What Sells on Steam: You Don't Need a Hook

Let's talk about how to make a video game that actually sells on Steam and why you don't need a hook. The problem

is that when talking about hooks, everybody kind of means something else.

What I mean is something like this. You

have a pitch, a platformer, but with gravity shifting, bada boom. So, this is your hook right there and then you go everywhere and pitch your game as a platformer but with gravity shifting.

Bada boom. You tell your friends about it. You tell the publisher about it. So,

it. You tell the publisher about it. So,

a mechanic that sets your game apart and is designed to get you attention. And uh

in spec specifically, I'm talking about mechanics. So, I know that there are

mechanics. So, I know that there are also different ways to use the word hook. Like some people say like there's

hook. Like some people say like there's a gameplay hook, there can be a story hook, there can be an art hook. Um for

the purpose of this discussion, I specifically mean mechanics.

You don't need a hook. So, what I'm talking about is you don't need a mechanic that sets you apart. And we'll

also talk a little bit about what you do need instead. and not just a little bit.

need instead. and not just a little bit.

I'll I'll straight up tell you what I think you do need instead. First of all, let's talk about why this is maybe not the correct approach.

Let's say you want to make a game with gravity shifting bada boom, a platformer, but with gravity shifting bada boom. This is like your Steam page

bada boom. This is like your Steam page and then the customer sees it and it's like, "Oh, a platformer. It could be fun, I guess." And the truth is most players don't really care about

mechanics. Compared to something like

mechanics. Compared to something like this, what do we see here? It's not a very interesting mechanic. Watering

plants is not a very interesting or unique mechanic. That's that's what we

unique mechanic. That's that's what we see here. It's like clicking to water a

see here. It's like clicking to water a plant. Not a crazy unique mechanic. And

plant. Not a crazy unique mechanic. And

still the customers like, "Oh my god, I get to be a drug lord." And the reason for that is because the context of the mechanic matters, not so much the

mechanic itself. Players care about

mechanic itself. Players care about experience.

And what does this mean for how we should make games? It probably means we should start from the experience. When

Paul and I made Thronefall, we struggled a lot with the prototyping. We made so many prototypes and we didn't really get anywhere. And the problem, I think, was

anywhere. And the problem, I think, was that we were too focused on gameplay because at some point we wrote this onto our mirror board. Build and defend your

castle. So very clear fantasy, very

castle. So very clear fantasy, very clear vision. And from that point on,

clear vision. And from that point on, things started falling into place so much more easily because we defined our experience. And all of a sudden, our

experience. And all of a sudden, our prototypes became way more targeted. All

of a sudden, our research became way more targeted. Like, we could do way

more targeted. Like, we could do way more specific research into art styles, into castles, into other similar games, into how to stylize the game potentially, and so on. Way better

quality research led to better decisions. This like an early look of

decisions. This like an early look of our game that you see here and it eventually turned into a game that sold over 1 million copies.

I don't know why I did the voice like that. Always a bit uncomfortable to to

that. Always a bit uncomfortable to to brag about numbers, but it gives credibility. So that's that's why you

credibility. So that's that's why you kind of got to do it. Also my other games, I think large reason for why they work is because they're all very experience focused. Like Islanders, it's

experience focused. Like Islanders, it's not really a game about getting points from placing puzzle pieces, right? It's

not about the mechanic. It's about

building islands. Will you snail is not about jumping. It's about the evil AI,

about jumping. It's about the evil AI, the interactions with the evil AI. You

can see a little bit in the background here. Then Fall is also not a game about

here. Then Fall is also not a game about draining health bars. It's it's a game about building and defending your kingdom. So, it's always always about

kingdom. So, it's always always about the experience and I think that's why they worked. So, what about this? What

they worked. So, what about this? What

about pitching your game like this?

Hooks are cool. I think they actually even kind of work. That's confusing.

Didn't you just say they don't? Um, not

quite. I think I think they do work. I

think they do work, but you're putting yourself in danger because a lot of people who do this, they forget to care about the experience, and if you do that, then you're in trouble. This is a

fun example. This is a game called

fun example. This is a game called Mary's Adventure. I've talked to the

Mary's Adventure. I've talked to the deaf on Twitter a bit. This is very interesting cuz the game did not do very well. And this is a honestly a very

well. And this is a honestly a very typical example of a gameplay hook. It's

like a a platformer, but you can turn into a shark. So, it turns out that is kind of not enough to sell the game apparently. But then the same developer

apparently. But then the same developer made another game called Pedal Pedal Pedal. And you can see it also doesn't

Pedal. And you can see it also doesn't have the greatest art. I think we can quite generally all agree on that. But

it did it did like way way way way better. And the reason for that is that

better. And the reason for that is that the fantasy and the experience is just such a more compelling pitch. Like even

here on the capsule image, it already sells the fantasy so much more. It's

like you're in a boat together with your friend. You get to pedal. So if you ask

friend. You get to pedal. So if you ask me, the difference is this one is a mechanics focused pitch and this one is an experienced focused pitch. You don't

need a hook. Players aren't fish. They

are people looking for cool experiences.

