Mormont
Devoted Member
- Nov 30, 2018
- 11,927
- 53,099
- 1,001
Something else he can't get rightI wouldn't call it a beta release more like an early pre-alpha release.
Something else he can't get rightI wouldn't call it a beta release more like an early pre-alpha release.
Thats an option too, yes.Have a stark drop in quality in their games, increase the "production" time even though, theoretically, they should be able to afford more members on the team and drop the project dead, milking it more than Call of Duty while rolling back to images without animations?
I'm not talking about dev's that are already making a good amount of money, 10-15k$ is a very good amount of money. I'm talking about the dev's that have to work their day jobs and then develop their games. If these dev's would earn more they could upgrade their equipment and maybe even quit their dayjobs and start developing fulltime. It might be that not every dev would increase in quality but there are several that would increase in quality and update more frequently.To be fair, growing small projects seems to be a huge problem in general. It's usually fine as long as there's a signle person or a really small team doing their stuff but as soon as one is talking about basically "starting a small company" while greatly increasing the amount of content output, I'm not aware that there's anybody who has really done it. So just because a dev is doing a great job at 10 to 15k$ doesn't mean that he'd be twice that good/effective at 40k.
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.I'm not talking about dev's that are already making a good amount of money, 10-15k$ is a very good amount of money. I'm talking about the dev's that have to work their day jobs and then develop their games. If these dev's would earn more they could upgrade their equipment and maybe even quit their dayjobs and start developing fulltime. It might be that not every dev would increase in quality but there are several that would increase in quality and update more frequently.
When you take a look around here on F95 and check some of the games, that are not your usual braindead crap, and see that not few of these dev's make less than 1k$ you'll understand what i mean.
it’s better to get the game without animation than not to get it at allnot enough he said this week so its not going to be in the 10 like i suspected its going to be without animations so why to release it who want game without animation are this comics game or what
true its a good pointit’s better to get the game without animation than not to get it at all
To have all that time and not have the animations ready is pretty poor from his side, looks like people will have to use their imaginations for the animation scenesit’s better to get the game without animation than not to get it at all
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.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.