4 ms·

For me, Elite:Dangerous had a better model (although still not without it's troubles). They delivered the base game in reasonable order and have been iterating

For me, Elite:Dangerous had a better model (although still not without it's troubles). They delivered the base game in reasonable order and have been iterating and adding content since then. Whilst the early game was pretty sparse in terms of content, at least it was delivered and reasonably complete.

djsumdog 8y ago
That does seem like a better model. I might have to check that game out. Games should produce the base game they promised, and then just add expansion packs or additional levels (free to initial backers) to try and get everything else in until the money runs out. Maybe even the old shareware style route of releasing Episode 1, 2 and 3 (although in the shareware days, Ep1 was free and 2/3 were commercial .. like 1 was a really long game demo).
- zchrykng 8y ago
  Elite:Dangerous is definitely worth a look. Gave money to both of these projects and don't want anything more to do with anything Chris Roberts touches.
- pearle 8y ago
  Elite is also one of the better VR games available.
- notjustanymike 8y ago
  I love Elite, just be prepared it's very much a make-your-own-adventure game.
skohan 8y ago
I'm a huge fan in general of starting a project from a complete, well-polished core and growing outward gradually while maintaining quality. Once things get messy it's almost impossible to get back to that same level of refinement as if it was kept clean the whole time.
- panopticon 8y ago
  I imagine keeping the community interested, thriving, and paying for years of development is a tough nut to crack. Obviously it's not impossible (see Minecraft, Fortnite, etc), but the success ratio seems to be orders of magnitude lower than the traditional game development model.
mo1ok 8y ago
The tech industry learned this the hard way - MVP, then iterate is the way to go. Star citizen abandoned its MVP (Squadron 42) awhile ago. That's why the combat sucks and there is still no core gameplay loop. A management fiasco that would be impressive to recover from.
rm_-rf_slash 8y ago
Fortnite is another good example of this. It began as a zombie killer game that nobody played, but then they noticed all the money success and money that PUBG was getting, so they hacked together a Fortnite version of PUBG on a much smaller map with far fewer features (like vehicles). Fortnite BR had very little beyond its core gameplay. There were few weapons and only a smattering of locations amidst a largely homogenous small island. But bit by bit, Epic added features, slowly, deliberately. They listened to their fans and made what they wanted as the game and the community progressed. The result was one of the most successful, popular, and lucrative video games of all time.

djsumdog 8y ago

That does seem like a better model. I might have to check that game out. Games should produce the base game they promised, and then just add expansion packs or additional levels (free to initial backers) to try and get everything else in until the money runs out. Maybe even the old shareware style route of releasing Episode 1, 2 and 3 (although in the shareware days, Ep1 was free and 2/3 were commercial .. like 1 was a really long game demo).

zchrykng 8y ago
Elite:Dangerous is definitely worth a look. Gave money to both of these projects and don't want anything more to do with anything Chris Roberts touches.
pearle 8y ago
Elite is also one of the better VR games available.
notjustanymike 8y ago
I love Elite, just be prepared it's very much a make-your-own-adventure game.

skohan 8y ago

I'm a huge fan in general of starting a project from a complete, well-polished core and growing outward gradually while maintaining quality. Once things get messy it's almost impossible to get back to that same level of refinement as if it was kept clean the whole time.

panopticon 8y ago
I imagine keeping the community interested, thriving, and paying for years of development is a tough nut to crack. Obviously it's not impossible (see Minecraft, Fortnite, etc), but the success ratio seems to be orders of magnitude lower than the traditional game development model.

mo1ok 8y ago

The tech industry learned this the hard way - MVP, then iterate is the way to go. Star citizen abandoned its MVP (Squadron 42) awhile ago. That's why the combat sucks and there is still no core gameplay loop. A management fiasco that would be impressive to recover from.

rm_-rf_slash 8y ago

Fortnite is another good example of this. It began as a zombie killer game that nobody played, but then they noticed all the money success and money that PUBG was getting, so they hacked together a Fortnite version of PUBG on a much smaller map with far fewer features (like vehicles). Fortnite BR had very little beyond its core gameplay. There were few weapons and only a smattering of locations amidst a largely homogenous small island. But bit by bit, Epic added features, slowly, deliberately. They listened to their fans and made what they wanted as the game and the community progressed. The result was one of the most successful, popular, and lucrative video games of all time.