Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Company News Taking Care of Business - Iron Tower Studio 2018 Business Diary

Mustawd

Guest
Making what decisions?

The meme is “bean counters decide on what games should be made”.

And we should go back to arguing about something we all agree on - like your shitty taste in rpgs.

Sure. Whatever.
 

YES!

Hi, I'm Roqua
Dumbfuck
Joined
Feb 26, 2017
Messages
2,088
I rarely check the refund data because

Have you ever received good input from this? I'm wondering because historically I have taken the time to explain why I refunded a product and it usually boils down to me explaining why their product was mislabeled as an rpg or my having a hissy fit over how savage their UI and controls where. Is there a chance a dev would read it and be like, "yeah, of course we have to add in rebindable keys! This isn't 1982 and we aren't filthy savage animals. We are human beings for crying out loud! Our control functionality is the like having ASCII graphics. He's right! Let's fix this STAT" Or are the like - "My control scheme is the best ever and there is no reason anyone would ever want to change it!" I've also returned games that were borderline but them including the "Check this out something retarded with the Steam controller picture" on their store page and promoting the uncivilized savageness of using a controller on a PC game caused me to refund. I just don't get it. Its like a hot dog stand advertising they have mustard, ketchup, and feces as toppings. Who the fuck would want to put feces on a hot dog? I honestly can't imagine why someone would do it or that they have a big enough population to cater to, especially considering all the normal people that will walk by their stand because they are advertising shit as a topping.

I'd really like an to know if you think I am wasting my time leaving a comment when I refund a game. So far zero developers have made their controls more civilized after I refunded.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
You saw what I posted. I didn't cherry-pick, that's the kind of mind-boggling feedback we get. "The game is too difficult" written in different ways. I'm glad that people who can't play the game are able to return it. The game isn't for them, that's all there's to it.

If you want to talk to developers and offer your feedback, posting on their forums or emailing them seem like a better way to start a conversation.
 

Mustawd

Guest
The game isn't for them, that's all there's to it.

The entire thing seemed like the author was complaining about the game existing in and of itself. Literally every reason you'd play the game is what he bitched about.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
That's not one guy. Each line is a different reason provided for a different refund.
 
Self-Ejected

Davaris

Self-Ejected
Developer
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
6,547
Location
Idiocracy
These are full-scale games sold at full price. We're talking about a $5 game put together in 10 months. I'm not asking if it's a great game (it's not) or how to sell a million copies (you can't), I'm asking if there's a 100k copies market for such games.


It's complicated.

First, each game has an expiration date (at which point it's mostly forgotten and no longer being talked about, which is the most vital aspect). For many indie games it's about a year or less. We managed to stretch it to 2 years, which is quite a feat, but this period ended 5 months ago. I believe that discounts will be less effective after the 'expiration date' so waiting until people stop talking about it and then offering deeper discounts to entice them is a losing strategy because your game will be invisible by then. So like it or not, we have to go through the full discount cycle while there's still some interest.

We ran 15% off 3 times. The first sale was ok, the second kinda ok, the third sale wasn't very effective at all. So we moved to 25% off, rinse and repeat.

Second, we didn't go overboard with YT-bers, we gave away maybe 50 keys, which cost us nothing and not a lost sale. If a YT-ber has even a 1,000 subscribers and only 50 people would watch his/her AoD video and only 1 person would buy it, it's already more than we would have had otherwise. If anything, maybe we were too conservative there. Essentially, it's free publicity no matter how you look at it.

Edit: Just got a notification that 6 games I once wanted to buy are on sale now, 50-75% off discounts. It's nice but I've already moved on, have other games I bought but didn't have a chance to play much yet, or games I'll definitely buy in the near future. So, not too little but definitely too late.

So the only question here is do we spend 12 months on a tactical game or switch to the next full-scale RPG right away.

Going back to my other post I mentioned I had seen people try what you have done by making a game, so they could make the one they really like, and all it got them was poorer and older. I thought of that when heard you were making the tactics game, so I would say do what you really want to do to the best of your ability. Don't waste time on detours.

