87
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] truthfultemporarily@feddit.org 77 points 2 months ago

The dev seems surprised by what is pretty common knowledge:

  • You get only roughly 50% of gross revenue paid out after distributor cut (30%), vat (10%) and returns (10%).
  • Games make the vast majority of profits in their first month, only ticking back up slightly when releasing DLCs.

So there are only three things to do really:

  • be happy the game did well, do 1-3 months of patching, and go on to the next game (and do your best to ignore angry gamers yelling that "the game is abandoned")
  • the paradox route: keep releasing regular DLC to keep cash flow up while also releasing regular free updates (and do your best to ignore angry gamers yelling that you are a greedy evil corporation)
  • introduce micro transactions, subscription models or any other way to keep making money after release (and do your best to ignore angry gamers yelling that you are greedy)

Instead, for some reason the dev seemed to think they can keep up developing the game indefinitely and that somehow, it would keep making money? There are like 10 games in history that made enough money to allow development for years: Minecraft, Terraria, Witcher 3, Stardew Valley, etc. And I don't think they are even cash flow positive on their own.

[-] HereIAm@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

Yeah I don't understand peoples obsession with continuous development. I understand there's more competition now, but counter-strike 1.6 stood on it's own legs for a decade without meaningful updates. If you find a new game that appeals to you more, then go play that. Same with Early Access, if you don't want to buy an incomplete game, don't buy early access titles. Of course it would be nice if developers communicated any development breaks or pauses, but they don't really owe you anything.

[-] andioop@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I feel devs should push major bug fixes for free—something something games released with more bugs not just because of increasing complexity but because they just ship immediately due to easier distribution of an update instead of testing before shipping. That's all we're entitled to. If you want content updates you should probably pay for continued development costs, which is where DLC and subscription comes in. Those also have potential for abuse and unfair pricing, though, so that's a whole other minefield.

[-] 50MYT@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

Factorio too.

The DLC was... Good...

[-] truthfultemporarily@feddit.org 19 points 2 months ago

Small team + great game and that's what you get. According to steam revenue calculator, factorio made 83 million net revenue. Probably is quite a bit lower because its using the updated price.

They have like.. 4? People working on that game + accounting and maybe community management. They could go indefinitely.

[-] SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

Also No Man's Sky, somehow still getting free content

[-] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yep. The whole story to me was a textbook example of "this isn't how this works, at all". And the only way to prevent it is to spread stories like this far and wide so that everyone who gets a decent shot at success doesn't do the same stuff.

What stuck out to me was:

Mochi went on to explain that momentum for Rise of Industry dropped off, so he tried to "hold it together with duct tape and 80 hours a week." While the studio hoped patches would help, "it never stabilised," and Mochi’s health and personal life were heavily impacted – he even faced losing his home.

There was a similar story about... I think the big asian market crash in the 90s or something, where one of the traders thought he could just buy enough stock that his action alone, the demand he "created" would stop the market from crashing and lessen the loss. But of course all he did was take all his company's funds and threw them into a black hole.

It's understandable as a panic reaction. But... yeah.

Back to the story, at that point, what was even the expectation of what the publisher would do? Also throw more money in? More advertising for the game that had a big moment, captured the audience that it can capture, but is not working well enough to keep that attention?

Go above and beyond the contract? Nobody will do that, that's why the contract exists.

Anyway, I hope the dev is doing ok, I don't mean to hate on the person and truly wish him happiness and success.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Another viable path is early access for 'free' testing and a dripfeed of a few sale, and then effectively a second release. Have your cake, and eat it, if you can live off a small slice initially.

It frontloads a lot of 'post release' development devs might want to do. Not that its easy by any means, but it is kind of a 'hack' since storefronts will treat your existing game as a new release.

[-] Kissaki@programming.dev 13 points 2 months ago

Article has a 919 partner personal data sharing wall.

[-] it_depends_man@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Sorry! for reasons I can't explain, be that ad blocking or old incompatible browser or because I accidentally agreed to them already, I'm not seeing the wall.

[-] Kissaki@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago

Could also be regional. :)

this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
87 points (100.0% liked)

Game Development

5085 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the game development community! This is a place to talk about and post anything related to the field of game development.

Community Wiki

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS