Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
But everyone can contribute to the modding community!
Then Rimworld should offer you the fix you want, and give you all the things you want for .. -)
I had many hours with Rimworld, its a fun game, but I don't like to pitch one game up against another when they so different. It's a bit like "I want Rimworld with that game's graphic, and your game bad because its not like Rimworld who does it better"..
I think cause it just makes more sense. If you raise a cow, and it starts producing milk, you don't slaughter it cause you got your milk now. Keep it flowing.... If you have the foundation of a game already done, and people enjoy playing it and have opinions and suggestions, why not continue to profit from you hard built project?
IMO the service aspect just feels smart, because you aren't CoD, and can't sell updates and map changes as a full priced premium title every year. Just seems like a good way of maintaining an income to support yourself plus future development, especially for a small dev.
Now imagine, you a farmer with 1 cow... you go up early in the morning at 06, huddle into the barn, milk the cow. Then you go to market to sell your milk, Spend all day there, and end up sell 1 jug of milk..... So, how's your profit going?
Even a game broke even, or made a small profit doesn't make it a good candidate to keep release dlc's. It's a given the number of people buying dlc's is less than the ones bought the original release. End of the day it's the publisher that sit with the ball, not the devs. Publishers goal is to make money so when the choice is to support make a dlc for a game that didn't do that well, vs chance on back a new game hope it would do better, they will go for the later.
https://www.thearmchairtrader.com/frontier-developments-closes-foundry-to-concentrate-on-its-own-ip/
Then a new publisher would have to buy the rights to the game in that case. Or the devs bought the rights and got a new publisher which is even less likely.