DEV Community: Evgenii Park

The Story, Achievements, and Challenges of Unreal Engine

Evgenii Park — Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:02:10 +0000

Unreal Engine is not just a tool for making games — it’s a true revolution in game development. Since its debut in the late 1990s, it has evolved from a niche engine for shooters into a universal platform used in AAA titles, indie games, films, and even virtual reality. In this article, we’ll revisit the history of Unreal Engine, its key milestones, and the innovations that made it indispensable. But we’ll also touch on its fifth version — the one that promises the future, yet currently gives players and developers quite a few headaches.

Unreal Tournament 3

From a Teenage Hobby to an “Epic” Empire

The story of Unreal Engine began in 1995, when 24-year-old Tim Sweeney started developing it as a hobby project. A self-taught programmer, Sweeney had already released his first game, the text-based adventure ZZT, at age 20 and founded Potomac Computer Systems — the company that would later become Epic MegaGames. The commercial success of his next project, the platformer Jill of the Jungle, inspired him to aim higher: to create a tool for 3D shooters that focused on detailed textures and dynamic lighting.

The first version of Unreal Engine was released in 1998 along with the FPS Unreal — a game that shocked players with its graphics and atmosphere. It became a hit, selling over 1.5 million copies and marking the beginning of Unreal Engine’s commercialization.

Among competitors like id Tech 2 (first used in Quake II, released in 1997) and the popular cross-platform RenderWare, UE1 stood out for its visual revolution: it offered richer colors, detailed textures, volumetric fog, and realistic reflections, enabling developers to create atmospheric open worlds that looked impressive even compared to the stunning Quake II. BSP trees — a new method of optimizing 3D geometry — allowed developers to build complex levels without losing performance. UnrealEd, a real-time level editor, gave designers an intuitive tool for creating maps, while UnrealScript opened the door to modding, inspiring the community to experiment.

Unreal. Source: Rock Paper Shotgun

At the same time, UE1 had its share of issues — primarily optimization. Games built on it often suffered from low FPS on weaker hardware, while Quake II ran faster and more stably, especially in enclosed environments. In addition, UE1 relied heavily on the Glide API from 3dfx for improved visuals, making it dependent on Voodoo graphics cards and prone to compatibility problems on other systems, unlike the more universal OpenGL used by id Tech 2.

Still, UE1’s popularity grew rapidly: by the early 2000s, third-party developers were licensing Epic MegaGames’ technology more often than id’s Quake II engine. For example, when Legend Entertainment set out to create the fantasy shooter Wheel of Time with cutting-edge visuals, they chose Unreal Engine to make it happen.

In 2002, the engine evolved. Unreal Engine 2 became more versatile: it powered not only traditional shooters but also 3D platformers (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban) and stealth action games (Thief: Deadly Shadows). It introduced realistic physics simulation via Karma Physics, which shined in Unreal Tournament 2004 and Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood. The system modeled falling, tumbling, and object collisions with mass, inertia, and friction in mind; supported ragdoll animation with articulated skeletons; allowed for constraints — joints, springs, and motors for swinging doors or suspended structures; and even simulated vehicles with wheels, suspension, and drifting.

Thief: Deadly Shadows

However, performance was still an issue. id Tech 3 continued to outperform its rival in optimization for mid-range PCs and in multiplayer code, making it the preferred choice for competitive projects.

Conquering the Market

Unreal Engine’s true market dominance began with the release of its third version in 2006. Multi-platform and capable of producing highly cinematic visuals, it won over many developers right from the launch of Gears of War. Unlike, say, Source Engine — which was renowned for its modding tools and online features — UE3 offered superior console support and cinematic capabilities. And while CryEngine by CryTek could render more realistic environments, it lagged behind in licensing flexibility and overall toolset richness.

PhysX integration introduced GPU-accelerated physics, enabling real-time destruction and effects with minimal performance cost. The Matinee tool simplified cinematic scene creation, making UE3 attractive not only for games but also for early experiments in virtual film production.

Gears of War. Source: neogaf.com, Scotch

UE3 also featured multithreading support — one of the first in the industry — allowing it to take advantage of multi-core processors for parallel rendering and simulations, reducing latency in complex scenes. Its DirectX 9-based renderer introduced cutting-edge techniques such as HDR rendering for realistic dynamic range and accurate lighting, resulting in immersive environments with soft transitions and reflections.

It’s no surprise that by the late 2000s, dozens of major studios — from Rocksteady to Gearbox — chose Unreal Engine 3 for their projects. It powered hundreds of games. The only holdouts were indie developers, for whom a UE license was still too expensive — but Epic Games had plans for them, too.

In 2014, Epic released Unreal Engine 4 and… made it free for indie developers. A modest 5% royalty applied only after a project earned over a million dollars in revenue — a move that opened the door to game development for hundreds of small studios and solo creators. UE4 became the engine of choice for indie hits like Omno and Abzû, while major developers increasingly adopted it as well. By the 2020s, Unreal claimed between 16% and 30% of the market.

Source: Epic Games

This version also introduced Blueprints — a visual scripting system that allowed designers to create game logic without writing a single line of code, connecting nodes to quickly prototype gameplay mechanics. Epic kept improving this tool, and by 2025 it was integrated with AI to enable rapid testing of procedural content generation — from landscapes to NPC behavior.

But Blueprints weren’t UE4’s only innovation. The launch of MetaHuman Creator in 2021 gave developers a cloud-based tool for building hyperrealistic human characters in minutes: scan a face, tweak animations — and you had a nearly production-ready NPC. Niagara, the new visual effects system, brought GPU-accelerated particle effects like fire, smoke, and debris; Chaos Physics enabled real-time building destruction. World Partition and One File Per Actor simplified open-world creation, automatically streaming landscapes without visible seams.

All of this made Unreal Engine 4 the main alternative to Unity. AAA studios loved its scalability; indie developers appreciated how it saved them thousands in production costs without forcing graphical compromises. Players, too, embraced UE4 — despite early optimization issues, by the ninth console generation the engine delivered strong performance and stunning visuals. By 2025, Epic reported over 850,000 active developers using the engine monthly, and Unreal Engine even caught the attention of film studios.

Sea of Thieves. Source: GQ

This evolution reflects a journey from a garage project to a full-blown ecosystem where Epic invests billions in R&D, partnering with NVIDIA and AMD.

And then came Unreal Engine 5.

Photorealism and the Agony of Optimization

When Unreal Engine 5 launched in 2022, it instantly dominated gaming headlines thanks to two key technologies. Nanite — a virtualized geometry system — allowed rendering billions of polygons without traditional Levels of Detail (LODs), producing worlds with cinematic detail. Lumen added dynamic global illumination, eliminating the need for pre-baked lightmaps. There were other breakthroughs, too: MetaSounds for immersive audio design, World Builder for seamless open worlds, and advanced ray tracing and VR/AR support that pushed Unreal beyond traditional gaming — into metaverses and simulations. What wasn’t included, apparently, was anything to handle optimization.

We’re joking — but only partly. In recent months, UE5’s optimization issues have become impossible to ignore, especially after the release of the Switch 2. On Nintendo’s new console, games like Borderlands 4 suffer from FPS drops below 30 and limits on on-screen objects. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney, in an interview following Unreal Fest in Seoul, blamed “lazy developers” who target high-end hardware first and only think about optimizing for weaker consoles and older PCs at the last minute.

There’s some truth to that. Fortnite — optimized in-house by Epic — runs flawlessly on Switch 2, while Metal Gear Solid Delta or Wuchang: Fallen Feathers can overheat top-end GPUs. Why? Because UE5’s architectural innovations are resource-hungry.

Wuchang: Fallen Feathers

UE5’s breakthrough technologies are extremely sensitive to optimization: neglect it, and you’re in for memory overuse and stuttering. Nanite renders billions of polygons but causes frame drops on weaker systems because each object is streamed dynamically, overloading CPU and GPU. Lumen, which calculates real-time reflections, eats up VRAM — on an RTX 3060, you’ll see 30–40 FPS in complex scenes, even with DLSS. Experienced studios like Epic’s Fortnite team manage fine, but indie and mid-tier developers (like those behind RoboCop: Rogue City) spend months profiling, creating LOD hacks, and disabling features. As a result, games like Immortals of Aveum or Stalker 2 launched with severe performance issues and bugs — often requiring massive day-one patches before they were even playable.

Epic essentially traded stability for next-gen features, tuning the engine for ray-tracing GPUs and the latest consoles — while leaving behind the 70% of players with less powerful devices. The result? UE5 became an artist’s dream but a QA nightmare.

Sweeney has announced two measures to address this: first, Epic will roll out advanced training, consulting, and documentation for UE5 developers; second, future engine versions will feature automated optimization — Unreal Engine 5.6 already handles shaders and Lumen lighting much better.

RoboCop: Rogue City

Still, perhaps the time for mass transition to UE5 simply hasn’t come yet — and many developers jumped the gun. After all, the previous version, Unreal Engine 4, still looks fantastic and delivers stable performance without compromises.

Take Stellar Blade by Shift Up, for example. The game uses PBR for photorealistic materials on skin, metal, and fabric, plus GPU-accelerated Niagara particles for dust, sparks, and destruction. Thanks to soft-body physics, the heroine Eve’s clothing and hair react to motion, wind, and collisions in real time with remarkable detail. Yet the game maintains over 100 FPS on RTX 3060 in 1080p and 70+ on RTX 4060 in 1440p, with no shader stutter — unlike many UE5 projects, where similar systems cause frame drops even on top-tier GPUs.

Another case is South of Midnight by Compulsion Games, also running on UE4 and easily achieving 60 FPS on Xbox Series X|S and PC. Its power lies not in technical trickery but in art direction — the stop-motion-inspired animation and handcrafted textures give it a unique style that rivals UE5’s graphical showpieces. These examples prove that UE4 remains a mature, reliable platform for hits without the torment of optimization — and that rushing to upgrade isn’t always the right move.

South of Midnight

Unreal Engine remains the king of the industry, but UE5 serves as a warning: innovation without balance leads to disaster. Epic continues to evolve the engine, adding AI-assisted optimization, performance budgeting, and new learning tools — but for now, if you’re in game development, maybe it’s better to start with UE4 for stability and proven tools; risk UE5 only if you have a clear optimization plan for your target hardware from day one. Otherwise, you may end up with day-one patches, angry players, and months of rework — instead of the next-gen experience you were hoping for.

What Happened to Web3 in Gaming

Evgenii Park — Tue, 28 Oct 2025 12:11:16 +0000

A few years back, it felt like blockchain, Web3, and NFTs were about to flip video games upside down. In 2021, you couldn’t escape those buzzwords at any gaming conference, and every article about the industry’s future was hyping “true digital ownership,” “play-to-earn,” and “player-driven economies.” With crypto skyrocketing and token mania in full swing, even the most cautious publishers had to jump in. Fast forward to today, and the Web3 hype has fizzled. Gamers mostly see NFTs as a flop, and developers? They’re treating it like a lesson learned.

Web3’s Flashy but Fleeting Moment

In 2021, the crypto market was on fire — Bitcoin, Ethereum, shiny new tokens, you name it. The vibe was electric, almost giddy. Against that backdrop, “digital ownership” wasn’t just some tech jargon; it felt like the next big thing. We’re already used to owning accounts, skins, subscriptions — so why not own digital stuff for real, backed by blockchain’s seal of uniqueness? That’s where NFTs came in, promising you could truly own a digital item, verified on the blockchain.
That March, artist Beeple sold his digital piece Everydays: The First 5000 Days at Christie’s for a jaw-dropping $69.3 million, a moment that blew crypto into the mainstream. Celebrities piled on — Grimes raked in millions with her NFT collection. Even McDonald’s got in on the action, dropping McRib NFTs for the sandwich’s 40th birthday, proof that “digital ownership” had wormed its way into pop culture.
But regular folks weren’t as sold as the crypto crowd. In 2021, only about 20% of U.S. adults knew what an NFT was; by 2022, that jumped to around 65% — but just 4% actually owned one, and only 15% thought they were worth the cash. It was a weird split: on one hand, wild hype, huge numbers, celebs, and brands; on the other, regular people scratching their heads, thinking, “Why buy a digital file I can just screenshot?”

Source: The Guardian

No shock, then, that the art world started seeing red flags. The NFT market was pulling in billions — digital art alone hit $20 billion or more in 2021 — but the buyer-seller pool stopped growing. Regular users didn’t see the point, and Web3 started feeling less like an economic revolution and more like a speculative bubble. Still, companies kept chasing the trend, and gaming companies were all in.

Web3 in Games: Big Promises, Bigger Messes

Big gaming names dove headfirst into blockchain and NFTs, seeing them as more than just a cash grab — a way to shake up the whole gaming ecosystem. Late 2021, Ubisoft rolled out Quartz: NFT gear and skins called Digits for Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Breakpoint. Each had a unique serial number, lived on the Tezos blockchain, and could be traded outside the game’s usual inventory.

Players were not having it. Forums lit up with snarky comments and total confusion—nobody asked for this. It felt like another monetization stunt wrapped in fancy “ownership” talk. The Quartz reveal video got hammered with over 16,000 dislikes against a few hundred likes, so Ubisoft quietly pulled it offline.

By late 2022, Square Enix dropped Symbiogenesis, a “digital collectible art experience” built entirely on Web3. Picture a virtual world filled with NFT characters you could own, use in the story, or slap on as avatars. They picked Polygon for its cheap fees and fast transactions, later investing in HyperPlay to spread Symbiogenesis and future projects. They hyped a “digital art hunt” on Discord, where special NFT “Member Cards” unlocked extra perks and bonuses.

Other studios and publishers also jumped on the Web3 bandwagon, announcing games or integrations. But not all of these projects made it to release, and many felt like clumsy attempts to slap NFT features onto any game they could. It was especially surprising to see this from industry veterans. For instance, Will Wright, the legendary designer behind The Sims, unveiled VoxVerse, a blockchain-based project. He stressed it wasn’t about peddling NFTs but rather about enabling transactions and social interactions.

Another industry heavyweight, Jon Van Caneghem — known for Might & Magic and Heroes of Might & Magic — teamed up with Digital Insight Games to announce Cloud Castles. This strategic action game, built on Unreal Engine 5, mixed in collectible fantasy creatures and Web3 tech. Players were promised “full ownership” of in-game assets, with the ability to buy, sell, trade, and evolve them through the blockchain.

So, studios eagerly hopped aboard the Web3 train: commercially enticing ideas, big-name brands, and bold promises of a new gaming era. Corporate hype, slick marketing, and major franchises were all in play. But beneath the shiny surface lurked shaky execution, lukewarm player interest, and outright cultural pushback.

First Results: Hype Crashes Hard

When the first Web3 games hit the market, it became clear the promised “ownership revolution” wasn’t living up to the hype. Most projects leaned on a play-to-earn model, where players earned tokens for their activity and could sell them, transforming users from passive consumers into co-owners of digital ecosystems. But this economy relied entirely on a steady stream of new players. Once interest waned, token prices plummeted, and with them, players’ motivation to keep going.

In practice, many of these implementations felt like trendy window dressing hastily slapped onto existing projects. The concept of ownership was often barely tied to the core game design, with NFTs serving as little more than a marketing gimmick for extra monetization. In some cases, the flaws were glaring: the play-to-earn model proved hypersensitive to macroeconomic shifts and new player inflows. Crashing token prices and major hacks eroded both ecosystems and trust.

Take Ember Sword, a much-hyped Web3 MMORPG that launched in early access in December 2024 — by May 2025, its servers shut down due to financial instability. Axie Infinity saw its in-game token crash after the broader crypto market tanked, and a March 2022 hack of the Ronin bridge network led to the theft of hundreds of millions of dollars, dealing a brutal blow to the reputation of play-to-earn games. As a result, some developers dialed back the play-to-earn hype in their marketing, pivoting to more restrained systems where earning was a side effect, not the main draw.

Will Wright’s VoxVerse is still languishing in development hell, with barely any news trickling out. Jon Van Caneghem’s Cloud Castles is in a similar boat — its developer website is technically still up, but public updates are nowhere to be found. Even Square Enix gave up on Symbiogenesis: the game got its final content season in July 2025 but failed to hook either players or their wallets.

Not every company learned from the fading NFT craze, though. Yes, we’re talking about Ubisoft again. Their Web3 experiments in Ghost Recon: Breakpoint were a disaster: they minted around 2,256 exclusive items, but only 15 sold in the first two weeks. Yet Ubisoft kept pushing their philosophy: players aren’t just consumers — they’re ecosystem participants, digital asset owners, full-fledged players in the game’s economy. They rolled out slogans like, “You own a piece of the game and leave your mark on its history.”

To the wider audience, NFT games became a shorthand for greed and mistrust. Forums and social media overflowed with sarcastic jabs: “Nobody asked for this,” “NFTs are the worst thing to hit gaming since lootboxes.” The reputational damage was so severe that major companies quietly dropped the word “blockchain” from their press releases.

VoxVerse

Where We’re at Now

By mid-2025, Web3 gaming’s still around — but it’s no mainstream hit. Analysts say a few million wallets are active: about 4.9 million unique ones were engaging with blockchain games daily in May 2025, even as market share and investments shrink. It’s a far cry from the explosive growth hyped in 2021–2022; the scene’s gone niche. Money’s tight, too. Web3 gaming projects pulled in just over $91 million in Q1 2025 — down 71% from Q4 2024 and 68% from a year ago. Deals are quieter now: less flash, more grants, and infrastructure bets.

With the hype dying down, developers have dropped the hard sell on NFTs and blockchain as a “game-changer.” Now it’s all about “blockchain as infrastructure” — tracking ownership, making trades transparent, or moving assets across platforms. Some make Web3 optional, hide it in menus, or weave it in so smoothly you barely notice. Illuvium, for example, still lets you collect creatures and items, but they’ve ditched NFT talk in marketing, admitting it’s just part of the game’s economy, not a get-rich-quick scheme.

Big Time, an ARPG from Big Time Studios, does something similar: items are technically tokens, but to players, they’re just cool rewards. After a 2025 update, they scrubbed NFT mentions from their Steam page, focusing on crafting and trading. Fans noticed and liked it: the game finally feels like a game, not a crypto wallet.

Might & Magic Fates

Big publishers are tiptoeing back in, but they’re playing it smart. Ubisoft teamed up with Immutable for Might & Magic: Fates, a mobile card strategy game for iOS and Android. Some cards can be traded on Immutable Marketplace, but they’re clear: “Gameplay first, not tokenization.” It’s a sign of the times — Ubisoft’s basically saying their Quartz days were a misfire, and now they’re sneaking blockchain in quietly.

Krafton, the PUBG folks, launched Overdare in 2025 — a Roblox-style sandbox built on the Settlus network with Naver Z. Blockchain’s used for tracking creator rights and doling out rewards, not as a status symbol but as a tool for a fair economy. This “creator economy on blockchain” is one of the few spots where Web3 actually solves real problems.

Looking forward, the outlook’s cautiously upbeat. Analysts predict Web3 gaming could grow from ~$37.55 billion in 2025 to ~$182.98 billion by 2034, with a roughly 19% CAGR. Gala Games, Mythical Games (Blankos Block Party), and Sky Mavis (Axie Infinity) are still building, striking partnerships, and adding fiat payments to make it easier to jump in. Their socials hit a common note: “Players shouldn’t care it’s Web3 — they should just have fun.” It’s a sign that many think Web3 games could carve out a real place someday, but it’s gonna be a slow, twisty road.

Axie Infinity

Web3 gaming’s story isn’t about crashing and burning — it’s about an industry growing up. The tech that promised to set players free hit the same snags as old-school game dev: monetization, trust, and making stuff people actually enjoy. The NFT craze proved you can’t build a game around “making bank” — you’ve got to build it around why someone would want to play in the first place.

Right now, Web3 gaming lives in its own little world, a niche for enthusiasts and investors. Maybe one day a game will come along and show digital ownership’s worth it. Until then, it’s a reminder: no token can beat the thrill of a damn good game.

The Hidden Pitfalls of the Outsourcing Industry

Evgenii Park — Mon, 01 Sep 2025 05:49:46 +0000

by codastudio.dev

Outsourcing studios are a convenient tool for scaling production, but some clients abuse this convenience and try to cut costs at the expense of external contractors. Coda has also encountered such situations — and in practice, it turned out that working with AAA studios can be just as risky as working with solo developers. One client might delay a six-figure payment for more than four months, while another might outright refuse to pay — claiming that the company’s CEO didn’t approve the results, even though the art team was happy with them.

These cases point to a systemic problem rooted in economic instability, a culture of exploitation, and weak regulation. In this article, we’ll break down how such scams happen, why they’ve become normalized, and how to protect yourself — drawing on real examples and our own experience.

Stories of Deception
There are countless cases, details, and circumstances in which freelancers and outsourcing studios are cheated, but all disputes generally fall into three categories.

Power imbalance from the start
This includes cases involving seemingly reputable and public companies that decide to save money at the expense of labor. Almost always, contractors are required to sign an NDA before beginning work — not only forbidding them to talk about the project, but even to mention the fact of collaboration itself. Breaking it can lead to heavy fines and lawsuits, often under the laws of the client’s country. That’s why most industry scandals only surface after the contract is over.

The next step is the contract — almost always written by the client and designed to protect their interests. It typically includes detailed penalties for missed deadlines, but rarely, if ever, addresses the client’s responsibility for late payments. Contractors may try to make edits, but big studios are rarely willing to spend time on negotiations. Their stance is usually: “If you don’t agree, we’ll find someone else.” The result: the contractor is placed in a deliberately weaker position.

No legal entity
Another case involves “clients” who never really intended to release a game, but simply wanted free work. Someone under the pseudonym Kova announced hiring for the projects Zeal and AetherBound: 20–60 hours a week, about $13/hour, with promised investments and “connections to Amazon Game Studios.” Later, it turned out the company wasn’t registered at all; after months of work, Kova vanished without paying anyone — and the truth only came out after victims shared screenshots of their chats.
In 2024, MBS Studios promised freelancers $10,000 a month for creating Unreal Engine tools and even asked for banking details for “payment.” But they disappeared without a contract. Later it became clear that MBS was using unpaid content, possibly for demos or fundraising.

Free freelance work
The largest share of scams target freelancers. On platforms like Fiverr and Upwork, artists often face disappearing clients after delivery or endless unpaid revisions. These stories are especially common among newcomers willing to take risks for experience and portfolio pieces.

For example, artist Greg Mirles worked from 2013 to 2016 on the Kickstarter project The Mandate by Matsuko. He created over 1,000 assets, turned down other lucrative offers, and worked almost nonstop. But in the end, he went unpaid for the last six months of work.

Another freelance artist from Germany worked remotely on a project for a Portuguese game studio. All payments went through — except the final one of €1,200. The client kept saying “the transfer is coming soon,” then blocked him on Discord and stopped replying to emails. Suing would have cost the freelancer far more than the €1,200 he lost — exactly what the client was counting on.

Yet another freelancer, working on an unnamed project for two weeks at an hourly rate, expected payment on the due date. Instead, the client simply declared the work “not up to their high standards” and refused to pay altogether.

Why It Happens
Problems with payments and scams in outsourcing don’t come from one or two bad clients. Since 2022, the industry has been under huge pressure: studios are closing, hundreds of thousands of developers have lost their jobs, and rising competition has driven rates to rock bottom. In such conditions, even an offer to “try it for free first” can sound tempting. Scammers and opportunistic companies take advantage of this by creating fake job postings, promising access to “big projects,” and walking away with free content.

Things get especially blurry when enthusiasm borders on exploitation. There are many stories of modders creating large-scale content for AAA games — but not always getting credited. On The Wayward Realms by OnceLost Games (led by developers of Morrowind), some of the content is still being produced by unpaid volunteers. The line between passion and exploitation has become dangerously thin.

The imbalance of power in the industry only makes things worse. Small studios and freelancers compete for a limited number of projects, rarely have leverage to dictate terms, and most “standard contracts” protect only the client: penalties for missed deadlines are there, but no liability for late payments. And if payment flows through intermediaries (agencies, partner studios), the contractor can simply get “lost” in the bureaucracy, without the resources to sue. International litigation often costs more than the contract itself.

This creates the foundation for a larger crisis. Game budgets keep rising: producing a AAA title now easily exceeds $200 million, while according to rumors, a game like Concord might have cost around $400 million. Yet the industry still prefers to bet on big names and marketing — investments that don’t always pay off. As Jason Schreier wrote in Press Reset and his Bloomberg investigations, studios often burn out their teams chasing hype, and when a game flops, the risk falls on developers and outsourcing partners. Sure, we got a great example with Keanu Reeves in Cyberpunk 2077 — but on the other hand, does anyone still remember Crime Boss: Rockay City starring Michael Madsen?

All this shows that delayed or refused payments aren’t accidents, but symptoms of the industry’s systemic model. It’s important to remember: crisis demands systemic solutions. Contracts, client verification, and collective pressure against bad practices aren’t overcautious — they’re necessary for survival.

How to Protect Yourself

1. Document everything
Before starting work, two documents are usually signed: an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) and the main Contract. These are the key tools for describing the relationship and resolving potential disputes. A good practice is to consult a lawyer: they can help navigate complex wording and advise on where to add clauses you need.
NDA — carefully read the terms to avoid violations that could result in fines.

Payment terms — make sure the process is clearly defined. For example: once work is delivered and an invoice issued, the client must pay within 15 days. Also check which account the payment will come from and specify your own.

Revisions — set a fixed number of revisions, or at least agree on how changes will be handled and compensated. Make sure the client has properly defined their expectations upfront.

Conflict resolution and force majeure — the contract should define when and how cooperation can be ended, suspended, or extended.

2. Vet your clients
Before working with a new client, make sure they’re real and reliable:
Registration and legal status — check whether the company is officially registered. The contract should list its legal address and business ID. Even a quick search can reveal details about founders, staff size, and legitimacy.

Reviews and website — look for mentions on professional platforms, social media, or forums. Reddit or Discord can work too. Did the company attend GDC? Are employees members of professional associations? These details can expose red flags.

Recommendations— if possible, talk to contractors who’ve worked with them before and ask about their experience.

Start small — if you can, begin with a small task to test their honesty and communication without risking major resources.

Connections — networking often reveals insights about which studios to avoid. The industry is surprisingly small, and word-of-mouth can be faster than waiting for public info.

Many studios and artists come into gamedev out of love for games — for some it’s a childhood dream, for others a way to be closer to beloved worlds and communities. But it’s important to remember: no matter how inspiring the project, this is still business. Pragmatism and caution are essential.

Every deal should be backed by documents that protect both sides — not just the client. Contracts and formalities may seem boring, but they’re what turn a risky collaboration into a sustainable partnership. And the more carefully studios and freelancers approach these matters, the less room there will be for exploitation — and the healthier the whole industry will become.

Participation in offline B2B events: why it still matters and what we've learned

Evgenii Park — Mon, 25 Aug 2025 15:39:14 +0000

We are CODA, a co-development studio specializing in video games — CODA Art Studio. Over the past year, we've made a strategic shift toward participating in international industry events and exhibitions. This decision was a direct response to changes in the industry that can no longer be ignored.
Our team was formed post-pandemic, during a time when most IT companies transitioned to remote formats. From the beginning, we built our workflows online, confident that digital channels could effectively connect us with clients and partners. Initially, this approach worked: we successfully attracted projects through LinkedIn, Discord, niche platforms, and direct outreach.

However, in the past couple of years, the video game industry has faced a significant downturn. According to analysts, more than 35,000 professionals have been laid off during this period — over 14,600 of them in 2024 alone. This has had a direct impact on all market participants, including us. Competition for the attention of publishers and investors has intensified, and remote communication channels have become less effective amid the oversaturation of offers.

After conducting thorough research, it became clear that offline events and exhibitions continue to hold significant value — especially in the B2B segment. That’s why in 2025, our team is actively represented at leading gaming events around the world — from the CIS and Europe to the U.S. and China.
The effectiveness of participating in such events depends directly on preparation, on-site engagement, and a well-structured follow-up process with leads after the event.
We’ve learned which stages require special attention, how to allocate resources within the team, and which details truly impact the outcome. In this article, we’re sharing key principles and practices that can be adapted to any B2B event — regardless of its scale, location, or audience specifics.

1. Social media announcements: not just reach, but trust-building
Social media isn’t just a channel for audience reach. In the context of B2B events, it becomes a tool for “soft touch” engagement — helping build trust, increase brand recognition, and create entry points for future partnerships.
Here’s what we practice:

Participation announcement — publish a post in advance with details about your attendance, dates, format, and goals.
Team mentions — tag key members of your studio to highlight personal presence and boost engagement.
Reposting the event’s official account — helps integrate into the event’s information flow and increases visibility among other participants.
Hashtag usage — especially official ones related to the exhibition. This improves chances of organic reach and inclusion in thematic feeds.
Links to your meeting profile or calendar slots — simplify communication and allow for pre-scheduled meetings.
SEO-friendly content — participating in an event is a great reason to create materials that work for you long-term: post-releases, photo reports, interviews, and brief insights. These can be used on your website and social media to strengthen SEO and brand awareness.

2. Pre-event outreach to your contact base
One of the most effective strategies for preparing for an event is to reach out to potential partners and clients in advance — especially if you already have a list of participants obtained through a matchmaking system, last year's database, or public profiles.
For our team, LinkedIn remains the primary channel for such outreach — a platform that makes it easy to conduct business correspondence, track company participation in events, and arrange meetings.
However, it’s important to consider the market context of the event. Different regions use different communication tools, and ignoring these differences can reduce the effectiveness of your outreach.
For example:

In North America and Europe, LinkedIn remains the main channel for B2B communication.
In China, the key tool is WeChat — a nearly universal messenger used for both personal and business contacts. Many participants prefer exchanging QR codes instead of business cards, and WeChat messaging is considered an official channel.
In South Korea and Japan, KakaoTalk and LINE are popular, respectively, and this should be factored into your communication planning.

