Carpe Stultus

Engaged Member
Sep 30, 2018
3,402
8,845
Well, that's a different question though. You are basically saying that one shouldn't give money to devs which are already popular, because they make enough. That's fine. But most of those do make that kind of money because people like their games better than others and thus are prepared to pay. At that point a lot of money starts to flow and devs have to deal with that in one way or the other. That was the point I wanted to make. I mean, it's not really about fairness or the "best overall use of money" in that case. Sure, there a few games I personally wish would do better, but then again I know in many cases why they don't.
There are also dev's who just make a lot of money because they are in the business for a long time and people just keep supporting them without even playing their games, but thats a different topic. I get your point.

There are sure cases where i wish the game would do better but i know that even a lot of money wouldn't change that, but there are also games where i know that more money would increase the quality and frequenzy of the updates because the dev would dive in fulltime. It is really a double edged sword in some cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arms99

Gh8st

Newbie
Sep 12, 2017
22
10
What can I say. 3-4 month for this update is too much. Previous week or weeks were for testing and here we go again. The best solution is to show real release date. After that date all patrons payments stay on hold and patrons don't be waste their money on devs problems. Cause every developer must plan his time, if you need extra time(tests, bugs) add it before releasing new date. I know it because I'm also developer. In my opinion, it looks like dev is milking users for more money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
3.80 star(s) 415 Votes