Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[forsaken1111]

But if you ARE the industry, and the industry is shit...

/sarcasm

[aristabulus]

...
I'm really curious where he got these statistics:
...

https://medium.com/@galyonkin/how-many-games-are-eligible-for-steam-refunds-7a4f3ea74c19

I find it odd that neither the Puppygames rant nor the link above say anything significant about trading cards, and the behaviour they tend to elicit.

More than a few games on Steam have 5 cards total, 3 drops on a new copy, and will dole them out at 15/30/60 minutes.  I know there are games I've gotten in bundles, didn't really have any interest in playing them (not the reason for buying the bundle), but they had cards...  so I idle for however long to get the drops, uninstall the game, and flog off the all the cards I have laying about to buy something cheap.

I can't be the only one, so it makes me wonder how much that distorts the stats.

-----

As for the Puppygames guy...  his rant comes off a little caustic, yeah, but fundamentally he's not wrong on a lot of what he says.  He has been previously harassed by GG (maybe still is), so I can understand why he's not trying to be diplomatic.  The Internet Hate Mob eats "polite & diplomatic" for a snack.

People that buy things cheaply, or get them "free" because of how they perceive the costs of a bundle, just aren't invested in giving the game an honest chance.  They are not likely to be talking about the game.  They are not likely to give other titles in the developer's stable a look, because there is no connection with the work.  They _are_ likely to be a CS nightmare, like the rant says.  From a purely economic standpoint, they are highly likely to be a net-loss customer; this is the angle from which he says "worthless customer" in the rant.  If he's a bit angry at those people because they want him to pull the moon from the sky for a quid or less in his pocket?  I think that's reasonable, all in all.

I got Titan Attacks in a bundle, and gave it a spin... it was okay.  I am unlikely to play it again, but if my daughter/nephews/niece ever get interested in gaming history, it'll make the list to be part of a Then & Now comparison with Space Invaders.

[BurnedToast]

Who are you to judge?

A 31 year old gamer who has been around since beating Dragon Warrior II was considered a cool thing to do. I am the industry. Every game evolving over time into the (some good, some) shit that it is. The countless "reboots", the fucking tragedy of "spiritual successors". I have watched things go from bad to worse. I've seen new ideas come and go, some of them worked, others didn't. I've watched AAA and indie alike fuck up time after time. I've heard promises turned into outright lies, watched hype which was nothing more than propaganda for a shit release, and gradually observed the industry practice "Dump>Patch>DLC" instead of releasing quality from the jump.

Yeah. I'm qualified to judge. I'm the guy with a stack of CDs about two feet high. Magic Carpet to Gothic. I was playing Ultima Online before stat loss. I was in the delivery room when Steam was born. I could go on and on, but I won't. I'm qualified to judge games, period.

Had a bit of a rant typed up, but it's rather offtopic so I deleted it. Instead I'll just say I'm even older and have played games even longer (and thus by your logic, am even more qualified to judge) and I mostly disagree with you.

Your opinion remains just an opinion, equal in value to everyone else's.

People that buy things cheaply, or get them "free" because of how they perceive the costs of a bundle, just aren't invested in giving the game an honest chance.  They are not likely to be talking about the game.  They are not likely to give other titles in the developer's stable a look, because there is no connection with the work.  They _are_ likely to be a CS nightmare, like the rant says.  From a purely economic standpoint, they are highly likely to be a net-loss customer; this is the angle from which he says "worthless customer" in the rant.  If he's a bit angry at those people because they want him to pull the moon from the sky for a quid or less in his pocket?  I think that's reasonable, all in all.

Maybe they should consider that before they put it in a bundle or sell it for very cheap?

I'm sure the counter-argument will be that they are forced to do so to sell copies, but that's stupid. Either make games people want to pay money for, or create games that you want to create but accept you won't make a living off it.

If you are so bad at business you are making 0 or negative money off the copies you sell, it's your fault, not the customers and blaming them is empty-headed.

[aristabulus]

...

Maybe they should consider that before they put it in a bundle or sell it for very cheap?

I'm sure the counter-argument will be that they are forced to do so to sell copies, but that's stupid. Either make games people want to pay money for, or create games that you want to create but accept you won't make a living off it.

If you are so bad at business you are making 0 or negative money off the copies you sell, it's your fault, not the customers and blaming them is empty-headed.

Many of them probably did consider the issues before giving the go-ahead on bundles or sales...  but there's been a terrible supply-side problem for years now.  The number of games being made are absurd, everyone knows it, and nobody wants to stop making games unless a triple A devhouse software sweatshop crushes the dream out of them, or they are literally starving to death.  As with books, so too it is with games: obscurity is a far greater threat... and desperate people do desperate things.

I'm sure the bundle folks didn't help by talking up the "excellent visibility" being in a bundle is supposed to give.  They are invested in having interesting bundles; you'd have a hard time getting them to care about the technical or CS debt that the bundle creates for the developers.  If the bundle folks talked about that in their pitch, just about everyone would NOPE-NOPE-NOPE right out of that meeting.

Are some/many indies bad at business?  Absolutely, and not just because of broad reasons of varying business acumen amongst a large population.  Many of them want to Make Their Dream Game, or Be Their Own Boss, without knowing what that really means.  It doesn't mean they are bad people acting in bad faith; they're just in over their heads, like many of us in varied other ways.

It's easy to watch from afar and commentate from an armchair...  it's a lot messier when you're in the middle of it.

[Moghjubar]

*rants about modern games/industry*

So... wheres the Hatred Game parody video ranting about the modern games industry?

[BurnedToast]

...

Maybe they should consider that before they put it in a bundle or sell it for very cheap?

I'm sure the counter-argument will be that they are forced to do so to sell copies, but that's stupid. Either make games people want to pay money for, or create games that you want to create but accept you won't make a living off it.

If you are so bad at business you are making 0 or negative money off the copies you sell, it's your fault, not the customers and blaming them is empty-headed.

Many of them probably did consider the issues before giving the go-ahead on bundles or sales...  but there's been a terrible supply-side problem for years now.  The number of games being made are absurd, everyone knows it, and nobody wants to stop making games unless a triple A devhouse software sweatshop crushes the dream out of them, or they are literally starving to death.  As with books, so too it is with games: obscurity is a far greater threat... and desperate people do desperate things.

I'm sure the bundle folks didn't help by talking up the "excellent visibility" being in a bundle is supposed to give.  They are invested in having interesting bundles; you'd have a hard time getting them to care about the technical or CS debt that the bundle creates for the developers.  If the bundle folks talked about that in their pitch, just about everyone would NOPE-NOPE-NOPE right out of that meeting.

Are some/many indies bad at business?  Absolutely, and not just because of broad reasons of varying business acumen amongst a large population.  Many of them want to Make Their Dream Game, or Be Their Own Boss, without knowing what that really means.  It doesn't mean they are bad people acting in bad faith; they're just in over their heads, like many of us in varied other ways.

It's easy to watch from afar and commentate from an armchair...  it's a lot messier when you're in the middle of it.

I don't disagree, but I think my point still stands - blaming the customer for all that is stupid.

I understand it's hard, I understand they are trying to do what they love, and I understand sometimes things get out of control. I had a lot of sympathy for them..... right up to the point they started blaming other people for their own mistakes.

That's just not how it works. Own your mistakes, learn from them, and move on instead of trying to shift blame on to anyone and anything else.

[nenjin]

That's just not how it works. Own your mistakes, learn from them, and move on instead of trying to shift blame on to anyone and anything else.

In other words, success needs no excuses. I feel for developers who didn't achieve the success they wanted (I've seen at least one dev IRL suffer this) but getting desperate and screwing yourself isn't going to make up for the fact the game wasn't popular. And trying to blame someone isn't going to suddenly improve your sales.

[Darkmere]

Yeah for what it's worth I don't have any strong opinion about puppygames one way or another, rant included. I just felt that the one game of theirs I played (Attack of the Titans, I think? The pseudo-tower defense one) had what I consider objectively bad design, and it turned me off enough that I just never wanted to play anything from them again.


For the record it was trial-and-error gameplay over long campaigns with only one viable solution. Roguelikes have more than one solution, so trial-and-error isn't so bad. Long campaign games with only one solution usually present it quickly, but this game intentionally hid it from you. So fie on that game.

[Toady One]

If there's a problem developing in this thread (the "shit-o-meter" is spiking at times), please try to be more circumspect and so forth.  There doesn't need to be arguing where discussion would work just fine.

