Matters Arising
Post Mortem: Ghost Master (Part Two)

Post Mortem: Ghost Master (Part One)

Two years after the release of Ghost Master (PC) seems a little late for a post mortem, but there is much to be learned from examining just what went wrong with this game. Of particular note is that what went wrong wasn't, for once, the result of 'bad design'. In fact, the design was perfectly serviceable for a first title in a franchise, although this doesn't mean there wasn't room for improvement (there always is room for improvement!) What went wrong, broadly speaking was a total lack of marketing.

As background, I should explain that this is in response to perfectly reasonable questions raised by Deacon over at Design Synthesis, following on from genre discussions at Man Bytes Blog. I should also explain that I was the game designer on this project - although the project director, Gregg Barnett, made the content decisions and worked closely with me on the game design. A good way to understand the relationship between Gregg and myself on this project: Gregg made all the decisions; I gave him the options and generated all the design documentation. The game would be utterly different without our creative partnership.

Let’s begin with why I don't consider the game design to be ‘bad’. Well, subjective issues aside, the 81% metacritic review score is a fairly convincing vindication for a game developed on about a quarter of the budget of most other critically-acclaimed games. Since it didn't have the budget to wow players with its production values, it came down to the quality of the game design and the skills of the programmers and artists. This latter point should not be overlooked: the Sick Puppies team was built from the ground up by Gregg and was exceptional. A game designer can only be as good as the team behind them, and this team was first rate.

Note that one of the reviews listed on metacritic is PC Gamer (US) magazine, which gives it a 90% score. PC Gamer is allegedly the most influential video game magazine in the world; certainly it is the game magazine with the largest global circulation. Industry wisdom claims that getting a 90% in PC Gamer all but guarantees a top ten best selling game.

That's not what happened to Ghost Master. In fact, it vanished practically without a trace.

What went wrong?

I'm going to look at two particular elements in the game's commercial failure - audience model errors (which were my responsibility) and marketing failure (which was not). I'm also going to look at the extent to which genre confusion hurt the game, although this is at best a secondary issue.

Audience Model Errors

When I designed Ghost Master, our audience model wasn't very sophisticated. It was the Hardcore-Casual split, the most basic model at use in the industry. Still, it is better than nothing, and I can hardly be blamed for not having a better model since until we researched ours, there wasn't a better model (Nicole Lazarro's Four Keys didn't exist yet either).

I badly misread the Hardcore on a number of points, chief of which were:

  • Hidden Fiero: Believing that innovation and well designed gameplay would meet the play needs of the Hardcore. It did for some players - but not for those for whom fiero was a key play need. There is fiero to be found - but only in going for the "Triple Pumpkins" (effectively gold medals). Since most fiero-seeking (Type 1 Conqueror in DGD1) players found little or no fiero in their initial play through, they never tried for the Triple Pumpkins and hence never found the fiero. Also, the esoteric name for the medals (Gregg delighted in maintaining the consistency of a game's identity) meant they weren't interpreted as medals. We would, in fact, have done better to call them Medals - as then at least some of the Type 1 players would have felt more compelled to tackle the more difficult Triple Pumpkin challenges.
  • No Micromanagement: The gameplay was designed to allow the player to genuinely be in charge of a team, reacting to dynamic situations by making leadership decisions. Strong ghosts in your team could compensate for the lesser skills of an inexperienced player, whilst adept players could enjoy the satisfaction of commanding a well-oiled team. The key to this was a simple but effective AI subsystem for the ghosts themselves, who acted as quasi-autonomous agents. (This is one of the few games to have such complex agents, in fact). Because of the highly dynamic environment - you can never reproduce exactly the same results even with the same haunters - the game supports Tactical and Strategic play but not Logistical play. Say goodbye to the players fitting the Type 1 Conqueror archetype once again.

One other problem - the game was too short. This was not strictly our fault, since most of the game budget was required to get everything up and running, and the environments required a lot of care and attention to produce. Furthermore the method used to develop the game locations did not support the option for a level editor without a great deal of additional time and expense. This particular problem would have been fixed had we got a sequel - we all agreed it would have been a priority for Ghost Master 2, a game that now can never happen.