Example of a first outreach message:
Hi! Our team will be attending [event name] in [city]. Will you be there? It would be great to meet in person and chat — we could explore potential synergies.
Such messages are best sent 2–3 weeks before the event to allow time for planning and avoid peak overload periods. It’s important to adapt the tone and format to the region — in China, for instance, a greeting and brief studio introduction in the first message is standard, while in Europe, brevity and a direct meeting request are more appreciated.

3.Plan logistics and ticket purchase in advance
Some niche but strategically important exhibitions — such as XDS in Vancouver — sell out within a single day. A standard ticket costs around $1,195 USD, but if you register late, the only available option might be an investor package priced up to $10,000, with restrictions on participant status.
These risks make early booking not just convenient, but critically important for studios focused on the B2B format.

4.Use matchmaking systems
All major B2B events feature an internal matchmaking system. It becomes available either immediately after ticket purchase or a few weeks before the event begins. There, you can find a list of all participants, their contact details, and areas of interest (e.g., investment, marketing, development).
What we do:
Compile a priority list of participants we want to meet.
Schedule meetings in advance — ideally 1–2 weeks before the event.
Simultaneously add contacts on LinkedIn.
Maintain a table with the meeting schedule: who confirmed, date, time, interests, and additional notes.
Always include buffer time between meetings — especially at large venues.

Example of an agenda table

5.Who’s attending the event?
This is one of the key questions that should be addressed well before the event. Participation format, goals, and region — all of these influence who should be sent on the business trip. When selecting a representative, it’s important to consider not only their position but also practical factors: the ability to obtain a visa quickly, the duration and complexity of travel, knowledge of the host country’s language, overall communication skills, and the ability to adapt to the event format. Even a highly experienced specialist may be ineffective if they’re not prepared for the cultural context or feel uncomfortable with live networking.

Founders or top management Pros: high engagement, ability to make decisions on the spot, strengthens studio image. Cons: high participation cost, distraction from operational tasks.
Full-time employee (e.g., account manager or producer) Pros: can focus on networking and negotiations while staying within budget. Cons: limited authority, possible lack of strategic context.
Part-time representative or local manager Pros: flexibility, ability to bring in a specialist with relevant expertise or language skills. Cons: may not be deeply integrated into studio processes.
B2B agency or outsourced firm Pros: experience, existing contacts, time-saving. Cons: limited control, risk of superficial representation of the studio.

6.On-site — explore the venue before it starts
Before the event starts, it’s crucial to understand the layout — especially at large-scale venues with hundreds of booths, dozens of halls, and multiple meeting zones.
That’s why we follow these steps:

Download the venue map (usually available on the event’s website).
Identify the location of our booth/hall, meeting points, and food areas.
Plan a route between key locations.
Schedule meetings with buffer time for movement (at least 10–15 minutes between slots).

Additionally, it’s worth noting that some potential clients prefer to hold meetings outside the exhibition zone — in a hotel lobby, nearby café, or restaurant. That’s why it’s important to research the surrounding infrastructure in advance: where convenient meeting spots are located, how busy they get during peak hours, and how quickly you can get there. If the meeting takes place in a café, it’s a good idea to plan ahead what you’ll order — this helps avoid awkward pauses and maintain a professional tone.

7. Take photos with people
If your potential client is open to it — take a photo together. It creates an additional touchpoint after the event, strengthens your network, and can be useful for social media posts with tags. Tagging their profile when posting the photo, by the way, is a great tool for a soft reminder of your presence. Most importantly — respect personal boundaries: if someone isn’t comfortable, don’t insist.

Our BD team at DreamHack 2025

ChinaJoy Exhibition

8. Parties and informal gatherings - a must have
One of the most effective formats for building connections at ChinaJoy is attending parties and afterparties following the main program. These informal gatherings often lead to the “real” introductions — in a relaxed atmosphere, free from pressure, where people are more open to dialogue and willing to talk beyond business.
However, it’s important to understand the nuances. If the event doesn’t require prior registration or additional payment, its value may be diminished. For example, if an afterparty is held at a nearby club and open to anyone, it’s likely to be noisy, chaotic, and unfocused on a professional audience — which often results in wasted time.
So here’s what we recommend:

Clarify the format in advance — is it a closed, invite-only event or an open gathering?
Evaluate the guest list — will the people you want to meet actually be there?
Remember: parties are not for hard selling. The goal is to establish rapport, find common ground, and agree on a follow-up in a more suitable setting.

By the way, ChinaJoy 2025 is currently underway at the Shanghai New International Expo Centre, attracting over 700 companies from 37 countries. Major players like Tencent, NetEase, Sony, and Qualcomm are showcasing their latest innovations, and industry leaders such as Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond from Xbox have made surprise appearances.

9. Attend industry — relevant talks
If the event program includes talks relevant to your field — make sure to add them to your schedule. It’s not just a chance to hear valuable insights, but also a great way to expand your professional network.
Why it matters:

Networking opportunity. After a talk, you have a natural reason to approach the speaker, introduce yourself, and start a conversation. Even a brief exchange can lead to a meaningful connection.
Knowledge update. Conferences often feature fresh trends, real-world case studies, and tools that haven’t yet made it into articles or blogs. It’s a great way to stay in sync with the industry pulse.
Additional content opportunity. You can create a social media post about attending the session (tagging the speaker and company), briefly share what you liked, and add your own thoughts — this showcases your engagement and expertise.

10. Post event lead follow-up: when the real work begins
Remember: attending the event is just the first part of the cycle. The real work begins after the conference, when it’s crucial to properly follow up with all the contacts you’ve made.

The goal of post-event work is to turn introductions into partnerships.

What to do immediately after the event:

Collect and organize all leads. Use a single document (spreadsheet or CRM) to record: Name, position, companyContact channelsBrief summary of the meetingNext step: what you promised to send, what was agreed upon, and when to follow up
Name, position, company
Contact channels
Brief summary of the meeting
Next step: what you promised to send, what was agreed upon, and when to follow up
Don’t rely on just one touchpoint. If there’s no reply to your first email — follow up a week later. If the contact is active on LinkedIn — continue soft engagement: comment, react, and share useful content.

Participation in an event is an investment. It only pays off if you commit to systematic follow-up with every contact afterward. One well-nurtured warm lead can bring more value than dozens of meetings with no proper follow-through.

We hope this article helps you better prepare for your next offline B2B event, avoid common mistakes, and make the most of your participation.

by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev

Working on Visual Weapon Design

Evgenii Park — Sat, 23 Aug 2025 08:49:35 +0000

Vitaliy Ishkov talked about the way he approaches weapon concept design, rendering, materials, and post-process.

Introduction

Hello, my name is Vitaliy Ishkov. I am a freelance hard-surface artist living in Saint-Petersburg, Russia, at the moment. I have been doing 3D for not so long, starting in 2015 at the university. One of the first works I posted on the Internet was a vehicle project called Buggy:

Project «Buggy»

After that, I received a job offer from our local outsource studio and this was my first professional experience in the CG industry.

In the studio, I worked on a variety of projects, for example, Warthunder. At the moment, I work remotely on several unannounced projects doing weapons, sci-fi armor and stuff like this.In my spare time, I focus on conceptual design and try to build an iterative approach to it, develop my own visual language and learn different aspects of design to achieve efficient and high-quality results. Also, I experiment a lot with tools and different pipelines.

Learning 3D

As I said before, I have been doing 3D since 2015, so I’ve been in the industry for 4+ years now. My way into CG began at the university where I studied Automotive Engineering and did a lot of CAD modeling. Little by little, I went into modeling more and more, started to practice in my spare time, learn polygonal modeling and rendering. I think my learning process was pretty standard: I didn’t have a mentor and used any source of information I could find like Gumroad, Gnomon, Learn Squared, etc.

After I got my first job in the game dev industry I became very interested in concept design. I think it happened because of the fact that I was fond of all sorts of engineering since childhood and especially, I was crazy about automotive design. Eventually, I found the opportunity and tools to express this passion by doing hard-surface concept art.

Speaking of self-education, to my mind, discipline is the best «tool» for me in reaching goals and becoming a better artist. However, it’s also the biggest challenge for me.

SP 300 Pistol: Start

This sci-fi pistol was made for practicing and learning design. At this period, I try to focus on weapons and props and I had a plan to design something like that a long time ago.As usual, I started with the R&D process and references. Here is the ref board I collected:

Ref board

As you can see I have some real guns and a few CG works (by Alex Senechal, Wouter Kroon, Des Zhu, Elijah McNeal) for inspiration.

Designing a Weapon

I have quite a standard design algorithm, and the next step after collecting references is thumbnails. During this stage, I get a better idea about the silhouette, proportions, etc. Here are the thumbnails I’ve made:

Thumbnails

As you can see, the chosen silhouette is not that similar to the final design, but it doesn’t matter. This stage is more «psychological» for me, I just try to get rid of the blank canvas and get some base for further work. Also, when I work on the silhouettes, I go deeper into references, play with gun photos in Photoshop, do some photobashing and get a more complete view of the final design.

After I created several silhouettes, I moved onto modeling and made a very simple blockout using polygonal modeling in 3ds Max. The main task of this stage is to transfer a 2D silhouette into 3D and start working on the main (biggest) forms. I don’t think about the small details, topology and precise forms yet, just overall proportions and silhouette. The only technical thing that has to be solved at the blockout stage is to determinate which parts would be more convenient for me to do with subd modeling and which parts would be easy to do in Fusion 360. In the image, the green element was decided to do with subd modeling as I think it’s easier to make major forms using polygons and then add small details, cuts, etc. in Fusion 360.

Blockout

Before exporting the green element into Fusion, I polished shapes a bit to bring them closer to the final idea and added support loops for correct smoothing. Here you can see this element prepared for exporting:

Subd element

Then, I brought the whole blockout model into Fusion 360. You can find a lot of information about the process of importing a polygonal model into Fusion on the Internet.

The rest of the work was done in Fusion. After I had brought the model there, I started to work on large and medium forms.

Here you can see the blockout after a bit of work in Fusion:

Fusion 360 re-worked blockout

To describe the main idea of the pistol: I tried to create a light personal weapon, quite classical but equipped with a stock to make it more interesting. Moreover, the gun shoots with electrical energy from the batteries which are located in the body of the gun and additionally in the stock.

As for the functional aspect of the design, at the moment functionality is on the second place for me, and I’m trying to concentrate more on the visual part. So I didn’t worry a lot about the technical details, and there is no science behind the pistol. But at the same time, if we are talking about weapon design, I always try to pay more attention to the grip and the elements users interact with (buttons, switches, etc.) and make those elements more ergonomic, give them the right scale and proportions. In my opinion, grip often draws the most attention and if it looks clumsy, super uncomfortable (with way too sharp corners, wrong proportions, strange forms, etc.), the design can seem broken.

I know good design is a form + function, but as I said, right now, I focus on the visual part more. I believe that the visual part is more important in concept art for video games and cinematics. Once I achieve a certain level in the visuals I will work on the functionality.

Visual Aspects of Design

Now, let’s talk about the visual aspect of design. Generally, it’s the trickiest part for me, and I find it hard to put together all my thoughts on this topic. Below, I listed a few materials that helped me to figure out some rules for this:

Alex Senechal, «Visual Design Basics»
Anthony Jones, «Design Core Principles»
Mike Hill, «Intrinsic Vehicle Design»
Joe Peterson, «Tech Tips Series»
A Russian book called «Композиция в технике» by Somov Y. S.

Next, let’s talk about some rules I keep in mind during the design process:

Avoid evenness: I think dividing an object into primary, secondary and tertiary forms or main and subforms is a good way to create a hierarchy: something that bigger is more important than something smaller. Also, this rule helps you to create size contrast and variation that feels more natural than the same sized objects.

Hierarchy

Also, I try to create a hierarchy on different levels, for example, the first level is the whole weapon (dividing big forms):

Hierarchy (Big (primary) forms)

Then I divide medium forms, for example:

Hierarchy (Medium (secondary) forms)

And the last level is small details:

Hierarchy (Small(tertiary) forms)

The next rule is «Dynamic Balance» which I also call«Zig-zag» detail distribution: This means that you need to choose the main axis (or 2 axes) of an object and distribute details asymmetrically relative to this axis (axes). I found this asymmetric weight distribution visually more interesting than symmetric one and also this method helps you to balance composition between main axes.

Zig-Zag detail destribution

Echoing (details/angles/shapes/colors): It’s a pretty common rule. You can take a detail and copy it several times, plus you can copy angles and colors. This rule helps you to make your design simpler and more holistic.

Echoing (repetition)

Grouping (details):
By grouping we create natural rest areas and also it helps to fortify existing areas of details.

Grouping

Plane changes/depth: Big flat surfaces are boring! I often try to make forms look more interesting by using plane changes and depth.

Plane changes and depth

That’s it. You can find more rules and greater explanation in tutorials that are listed above.

Rendering

Let’s talk about rendering and materials a bit. In this work, I used KeyShot for rendering and Photoshop for post-production. Unfortunately, I don’t have any super-secret effective techniques that I could share with you, so I’ll just describe my process.

First things first, I distribute standard Keyshot materials and choose a color scheme. During this process, I am using one of the standard Keyshot HDR map and simple black background; I don’t worry about lighting, background or environment at this step, I just distribute various types of materials according to my taste. For me, Brian Sum‘s works are one of the best examples of color distribution. I like the way Brian uses contrasting colors to create hierarchy and determine primary, secondary and tertiary forms.

by Brian Sum

Here you can see the pistol with basic materials on it:

Basic material setup

After that, I usually start to work on the lighting setup. As a base, I use a standard 3 point light scheme. According to this scheme I set up 3 emitters:

Key light;
Fill light;
Rim light.

3 point light scheme

The Key Light: This is your main source of light and is the brightest light in your scene. The key light is what will give you your scene and subject its overall exposure. Usually, it’s placed in front of the subject and is often off to one side to create some dimension and depth.

The Fill Light: This is your second source of light. It’s usually much dimmer than the key light and is used to fill in any shadows created by the key light. The reason you may want to use a fill light is to retain some detail in the shadow areas and to reduce the overall contrast of the scene.

The Rim Light: This is your third and final source of light in a three-point lighting setup. It’s usually placed behind the subject, sometimes off to one side, directly behind or overhead but still behind the subject. The backlight is used to create separation between the subject and the background so that they don’t fade into each other. It’s achieved by creating a “highlight” around the outline of the subject.

After a basic 3-point lighting setup, I start to think about the environment. The environment can strongly affect the lighting because of the reflections, color bleeding and stuff like this, so I think you need to figure out the environment on the early stage of lightning. As you can see, I decided to use just a plane, but what is interesting, for this plane, I used the material called Thin Film in Keyshot.

Thin Film material

I experimented a lot with the plane and when I accidentally applied this material I realized that this is what I was looking for. Thin Film has non-uniform reflections of different colors, and for me, it looks very interesting. I also added a standard normal bump map from the Keyshot library and a black and white roughness map to make reflections even more interesting.

Next, I proceeded to in-depth work on lighting. I started adding more light sources in order to achieve the following goals:

Well-readable forms: it’s necessary to achieve different tones in the areas where the plane changes and nice gradients on cylindrical surfaces, but I try to prevent super-contrasting transitions between the planes to make sure that image doesn’t look messy and overloaded.

Well-readable forms

Depth/overlaps: I always try to make sure that the deepest areas (negative spaces, deep cuts etc.) are darkened. Also, if I have overlapped objects, I try to make objects that are closer (to the camera) brighter than those that are farther away. It helps to create a feeling of depth.

Materials

Then, I started to work on the materials. I think it’s convenient to work on them in parallel with the lighting setup, but I highlighted this stage as a separate chapter after the lighting setup, just to make the article consistent.

When I work with materials, I always keep in mind that forms should be well-readable (materials + lighting = good form reading) and I don’t really worry about material parameters. I think when you are doing concept art it’s not so important to keep all parameters of the materials physically corrected, compared to production, for example. Also, I keep materials fairly simple and clean, as to my mind, the forms read better this way.

Most of the shaders just standard Keyshot materials with roughness and normal maps. For example, for the grip, I used a standard Keyshot material called Black Paint and just added roughness and normal bump maps to it. Almost all of the maps that are used in this project (normal and roughness) are bought on Quixel Megascans. I use the same process for all materials in this work.

Quixel Megascans maps

As you can see, everything is quite simple. I feel it’s all about the rendering process and the lighting setup, so I spend most of the time on those.

This is my raw render:

Raw render

And here’s the result after post-production:

Final image

Post-Process

Let me describe post-process on the example of this image below.

Orange version

The raw render looks like that:First of all, I’ve added this white pattern:

White pattern

The model hasn’t UVs so I just rendered another shot with white grip and added those white spots in Photoshop using a mask.

I wasn’t really happy with the lightning in several areas (marked with red in the image):

Bad lighting

So, I’ve added a few additional emitters in the Keyshot scene, rendered another shot and overlayed it in Photoshop using a mask, I did this because I didn’t want to change the whole lighting of the frame but only in these areas. Yes, it’s not physically accurate but it doesn’t matter in this specific case.

And I’ve got this:

Then, I’ve added smart sharpness in Photoshop and just masked out areas that are not in focus. It helps to pop-up details a bit. I also changed the color of the grip (If I remember right, I used Clown Pass in Keyshot to select grip only and change the hue for it). Also, I played a bit with color grading, saturation, and contrast using standard Photoshop plugin called Filter Camera Raw. I made the whole image a bit warmer, increased exposure a bit, and decreased the floor darkness.

And here you can see what I’ve got:

In the end, I added a really slight flare effect on the glass using flares library from the Knoll Light Factory.

Flare

Then, I put a photo texture (found on the internet) on top of the whole image with Screen mode and really low opacity (something like 5 or 10%).

Photo texture

Here is the final result:

Final image

Hope it will be useful for someone!

Vitaliy Ishkov, 3D Hard-Surface Artist

Interview conducted by Kirill Tokarev

by codastudio.dev

How Outsource Enables LTV

Evgenii Park — Fri, 22 Aug 2025 19:29:37 +0000

The core trend we've seen across the events, personal opinion, and the gurus of GameDev in 2023 is that 2024 is going to be all about fighting for every point at growing the LTV coefficient — the Life Time Value of the gamer experiencing your title.

Client acquisition on the market is getting tougher, while the number of unique competitors is inevitably growing. Whether those are good-old enterprises with major marketing budgets, or unique indie developers with powerful social media support — all are fighting for the same player.

That is where the LTV term comes in, showing how much engagement a game developer can acquire from one player. Meaning, the more interactions a gamer completes within the game — whether it's purchasing a prop, upgrading equipment, following the sequels etc, the better :)

As an External Development team, we work in two fronts: supporting the existing titles and helping the new ones to be born. After a very exciting brainstorm, talking with Concept artists, Animators, Art director, and managers, we've formulated all the key points how Game Development studios can rely on outsource.

Improved Game Quality and Visual Appeal:

High-Quality Art Assets: Skilled artists create visually stunning characters, environments, and objects that enhance the overall game experience, making it more immersive and engaging for players.
Increased Artistic Consistency: Outsourced studios provide a dedicated team of artists with a consistent style, ensuring the game's visuals are cohesive and polished.
Freed Up Internal Resources: Offloading art development frees up valuable time and resources for the game development studio to focus on other core aspects like gameplay and mechanics.

Faster Development and Content Delivery:

Scalability: Outsourced studios quickly scale their team up or down based on project needs, allowing for faster development and content creation.
Expertise in Specific Art Styles: Access to specialized artists with expertise in specific art styles allows for the creation of unique and high-quality assets that cater to the target audience.
Reduced Development Risks: Outsourcing art development reduces the risk of delays and budget overruns associated with hiring and managing an in-house team.

Enhanced Player Engagement and Retention:

Creative and Engaging Art: Unique and captivating visuals draw players in and keep them engaged, increasing their overall enjoyment and investment in the game.
More Frequent Content Updates: Outsourced studios help maintain a steady flow of new content with fresh visuals, preventing players from becoming bored and disengaged.
Improved Brand Perception: High-quality art contribute to a positive brand image for the game, attracting new players and encouraging older players to return.

