Skip to main content

Agile Game Development: Magicka

Update 2011.05.09: Arrowhead posted a reply to this post.

This post is a tribute to a company which, judging by the looks of it, is kicking ass, agile style.

"This sprint is really going down the drain" from the first scene
of Magicka in adventure mode.
What's this about
The company is called Arrowhead Game Studios, and they've made a game called Magicka.

Now, I'm not going to write so much about the game itself, but it's awesome. I used to play a lot of computer games growing up, all the way through my studies. Since then, it's been pretty sporadic. Until I tried out Magicka. I've been playing it for over 50 hours, which is pretty good value-for-money, considering it cost 10€ (plus DLC's, which are a point I'll come back to later).

How successful is it?
In the first 17 days it was for sale, it sold over 200.000 copies. At times it topped the stats for most-selling game on Steam, at one point selling 30.000 copies in 24 hours. Its gotten pretty good reviews all round, and some rather high ranking game reviewers have completely fallen for the game.

Take into account that this is an indie game which was/is developed by eight Swedish students turned game developers. The only other game I've heard of that comes close to this phenomenon is Minecraft.

Why is it agile?
They ship early and they ship often.

Early because they launched the game while it was still early alpha and crap-full of bugs. Often, cause after they went live on Steam they were patching on a daily basis (the Steam automatically upgrades the game, a bit like the Windows update). Since then they've eased down to more of a weekly release cycle.

Now for those of you who haven't been playing a lot of computer games lately, to me this is pretty radical. A big "Hollywood" game usually takes weeks to produce their first (well needed) patches, some times even months.

Lots of people have been complaining about the instability of the game and the bugs from early on. Then again, so do many big budget games. For a small company of eight developers, it's hard to keep coverage of all possible hardware drivers and configurations, so this is understandable. 

But they fix the problems continuously. These releases are pumped out so regularly that I hardly notice them anymore. They've gotten really good at not letting new bugs slip through. This is continuous delivery.

Humble, Open and Honest
The developers seem incredibly involved with their users. As an apology for the early buggy releases of the game, they released a new avatar in: The Mea Culpa Wizard (granted some new magical powers: summon bugs, and the spell Crash To Desktop). By now you can probably guess that there's a lot of geek humor in there.

They communicate frequently with the world through twitter and forums. They often take in suggestions from players into patches and new changes. They post release notes and weekly community updates.

They are honest, continuously maintaining a list of things they know are still buggy. They admit it when they mess up and they apologize. They say thanks when they get feedback.

Even though I've never met them, it feels like the developers are practically my buddies, eager to understand and help me have the best possible gaming experience.

I really had to smile when I saw the Scrum board from the first scene in the game (see screenshot in the top of this post). I mean, how many gamers out there know what Scrum is? That is clearly a wink to other devs out there :)

Pay per use
Its important for the developers to keep the players happy, and keeping them playing, also after that they bought the game. They've shipped some downloadable content, some of it is free, others cost a few euros.

I bought the game for 10€. I then bought the Vietnam extension for 5€, and then I *had* to get the latest level as well for a meager 2€. Later on they are going to release Player-vs-player mode (PvP) for free, due to heavy demand among the fans.

They are tip-toeing the fine line of keeping players paying for more, while not giving the impression that they are exploiting (like some other games have tried).

Courage
Arrowhead have really challenged a lot of the existing conventions in the gaming industry. They heavily under-priced (games are usually 30-50€). They launched the game without a 6 month QA period. They did no traditional marketing (apart from getting on Steam, which was probably a big part of the lift-off). They sit down to play and discuss the game, while streaming it online. It's a spelled-based game where there is no mana-bar, for crying out loud!

Rounding off..
The XP values are Communication, Feedback, Simplicity, Courage and Respect. I think these really ring through every time I have read on the forums. Just to paste some quotes from their change log announcements:

From early on:
Right now we've got so many players posting on the steam forums we're having a hard time keeping up answering posts. But we're reading all of them and are adding stuff to our "to-do"-list. [...] We'll monitor your response closely and keep patching the game as often as possible. Please let us know if the patch helped!
Later on:
We (devs and publisher) are still super committed to fix stuff that's broken and make sure you guys can have a great time with the game. Additionally we've also have a bunch of improvements planned and will be patched in as soon as the major issues are out of the way! These are based directly off your input.
Later:
As we've released new patches we're seeing much fewer reports of the game malfunctioning. More and more players are reporting that the game is working nicely for them. We're also noticing that the problems that exist are A) known and being worked on and B) centered around fewer different things. 
And then things are really becoming stable:
So the last patch squashed a lot of bugs and we're glad to report that we're getting fewer error reports and the reports we're getting are about a smaller number of problems.
So we're definitely getting where we want to go! BUT that doesn't mean we're done. We'll keep updating the game and improve it as we go along. We will also try to add additional features that you guys are requesting. 
And since then they've done another ten patches. This is agile straight out of the book (or into it, depending on how you look at it). Really inspiring to see how successful they are.

Update 2011.05.09: Arrowhead posted a reply to this post.

Comments

  1. Ferris,

    Good post! I agree with the values you enjoyed, but wanted to point out that XP done correctly (including TDD practices) should not result in early releases full of bugs. You're not truly releasing something if it requires patches to finish features. XP focuses on prioritized customer value, which includes stability. This is not to say they are not doing XP, but they should be modifying/improving their practices to ensure they keep up the early/frequent releases that are more stable.

    Clinton Keith
    Author, Agile Game Development

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Clinton, thanks for the comment!

    Wow, I had no idea there's a book on the subject, with the exact same title even :)

    You're right about that, of course. And the developers openly admit this in retrospect (listening to their vods with Total Biscuit you pick up a lot of interesting facts).

    I think all the way through, the devs acted to the best of their knowledge (probably some pressure from the publisher), and as as soon as they realized that quality was below par for the general public, they adapted: focused on increasing stability, daily releasing patches to remove bugs.

    An interesting example of this is here, quoting from these release notes:

    We've got a new patch for you! It'll take care of Friday's patch that was...less than stellar... Again, we're terribly sorry for the inconvenience. We'll make it up to you...promise!

    I can also tell you that we're putting a new patching/testing/verification procedure in place to avoid additional f-ups. We'll talk more about that in a future community update!

    (end quote)

    Even though their values seem to be in the right place, I'm not sure if these devs did, or do TDD, or continuous integration. Would be interesting to find out! I'll give them a tweet, or a post in their forum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. it was realy wonderful blog..!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant

Encrypting and Decrypting with Spring

I was recently working with protecting some sensitive data in a typical Java application with a database underneath. We convert the data on its way out of the application using Spring Security Crypto Utilities . It "was decided" that we'd be doing AES with a key-length of 256 , and this just happens to be the kind of encryption Spring crypto does out of the box. Sweet! The big aber is that whatever JRE is running the application has to be patched with Oracle's JCE  in order to do 256 bits. It's a fascinating story , the short version being that U.S. companies are restricted from exporting various encryption algorithms to certain countries, and some countries are restricted from importing them. Once I had patched my JRE with the JCE, I found it fascinating how straight forward it was to encrypt and decrypt using the Spring Encryptors. So just for fun at the weekend, I threw together a little desktop app that will encrypt and decrypt stuff for the given password

The Git Users Mailing List

A year ago or so, I came across the Git-user mailing list (aka. "Git for human beings"). Over the year, I grew a little addicted to helping people out with their Git problems. When the new git-scm.com webpage launched , and the link to the mailing list had disappeared, I was quick to ask them to add it again . I think this mailing list fills an important hole in the Git community between: The Git developer mailing list git@vger.kernel.org  - which I find to be a bit too hard-core and scary for Git newbies. Besides, the Majordomo mailing list system is pretty archaic, and I personally can't stand browsing or searching in the Gmane archives. The IRC channel #git on Freenode, which is a bit out-of-reach for people who never experienced the glory days of IRC. Furthermore, when the channel is busy, it's a big pain to follow any discussion. StackOverflow questions tagged git , these come pretty close, but it's a bit hard to keep an overview of what questio

Git tools for keeping patches on top of moving upstreams

At work, we maintain patches for some pretty large open source repositories that regularly release new versions, forcing us to update our patches to match. So far, we've been using basic Git operations to transplant our modifications from one major version of the upstream to the next. Every time we make such a transplant, we simply squash together the modifications we made in the previous version, and land it as one big commit into the next version. Those who are used to very stringent keeping of Git history may wrinkle their nose at this, but it is a pragmatic choice. Maintaining modifications on top of the rapidly changing upstream is a lot of work, and so far we haven't had the opportunity to figure out a more clever way to do it. Nor have we really suffered any consequences of not having an easy to read history of our modifications - it's a relatively small amount of patches, after all. With a recent boost in team size, we may have that opportunity. Also the need for be

Managing dot-files with vcsh and myrepos

Say I want to get my dot-files out on a new computer. Here's what I do: # install vcsh & myrepos via apt/brew/etc vcsh clone https://github.com/tfnico/config-mr.git mr mr update Done! All dot-files are ready to use and in place. No deploy command, no linking up symlinks to the files . No checking/out in my entire home directory as a Git repository. Yet, all my dot-files are neatly kept in fine-grained repositories, and any changes I make are immediately ready to be committed: config-atom.git     -> ~/.atom/* config-mr.git     -> ~/.mrconfig     -> ~/.config/mr/* config-tmuxinator.git       -> ~/.tmuxinator/* config-vim.git     -> ~/.vimrc     -> ~/.vim/* config-bin.git        -> ~/bin/* config-git.git               -> ~/.gitconfig config-tmux.git       -> ~/.tmux.conf     config-zsh.git     -> ~/.zshrc How can this be? The key here is to use vcsh to keep track of your dot-files, and its partner myrepos/mr for o