I’d prefer to pay for a product they slowly but surely upgrade through time than to gamble a lot of money on something that I don’t know will be good or not
(Disclaimer: I was mainly thinking about video games)
See, this is part of why every game these days is always online and can’t be played again once the next version comes out and the publisher pulls the plug
While I see and understand your point, I don’t really approve it from a game dev point of view. (Disclaimer: not a game dev, only a software dev)
And this applies whether the game dev has a publisher or not. Wasting huge amounts of resources and time on a game that is not well received in the public, this is counter productive for the team behind it.
On the other side, getting small updates based on the input of the user base, that’s a bit more productive.
I get your view, I myself experienced updateless video games, and these were the days. But these games were the product of a survival bias. There are many other game that were not making enough money to sustain the company’s finances behind (and most importantly, the dev salaries) (see Infogrammes)
Now don’t get me wrong, I am certainly not talking about the way they handle how the game belongs to someone and how versioning works. A game where you can download any version (see Minecraft) can coexist with the iterative and more productive methodology of maintaining and adding new features into the game through time and based on the users’ input.
My point isn’t about the game getting or no getting updates. My point is about having every game be always online and it becoming unplayable when the publisher pulls the plug on it
And I’m not talking about MMOs where the multiplayer aspect is the core of the experience.
There’s plenty of games with a really good single player campaign that can’t be played anymore because the publisher pulled the plug on the servers and threw the key away.
Not to mention things like diablo 3 or the last remake of sim city
For the complete and functional product tho… Idk
I’d prefer to pay for a product they slowly but surely upgrade through time than to gamble a lot of money on something that I don’t know will be good or not
(Disclaimer: I was mainly thinking about video games)
See, this is part of why every game these days is always online and can’t be played again once the next version comes out and the publisher pulls the plug
While I see and understand your point, I don’t really approve it from a game dev point of view. (Disclaimer: not a game dev, only a software dev)
And this applies whether the game dev has a publisher or not. Wasting huge amounts of resources and time on a game that is not well received in the public, this is counter productive for the team behind it.
On the other side, getting small updates based on the input of the user base, that’s a bit more productive.
I get your view, I myself experienced updateless video games, and these were the days. But these games were the product of a survival bias. There are many other game that were not making enough money to sustain the company’s finances behind (and most importantly, the dev salaries) (see Infogrammes)
Now don’t get me wrong, I am certainly not talking about the way they handle how the game belongs to someone and how versioning works. A game where you can download any version (see Minecraft) can coexist with the iterative and more productive methodology of maintaining and adding new features into the game through time and based on the users’ input.
My point isn’t about the game getting or no getting updates. My point is about having every game be always online and it becoming unplayable when the publisher pulls the plug on it
And I’m not talking about MMOs where the multiplayer aspect is the core of the experience.
There’s plenty of games with a really good single player campaign that can’t be played anymore because the publisher pulled the plug on the servers and threw the key away.
Not to mention things like diablo 3 or the last remake of sim city
If you didn’t steal it, you don’t own it. Giving corpos your money is a sign of brain damage.