Cost-effectiveness:

Reduced Costs: Outsourcing be significantly cheaper than hiring and managing an in-house art team, especially for smaller studios.
Flexible Cost Structure: Studios pay only for the work completed, allowing for flexible budgeting and cost control.
Reduced Overhead Costs: Outsourcing eliminates the need for additional office space, equipment, and software licenses, further reducing costs.

Access to Global Talent Pool:

Specialized Expertise: Studios tap into a global pool of artists with expertise in specific areas, such as animation, 3D modeling, and concept art.
Diverse Perspectives: Diverse artistic styles and perspectives lead to innovative and creative solutions, enhancing the game's overall appeal.
Round-the-clock Development: Studios leverage time zone differences to maintain continuous development and content creation.

Do you think we've missed a point or two? Happy to hear your take, and of course, learn based on your experience working with outsource development over the years.

by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev

How to Choose an Outsourcing Studio for Video Game Development: A Practical Guide for Producers and Art Directors

Evgenii Park — Thu, 21 Aug 2025 20:45:56 +0000

Outsourcing has become an integral part of game development. From indie teams to AAA giants, studios of all sizes actively delegate asset creation, characters, environments, animations, and even full levels to external teams. This allows them to focus on game design, narrative, and production management while leaving execution to outside experts.

But for collaboration to run smoothly, it’s not enough to simply pick a studio — you also need to know which tasks to delegate, how to hand them over, what to negotiate upfront, and more. In this article, we at Coda Studio will share our own experience on how to structure outsourcing so you avoid unpleasant surprises — whether in timelines or in budget.

In-House or Outsourced: When It’s Time to Hand Tasks Over

Let’s start with the basics: how to know when your project would benefit from outsourcing.

The decision to pass some tasks to an external studio shouldn’t be based solely on saving money or speeding up production. First, evaluate your team’s current capacity. If you notice deadlines slipping, your staff overloaded, or people getting distracted by non-core tasks — that’s a red flag. Studios often try to handle everything in-house until the last moment, even when the work is outside their specialization.

For example, you might have strong game design and an internal 2D art team, but your project requires photorealistic 3D characters or complex VFX. Finding and onboarding specialists from scratch can be slow and costly — especially if the workload is temporary.

Outsourcing is often the optimal choice when:

The project requires expertise you don’t have in-house (e.g., rigging, motion capture, technical art);
You can’t meet deadlines with your current team;
You need to handle peak workload without growing your permanent staff;
Your in-house specialists lack experience in the genre, style, or type of assets you need;
You have tasks that can be delegated so your team can focus on core features (e.g., UI, props, backgrounds).

Remember: outsourcing isn’t just about cutting costs. It’s a tool for scaling without risk. You can flexibly assemble teams for specific project phases without the burden of hiring and onboarding. This is especially important for indie developers or studios using agile methodologies, where team workload fluctuates from sprint to sprint.

Giants and Boutiques

Broadly speaking, outsourcing studios fall into two categories: large generalists and boutique specialists.

The first type — giants — have hundreds or even thousands of employees and can take on projects of any complexity or style. Examples include Virtuos, Liquid Development, and Chinese studios like Sparx or MoreVFX. They can produce hundreds of assets in parallel, deliver fast results, or even handle full ports and remasters — such as the recent Oblivion port to Unreal Engine.

The second type — boutiques — are small teams deeply specialized in a specific area: only characters, only hard-surface modeling, only stylized art. Studios like Keos Masons or Ryzin often have just a few dozen members but possess unique expertise. They’re chosen not for speed, but for signature style, attention to detail, and deep mastery of their niche.

Portfolio and Specialization: Find “Your” Match

A common mistake clients make is approaching studios without considering their specialization. If you’re making a sci-fi shooter, there’s little point in going to a studio known for cartoony stylization — and vice versa. Likewise, you wouldn’t order architecture from character art specialists.

When reviewing a potential partner’s portfolio, look at more than just the overall quality:

Do they have similar work in style and quality? Even if the quality is generally high, switching from one visual language to another takes time, pipeline adjustments, and can lead to mismatched expectations and blown budgets — revisions are always costly, sometimes to the tune of thousands of dollars. The closer their portfolio references are to your art vision, the fewer iterations, revisions, and misunderstandings you’ll face. Pay attention to scenes and lighting: do they use similar palettes? Can they capture an atmosphere close to yours? Sometimes a technically capable studio may still miss the right “mood.”
Have they delivered assets for similar platforms (mobile, PC, console)? Asset requirements vary greatly by platform. Mobile projects require strict optimization — low poly counts, simple shaders, compressed textures. Consoles and PCs allow for heavier assets, complex lighting, and highly detailed materials. A studio that has only worked on a mobile gacha game might struggle to produce ultra-realistic Unreal Engine assets for PS5 without adapting their pipeline. Ask if their portfolio includes work for your target platform, and request background details: what were the project constraints? How was optimization handled?
Does their level of detail match your expectations? Even within the same style, detail levels can vary significantly. A “realistic soldier” might be built with 20K polygons and basic materials — or with 100K polygons, advanced shading, microdetail normals, and individually textured buttons. If their typical detail level is below your expectations, they may not deliver your target quality without significant training — which risks delays and extra costs.

A Clear Brief Saves Money, Time, and Nerves

The clearer you explain your needs, the faster a studio can start — and the fewer unnecessary iterations will be required. Even the best team can’t “guess” your expectations without a detailed technical brief. Ambiguity in your request leads to delays, misunderstandings, rework, and ultimately, budget overruns.

Keep in mind: for an outsourcing studio, you’re one of many clients. The clearer and more structured your request, the sooner it will be prioritized. If your brief is clear and easy to execute, it reads as “low risk, high clarity,” making it more attractive to take on quickly.

A good brief should include:

General description: what the asset is, where and how it will be used;
Target platform: affects technical constraints (e.g., fewer polys and smaller textures for mobile);
Pipeline: your expected modeling, retopology, and texturing approach (high-to-low, mid-poly, game-ready, etc.);
Technical constraints: tri count, UV sets, texture size, desired shading;
Formats: expected deliverables (.FBX, .OBJ, .blend, .TGA, .PNG, etc.);
References: 3–5 images matching desired style, quality, and detail level;
Existing materials: texture libraries, finished assets, style guides;
Deadlines and budget: the clearer you are, the faster a studio can assess feasibility and provide accurate estimates.

Example of a bad request:
❌ “Need a realistic sci-fi character for a shooter. How much will it cost?”
This raises more questions than it answers: what style? Polycount? Platform? Rigging? Texture requirements? Output format? Timeline? Existing materials?

Example of a good request:
✅ “Need a game-ready sci-fi character, style reference — Mass Effect. High-to-low pipeline, PBR texturing (Metal-Roughness) in Substance Painter. 80K tris limit, two UV sets (body, armor). Output: .FBX with rig-ready geometry, 4K textures in .TGA. Budget up to $10,000. Base concept art ready, deadline August 20.”

If you’re inexperienced in writing briefs, work with your producer or art lead from the start. Preparing a detailed brief saves 10x more time and money than it costs to make.

Pipelines, Deadlines, and Workload

The pipeline a studio uses directly impacts results. The same asset created via ZBrush → retopo → bake → Substance Painter will differ greatly from one produced via photogrammetry and refined in Blender — in quality, speed, and price.

It’s not enough to say “we need an asset.” Specify the production stages, tools, deliverables (.fbx, .maya, .glb, PBR specs, etc.), and whether you need rigging, animation, or LODs. These all affect cost and schedule.

If deadlines are tight, a studio can assign multiple artists to one asset — faster but more expensive. Alternatively, you can opt for staged delivery: e.g., 10 assets per week instead of all at once. Always clarify:

How does the studio handle deadlines?
What processes do they use during peak loads?
Can they deliver partial results in sprints?
Will your project have a stable team or rotating members?
Can they scale up manpower if needed, e.g., double the number of artists?

No Feedback, No Results

Working with an outsourcing studio isn’t a “give it and forget it” process. Even with a perfect brief, you can’t foresee every nuance of style, pipeline quirks, team preferences, and mid-project changes. Regular, constructive, structured feedback is the key to success.

Why is feedback so important? It allows the studio to course-correct before they go too far in the wrong direction. Without it, even experienced partners can spend dozens of hours on work that ultimately gets rejected. The earlier you catch a mismatch, the fewer revisions you’ll need — saving both time and money.

✅ Good feedback: “Armor is too smooth — let’s add fine scratches like in the second reference. Shape distortion on the chest — please make it symmetrical. Overall style — closer to Dead Space than Halo.”

❌ Bad feedback: “Not great,” “I don’t like it,” “Let’s try two more versions.”

Such vague comments don’t tell the studio what to change. The result: they either guess or put the task on hold until clarified. Remember: you’re not just a client — you’re a partner. Artists want to do great work too, but without your involvement, even the best will drift off course. The clearer and faster your responses, the sooner you’ll get what you want — saving everyone time, money, and stress.

Other Things to Keep in Mind

Payment: If the asset scope is well-defined and you don’t need to micromanage, choose a fixed-price model. It reduces risk and keeps budgets predictable — but usually includes a limited number of revisions. Hourly rates work better for exploratory or experimental projects but require more trust and oversight: track hours, sprints, and team load, and know the average time needed for your type of task.
Legal: Serious studios will start with an NDA and contract. Many have templates you can adapt. Be sure to discuss ownership of rights, number of included iterations, penalties for missed deadlines, payment terms (milestones, post-payment, with advance), and applicable jurisdiction. Ideally, have your own lawyer review and adjust the contract.
Geography: Global outsourcing lets you tap into talent worldwide — from Brazil to the Philippines to Singapore. But keep in mind time zone differences (daily calls may require overlapping hours) and communication styles (in some cultures, questioning or pushing back isn’t common). English proficiency can also affect speed and clarity — if language may be a barrier, clarify who your main contact will be and their fluency.

