Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(2 edits)

Thank you very much for this information. I can tell that you have a lot of experience and capability.

For us, we find it difficult to draw a clear line between what is MVP-0 and what isn't. For example, people in the Art team feel they need to create visually appealing images to call it MVP-0, while 3D artists often say there must be meshes and animations that communicate with players to qualify as MVP-0. Working as a team makes it challenging because each person has a different idea about what constitutes MVP-0.

Ahh, I don't know if I can answer that for you as team dynamics can be challenging and it really differs from team to team, and I agree that each person has different priorities, and if there is a lack of "alignment" it can be conflicting to determine what MVP-0 actually is!

This is obviously only my personal opinion and there will be people who think differently from me:

If your game is a game that relies on visuals, such as a visual novel, an atmospheric game, or in rare cases, the art is the hook (very rare, I only count top 1% of games like Cuphead and Bodycam into this category - they sell because they've made something nobody has seen before, this doesn't apply to just any game that looks pretty), then it may be okay to have MVP-0 require visually appealing visuals. As you can see, this depends on your genre.

The other case I may consider is when your game relies on animations to convey the gameplay and genre. I can't think of examples, but maybe some animation-driven game would fall into this case.

However, if your primary hook is gameplay (in the case of genres like roguelites, city builder, and possibly majority of games), then what you really want to do is test if people even like your idea - the art is there to support and sell the game. Yes, the art can help attract new players, but whether the game has retention or makes the player feel value for their time spent, hinges on gameplay and possibly its unique selling point. If the MVP has great art but ultimately fails to convey its genre or hook, then its purpose is debatable. That's not to say leave art all the way at the end or to ignore it, art has a role, but but you have to ask yourself what is the purpose of making your MVP. Is it to make a pretty thing sell your concept? If so, then you might want to consider making a vertical slice, instead of an MVP.

In the context of games in the genres above, I think the MVP is to let players play it and gather feedback on if the concept is viable, which is the "V" in "MVP".

Note that what is considered the MVP depends on a lot of factors - concept, so what I said here may not be applicable - I don't know your context, so it can be a case by case basis.

I always write way more than I expect haha, so the summary is: What are you trying to validate?

"Is this game fun?" -> if trying to validate fun, and you find that it's fun even with a bunch of placeholder white squares, you know your concept is a banger! In fact, not having polished art makes this easier because you're judging it "objectively" without being distracted by visuals.

Wow, the 'vertical slice'—I love it! It’s such a spot-on solution. I’m deeply grateful you sacrificed your time to write such detailed guidance for me, and I hope these valuable insights can be shared with other developers too. Thank you so much!

I am more than happy to be of assistance and to help everyone as much as I possibly can! I wish you all the best with your team, the jam, and your games :)

Also if you have any constructive feedback and criticism - feel free to share them too! It will not just help me a lot to learn and improve, but to also make the game better for other people!