[Boltgun]

That's just not how it works. Own your mistakes, learn from them, and move on instead of trying to shift blame on to anyone and anything else.

In other words, success needs no excuses. I feel for developers who didn't achieve the success they wanted (I've seen at least one dev IRL suffer this) but getting desperate and screwing yourself isn't going to make up for the fact the game wasn't popular. And trying to blame someone isn't going to suddenly improve your sales.

Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE had a good game project fall apart and handling failure is the difference between good and bad game devs. Throwing a tantrum will only cut you away from helpful contacts who would have helped on your post mortem otherwise.

The Puppygames guy is not stupid, but I think that he wanted to treat his players like special birds while his kind of games won't allow him to. He has a foot into the mass/casual games and he'll have to live with it or find a smaller niche to go for.

One thing I'm learning from AAA games is that the risk of trying for a big success may not outweight the security of shoving mobile f2ps. Fallout shelter is funding Fallout 4 for example, and who knows if Fallout 4 will be profitable. As butthurt people get in this thread (and, but you cannot ask for 1080p HD graphics with 15 customer shaders and 10km of view distance and at the same time complain that companies issues casual games for cash. In fact, as I see it, mobilizing 400 people (and I'm being optimistic) on a game that may not even be profitable withing the year requires a lot of faith.

And one last thing, at 30-something we should know better then to add violence in our language.

[alexpoysky]

I've found that in development, success isn't reliant on pointing your finger so much as doing your best. You WILL make mistakes, people WILL hate you for them, but if you can look past that and provide entertainment for others it'll all have been worth it.

Straight up facts, there are people giving back my game, and I am perfectly fine with it. I would prefer someone who dislikes what I've made to give back the title than feel entitled to his hard earned money. It's dishonest. We aren't selling hot dogs on a street corner, we are selling a product, and as such, a client is entitled to a refund of said product IF he or she finds out that it is not to their liking.

The steam refund system, in my humble opinion, is a perfect way for Valve, the industry, and YOU to seperate the wheat from the chaff. There are hundreds upon hundreds of dime a dozen early access cash grabs out there and up until a month ago you had to purchase a game based on it's trailer.

OF COURSE there will be abuse, there's abuse in every human social interaction in the world,but an abusive minority doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to what is helping to solidify the industry and keep it from a market bubble burst like in the 80's (look up the video game crash of the 80's).

My game is terrible in some people's eyes, and I respect and value that. That's why THIS is a good idea. Because those people, instead of telling a hundred other people on the internet that it's terrible, can simply recieve a refund, vent their proper opinion and not spend days at a time on the steam forum trash talking the game until someone offers a refund. On the flip side SHORT indie titles that are a little more on the pricey side will see a lackluster response, as the aforementioned abusers will play through it and reufnd it before the two hours are up. No one solution is perfect, but this one is a good starting step in the right direction in my opinion.

[Sensei]

Fallout shelter is funding Fallout 4 for example, and who knows if Fallout 4 will be profitable.

I would imagine that Fallout Shelter's profit is largely measured in Fallout 4 preorders.

[LordArchibald]

Because those people, instead of telling a hundred other people on the internet that it's terrible, can simply recieve a refund, vent their proper opinion and not spend days at a time on the steam forum trash talking the game until someone offers a refund.

LOL, a good point. I think the average of positive ratings overall will raise (I mean, if I refunded a terrible game why should I write a negative review?)

BTW, does anyone know about the trading cards and the like? Will these stay if you refund (I see the biggest possiblity for abuse here)?

[Sappho]

Because those people, instead of telling a hundred other people on the internet that it's terrible, can simply recieve a refund, vent their proper opinion and not spend days at a time on the steam forum trash talking the game until someone offers a refund.

LOL, a good point. I think the average of positive ratings overall will raise (I mean, if I refunded a terrible game why should I write a negative review?)

BTW, does anyone know about the trading cards and the like? Will these stay if you refund (I see the biggest possiblity for abuse here)?

From what I can tell, they seem to have changed card drops so they don't start until after 2 hours of play. Makes farming a lot more tedious, but I understand why they needed to change that.

[Zangi]

Steam cards are worth actual cash monies to someone out there?