Getting Started: Step-by-Step

Prepare your request — style, brief, deadlines, references;
Find relevant studios — via ArtStation, LinkedIn, recommendations;
Send the request and get estimates (ideally from 3–5 teams);
Run a test task if unsure;
Sign contract and NDA;
Set up communication and feedback processes;
Monitor progress — without micromanaging, but with clear checkpoints.

Choosing an outsourcing studio isn’t just “who to send the task to.” It’s a strategic decision that affects the look and stability of your project. There’s no one-size-fits-all answer — each studio has strengths and weaknesses. But if you know exactly what you want, finding the right partner becomes much easier.

Outsourcing isn’t just subcontracting — it’s expanding your team. With the right setup, it can be not only reliable but inspiring.

About us: We are a co-development studio with experience ranging from indie one-off projects to major AAA titles, delivering dozens of assets each month. You can request a free consultation — we’ll help you navigate outsourcing options, suggest ballpark pricing, and give a preliminary assessment of your needs so you can make an informed choice when selecting an outsourcing partner.

by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev

How to Use Outsourcing Correctly in an Indie Project

Evgenii Park — Wed, 20 Aug 2025 07:57:13 +0000

Indie development is a constant struggle for resources. With limited time and budget, every task requires a strategic approach. You need not just to make a game, but to make it efficiently: quickly, with quality, and within budget. But what do you do if your team, for example, has strong programmers and game designers, but no skilled artists? That’s where outsourcing can help. Based on our own experience, we’ve gathered tips on how indie developers can work with external teams and not lose money in the process.

What to Outsource?
Many indie developers believe that outsourcing is a tool exclusively for large studios with million-dollar budgets. But in reality, it’s often the opposite: for a small team, outsourcing can be a way to survive and grow. When you’re working as a team of three and doing everything yourself — from level design to marketing — delegating tasks allows you to avoid spreading yourself too thin and focus on the essentials: gameplay and production.

Today, outsourcing is available at different price points and scales: you can order not “all the art,” but, say, 10 UI icons or a single modular location kit. The main thing is to know exactly what you need and how it will fit into your project. The indie approach — with clear priorities — makes this format especially effective.

Most indie developers first consider hiring freelancers — they will cost less than a full outsourcing studio. But in that case, you only get an executor, with no external quality control or art direction. Large outsourcing providers solve these issues: you get a team, an established pipeline, your own art director, and managers ready to run your project. But the price will be higher, and flexibility lower — not every major contractor will take on small volumes or be ready to adapt to the unconventional conditions of indie development.

A golden middle ground is often small outsourcing studios. They are often made up of experienced specialists who have recently joined forces, bringing with them the practices of big companies while keeping flexibility and engagement. For indies, this is often the optimal option: you get a coordinated team that takes over organization and control, but without excessive overhead costs. At the same time, you should remember that different types of work have different “weights” in the budget and affect the final quality of the game in different ways. The same budget can be spent on:
one super-detailed realistic model of the main character,
— or —
a whole modular environment set.

Moreover, visual style can influence timing and cost no less than volume. Simple-looking stylized graphics may take just as much time as realism — especially if you need a flawless silhouette, well-thought-out colors, and expressive props. Assets comparable in quality to Blizzard’s works or modern photorealistic blockbusters will cost you tens of thousands — so why not target older, less technically demanding, but still beautiful games?

Important: The goal of outsourcing is not just “to do the work well,” but to allocate the budget as effectively as possible while keeping the focus on your team’s strengths.

Let’s break tasks down by the “cost → effect” principle: which ones give the highest return on investment (ROI)? ROI (Return on Investment) is the ratio between what you invested in a task and the benefit it brought to the project. In game development, this is not always about money directly — it’s more about the result for the resources spent: time, effort, budget. For example, if you order a modular environment kit that can be reused in different levels, its ROI will be higher than that of a unique object that appears in the game only once. High ROI means that the investment works for the project — visually, gameplay-wise, or marketing-wise.

✅ High ROI — smart investments that scale the project
Environment and modular assets

Reusable elements: walls, doors, furniture, natural objects, props

Scalable: one set can cover most of a level

Often cheaper when ordered in bulk (one scene = dozens of same-style objects)

Examples: sci-fi corridors, village architecture, dungeons, ruins, throne rooms

NPCs and secondary characters

Do not require the same level of detail as the main character

Create a sense of a living, populated world

Well-suited for pipeline work (one style — many variations)

Examples: villagers, merchants, guards, enemies, neutral creatures

UI/UX elements

A quality interface is one of the most underrated elements of game presentation

Icons, HUDs, menus, character cards — the “front” the player sees all the time

Work “outside the engine” — easy to hand over and integrate

⚠ Medium ROI — worth outsourcing, but with caution
Main character

The face of the game, a key marketing element

One character can take up to two months of work

Even if your game is first-person, creating in-frame character hands with all iterations and revisions will still take a lot of time.

Tip: Remember that a character is not just the model itself but also rigging, animation, and voiceover, each of which affects overall quality. In indie and AA projects, you sometimes see beautifully drawn characters with mediocre VO or poor animation — such mismatches can nullify all the effort.

Key environment details

Boss arenas, central hubs, unique buildings

These elements influence the perception of the project as “premium”

Require immersion in the game’s style and context

❌ Low ROI — expensive and risky for a limited budget
Full cutscenes and complex animation

Requires not only rigging and animation but also directing, camera work, and sound synchronization

A production nightmare without a final script and VO

Better to use library solutions: Mixamo, Asset Store, Retargeting

VFX, shaders, complex visual systems

Require precise integration into gameplay

Often subject to constant iteration: balance, readability, performance

In small amounts, easier to make in-house; but if you know you’ll need many, and exactly which ones, better to outsource

When to Start Outsourcing?
It makes sense to bring in outsourcing not at the very beginning but when the project already has a foundation — the vertical slice is complete. This means you’ve built a working prototype, tested core mechanics, settled on the style, and obtained at least minimal funding — be it a grant, Kickstarter money, or a publisher deal. At this stage, it’s already clear which assets are needed, in what volume, and how they will be used in the game. This allows you to avoid wasting time on rework and immediately give the studio a clear technical brief.

You can start carefully — order one pilot asset and see how well the contractor matches the style and deadlines. This approach is especially useful if you’re working with a new studio: the test task helps build trust and avoid unpleasant surprises later. At this point, you can also plan production in “batches” — for example, order a set of props for several levels at once or a batch of NPCs, which saves money through volume.

Starting outsourcing too early, before the prototype, is almost always a mistake. At that point, the game may still change: mechanics, visual style, even genre. Assets made in advance may not fit the final version, and you’ll have to redo them. Another risk is panic before a deadline. Rush outsourcing is almost always more expensive and often lower in quality: the studio has no time for reviews, polishing, or getting into the details. It’s better to plan ahead and choose the right partners without haste.

Where to Find Contractors
The easiest way to find outsourcing studios is on platforms familiar to most developers. LinkedIn is an excellent option if business contacts and transparent company information are important: you can view the studio’s profile, case studies, staff, and even reviews. On ArtStation, there is a dedicated Studios tab where you can find teams with the desired style and quality level, browse portfolios, and contact them directly.
In addition, there are B2B contractor directories like Clutch and GoodFirms. They work on a ranking system: companies are listed according to client reviews, project volume, specialization, and geography. This is a convenient way to quickly filter out unsuitable contractors and focus on those with real game development experience who are ready to work with your type of project.

Outsourcing rates vary greatly by region but don’t always affect quality — a reality you can use to your advantage. Here’s an approximate table of hourly rates for specialists (including art, tech art, rigging, etc.) in different regions. Note: this includes not just the artist’s labor but the full cost of the studio’s service.

USA & Canada
71–95
Wide selection of boutique studios and skilled niche specialists, good for critical one-off tasks

Western Europe
~60–75
Reliability, strict management, stable communication

Eastern Europe
~25–45
Lowest labor costs without quality loss, convenient time zones for Europe

Latin America
~35–60
Convenient time zone for the US, growing market

Asia & South Asia
~22–44
Lowest rates, but less transparent market and possible communication/stability issues

For high-value brands and art assets critical to the game, Western Europe or USA/Canada are ideal — but expect higher prices. For fast, localized, low-budget projects, Latin America is worth considering — though time zones may not suit everyone. Asia works if cost efficiency is key, but the risks of communication and control are higher. For indies with both limited budgets and high quality/reliability needs, Eastern Europe offers the best compromise:

Many studios experienced in both AAA and indie

Understanding of processes, documentation, and approaches familiar to Western industry

Moderate rates without loss of quality

What You’re Really Paying For
When indie developers first encounter outsourcing, one of the most common reactions is confusion about the rate. Why does an hour of studio work cost more than a freelancer on ArtStation or Upwork? The answer lies in the structure: a studio sells not just “artist hours,” but a complete production process tailored to the client’s needs.

Spoiler: you’re not paying for hours — you’re paying for reliability.

🎨 Art direction — style under control. You send references, describe the atmosphere — and that’s it. The studio’s art director ensures every asset matches the game’s visual language. No endless “this isn’t quite the style” or “the character feels off.” Everything is pre-approved and monitored.

🛡 Built-in QA — no need to play cop. Every asset goes through technical checks before it reaches you. UVs, topology, materials, scale — all matched to the brief and engine requirements. You get not a “raw” file, but a result verified by a team.

🔁 Pipeline management. You don’t coordinate artists, remind them about deadlines, or send revisions manually. The studio’s internal manager tracks the process: who does what, in what order, when to deliver, and when to review. You don’t manage production — you just receive progress.

⚙ Teamwork = scalability. Need 20 props in two weeks? One freelancer can’t handle it. A studio can quickly scale and bring in five artists at once. You get results faster without losing quality.

🤝 Post-delivery support. What if the pipeline changes? Or you need adaptation for the engine? The freelancer might be busy with another project. The studio stays in touch — quick edits, integration help, formatting included.

Versatility. Whether you need concept art, animation, rigging, models, integration, optimization, or something else — usually one studio can handle it.

A simple example: imagine you need a stylized 3D model of the main character. A freelancer might create a great high-poly, but it turns out too detailed for your mobile project, mismatched with your UI style, and with poor UVs. You end up hiring someone else to redo it, paying twice, losing time. In a studio, the art director monitors the style, the 3D artist meets optimization requirements, QA checks everything before delivery — and you get a working result.

