing a game completely solo, just like how companies can claim to be "indie" with a multi-million dollar budgets and a large team. It's all for the marketing and takes opportunities away from genuine indie solo developers.

We just need to define such games as games made by a "team of solo devs". Then every game is made by solo devs... working together sometimes... in a team...

Consumers and Streamers seen "solo dev" already. Once they attach to an idea its set in stone. The guy could hire 1000 people and people would still call it a solo dev game.

Every day I go into the mines just to be a solo dev

There Trolls game developers too. Soco indie developers can relie on resources made by others. One you start hiring people to work for you you are a small indie studio. making your own OS gaming unit that was good idea in the 80s

I think if it is he used something which is available for the public in general like the Game Engine , the computer , the OS , the assets (like asset store in Unity) ,etc and his work ONLY, then it is a solo project, because he did something ALONE working on top of something available to the public. But if he hired freelancers , asked friends to do something specific which is targeted to him and not the public then it is not a solo game project anymore. But credit should be given to the developer because he ran a marathon which lasted years............

You can never be a solo dev until you build your own operating system and computer hardware as well lol

@BoltRM

Ай бұрын

What about the electricity? What about stardust?

@tomaszdecker5862

Ай бұрын

@@BoltRM You are not a solo dev until you dig your own sand to make silicon for CPU.

@BananaDynastyX

Ай бұрын

Hell why stop there, might as well say no one can be a solo dev since you didn't create your own DNA

@-Engineering01-

Ай бұрын

Hey, you gotta build the factory first!

As someone who worked for a studio, and has done solo development. You are just so much more productive being solo. No staff meetings, no prototyping so another person can do their job.. no wasted time communicating with other developers about features, or how things are organized. There is just so much time where you are communicating with the other developers or wasting time brainstorming on things that they end up not wanting to implement. As far as manor lords... i think it comes down to what he was contracting out. if it was art, sounds or music, that is one thing, but if it was actual gameplay coding, that is something different.

A game engine is a framework in which you build on top of - like a programming language, any software application or even a paint brush and canvas. The content you "develop" or "create" is what matters as it's not part of this foundational framework. Someone that uses a game engine and does all the Code, Design, Art, Music, and whatever else by themselves, cannot be placed in the same label of "solo dev" with someone that hires a bunch of people to do a significant part of the work for them. Manor Lords is a great game nonetheless, and the dev should take credit for it. To say he did it all alone is a bit of a stretch.

Im interested in the full development syory of what it took man power wise to build the game. As an solo hobby developer without commercial success there is a fair question in my mind of whether or not there enough time to actually build a game completely solo. It seems all these successful "indie" solo dev ganes were not developed solo. Whether its scores of testers or help from a community, one or two strategically commissioned art pieces etc. if i must either sacrifice another year or two in development myself or have to spend some money for a commission itd be nice to know what is actually typical. Plenty of evidence suggests people get lots of help to be successful.

Overall very correctly said.

I think some people WAY overthink this. Honestly, it's like an author can't call themselves an author of a book because they didn't grow the trees that were turned into wood pulp to make the paper that got fed into the printing press to print the books that were shipped to the store that sold them. How many people is THAT process, never mind editing, marketing, and all the OTHER steps that are part of the process? And yet nobody takes any umbrage to a person saying "*I* wrote a book", and jumps in like a neckbeard to be like "ACTUALLY YOU didn't, because you didn't create the language the book was written in..." Sheesh.

@indiesigi7807

Ай бұрын

Nah, it's an author hiring ghostwriters and claiming he solo wrote the book. The problem here is that a lot of the marketing was predicated on the 'solo dev' narrative.

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

Difference is that no one markets a book as "Only one author!!" 😮 We're not saying it's a complete ghostwriter/fraud situation, but clearly the publisher knew that splashing "Made by One Guy" across the internet [and those metal helmets 😂] would draw more attention than the unfiltered truth.

@danke1150

Ай бұрын

@@indiesigi7807 Actually, it would be more like an author hiring an illustrator for the books cover and then being accused of not making the writing the book alone. Sound effects are necessary, but it's not development of the game. You wouldn't call someone who does sound effects a developer.

@indiesigi7807

Ай бұрын

@@danke1150 No no. I'm quite correct.

@danke1150

Ай бұрын

@@indiesigi7807 No, you're not. The main part of a book is the writing, not the cover. The main part of a game is not sound effects, it's the code and design. It was said that he outsourced artwork which is not the main part of a game, so it's much more like my cover analogy than your "ghost writing" one.

i agree with comments here. as a software engineer. you do NOT count the tools to consider.... if you use a hammer to build a house, you developed the house using the hammer. thats it. plain cut and dry. tools used does NOT effect the definition. it isn't saying you made the tools from scratch. game dev wise is the same concept. you MUST development ALL pieces to the project using any tools you want. you aren't judged by tools, but you ARE judged on labor percentage. concerned age is 100% solo dev for stardew valley. he made everything 100% using tools. if he one day were to purchase an asset pack, he would no longer be a solo dev. he didn't make 100% alone. a video game is EVERYTHING within the game. dev for manor lords; he wouldn't have a game either if he didnt hire 3d modelers and an orchestra for music. you would just have 2D circle and squares moving around since he didn't make 3D models. the game is composed of ALL elements. which is why nintendo games (some) are considered a work of art. like mario galaxy for example

For me indie has simple definition. If game dev studio does not relay on other entity like a publisher then they are indie.

If you drive contractors and pay your own money, then you own their work, cause they spent their time in exchange of your money. And only for them was to choose, how much they wanna take from you for their work, while you doing your own. There is another question too, without human who took everything in one place would be this project born? No, maybe different, but mainly no, someone will do it anyways. Even if he didnt done any real job, but payed money for this people who worked on him and he got this idea to take everything to one, all profit he got should and will belong to him. I think this too can be considered as solo dev.

The dress is grey! 😂 Seriously, the marketing on this is the *real* story. The pubs crafted a lovely story about a solo-dev "handcrafting" the game out of love for 7yrs. They sent metal knight's helmets with keys to any & every streamer who might cover it. And the controversy around both solo-or-not, as well as "this isn't a Total War killer" all just fed the hype-cycle. All this and the game is still just Early Access. What we can takeaway I think, is further confirmation that great marketing is an amazing multiplier, and essential to see any success at all.

I only consider a game "indie" if only one person BUILT it. The tools they use doesn't really matter. What matters is the building process and who was involved. Example, you can buy different ingredients to prepare a meal but as long as you put everything together and cooked it yourself, we say you cooked the meal alone! Buying tools and assets doesn't get you a game, it only gets you tools and assets! But I've seen teams of programmers build a game and say it is solo developed by the head of the team. Which is bullshit!

@GameDevBox

Ай бұрын

agree!

Sure, it's impossible for one person to do all, all art, all assets etc. Well, it could be done, and it's been done before, but it prolongs completion time a lot!

People really bitter when someone succeed. Solo dev or not. It's successful because the game is good.

Its a realy interisting debate. Kinda like the "Penny Donation"; Someone asks you for a donation for a good cause. Only 0.01$. Sure, why not. Then they ask for 0.02$. Double the amount, quite an increase. But, hey, just 0.02$, so yeah. 0.03$ ... 0.04$ ... the increments become more and more insignificant while the total amount spirals out of control. Eventualy you hit 5$, 10$, 50$... and at some point you just say "STOP! Thats it!", and there is no single increment that you can point to that crossed the line. Just the vague feeling that there *is* a line somewhere. And you feel like you crossed it quite a while ago, even thou you just said "STOP!".

As said at the end of the video, to players and end users does it even matter if a game is made solo or not? What people care about is a good a game, the rest is the maker's business. Whether you wanna put your name on it or the name of the company. Heck, I could open up a company tomorrow just like ML maker did and put its name on my product and nobody will ever know the "company" or "studio" is just me.

Today I have successfully completed 100 comments on your channel

What if you don't hire contractors but use Generative AI instead?

If a game has a publisher, while still being low budget... Maybe we should start calling it 'A game', in contrast to AA and AAA games.

I kind of feel like the categories have collapsed into "either you're indie or you're AAA." Hardly anyone ever talks about or uses other categories like AA anymore. I've heard a few people float the idea of a III (triple I or triple Indie) which would be studios that started as indie but have grown thanks to massive success while still being largely independent and free of monied influences. So Klei and Team Cherry would come to mind.

@CodeMonkeyUnity

Ай бұрын

Yup those are indeed pretty much the only terms used nowadays. I do hope triple I indie becomes a more popular term, it does describe those studios perfectly

my only problem is that the "solo" is being used as a selling point. "look at this game and it is made by only one person!", which is great marketing, but that applies to many games (and Code Monkey's games even more). it's the same asthe engine debate. all engines have their pros and cons and i'm pretty emotionless when it comes to this, but i HATE people that use "made in unral 5" as a selling point

To my definition: If assets you using made only for your game then you're not a solo game dev. You are an indie team.