The trouble with games being too short is that they don't stay in circulation. Even if a large proportion of Hardcore players love a game, if they complete it in a week and there's nothing to go back for, they go on and start playing something new. That only gives you a week for them to recommend it to someone else in real terms. It's what we have termed the 'play window' of the game - and for Ghost Master, it was cripplingly short. Part of the secret of the success of the recent GTA games is a huge play window - it allowed word of mouth to build. I'm not saying we could have been as big as a GTA game on our tiny budget, but the point still stands.

So we don't have the support of the Type 1 Conqueror players, and the game is too short for word of mouth to build up momentum... Both of these elements hurt us, because with the support of players fitting the Type 1 archetype (who are in general vocal supporters of the games they love) and a long enough play window, we might have been able to survive the game's other problem.

Marketing Failure

How can I competently tell that this was a case of marketing failure? Well, there are two key pieces of evidence. Firstly, the news that Gregg reported to me from his contacts in the US which described Vivendi's promotion of the game at release as "the worst campaign Vivendi has ever mounted". If you saw any promotional materials for the game anywhere in the US - any advertising, point-of-sale fixtures, posters or anything else at all, please let me know - you might be the only witness to this unbelievably lacklustre affair.

The second piece of evidence is my first hand observation of what happened at launch. I was able to find the game on the shelves in the States, but I had to look, it wasn't stocked in every store (only one out of four chains in the region I was visiting had it), and in all cases the staff in the video games shops had either not heard of the game, or was only aware of it sufficiently to know it was on the PC shelf. This generally happens only when the publisher drops the ball on its marketing campaign (or when there is no marketing campaign).

I may never know exactly why this happened but there are two schools of thought. The first school says: Empire (the publisher who owned Sick Puppies) basically pissed off Vivendi, and so Vivendi snubbed the game. The second school says: whoever made the decisions inside Vivendi assessed the game as not very significant, and assigned a marketing budget accordingly; when the PC Gamer review came in, nobody thought to shift gears and initiate a second round of marketing. Perhaps they figured it was too late at that point.

Combined with the Audience Model errors, the marketing failure meant the game was never to have any commercial success, despite a very positive critical response.

"But It's a Strategy Game"

Although it's a small point, part of the problem with the game was that it didn't go down well in the UK, and so the assumption was that there was a problem with the game. Well, there was a problem with the UK release - it was rushed, and we hadn't ironed out all the bugs until the US release, but of course, this wouldn't have mattered if we'd had the Hardcore support. At the time (and possibly still now) the specialist press in the UK strongly resembles the Type 1 Conqueror archetype, and agon (competition) and fiero (triumph over adversity) appear to dominate the play needs of most UK specialist press reviewers. As already mentioned, it was a bad fit to the audience - but it shouldn't have mattered, because Gregg and I had always known that the German and US audiences were the key to the game's success. (I have no idea what went wrong in Germany, incidentally - probably similar problems to the ones already mentioned).

Chatter in the forums behind the scenes of the specialist press showed up all manner of extremely negative response, characterised by one particularly vitriolic individual who declared the game "the easiest strategy game ever" - meaning this to be an insult. (Presumably the point here was that the player in question couldn't manage to get the game to provide any fiero for them). Consider also this extract from the PC Format review:

The puzzle elements are more like extremely simple exercises that you have to complete, rather than challenging problems that need solving, and the same is sadly true for the strategy.

This person sounds like they are closer to the Type 2 Manager archetype - interested in puzzles and strategy - but clearly the failing point here a mismatch between their skills and the level of challenge the game provides. (Fiero is not just for players preferring Type 1 play, of course). Now it must be said, some of the puzzles in the game are in fact seriously challenging, and only an extremely expert adventure game player could possibly dismiss all the puzzles in the game as 'extremely simple exercises' - but this is beside the point, as I didn't actually intend for the puzzles to be hard. They were supposed to be relatively simple, because they weren't supposed to represent the core gameplay, which is about how you use your team. Again, this player almost certainly never tried for the Triple Pumpkins, which are really quite challenging strategically, especially Full Mortal Jacket and, to some extent, Haunting 101.

As an aside, let me just say that I never wanted the puzzles - it was something Gregg made me put in. According to him, the publisher asked for puzzles because they couldn't understand what the game was about otherwise. This may not be the whole truth, however. Gregg has a love of puzzles, and a gift for making them which far outstrips my own talents in that particular area. I wanted to just focus on the gameplay inherent in the haunting itself, although in retrospect having the puzzles wasn't significantly problematic.

From responses like those above, it seems there was a definite intent to interpret the game as a strategy game. I'm not an expert on the genre, but I would predict that many popular strategy games are sources of fiero because the player fails certain battles over and over again (thus experiencing fiero when they beat it). Ghost Master isn't like that - the levels are relatively easy to beat, they are just hard to beat completely.

Seeing the game as a strategy game therefore hurt us in some indefinable way, although as mentioned above, the biggest problem in this genre mismatch was probably that it hurt how the game was marketed. On the one hand you have a box which suggests "this is like The Sims", and on the other you have some reviews or word of mouth which say "this isn't a very good a strategy game". We strayed too far from genre expectations, and this hurt us simply because there wasn't a ready-made cluster of game evangelists waiting to support the game.

Instead, there was a ready-made cluster of strategy fans who, apparently, didn't get to grips with the idea of a strategy game in which you lead your units (your ghosts), rather than controlling their every move. This probably reflects the fact that most strategy games are in fact tactical games - very few real time games require Strategic skills to play well; most require quick thinking responses (Tactical skills) or methodical planning and optimisation (Logistical skills).

The lack of direct control also probably hurt us: we should probably have given the player the capacity to directly control the ghosts if they wanted to. We didn't because it would have destroyed the original gameplay we'd created (turning novel new gameplay into a modified FPS). For anyone for whom watching the ghosts act out your plans was insufficient, having direct control would have been some compensation, though. It was planned for the sequel (but would have been designed such that it would not have been in any way necessary).

Lessons Learned

I learned a lot from Ghost Master, much of it about the importance of marketing a game, the treacherous landscape of the games market, and the problems of trying to promote a game without a clear genre to inform people how to interpret it. Collectively, people do not accept new approaches to play with an open mind. Everything is assumed to be related to other things, things that have already been seen. This isn't true for every individual, of course, but when you average over a large enough group of people...

If we had got a sequel, I believe we could have ironed out a lot of the problems the game had - but sadly the games industry is a vicious marketplace which throws away a lot of the value that it creates. When EA bought Bullfrog, they threw away all its IP because there was nothing in their portfolio with a big enough following to operate at EA's scale. But a smaller publisher could have made a profit on franchises such as Dungeon Keeper, Populous and Theme Whatever - not that EA would sell on the IP, because that would be helping their competitors. The fact that their competitors are so small as to make such a sale practically foreign aid from a superpower to a banana republic is somewhat beside the point. So these franchises are lost forever, just as the Ghost Master franchise that never was is now lost forever.

It's not really a huge tragedy, when all is said and done, after all, it's only a game. Mind you, it does demonstrate that the constant talk of desire for "innovation" in games is either a minority desire, or is only a half truth. I suspect what people want are new variations on established themes - why else would God of War, the most advanced and expensive scrolling beat-em-up ever made, be oft praised as 'innovative' rather than being considered an especially slick and impressive take on a genre which is almost twenty years old? Why else would Halo often be considered an innovative FPS, rather than a skillfully crafted pinnacle of an already codified form?

I feel truly innovative games should transcend, expand or defy genre, but this in turn may make them harder to sell to the audience at large. It certainly didn't help Ghost Master that it wasn't designed to belong to a particular genre, but that doesn't mean that it should have done - it just means one should be careful straying too far from the genre norms unless you either have marketing on your side, or you don't need to capture too large an audience.

One final note: although I'm certain the delusion was in our heads at the time that we would capture some of the audience of The Sims with Ghost Master, it is now abundantly apparent that this could never have happened (from the perspective of our DGD model, at least; the game doesn't really support Type 4: Participant play) . Still, in an online appearance, Wil Wright said that Ghost Master was the best 'Sims-like' game he'd seen so far, which is a nice compliment in anyone's book, although perhaps not the most fitting epitaph to this unusual but commercially doomed game.

Note: We didn't work on the console versions, and I have never played them. This is solely about the original PC version. Thanks for your patience with this excessively long and rambling post which is probably of limited interest to most people.

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm curious about your statements that it's "too late" that the game has found its audience via these new distribution methods. Even if the original developers are no longer receiving royalties for the game in its new sales markets, aren't the latest sales figures from Steam and GoG worth something? New copies of the game are still selling, and there are surges with each little promotion on the respective sites. I would think, if you had the figures, it could be used to show enough support to warrant a sequel or for other positive use.

Tchosgames: It's too late because the developer that made the game has been disbanded and the intellectual property rights are effectively in limbo. So even if it is now being appreciated, it would be too late for a sequel to be made.

Also I suspect, even though it does now appear to have found an audience, the game is being sold at such a low price point that the commercial argument for a sequel wouldn't be very strong anyway.

On the plus side, I am just pleased that the game is being enjoyed. There's little point in having made a game that no-one plays! :)

Thanks for commenting!

Those arguments don't sound like much of a hindrance to what I envision. No one expects a particular team to remain together in an unbroken chain between projects even when the developer remains constant. Teams can be reformed. Rights can (obviously) be obtained.

The low price may warrant a low budget, yes. A hindrance if you require a large one, but consider the smaller studios arising to release good, lower-budget games on, for instance, Steam. There are many games that are produced with that sort of selling price in mind from the beginning. Would you consider a low budget to be an insurmountable obstacle in the design of a Ghost Master game?

Tchosgames: To be true to what the first game delivered would require a modest budget, more than I think could be done on a low budget indie project. Partly this is because the artists really did contribute a great deal to the project, and there was a good size team of animators working on the haunters. Also, without a modest budget, reacquisition of the rights would be impossible.

I would love to work on a Ghost Master sequel, but at the moment it's not a very viable option. I would like to get hold of the Steam sales figures, though, and see how well it's actually doing because right now all I know is that more people have discovered the game via Steam than ever did when it was in the shops.

Best wishes!

Well, regardless of my apparent inability to adequately communicate my meanings, I appreciate your time and thoughts on the matter here. Best wishes to you too.

Tchosgames: sorry you feel you inadequately communicated in this exchange - if this did indeed happen, it may simply have been that my "shell of gloom" about the demise of Sick Puppies, the company that made the game, was just too difficult to crack. :) Thanks for stopping by!

It´s kinda sad that "Ghost Master" had to end like this. It´s true that it wasn´t "the perfect game" (bugs and a little bit unfinished here and there) but I was seeing so much potential in it. I really enjoyed the game and I still play it from time to time.

But thats the "parasitive capitalism"...

However. Thanks for that great game, I had (and still have) a lot of fun with it :)

Regards from a Ghost Master Fan from Germany

Thanks for dropping by! It's always a pleasure to know that there are people out there in the world enjoying Ghost Master. This is a very special game to me, and it means a lot to hear from the fans who have managed to find it.

Best wishes!

I don't know if anybody checks this place anymore, but Ghost Master is a very unique game. The only game that comes even close to it in idea is Haunting Starring Polterguy on Sega Genesis. GM is a great game for fans of horror, or those who enjoy watching Sims suffer. I read on this page that it's too late to release a "Ghost Master 2," due to rights and funding. Could there possibly be a spin-off idea, under a different name? That seems to happen a lot in the world of entertainment. The principles could be the same, but since it won't be tied to the franchise, any number of new and unrelated concepts could be put into it. A chance for a new game franchise, especially one that stands out from the FPS/MMORPG craze of today, would possibly find a strong market.

Hi Gndsac, yes, I still see comments here. :) I've recently updated my position on a Ghost Master sequel from "impossible" to "unlikely"... that's all I can say right now. ;)

I always like hearing from people who found this game and enjoyed it - thanks for dropping by!

Once upon a time, I was a little girl, and played a game at a friend's house. Years later, every so often, I'd think about this one game -- I couldn't remember what it was called, but I remember it was interesting, memorable enough to impact my tiny mind, and very, very fun.

A few weeks after one of these vague memories, I found a game called Ghost Master on sale on Steam. I paused. I clicked on screenshots. And I bought it without a second thought, laughing like a maniac. I played, preparing for the worst -- but it turned out, to my glee, that it wasn't just a key to a closed door in my childhood, it was a really, really good game.

First of all -- I know that this has been said, plentifully and before, but thank you so much for Ghost Master. It may have a small play window, but it also seems to be so replayable...every so often I start trying to Triple Pumpkin every level, with a timer and everything, and I fail but get lost in just having fun. I opened up the Big Box O' Papers in my closet, where I keep old drawings, stories and doodles, and I found that I had, in school, drawn the ghosts interacting with other ghosts of their category. I bought the strategy guide on Amazon, and the soundtrack somewhere else.

And now, you bring glee and anticipation by posting "sequel status is now from "impossible" to "unlikely"" comments in the comment field. Tempter.

Basically, I have nothing important or interesting or well-written to convey in this space, so I'll simply thank you and congratulate you. Best wishes, Chris. Fingers crossed.

Anna: it's always a great pleasure to hear from people who found and enjoyed this game! I always regretted that the game didn't ship with a sandbox mode that would allow younger children to mess around with the ghosts more freely outside of the gameplay - it's good to know there were some that found their own way with it anyway! ;)

All the best!

Just found this blog after all these years later. I keep installing this game for some reason and keep playing and playing it. Back in the day it got good reviews, I recall that part. I bought it on a whim and it even took a bit to get used to it. Alas, with the walk throughs and the trainer, it became a sensational game.

So, for a disabled veteran who found himself with a LOT of extra time on his hand, thanks for giving me a game I could still play, love, and enjoy for many, many years.

Brilliant game. I've been playing PC games forever and somehow missed this one. I got it a few days ago on gog.com and absolutely love it. It's too bad Ghost Master didn't get more recognition. It certainly deserved better.

Ethan

Brad: thanks for dropping by and letting me know you enjoyed this game! Even now, eight years later, this is still the game design I'm most proud of and it means a lot to me that there are players like you out there who not only found it, but loved it.

D: glad you found and enjoyed the game! Unfortunately, the original marketing campaign for this game was an 'epic fail', and alas it sank without a trace. But thanks to the internet, it's getting a new lease of life now.

All the best!

Chris, I realize the last comments are about three years old, and you might not see this, but I wanted you to know that Ghost Master is my favorite game ever. I must have completed it at least twice, and I have started over again now that I have the Steam version working (I keep misplacing my PC CD, but now I can play no matter what...yay!) It has some of the best replayability I know of--especially if you take a break from it now and then. Yes, I remember where things are and what to do, but there are always tweaks to be found, and those elusive triple pumpkins. I replay levels over and over to get them JUST right. If there is ever a sequel of any kind, I'll be there with bells on to buy it! Thank you for making a wonderful game for those of us who found it.

Rie

Every AAA franchise started off with a flawed game. In fact, most of them had issues much bigger than the ones you listed.

The difference from Ghost Master and those other titles:

1. You've got a clear list of things you would change to fix those flaws that's consistent with the spirit of the original game. Too many franchises tack on some game-breaking alteration designed to attract more mainstream gamers. You don't need to do that because you already have a plan.
2. Your publisher and distributor screwed you over badly by not getting the game enough publicity. You don't need them any more. I'd love to see you on Kickstarter with "Supernatural Squad" or some other title using the same design ideas. I'm down for $500.

Rie and Newell:
Thanks for sharing your comments, and your love of this game! It does mean a lot to me that it has fans, and its still my favourite of my game designs.

Rie - I'm especially glad to hear you praise the replayability, as a lot of the original reviewers for the game didn't seem to recognize this. I myself spent a lot of time playing and replaying the levels getting triple pumpkins (before the game was released) - and I've been struck by the fact that different players find different levels hard to crack when it comes to attaining perfection. This for me is a sign that the game supports a lot of different ways of playing - if we all played in similar ways, we'd struggle with the same challenges. I love the variety of haunting strategies you can deploy in Ghost Master, and it's great to hear from players who've also enjoyed this.

Newell - a Kickstarter is something I would consider. The Ghost Master brand can't be recovered easily, but a 'spiritual successor' is still possible. However, I couldn't do it without a developer lined up - it would be unreasonable to think that just raising development funds would be enough to get the game together. I used to say it was 'impossible', then it was 'unlikely', now I will update that to 'uncertain'. So it creeps ever closer to possibility, although it still has a way to go. :)

All the best!

Chris.

Sad to see a sequel is unlikely, but a truly thoughtful break-down nonetheless. I absolutely adored this game even though purchsing it in a different language (I live in Germany that I wasn't completely fluent in at the time had made things very difficult, for all that the translation was pretty good. The music is especially unforgettable, and I loved the aesthetics of the various ghost designs. I've actually had the most ridiculous craving to replay it recently and I'm now trying to track down and purchase a version of the game online that's in the original language and has the bonus end mission. You know it gets bad when you're watching The Conjuring and can't help but analyse the ghosts' actions from the perspective of a would-be Ghostmaster in charge of them... "Ah yes, here is where they needed to get the mortals worked up for a bit of plasma, and now they have it and can do big stuff..." XD

Don't know if it's been suggested above, but a 'hint' option for the later missions would have come in extremely handy. Both the specific abilities to advance the plot and the strategies to solve the puzzles and free the trapped ghosts were sometimes incredibly difficult to figure out, especially since the tutorial never shows you that e.g. weather-controlling powers can be used cumulatively. And some puzzles were luck-based enough to be incredibly frustrating, so some sort of option for a clue or hint with specific puzzles to even suggest the optimum strategy would have been appreciated. I remember the hospital missing being the epitome of that - it was already a mission that took a while to complete, and replaying it over and over again because I couldn't seem to get all the trapped ghosts in one go, or at all, was ridiculously frustrating (and I wasn't aware that you could get different ghosts in different playthroughs of the mission and still end up with them). The female ghost in the cellar was particularly bad, because while the solution was very elegant - scare off every female nurse and the lecherous doctor would eventually come bother the woman sitting in that room - it was very non-intuitive compared to the use of standard luring tactics that got you nowhere, and I know I'm not the only one to have spent hours on that mission.

I still love the game to bits and would have loved to see a sequel. Even if I ever play another haunting game (and there's certainly been no oversupply of that particular genre, despite it being so promising), it wouldn't be the same without the same unique charm this game had.

Hekateras:
Thanks for your charming comment - it's always a pleasure to find fans of this game! I totally agree with you on the hint system - I was never happy about the game's failure to teach the player about the weather system, for instance, and recognize that this was my responsibility as game designer. I like to say 'we would have sorted it out in a sequel...' ;)

The good news is that although I am not working on a sequel, I know of at least 3 different teams that are working on quasi-sequels to the game (or spiritual successors to it), and the rights are available - so you may yet get a sequel! Hurrah! :D

Thanks for stopping by!

Chris.

I definitely remember seeing Ghost Master promoted in the US. I think I got a demo of it on a disk that came with PC Gamer.

Hi Caleb,
Thanks for your comment - this is the first report of any promotional activity for the game that I've heard! :) As I say in the post-mortem, I was in the States when it launched, and it appeared immediately in the back shelves of most game stores. :(

Thanks for the info,

Chris.

I loved this game despite it's flaws -- for me, the most significant flaw was that it was too short! I wanted MORE. I would love to see a sequel to this.

I found the puzzles a bit annoying, but they did give interesting secondary goals. But mostly I wanted to play with my ghosts -- which sounds like that was what the core play of the game was all about.

The art direction was amazing.

And all of this is why I re-installed the game today (It's $6 on gog.com). Because my 11 year old daughter loves Ghostbusters and I think she is going to love this game as much as I do.

Could it have been better? Sure. But there's something to be said for a computer game that's being passed on to a new generation because it is FUN!

Hi D! Thanks for your comment and kind words.

It's so great to hear someone else who wasn't happy about the puzzles! I know some players enjoyed them, but I never liked them myself, and designing them was seriously unpleasant.

Always good to know a game I helped make has players who love it, and who knows, maybe one day there will be a sequel (although don't hold your breath!).

All the best!

Chris.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)