Thread 724700547

Is it better to not release a game at all than to release a flop?

No

>>724700728
But why? Everybody hates you if you release a flopped game.

>>724700779
No, they don't

>>724700547 (OP)
Yes

>>724700547 (OP)
Only if it's multiplayer

>>724700547 (OP)
You can't put a cancelled game on your CV. well you can but it will look like bullshit

>>724700547 (OP)
Yes absolutely. The best advice I ever got from a teacher was a photography teacher telling us the best way to be known as a good photographer was to only ever show people your great photos. If you shit something out that is attached to your name it will forever be attached to it. People will always know you're capable of releasing a shit game.

>>724700820
But they do.
>>724701118

>>724700547 (OP)
>>724700883
>>724701034
Toxotransmosis moment

>>724700547 (OP)
>>724700779
If you're talking from perspective of an indie dev, nothing will prepare you for the market better than a flop. You'll know how to finish a game, you'll know the formalities associated with it, the taxes, the Steam procedures and all, and you'll learn that nobody actually cares about you as a developer and people will give you less time of the day that you thought they would, which will let you set more realistic expectations for your next release.

>>724701198
A lot of the developers from Concord are currently working on other shit now. Clearly they're not that hated.

It's even less applicable if you're an indie dev. How many flops did Scott Cawthon make before he hit it big with FNAF? The answer is around 5.

Also Concord may be shit but Flop =/= Shit. Plenty of good games that have a very small niche dedicated fanbase that flopped. Are those people not important? IA more accurate thing to tell you is that if you are in the vidya industry only looking for fame and profit, then don't bother.

>>724701331
>Also Concord may be shit but Flop =/= Shit.
Concord was both, anon. It's a $400 million game that went offline 2 weeks after its release.

>>724701282
>nobody actually cares about you as a developer and people will give you less time of the day that you thought they would
Why make a next release then? By the time you put out your first game you probably have already reached all the self-actualisation needs already. And if nobody is gonna give a shit, then what's the point? You're kidding yourself if you think "just make games for yourself" is a viable strategy for anything other than a throwaway jam game.

>>724701531
Because if you're not a complete ape you'll realize that it's you who is supposed to work for people's attention if you care about that.

>>724701616
It's impossible to "work" for it nowadays. You either buy your way in by bribing streamers and youtubers or you luck into it. Algorithms killed organic discoverability.

>>724701682
And what are you going to do about it? People who got successful fired on all cylinders for their success.

>>724701531
Getting into game development is a bad idea for any sort of financial or success-chasing reasons, yes.
>>724701616
Trying to play a rigged game is just retarded.

>>724700547 (OP)
It's better to have not made a flop in the first place, but if you've already made it you may as well get what you can out of it

>>724700547 (OP)
Hyenas was much less embarassing for Sega than Concord was for Sony.

>>724703608
>Getting into game development is a bad idea for any sort of financial or success-chasing reasons, yes.
I don't think many people get into gamedev purely wanting to make money or success, only a small amount do. But as you get more proficient and as you inevitably start moving up the complexity and depth of your projects, it only becomes natural to want more output from your work for the increased input. I hardly doubt anybody on this board would invest their money into a project they know it will either fail for certain or fail with a very, VERY high likelihood, yet keep telling developers to also invest money and time into such things. You said it yourself, playing a rigged game is just retarded. Even more so when said rigged game requires exorbitant amount of effort on your end.

>>724700779
>But why? Everybody hates you if you release a flopped game.
No, they don't. You're confusing it with high-profile incidents by notable publishers. This is how you get people to hate you when releasing a flop:
>hype up game as second coming of Jesus Christ especially if it still looks good at the developer stage
>buggy, unplayable release, even with huge 40GB patch (or whatever) still extremely buggy
>publicly insult your target audience for complaining/not buying it
>disown the games that you made and people liked

If you release an indie and it flops it’s alright. Even if you worked on a major title and it flops it’s fine. Someone in this thread said your name is attached to shit but that’s not how it is. If you have experience you will be more desirable than someone without any. It’s like this analogy they’d rather have a race car driver that crashed than one without experience. Working on a flop game isn’t the same as getting cancelled. Someone said in this thread how Concorn devs easily found more companies to work for. Here’s a really interesting example, the Hunt Down the Freeman dev quickly got a job at Activision in game dev. Who knows maybe it was connections too but clearly any experience is helpful.

>>724700547 (OP)
Is your motivation to get paid for your work or is it to create games you want to exist?

