Phoenix Springs #3 | The release

For this third Tales From the Devs in collaboration with Calligram Studio, we once again take a behind-the-scenes look at the creation of Phoenix Springs. After exploring the artistic ambitions and game design in our previous interviews, this discussion focuses on the post-launch assessment: managing feedback, corrections, marketing adjustments, and learning for the future. With transparency, Jigmé Özier shares his experience of this unique independent project, while outlining the contours of their next creative ambitions.

Point’n Think: Hello Jigmé, it’s great to see you again after the release of Phoenix Springs. On the day of your game’s release, how did it go? Did you have any particular ritual, or was it just a normal day?

Jigmé Özer: Frankly, it was pretty anti-climactic. Everyone was at home, you press a button on Steam and… off you go. We were supposed to launch at 9am, but I postponed it a little because we still had a few things to check. And then, as soon as it’s online, you start seeing messages on the forums: “Where’s the game? Why isn’t it available yet?

The first day went well overall, but there was one big bug that really stressed me out. Fortunately, we were lucky: in the Steam ecosystem, there are players who test everything very quickly. Some rush the game to make guides or tutorials. And thanks to a Chinese streamer who quickly found the bug, I was able to get a patch out right away. But for a few hours, it was very stressful.

PnT: It must be intense, especially with the early feedback. How did things go with the press?

Jigmé: It was pretty special, because we had an embargo with the press. Initially, the game was due for release at the end of September, but we had to postpone it. With our communications company, we agreed to keep the embargo until the day of release, to give journalists more time to test the game. A few days before release, we started receiving interview requests from big names. When the game was released, we got very positive critical feedback from the press we were targeting: The Verge, New York Times, Vulture. These are media that don’t just cover video games, but also everything to do with art and culture, so that was exactly our target.

PnT: What about gamers?

Jigmé: It’s quite funny: we really attract two types of gamers. Those who love our somewhat artistic and interactive approach, and those who are more critical, often because they’re looking to complete the game 100%. The former are super enthusiastic, they understand our approach. The latter, who spend hours exploring everything, are much more demanding. They sometimes write us entire pamphlets on what they’d like to see or change. But the great thing is that it ends up creating a natural filter. Players who aren’t interested move on, and the ones who stay are the ones we wanted to reach. It’s really gratifying to see that.

PnT: What about negative reviews? How did you deal with them ?

Jigmé: We’ve had very few, to be honest. Edge gave us a 5 out of 10. It stings, because we had done an interview with them before the release, and everything seemed to be going well. But grades are always a bit strange. You spend years working on a project, and in the end you end up with a note that sums it all up. I’d rather get a 0 and say “it’s not for us” than a 5 that doesn’t mean anything. But hey, that’s the game. Journalists have a tough job, often poorly paid, with tight deadlines. So I understand.

PnT: With Phoenix Springs, did you really aim to reach an audience that appreciates this artistic and narrative aspect?

Jigmé: Exactly. We knew we wouldn’t be making a game for everyone, but we wanted those who entered our universe to feel deeply connected to it. What surprised us was the extent to which some players were moved by the emotional and artistic aspect. We had conceived Phoenix Springs as a kind of experiment, to test how far we could go in our creative approach. And to see such positive feedback is really gratifying. We’ve had messages from players saying that the game has made an impression on them, that it’s made them think. That’s more than we expected at the outset.

PnT: That’s great to hear. And I imagine the feedback from the press helped a lot in that respect too, didn’t it?

Jigmé:Yes, especially the Anglo-Saxon press. Media like Rock Paper Shotgun, Polygon, and Vulture really understood our approach. They wrote articles highlighting our vision, this mix between video games and interactive art. Well, as I was saying, there were also some not-so-good reviews, like Edge. But overall, we’ve had a lot of support from the press. And what’s interesting is that these are often media that also cover other art forms, not just video games. This has enabled us to reach a different audience, one that perhaps doesn’t necessarily watch what’s released on Steam on a daily basis.

PnT: And what’s next? Are you already thinking about it?

Jigmé: At the moment, we’re still digesting everything that happened with Phoenix Springs. But we do have some ideas. Maybe not a direct sequel, but a project that would take up certain themes or mechanics we explored in the game. We want to continue experimenting, creating experiences that blend narrative, art and interactivity. But we also want to take our time and get it right.

PnT: And with everything you’ve learned on this project, I imagine you have a better idea of what you want for the future?

Jigmé: This project has taught us an enormous amount, whether on a technical, artistic or even human level. We’ve seen what works, what resonates with players, and also what we could improve. For the future, we’d like to keep pushing this idea of games that aren’t limited to a single form of expression. We want to mix influences, play with players’ expectations, and create universes that leave a lasting impression.

PnT: You were talking earlier about the bug you had on the first day. That must have been an intense moment! Did you notice any specific feedback on certain bugs or improvements that came up quickly?

Jigmé: Honestly, no, nothing too serious. There were a few minor bugs, like softlocks – places where a player could get stuck with no way to progress. These were fairly easy problems to identify and correct. This allowed me to deal with each situation on a case-by-case basis. For example, if someone posted on the Steam forums that they were stuck, I could quickly see what the problem was and correct it. I’d say that after a week, everything was stabilized. Now the game runs on autopilot. I still keep an eye on it every day, but there aren’t really any more bugs to deal with.

PnT: That’s one of the great advantages of digital technology, isn’t it? Knowing that a bug, no matter how annoying, can be corrected after the fact. It’s not like a physical release where, if something goes wrong, it’s ruined.