A studio’s hourly rate is usually higher, but not always: for example, a senior freelance artist from the US may charge $75/hour, while a European studio charges from $30. When you calculate costs not in hours but in results, a studio is often more cost-effective: fewer revisions, less frustration, fewer missed deadlines. Which means more chances your indie game will release on time and at the quality you expect.

Conclusions
If you’re limited in time and resources (and indie developers almost always are), start outsourcing with tasks that bring maximum benefit for minimal budget — environments, props, UI. These elements scale well, are easy to reuse, and rarely require endless revisions. Moreover, they create the feeling of a “filled” world, even if you have only one level and a couple of enemies. Through modularity and repetition, they help make a small project look complete without overloading the budget.

The best time to bring in an external team is not at the very beginning, but after the vertical slice stage. Once you’ve tested mechanics and confirmed the idea works — and you know exactly which assets you need — you reduce the risk of rework, make communication with the contractor easier, and can be specific in your briefs. Contractors do well with clear, pre-planned work — this is when outsourcing works as a time-saving tool, not a source of chaos.

Finally, regional price differences are not just numbers — they’re a strategic tool. More importantly, a reliable studio takes on not just asset production but the entire process — quality control, style consistency, stage planning. You’re paying not only for “this sword model,” but for the certainty that it will arrive on time, look right, and not break your build. In indie development, that’s often more important than pretty graphics.

by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev

How a Game’s Visual Style Affects Production Costs

Evgenii Park — Wed, 20 Aug 2025 07:44:03 +0000

When developing a game, choosing a visual style is crucial: creating art can take up to 60% of the budget, and an unsuitable, overly complex, or expensive style can easily “sink” a project. The good news is that today’s players are open to a wide range of graphics—from retro to minimalist—and understand that simple or old-school visuals can be a deliberate artistic choice as well as a practical one.

Choosing a Style
A game’s visual style is guided by its concept—genre, atmosphere, and mechanics—but in reality, it’s often limited by budget. Dreaming of The Last of Us Part II–level graphics while having the resources of Stardew Valley is risky: it almost certainly leads to overspending both time and money.
Budget affects asset volume: the more unique objects, the higher the cost. Animation in realistic games has to be precise, while stylized games allow for simplifications, which saves time. Optimization and testing are also more involved in realistic projects, and even small revisions can affect multiple elements, stretching deadlines. That’s why it’s important to decide on a visual style as early as possible, starting with the basic choice: 2D or 3D.

2D
2D graphics are traditionally considered more budget-friendly than 3D—but that’s not always true. For instance, visuals like Hades, with meticulously drawn characters, smooth animation, and a striking color palette, require a team of skilled artists capable of maintaining high quality throughout the project. Cuphead’s visuals are equally stunning—but to achieve them, the creators had to mortgage their homes and invest personal funds to finish development.

On the other hand, retro styles, like in Vampire Survivors or Blasphemous, can be far cheaper. Pixel art usually doesn’t need complex pipelines, costly assets, or heavy engines. Small teams—or even solo developers—can produce it with just a few artists using tools like Aseprite or Photoshop. Examples include Stardew Valley (a solo development with huge commercial success) and Celeste, where pixel art became part of the game’s emotional storytelling.

The main limitation is artistic skill: even “simple” sprites can look cheap if they aren’t stylistically coherent. Pixel art is economical for basic sprites and simple scenes, but hand-drawn frame-by-frame animation can be time-consuming.

3D
3D graphics vary even more. At one end is the photorealism of Uncharted 4, with a multi-million-dollar budget and a huge team of specialists. Many beginner teams avoid this style—and understandably so: detailed models, complex materials, accurate lighting, and motion-capture animation make it expensive and time-intensive. Even with ready-made libraries and photogrammetry, time is needed for adaptation and optimization—at least, that was the case a few years ago.

Today, photorealism doesn’t have to cost a fortune: modern engines handle many “expensive” tasks. In Unreal Engine 5, Nanite handles high-detail meshes, reducing the need for optimization, and Lumen provides dynamic global illumination, cutting pipeline time and costs. Libraries of scanned assets (Quixel Megascans via Fab) allow fast environment assembly, and MetaHuman lowers the barrier for realistic characters, now built directly into UE 5.6. Unity HDRP also offers tools for photorealistic materials and lighting, and smartphone photogrammetry (KIRI/Polycam) can give a “high-end” look without a AAA-level team, relying on scans, kitbashing, and smart lighting and camera work.

If photorealism isn’t the goal, stylization is a solid alternative. Cartoonish 3D offers a compromise between expressiveness and speed. Simplified geometry, bright colors, minimal shaders, and stylized animation allow content to be created faster than in photorealism. Low-poly style makes it easier to create assets and scale projects without skyrocketing costs. For example, A Short Hike, made by a single person, uses simple shapes with a pixel filter but still feels cozy and atmospheric.

Retro stylization is another option. Graphics inspired by the original PlayStation feature intentionally crude models, low polygon counts, simple textures, and limited colors. This avoids the high costs of modern 3D assets while delivering strong aesthetic appeal: think Paratopic, Buckshot Roulette, or Fear the Spotlight.

Nostalgia works in your favor here: players see the graphics not as “outdated” but as an artistic choice. The result is minimal spending on models and textures compared to realism, while giving the project a unique identity and potentially attracting a wide audience among retro fans.
Stylized 3D in the style of Telltale games, with clear outlines, bright colors, and cel-shading, is still resource-intensive, even though it looks simpler than photorealism. Creating such characters requires careful work on design, rigs, and animation, while the environment needs thoughtfully composed scenes, lighting, and details to make the world feel alive and recognizable.

Even for indie projects with limited resources, developers must plan every element—characters, scenes, objects, and UI—to maintain a coherent style while staying on budget. This approach allows for a bold, comic-like aesthetic that makes the game stand out, but it demands significant effort from artists and animators.

Consider a few popular genres. Suppose you’re making a survival horror game—familiar mechanics can be presented in completely different styles, resulting in very different budgets. There are interesting 2D examples—Darkwood and Detention—both distinctive and stylistically unique.

But if you insist on 3D graphics—and your budget doesn’t cover The Callisto Protocol–level visuals—you’ll need to be clever. Developers of Tormented Souls deliberately made game locations more compact, allowing higher detail in each area; the creators of Signalis chose not to compromise on scale, instead giving the game a retro look reminiscent of the original Metal Gear Solid.

Another example: a platformer. Simple pixel graphics, like in Celeste, can cost around $50,000, roughly an average indie budget. A more detailed 2D game, like Ori and the Blind Forest, could cost around $5 million—despite both being 2D.

When Visual Style Defines the Game
Even with a budget for AAA-level graphics, it’s worth asking: does your project really need them? Often, the visual style becomes the defining feature, shaping player impressions even more than mechanics.
These games are usually made by small teams that don’t compete in “technical” AAA production. Instead, they create a strong artistic language that becomes their signature. Budgets go less to complex systems and more to artists, animators, and sound designers. Classic examples:
Journey (Thatgamecompany) — style, music, and the sense of journey create an emotional experience almost independent of specific actions.

Abzû (Giant Squid) — an underwater exploration game driven by the beauty of the ocean.

Gris (Nomada Studio) — a platformer with puzzle elements, where visuals and color accents literally tell the story.

Inside / Limbo (Playdead) — minimalism and unique style deliver atmosphere so that mechanics feel secondary.

In all these cases, visual style helped the games stand out, attracting press attention, festivals, and awards. But betting on style carries risks. If the art team underperforms, the visuals and atmosphere may fail, leaving the game without support. That’s why aesthetics-driven projects need not a huge budget but a clear artistic vision and strong organization.

Team and Organization
Developing a visual style is a complex process: concept art, models, textures, animations, environments, UI, cutscenes, and more. How many people are needed varies. Lucas Pope created Return of the Obra Dinn entirely solo, helped by stylized retro graphics.

Meanwhile, developers of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 relied heavily on outsourcing for animations—but the final work looks cohesive thanks to strict oversight from the art director, who established a unified visual language. Work formats can differ:

Volunteers: cheap but unpredictable; usually juniors who need mentoring, which can slow things down.

Small senior team (3–5 people): a good option for indie games, though expensive and requiring multi-skilled specialists.

Outsourcing studio: a team led by an art director, possibly integrated into a larger hierarchy (leads for environment, characters, effects + outsourcing managers). Flexible, scalable, and quality-controlled.
Costs depend on region, skill, and workload, but averages emerge. The cheapest 2D option is pixel art: one character takes 1–2 weeks, a level 2–4 weeks, and a full asset set for a small game costs around $5–10K.
Low-poly, popular for mobile and indie 3D projects, is slightly more expensive: one character 1–3 weeks, a level 3–5 weeks, total $8–15K. Hand-drawn 2D, common in narrative games, requires more time and skilled artists: 3–6 weeks per character, 6–8 weeks per level, costing $10–30K for a full set.
Stylized 3D demands serious preparation: 2–4 weeks per character, 4–6 weeks per level, costing $30–70K. At the extreme, AAA-level photorealism is the most expensive: 6–12 weeks per character, 8–16+ weeks per level, with a single character costing $20K or more.
Choosing a visual style is more than “prettier or cheaper.” Modern tools even allow photorealism with small teams, but not every project needs it. Carefully consider which style fits your project. As the examples above show, the same mechanics can work in very different visuals.
For indie developers and small teams, finishing the game matters more than chasing AAA graphics. A completed game with a tidy, simplified style is always better than a photorealistic project lost in production. This is proven by Vampire Survivors, Among Us, Signalis, and others—games that might never have seen the light of day if they had blindly pursued expensive visuals.
Finally, to avoid mistakes in choosing a visual style, remember to consider:
Available resources: honestly calculate budget and time to release.

Idea testing: create one asset in the proposed style to estimate effort.

Scalability: can you quickly add new content?

Gameplay: a minimalist style may be enough if your mechanics are strong.

Revisions: the more complex the style, the higher the risk of getting stuck in long revision cycles.

by Evgenii Park at codastudio.dev