I say ML is solo dev. As long as it was just the one dev opening the project and putting the pieces together, that's enough for me. Buying nails and boards from Home Depot doesn't mean that everybody from the Lowe's cashier back to the person who cut the rubber tree for the tires on the ore mining cart were part of the project. Same with buying premade assets vs buying rafters that are already put together. Using a resource that is generally available to the public doesn't deconstruct the solo part of the project. But when your project is on github and somebody else is pushing commits...not solo.

@Mendogology

Ай бұрын

We are talking about who develops and not who opens the project on the game engine. Those two are not the same.

I wonder how we are going to call the person that will build a game in, let's say 5+ years, when everything like code, models, textures, music will be done by AI and 1 person with the knowledge of these tools will put it all together. I think "the game conductor" could be a good word

How about a writer/mangaka that make story by using ghostwriters/staff? But we already know without "solo" writer/mangaka tend working alone.

@mandisaw

Ай бұрын

Most manga-ka actually have a small team of assistants, usually apprentices hoping to debut themselves one day. Even an established team like CLAMP started out mostly just working as the 4 of them, but added a bunch of assistants over the years on various projects.

well... i would define indie dev to be A person who can receive majority of the profit share (net 30%-50%) and make majority of the decisions and own the title in the following future (after publisher). Otherwise, i would consider him/her to be a studio owner rather than indie dev

you didn't make that pizza did you raise the cow?...

I would say that solo-dev is someone who put most of the hours of work.

To my perspective these are all marketing terms used and have no meaning to anything. Indi is just short for a studio that is independent of a publisher and solo meaning you do all the work on your own and with out you the game is going no where or progressing any further. If I finish a game and put it on the store I just say here is my game and enjoy. I don't need any these marketing labels to make a difference.

In the end, it doesn't matter. Is the game good? Is it selling? The rest is just marketing which seems to have worked well for them. You could extend this well into any other industry. I play guitar and sometimes write songs. Am I not a solo musician because I didn't build my guitar, took some lessons when I was younger, or I'm playing a common I-V-vi-iv chord progression? Or someone who builds a log cabin in the woods. They bought the hammer, nails, saw, etc. but put in the work of building the cabin themselves. Are they a solo builder? I could go on and on but why. This is just a discussion to kill time. It has no substance but I appreciate your even and unemotional coverage in this video.

if there's more than one person working on it, it's not solo. A small team or working with freelancer should qualify for "indie" because it's an independent development. As soon as you have a MegaGrant, or a publisher, it's not indie anymore.

Hi! Do you think that a 2d game or a simple 3d game (like the one in your free course) is better for a first project?

@Mendogology

Ай бұрын

The biggest difficulty with 3D games in comparison to 2D games, are graphics: making 3D models, animations, etc. 2D graphics are simpler and faster to make. And when it comes to coding, is almost the same difficulty for both 2D and 3D.

You're a solo dev! People are crazy! ML is a studio it seems, not a solo dev.

It's simple. Do you have more than one programmer on the team, yes or no. Maybe it could be called solo programmer for clarity but that sounds terrible.

If we can't agree on the definition of the term (solo dev) than the label is by definition meaningless. But if one person started the project on their own budget and has driven it from start to completion, regardless of whether they have had little to big help along the way, I'd say that's impressive which ever way you spin it. Or regardless of where it falls on CM's spectrum Cheers

Not a solo game but yes independent developer.

I think it’s all about level of responsibilities. If you’re solo dev, then you’re the one taking risks, spending your own money, nerves, signing contracts with publishers, etc to create a finished game. You’re little business owner, CEO and janitor in one person. Contract workers have less responsibilities, they don’t take risks, they should get paid for contributed work - and that’s it, no strings attached. At least that’s how I work at my full time job, I am not stressing about selling a game I am working on, I just wait for a pay check. Right now my friends and I are making own indie game and that’s three of us who are not getting paid, who are overworked and stressed just to finish our little project. Hired contractors get money and we’re grateful for their contribution, but game will be finished even without them. But without our core team of three - it will never see the light of the day.

Now Unreal Engine can no longer be seen as indie first choice 😂

Solo dev is same category as manticore or self-made billionaire: it's a myth, it doesn't exist. That being said, I cheer for Manor Lords' success