Jigmé:Exactly. The flexibility that a platform like Steam offers is really valuable. If a player encounters a problem, they can easily report it, and I can roll out an update quickly. That’s a huge difference from traditional launches in the past, where a bug on a CD or cartridge could doom an entire experience. On Steam, it’s also the community that helps a lot. Players don’t hesitate to point out problems or ask questions, whether about technical bugs or even puzzles they find too complex. And here, even if solutions exist online, some players still come to ask for help directly on the forums.

And it’s interesting to see how attitudes have changed. Before, with the old point-and-click games, if you got stuck, you really got stuck. You had to wait to find a solution in a magazine, call a hotline or even consult Minitel lines back then. Today, everything’s more accessible, but it also has unexpected effects. Some players, for example, end up playing with a solution in hand from start to finish. They just want to get on with the story, which I totally understand. But by playing like this, they often miss out on the context or details that enrich the experience. Our goal was really to design an experience that encouraged players to explore and think. But we also understand that everyone has their own way of playing, and our role is to make the experience as fluid as possible, even for those who want to move on quickly.

In the end, after a week of corrections and patches, the game was really in a stable state. This was important, especially as we were also launching the game on GOG shortly afterwards.

PnT: The end of the year was full of award ceremonies and rankings of all kinds. Is this something you’re aiming for? Are you trying to get nominated for more visibility?

Jigmé: Yes, we’re keeping an eye on all that. We didn’t get nominated for the Indie Game Awards unfortunately, but we do take part in other festivals. There’s a Steam event we’re associated with. After that, you have to be realistic. This year was an exceptional year for indie games. When I look at the other titles competing for categories in the Steam Awards, I honestly think there are so many games I’d vote for in my place (laughs).

PnT: It’s true, it’s been a busy year. There’s been an upsurge in indie games in recent years, but 2024 seems to have been a real turning point.

Jigmé: Even so, we have a number of things falling into place. For early 2025, we hope to see our game mentioned in the trade press’s lists of the best titles of the year. This kind of recognition may not translate directly into sales, but it’s a real plus in terms of credibility. It also creates a lasting relationship with the press. Personally, I love talking to the journalists who write about video games. They do an incredible job, and it’s important for us to maintain these connections, whether by thanking them or sharing information about our projects.

Even apart from the purely promotional aspects, we learn so much from them. Between release day and the week that follows, I’ve probably learned more about how to make games than I did during the whole development period. This feedback puts us in a state of mind where we feel ready to start the next project.

PnT: Is the studio still motivated to continue?

Jigmé:Oh yes! These seven years have been an incredible adventure. But we’re still a small team of three, and that’s how we want to carry on. For the next game, there may be fewer illustrations, but the team will remain the same. The small success we’ve had with this game allows us to move on, both financially and morally. We really realize how lucky we are, especially when you look at the many other games coming out that don’t always have this opportunity. We’re not talking about a success that would allow us to drop everything and retire. But it’s enough to reflect, adapt and work intelligently on the next game.

PnT: I suppose you have to move on quickly, don’t you? As long as the game is still in people’s minds, it’s a good time to go and see publishers, present them with a prototype or an idea, and try to launch the sequel.

Jigmé: That’s what we try to do. You learn from every aspect of the process: marketing, press relations, and even working with publishers, even though we didn’t have any for this project. Personally, what I found most challenging was the technical side. Let’s just say that marketing, even if I don’t necessarily like it, is still within my remit. Writing press releases, managing a campaign, it’s not complicated for me. What I really missed was a more in-depth knowledge of programming.

We used tools like Unity and Adventure Creator, which are very accessible for artists. But there’s always that other 10%, where you have to really dive into the code to finalize things: fixing complex bugs, adding specific features like Steam or GOG hits, etc. For the next game, I want to concentrate on learning these technical aspects. Maybe even start prototyping myself on Godot, which I really like, before looking for a developer to finalize things. It’s also when I see the technical challenges we face when porting, like for consoles, that I realize how important these skills are.

PnT: Looking back, are there any aspects of development that you would have approached differently? Things you would have prioritized or approached differently?

Jigmé: That’s a very good question, and honestly, this whole project has been a huge learning experience. Every step of the way, every challenge, has been like a game design school for us. Whether it’s a question of technique or how to design puzzles, we’ve learned everything on the job. I think if I had to sum up, the big lesson I’ve learned is the importance of being smart about the way you work, especially when you’re a small team. For example, for the next game, I really want to avoid jumping straight into Unity or finding myself in front of the computer too soon. What I prefer now is to go back to simpler methods: paper and pencil. I want to spend as much time as possible thinking, sketching ideas, designing in a notebook, before I even launch anything in software. It’s a way of laying the foundations calmly, without getting lost in technical details prematurely.

I love this idea of sitting down with my coffee, having my notebook in front of me, and letting the ideas come naturally. Write, draw, step back. It’s so much more productive than getting stuck in frustrating back-and-forth between menus or lines of code.

PnT: And do you think it was a waste of time on this first project?

Jigmé:Not really a waste of time, but let’s just say that we had the luxury, for a first game, of being able to experiment without having any specific expectations. We could afford to make mistakes, try things out and see if they worked or not. Now, with experience, I know it would be smarter to organize things better from the outset, to prioritize what really counts and optimize our time. But I have no regrets: we’ve learned a lot from all the mistakes we’ve made during this development. We now know that you have to lay the foundations methodically, think about priorities from the outset, and don’t rush. Time is a precious resource, especially for a small team like ours.