1) even a flop will have some fans, so better to make something if you think it's a good idea

2) better to make some money, even pennies, than nothing. The only way the reverse is true is if you used a cancelled game for a tax write off

>What about reputation

You have to understand most players aren't actually that connected to gaming news/reviews outlets. The only thing that could affect it is word of mouth, and sometimes the reverse happens with 'bad press.' For example, Fire Emblem Fates sold a good amount specifically because people wouldn't stop complaining about the localisation, but for the majority of players that's not a deal breaker, so the game essentially had months of free advertising

>>724707385
Read
>>724705812

>>724701034
WHAT? excuse me? is this real?

>724701269
>Ban evading subhuman is still spamming
Pathetic

>>724700547 (OP)
By "flop" do you mean a bad game or a game that doesn't sell well?

Most games I enjoy seem to be flops for whatever reason? I'm not sure if I should even bother reviewing it. There's no difference between getting 3 reviews, or 2. It's over.

I dunno man, the only reason the Exorcist got popular was because it was on the tonight show. Other horror novels of the era were just as good, but never got a spot on TV so they are forgotten. Like Audrey Rose.

But it's probably better to release a game than not to.

>>724707984
Then just don't invest money into the project.

>>724708539
>I'm not sure if I should even bother reviewing it.
You should. A game won't be recommended at all on Steam if it doesn't have 10 reviews and any single review helps push it closer to being seen at least by some people.
You really have no idea how fucked the Steam algorithm is.

>>724708768
Your intellect is lower than that of an ape. There is no point in conversing with you further.

>>724708783
Yes, I know. Both 2 reviews and 3 reviews are lower than ten.

>>724709057
It's still better if it has 3 reviews instead of 2.

Lonely toxotranny thread

>>724700838
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nplefywEFI

>>724707713
>even a flop will have some fans
No they don't. If a game flopped, nobody knows about it at all. Doubly so if we're talking about a modern indie game. The old games you're thinking of were not flops in the standard sense.

>>724701331
>the answer is about 5
It's definitely more than 5, the only games he really had financial success with were random slots games for mobile until FNAF. However his name wasn't besmirched in all that time since being small-time=no-one remembers if you release a flop.

>>724701034
@grok what kind of animal is this

>>724700547 (OP)
>>724701034
>>724701282
Toxotransmosis moment

>>724712863
>>724709204
Imagine being this guy. Spamming forum posts with the same bot replies every day. What a pathetic existence.

>>724700547 (OP)
from the point of view of developers? No. If they don't work on something they don't get paid. They release a flop? Their salary remains the same, at least until they are fired.
From the point of view of an investor? Still a flop would be preferable because they can get tax cuts.

>>724700547 (OP)
No. Someone might like your game.

>>724701682
>organic discoverability
hey what are the chances that you mean magazine adverts by that? maybe demodisks bundled with bigger, better known, more promoted products? or shareware given out freely in the hopes that some people would actually buy the full game?
yeah that's real organic shit, because marketing didn't exist until fagman started making algorithmic recommendations

>>724713296
I wasn't talking about big budget studios. Strange that your understanding of gamedev is only limited to AAA.

I agree with a lot of the comments here from the context of being an indie dev. Also you can't perfectly predict what flops and what doesn't.

You gotta take some risks when you put a game into the world. Oh one other thing, places like this are super cynical, but the reality is there's gonna be people who like your game and you're never going to know about it. So share it. If it does what you want great. If it doesn't learn from what happened and try new stuff for next time. Good luck.

>>724713752
>you mean magazine adverts by that? maybe demodisks bundled with bigger, better known, more promoted products?
Not organic discoverability. It's paid promotion similar to paying some sloptuber to make a 3 hour video essay on your game.
>or shareware given out freely in the hopes that some people would actually buy the full game?
I can count this, but this was a viable strategy dor an exceedingly short amount of time. I was also predominantly refering to the internet, as it's the most accessible medium for an average indie dev that they could use to reach an audience.

>>724700547 (OP)
It is better to buy rope, than ads.

>>724714215
if you lament the web consolidation and its consequences, then it's a more coherent point, but you gotta put it in less retarded terms
anything that's not word-of-mouth is not "organic discovery", but promotion

>>724714874
You seem to be upset that I didn't use the same terminology as you do, and you didn't provide your reasoning as to why yours is better to what I chose.

>>724708539
Releasing a game is relevant if you want to get hired by a studio afterward, even if your game has 2 reviews.