this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
87 points (97.8% liked)
Games
16694 readers
298 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This annoys me. It's pure semantics.
To be fair, his argument seems to be more about maintaining a pace of development as an openly unfinished early access game who already has paying customers.
I'm still on the side of the other guy, who can't control that fact that a game that he listed as unfinished as a solo dev/small team blew up too early. I think that for a small team trying to build something that's not tiny, having continuous feedback from a dedicated group of customers allows you to make a better game, and having income allows you to spend more time developing it.
I would generally not recommend buying an early access game unless you either think it's already at a level you're happy with or you really value that back and forth process and want to "invest" in helping the game you value get made. You need to do it with your eyes open. But I don't think it's an inherent failing to not magically build a studio when a game blows up.