Nothing wrong with defending your position, but an objective look at the market will come to the same conclusion as me.
Edit: Do you not understand survivorship bias? It's the idea that asking the people who are still here in this thread or on his Patreon if things should change is a bad idea.
The classic story of survivorship bias is about WW2 bombers. They used to look at the bombers that return and reinforce armor in the places where there are the most bullet holes. In actuality, that's the exact opposite of what you should do. The bombers that made it back reveal the places where it's okay to get shot and still live, whereas the places where they aren't shot don't have survivors, those bombers don't make it back. So in reality you should reinforce the places where the bombers who make it back aren't shot.
It's a pretty common mistake in business too. The people in this thread are the bombers who made it back, they're the customers who are still around. Ask them what needs improvement and they won't tell you the most important things. The biggest problems have caused the majority of customers to already not be customers, they have already left. All the survivors will tell you they are okay with how things are, because of course they are, the group is already preselected to be those who are happy with things.
Looking at things objectively, your existing customers will of course be okay with even severe problems with the game that should objectively be fixed, but they will be an ironically preselected group that will lie to you and tell you they are not problems.
No, it will not. There are RPGM games that see massive success. It's possible to have success with such a game. The market supports what I am saying.
You are the one who does not understand it. We are not dealing with a scenario where it's living people vs dead ones in some tragic incident. This is about customer appeal in a very specific niche within a niche. Niche games see success all the time. As do RPGM games. There is a precedent that both niche games and RPGM games can succeed. This has nothing to do with what people who currently are interested in the game like or not. You can like a game and still give feedback on how to improve it as well. Your whole scenario is what's filled with holes and self serving assumptions.
You are not looking at things objectively even slightly. You are looking at things purely through a lens of your own bias. For one, we aren't customers. We are commenters on a thread of people who have tried the game. This is a work still in production. We aren't bloody lying to the developer, lmao. We just don't have some weird hate boner for RPGM games like you do. A game being made on the RPGM platform is not an objective problem that needs to be fixed. Look at Tower of Trample. They haven't put out an update in over a year and they are still rolling in money each month. While it isn't quite as niche as this game, it is still rather niche. This has absolutely nothing to do with this being a RPGM game.
I like the game because I enjoy different takes on the sub/dom niche, especially between women. This is a unique game in a market that's rather baron. The RPGM aspect of the game is appealing to me, but I enjoy both renpy and RPGM games, but welcome this one being RPGM. I will say that it could be polished more, but before polishing it, it's sensible to get the core skeleton completed, and then polish it after there is plenty to work with.
There are a number of bugs currently that can make a typical user frustrated that should be worked out. Some of the scenes could be polished, and there should probably be more interactions with more scenes that give player choices more meaning. RPGM game's strongest asset over renpy games is how much interactivity they can have with characters and the world. Having more exciting H-content that rewards that interaction would make the game better combined with more general polish. Beyond that, getting the game noticed more by people within the niche it's catering to is paramount. Swapping the game over to renpy is going to virtually have no effect on things if everything else was the same as it is now. A game like this does not succeed or fail based on if it's based in RPGM or renpy.
'Objectively,' this is factual or else we would not see RPGM games succeed as much as they do. It is probably fair to say though that a RPGM game has a certain minimum it needs to reach to see it succeed that is likely higher than that of a renpy game, as you have to make the interactivity meaningful, engaging and rewarding. While a renpy game can be made very interactive, fundamentally, it's more suited to a VN style of game which is much less interactive by comparison, and thus is more driven by just the dialogue and scenes, rather than how fun the interactive aspect is in conjunction to them. But, at the same time, if you get the interactive aspect down in a RPGM-styled H game, it can be very fun and engaging, and see great success if its a polished experience on-top of that.
If the game is fleshed out more, polished, refined, and expanded upon after the fact, it will be a better experience, and thus retain interest of who it reaches. It's entirely possible as well though that this game has not reached enough of its audience in the first place though. Crying about it being a RPGM game though is useless as feedback for the developer. That's your personal bias coming into play, and it has little to do with the success of the game in and of itself.