So what you got to do is make cool experiences which may or may not include hooks. Another very fun example is Mega

hooks. Another very fun example is Mega Bonk, which has been going kind of viral recently. It's doing super well and it's

recently. It's doing super well and it's also a very experienced focused game.

It's like purely about the power fantasy. Tons and tons of enemies

fantasy. Tons and tons of enemies getting at you and you're just slashing them all and you get to break the game, build really powerful builds and just basically full-on power fantasy destroy

all of the enemies kind of thing. And it

works. It works. Here is kind of a useful way to think about this entire thing. I think about game development in

thing. I think about game development in like four main pillars that you need to solve. You need fun for keeping players.

solve. You need fun for keeping players.

You need appeal for gaining players. You

need scope for being efficient. And you

need monetization for paying rent.

Quickly want to talk about what I mean with appeal because it's also one of those ambiguous words that might mean different things. For me, appeal is

different things. For me, appeal is anything that creates reactions like I want to be that, I want to explore that, I want to prove myself with that, I want to spend time with that, I want to know the story, how the story unfolds, I want

to tinker with that. So an unsatisfied urge that is typically activated visually. Most people start here. Most

visually. Most people start here. Most

developers start here. And then they are like, "But we should also have a way to gain players." Like, it's not enough to

gain players." Like, it's not enough to just be fun. Let's also create a way to gain players. So, they extend out this

gain players. So, they extend out this little hook and are like, "Look, look, our game play is really cool. We have

cool gameplay. Come in." I think the more native and usually better solution is to just cover this natively instead of like hooking over from a different field. But eventually you need to check

field. But eventually you need to check all four boxes. If you want to make a commercially successful game, you need to check all four boxes anyway. But

where should you start? I don't think you should start with monetization because monetization a it's kind of disconnected from the other ones for indie games at the very least. You can

kind of worry about it at the very end and although it's relatively straightforward compared to the other ones. The next one is a bit more

ones. The next one is a bit more controversial because I also think fun is kind of easy. Um, I have to say it's not easy for everybody. Like it's not like when you just start making games,

making fun games is immediately going to be super easy for you. But it's like once you've been making for a couple of years, once you have a little bit of experience, once you know how to iterate properly, making a fun game is not

really the problem anymore. So, uh, once once you gather and collect some skills, then this stops becoming the problem.

So, I do think that the main problems are these two right here. I think appeal for gaining players and scope for being efficient. Those are the main problems

efficient. Those are the main problems you should probably start with because they're the most difficult to get right.

So the main problems are making games that players want to play before playing them. So that's appeal and doing so

them. So that's appeal and doing so costefficiently.

That's scope. And so maybe you should start your next game project by addressing these problems first.

I think you should. The question is of course how. There is no easy answer.

course how. There is no easy answer.

That's why it's the main problem. But I

do have a couple of ideas for you. And

the first one is actually to use a hook.

And with that I mean a gameplay mechanics hook. Your gravity shifting

mechanics hook. Your gravity shifting bada boom. Um the pros of this strategy

bada boom. Um the pros of this strategy is that it creates intrigue and it is indeed costefficient. That is for sure.

indeed costefficient. That is for sure.

It's a costefficient way to do it.

Problem is it's overused and players don't care that much about it. So I

think my summary would be maybe use it as a bonus but don't use it as a standalone strategy. A game that does

standalone strategy. A game that does this well in my opinion is Portal cuz it does have a very strong gameplay hook.

It does have the portals, but you can see on this screenshot here, for example, there's not a single portal on the screenshot. That's why I chose the

the screenshot. That's why I chose the screenshot. And you can see that even

screenshot. And you can see that even without portals, Portal is still a super appealing game. So, Portal still kind of

appealing game. So, Portal still kind of works without the portals. People would

still want to play this without the portals is what I'm claiming. So, this

is the correct way to use a gameplay hook, not as a standalone strategy.

Second idea, iterate on proven formulas.

This is kind of what we did with Thronefall. Um cuz Thronefall is very

Thronefall. Um cuz Thronefall is very strongly inspired by Kingdom. I think

it's fair to say that the advantage of that strategy is that it's relatively safe because it's already been proven.

Uh the disadvantage is that it requires some skill to pull off uh well and you need to do it best because others will also try. Like if people see that

also try. Like if people see that something's successful, then it will spawn a bunch of copycats and people like not necessarily copycats, but people who are inspired by the idea. So

you got to be able to compete with those. But if you do it well, then it's

those. But if you do it well, then it's a relatively safe strategy because it has already been proven. It's already

like the demand is already proven.

Another example, once again, Mega Bonk.

Just combine two very successful games like Risk of Rain and Vampire Survivors.

Combine them tastefully and you get another very successful game. Voila.

Idea three, find a gap in the market.