You want to get more out of your existing investment and give the press reason to report you. Lowering prices is not newsworthy, so you could try making small addon campaigns for the existing game like Bethesda does, or if you really want the big bucks
Horse Armour!
You know you like it! But seriously, do something newsworthy and they will report you.

Something I have seen indie devs do is make educational videos in their spare time. They show people how they code and say controversial things (Casey Muratori), or they do lectures on game design and make interesting stuff like a new programming language (Jon Blow). Of course doing all this, their existing games and old ones are brought up again and again by their viewers. A network of programmers and software has grown up around Casey because of his after work videos. What is that worth in terms of word of mouth promotion?

Also would Spiderweb still be around if he followed the AAA way and made new assets for every game? I don't think he would and he's said as much in the past.
 
Last edited:

Diggfinger

Arcane
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
1,200
Location
Belgium
I rarely check the refund data because... well, see for yourself:

Combat is impossible, if you can't even survive the first encounter after trying it multiple times then whats the point in even playing the game.

I didnt think you'd be force to fight people in this game, i chose a loremaster expecting to not have to fight people, but i have to and end up dying everytime i try to complete the main quest.

i dont have the brainpower for this game


.

These statements reflect my exact thoughts when playing the game...but I soldiered on despite the odds!:ehue:

Btw. are you considering some kind of early-access backing-beta for The New World (similar to AoD)? I would like to pay in advance and get to try builds/demos to track the progress until the final release.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Going back to my other post I mentioned I had seen people try what you have done by making a game, so they could make the one they really like, and all it got them was poorer and older.
It doesn't work when you do it as your first game but it can work as a follow up. We just need to tweak the formula.

You want to get more out of your existing investment and give the press reason to report you.
The press isn't a factor, although getting 4 reviews to get a proper rating on metacritic would have been nice. We only got 2 for DR so the game shall remain in rating limbo for eternity.

Also would Spiderweb still be around if he followed the AAA way and made new assets for every game? I don't think he would and he's said as much in the past.
Jeff is a one-man band. Like Rambo he can survive where others can't.

Btw. are you considering some kind of early-access backing-beta for The New World (similar to AoD)? I would like to pay in advance and get to try builds/demos to track the progress until the final release.
Yes, same model as AoD: combat demo, full demo, early access when have 50% of the content until all content is added, final release, 6 months of post-release support and extra content.
 

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
Thus moving to a brand new setting with different systems is the safest bet even though it looks like the riskiest.

This is the most interesting take I got from the editorial - it's obvious in hindsight but kinda against the first instinct you have as a developer when you think about playing it safe after your first game.
 

Andhaira

Arcane
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
1,868,966
So Vault Dweller how does it feel to be a millionaire? Did your penis grow in size automagically? Did attractive bitches throw themselves onto it/you? Did your wife now stop hating you for quitting job and taking on a loser nerd career?
 

Whisper

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
4,357
Change the names why? Because playing as Tough Bastard instead of Murderous Psychopath was so humiliating? There is a reason why games keep getting easier, why Hard became the new Normal and it has nothing to do with the naming conventions.

And what is this reason?
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Change the names why? Because playing as Tough Bastard instead of Murderous Psychopath was so humiliating? There is a reason why games keep getting easier, why Hard became the new Normal and it has nothing to do with the naming conventions.

And what is this reason?
Because players want to play a badass (heroic fantasy) but playing a badass on Easy feels wrong. So it has to be on Hard but without any real effort.

Since AoD's #1 complaint was difficulty, we added 3 difficulty modes in DR to see if it solves the problem. To be honest, I was pretty sure it would but I had many conversations with very upset people who showed me the error of my ways.

One person was convinced that we made Hard and Normal too hard on purpose, to humiliate players and force them to play on Easy (as if we have nothing better to do). I tried to explain that Hard is for people who like challenging fights but that upset him even more, as if he wasn't good enough. So he couldn't play on Hard but refused to play on Easy or Normal. Oddly enough, quite a few players felt they were humiliated.

