I'm currently working towards a vertical slice of my project, with the intention of then employing it in seeking publisher support for the project.

However, I've hit a bump in the road: I fear that audio is not my strong suit. And while I've managed (I think) to at least make do with royalty-free music, sound-effects are proving more difficult to source.

Now, the obvious thing is to simply hire someone. However, based on what I've found, it looks as though such a person would (understandably) be rather expensive, given the number of sound effects that I currently have in mind.

(The intention being, you see, to include the hiring of a dedicated audio person into the budget that goes with my pitches. I don't intend that I be the audio person all the way through.)

But it has occurred to me to question: for a vertical slice intended to be seen by potential publishers, how important is it that all elements of the demo be polished? Will unpolished audio undermine my chances of finding a publisher (and a good one)--or am I shooting myself in the foot struggling with audio and worrying about hiring someone when it's not likely to overly affect how publishers review the game?

(To be clear, even in the latter case I still intend to try to come up with halfway-decent audio--however, I may be more open to going with “acceptable stand-in” audio.)

Hmm… Okay, that's encouraging, then, and thank you. (I did indeed have it in mind to make it explicit in my submission that the sound effects are stand-ins, should I go that way.)

You say that ‘definitions of “vertical slice” vary widely’. While this is a bit of a derail, could you expand on that please? You've prompted me to want to check whether I'm making the right sort of vertical slice for my submission! ^^;

Thaumaturge said:
could you expand on that please?

Why don't you instead tell us what “sort of vertical slice” you are planning? (How about you working harder to get your answer rather than asking others to work harder to give you your answer.)

Tom Sloper said:
Why don't you instead tell us what “sort of vertical slice” you are planning?

As I said above: A vertical slice intended for inclusion with a publication pitch.

I ask because, heretofore, I wasn't aware that there were multiple types of vertical slice--hence my asking the poster who mentioned such variation to expand on that.

And, well, saying my “this is what I'm doing” and getting a “that's good” or “that's bad” answer seems less useful--not only to me but to any others who may visit this thread, come to think of it--than someone saying “here are the types of vertical slice” and me responding to that.

Thaumaturge said:
saying my “this is what I'm doing” and getting a “that's good” or “that's bad” answer seems less useful--not only to me but to any others who may visit this thread, come to think of it--than someone saying “here are the types of vertical slice”

Nobody can tell you “here are the types of vertical slice.” (They vary WIDELY, frob said, meaning everybody has their own definition, and therefore nobody can tell you them all.) Can you describe what you want to present? Placeholder audio, we got that. “Intended final look graphics”? “Full functionality of one level”?

Thaumaturge said:
for a vertical slice intended to be seen by potential publishers, how important is it that all elements of the demo be polished?

Instead of worrying about the term “vertical slice” just make the best possible demo. The less polished, the less likely you'll get a deal.

Tom Sloper said:
Can you describe what you want to present? Placeholder audio, we got that. “Intended final look graphics”? “Full functionality of one level”?

Ah, that I can do, I believe!

The current aim, then, (aside from audio) is something along these lines, presuming that I'm forgetting nothing:

• Final-look graphics
  • At least pending feedback on what I currently have
  • If then not “final”, at least I hope “decent”
• A small selection of areas, including something along the following lines:
  • A handful of very small areas
  • One partial medium-sized area
  • And one partial large area as the “centre-piece”
    • This including a few sub-levels in order to show some variety
  • Two very small “hubs” in which the above are found
• A small selection of weapons
  • Showing, I hope, some of the range that I have in mind
• A small selection of fully-functional enemies
• Two or three bosses
• All of the intended types of item/upgrade
  • There are about five of these types:
    • Weapons
    • Character-abilities
    • “Quest Items”
    • Health upgrades
    • Player-skins
• NPC interactions
• Full menuing
• And various other features

To explain a little regarding the levels/areas: The game that I'm working on is intended to be a metroidvania, with some of its regions being somewhat large. I then intend to include only one such large region, and that cut down: its sub-levels may be partial, with more focus being placed on showing variation between sub-levels.

It is possible that some other features will be yet-to-be implemented--I still have some decisions to make there. Further, I'm not sure of how much of the game's story will end up being included.

And there will likely be at least some bugs!

Or, put another way: Something close to final, I hope (save for audio and maybe some bugs), but a very limited section of content, and some elements missing (no tutorial, limited scope for exploration or quests, etc.).

Tom Sloper said:
Instead of worrying about the term “vertical slice” just make the best possible demo.

That's fair.

I suppose that, at my initial reading of Frob's original mention of “types of vertical slice”, I worried that I might be undermining my efforts at pitching by, well, “making the wrong sort of thing”.

Tom Sloper said:
The less polished, the less likely you'll get a deal.

Of course. The question, I suppose, is how much less likely. (In qualitative terms, not quantitative, of course!)

That is, naturally a demo with full, perfect audio is likely to be better than a demo with poor audio, which (I imagine) is likely to be better than a demo with no audio. But is poor audio so big a detriment that most publishers will discard the demo out of hand, or so minor a detriment that it's not worth worrying about--or somewhere in-between?

In short, I'm trying to figure out how much weight to give this one element, and thus how to allocate resources towards it.

frob said:
The problem comes from the term itself. …

…

At one extreme a vertical slice a basic prototype system. …

…

At the opposite extreme they're a full debugged demo ready for the unwashed masses to rip apart. …

Ah, I see! That makes a lot of sense now, and I'm with you, I believe!

I would say that I'm aiming for something closer to the latter extreme than the former, I think--but see my reply to Tom Sloper, above, for a more-detailed explanation.

frob said:
For a publisher it depends on what you're offering and what you're expecting them to bring to the table. If you're expecting them to bring significant funding for development, it should show you've got a fun concept. That usually (but not always) means a playable demo with the pitch, something they will find fun and engaging, and will be able to make a decision about.

…

Okay, that too makes a lot of sense.

I'm arguably planning on showing more than the level of aid being sought would suggest, based on your description: I'm asking for quite a bit of aid, I think, but am nevertheless planning on showing something playable.

Thank you very much for your detailed responses! They've proven rather helpful--and indeed, have to some degree settled my worry about the “type” of vertical slice that I'm working towards. ^_^

Thaumaturge said:
But is poor audio so big a detriment that most publishers will discard the demo out of hand, or so minor a detriment that it's not worth worrying about--or somewhere in-between?

None of us can predict how any individual of varying tastes and industry knowledge will react to a gorgeous demo with crappy audio. Make your placeholder audio be non-crappy.

In general, you can use the term “vertical slice” and then describe it with the kind of detail you did above, and nobody can say your use of the term is bogus.

Standard terminology has its uses, but it's not absolute. When I receive an “alpha” or “beta” delivery from a developer, I don't look at it with a general widely-accepted definition of those terms - I look at it with the wording used in the contractual definition of the milestone. When my QA lead complains that t delivery is not company-accepted “alpha” or “beta,” I say “it meets the contractual definition of the milestone, and you should test it on that basis.”