This is, I would say, what we did with Islanders. It's a very high reward

Islanders. It's a very high reward strategy, but it's also hard to find and it's hard to verify. I would very much claim that at the time where we published Islanders, there weren't any

super hyper minimalist citybuilders on Steam. At very least, not that I'm aware

Steam. At very least, not that I'm aware of. In hindsight, I learned that there

of. In hindsight, I learned that there are a couple of games that are similar to Islanders, but they weren't super popular, and I'm not sure if they were on Steam. And also, we didn't know about

on Steam. And also, we didn't know about them. So, I think we very much found our

them. So, I think we very much found our own niche uh with Islanders at the time, and it worked out very well. It's high

reward, but it's also risky. If you can pull it off, then good for you. Idea

four, start with a fantasy. This is one of our favorite favorite methods at Grizzly Games. This is Superflight, a

Grizzly Games. This is Superflight, a game a couple of my friends made before I joined Grizzly Games. It's a game where you fly in a wings suit and all you do is like dodge these little shapes and so on. And this is all about the

fantasy. It's just about flying in a

fantasy. It's just about flying in a wings suit.

It's easy. It's super impactful. And if

you pick something that people find appealing in reality, then you can be pretty certain they're also going to find it appealing in a game. The only

disadvantage I can see is that it sort of limits other options you have. For

example, like we can't have swarms of enemies spawning in or something that would like take attention away from the core fantasy. that would u make it more

core fantasy. that would u make it more confusing, would make it maybe even more difficult to market or we would have to use a different strategy at least like if if we go for the fantasy of flying in

a wings suit then we need to make sure that we fully serve this fantasy and fully support this fantasy and that's what Superfly did and it worked out really really well. Another one, this is

one that I got from Gavin, the true true creator, translate other successful media. And this is also very good

media. And this is also very good strategy. For example, if you have a

strategy. For example, if you have a super successful show like Breaking Bad, and then somebody comes along and basically copies the vibe into a game.

This is a screenshot from schedule one, of course. Then of course, of course,

of course. Then of course, of course, it's going to work out well if you do it tastefully. So, this can hit really

tastefully. So, this can hit really hard. you already know that it's

hard. you already know that it's successful. Like you know that the topic

successful. Like you know that the topic is popular, but it's difficult to do tastefully. Like it's schedule one is

tastefully. Like it's schedule one is not the first game that tried to copy the Breaking Bad vibe. It's just the first one that managed to do it tastefully enough to actually make it work. So this is even though this is a

work. So this is even though this is a very hard-hitting strategy, it's also kind of rare. Paul and I, I think, kind of have um like the the idea for our next game kind of falls into this

category. Uh we'll we'll see. We're

category. Uh we'll we'll see. We're

currently still prototyping. Idea six

also from Gavin. Design your appeal factor first. So this is something Gavin

factor first. So this is something Gavin did with Chuchu Charles which I find a very interesting strategy. He designed

basically the game for the trailer first. You spent like one or two months

first. You spent like one or two months just making the trailer for the game and then the entire development for the game was essentially after that if you pull it off you can sleep very well. Right?

If you have a viral trailer then you can sleep very well at night. You're already

going to know that your game is going to do well when it comes out with a very high certainty I would say. But it also requires a very specific skill set and it's also hard to do efficiently. And I

would also say it's not entirely risk-f free. I I would say it's lower risk than

free. I I would say it's lower risk than making the full game and then finding out if it works, but it could still be that you spend a month or two making a trying to make a viral trailer and it just doesn't work out. Then you still

you still lost one or two months. Like I

wouldn't bet on this working every time.

Got a tech advantage. This is one of the most underused ones. It's very powerful as I think more more people should do this because you have a lot less competition to deal with and it also

unlocks new kinds of appeal. Let's for

example say you have a very cool voxil engine that only you have access to and not a lot of other games are doing this because it's difficult to do. If it's

difficult to then you have less competition, right? For for example, not

competition, right? For for example, not every developer knows how to use ECS and have like millions and or thousands of enemies on screen. So, if you have the technology and the capabilities to do

something like this, then you have less competition and you unlock new kinds of appeal like the like you see here, like screenshots with thousands and thousands of enemies, very specific type of appeal that not everybody has access to. Only

thing I would say is that it's also not an auto win. You probably need to combine this strategy with a couple of other strategies to make it work. A good

example for tech advantage is Nita, like the game where every pixel is simulated.

This is just something that's still very difficult to do. I think they had to write like an entire custom engine essentially to make this work, but Noa sold really really well. Like it's a

absolute mega hit and that's because not a lot of I basically I don't know any games that are really competing in this niche. So you can really carve out a

niche. So you can really carve out a very good niche with the strategy. What

I want to make clear is that there are lots of solutions like the Zven that I just showed you are by no means all of them. I think there are lots and lots of

them. I think there are lots and lots of strategies to tackle the problems, but you need to focus on the correct problems. This is the main thing that I want to stress in my little talk here and that I want to take you away. The

wrong problem to focus on is this. What

goes after the butt. This is what a lot of new developers focus on. They're

like, I want to make a platformer, but I need to make it unique. So, I'm going to make a platformer, but and then they think filling in this gap here is the main problem. That's not the case. The

main problem. That's not the case. The

main problem are these two right here.

How do I make something appealing that players want to play before they play it? And how do you do so efficiently in

it? And how do you do so efficiently in a way that's not going to take you 10 years? If you can solve this problem,

years? If you can solve this problem, then you're very, very well set up for success. Thank you. That's it.

success. Thank you. That's it.