Another person felt that he deserved to win because he was a veteran player who beat Dragon Age on Hard (usually people namedrop Baldur's Gate to impress me with their credentials) and he shouldn't have to give enemies penalties (that's how the lower difficulty modes work) in order to beat the game. So again the reason is that the victory didn't feel so good if you know that you had to cripple the enemies. It has to feel real so next time we'll go with these difficulties: Hero, Great Hero, the Greatest Hero. No penalties to enemies, that's just wrong, but your super saiyan powers will grow exponentially with each difficulty level. The harder the game, the easier it should be.
 

Tigranes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
10,350
Ironically, the nu-CRPGs have a solution for this: make Hard easy, and then have .ini edits for people to have actual hard difficulty.
 

Whisper

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
4,357
Because players want to play a badass (heroic fantasy) but playing a badass on Easy feels wrong. So it has to be on Hard but without any real effort.

Since AoD's #1 complaint was difficulty, we added 3 difficulty modes in DR to see if it solves the problem. To be honest, I was pretty sure it would but I had many conversations with very upset people who showed me the error of my ways.

One person was convinced that we made Hard and Normal too hard on purpose, to humiliate players and force them to play on Easy (as if we have nothing better to do). I tried to explain that Hard is for people who like challenging fights but that upset him even more, as if he wasn't good enough. So he couldn't play on Hard but refused to play on Easy or Normal. Oddly enough, quite a few players felt they were humiliated.

Another person felt that he deserved to win because he was a veteran player who beat Dragon Age on Hard (usually people namedrop Baldur's Gate to impress me with their credentials) and he shouldn't have to give enemies penalties (that's how the lower difficulty modes work) in order to beat the game. So again the reason is that the victory didn't feel so good if you know that you had to cripple the enemies. It has to feel real so next time we'll go with these difficulties: Hero, Great Hero, the Greatest Hero. No penalties to enemies, that's just wrong, but your super saiyan powers will grow exponentially with each difficulty level. The harder the game, the easier it should be.


Dungeon Rats was pretty good difficulty if you a bit cripple character or try non-standart approach.

For example, i though Minimum Dex (4 AP points) character couldnt solo game, or that pure archer couldnt solo it, well - guess, they could. I hope that new game is winnable even with non-standart builds.


p.s. I tried to solo game with no defence character (= 0 dodge and 0 block skills) but only got past Barka fight. On upper elevator - no chance :(
 

Whisper

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
4,357
i thought that hard diffs are about exploiting game and its systems, not being good.

Like in old arcades where beating bosses was about finding loop holes in their AI

In AoD and DR its about understanding enemy weak/strong points and about planning ahead (good idea to beat game beforehand once if you want to start with max challenge - like cripple build).
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Honestly I thought the problem with Dungeon Rats was a rather underwhelming start. It got much, much better later on but the start was very meh. Playing local pest control and fighting ants - seriously? Not the most gripping start.

Go for a stronger start on your next dungeon crawler spinoff and it'll sell better, I would imagine.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Yeah, I have to say it doesn't seem impossible to me to make a low budget combat crawl that'd sell. It'd require a bit of creativity, an interesting catch, maybe some extra investment to create a particularly attractive and action-packed opening. Dungeon Rats played things distressingly straight - you can do better than that.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Dungeon Rats had some really cool parts. The big battles with human enemies, the ancient high tech area with the robots, they're all pretty cool.

But you need to have a good start to grab people. When the very first thing you have to do is hunt ants, that's not really exciting, especially when you're promised a big prison break right from the start.

Pacing at the beginning is important.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Dungeon Rats had some really cool parts. The big battles with human enemies, the ancient high tech area with the robots, they're all pretty cool.

But you need to have a good start to grab people. When the very first thing you have to do is hunt ants, that's not really exciting, especially when you're promised a big prison break right from the start.

Pacing at the beginning is important.
Good point.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom