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
The game fail cause hardly anyone paying for it. That's just the fate of EA game.
Then it was also a problem that the game came out of its EA too quickly, and in the supposed final version it lacked more content.
Almost all indie dev who made succefull game decided that it was worth getting a really low wage for a few year if it meanmaking a good game.
The reason no one brough this game was mainly because they never updated it. Had they worked on it they would have gotten more customer.
Since online conversations don't convey visual clues, I'll start this off with: none of what I say is meant to excuse devs/publishers. Rather, it is what I assume to be the driving factors behind what is going on.
Since other publishers have been forced into refunds ... I bet you behind the scenes every publisher who's got a dud on their hands is EXTRA careful not to fall into that same trap. They'll look very closely at how they communicate their "progress" to their customers. And in many instances, it looks like they decide "if we say nothing, it cannot be used against us".
Also, being able to convey negative facts in a way that won't get you torn to bits by your audience is a rare skill. One, I think, many devs seem to lack (I think I remember reading that there's actually a negative correlation between social skills and STEM affinity ... not always, but often enough). How often have we seen much bigger projects stumble because of the creative minds behind it are a bit ... hm ... too literal minded?
And then there's probably a hefty amount of being in a state of denial. Most people are pretty decent and don't intentionally scam others (and in this regard I disagree with above quote; I don't think this was "clearly a scam"). When you still end up in a position where it becomes clear you can't keep your word, it is excruciatingly difficult to fess up. Much easier to pretend that "if I just do this one thing, wait a bit longer, then things will turn out fine".
... again ... to be very clear ... none of the above makes what's happening with this game okay. Every single point I listed could have been addressed better and wasn't.
But that's the risk we take by buying an unfinished product. And Steam is very clear on that, too. Like any investment, it's a bit of a gamble. And as long as I don't see clear evidence that an EA was always meant as a cash grab and then make a run for it, I can't be too mad at the devs/publishers. I, of my own free will, made the informed decision to risk a certain amount of money on the chance of eventually getting a great game.
This time, it looks like I misplaced my bet. And it's not the only time ... but it is one of comparatively few instances and for all the rest, it paid out. I got Dave The Diver in EA, for example, and I'm so glad I did. Way back when (before you could even buy it on Steam) I got Factorio ... and that was another great investment. And so on.
I'll keep on buying EA. I'll keep on getting burned every so often. And I'll effing do it again ;) Because the payout is oh so worth it.
The problem is this one was out of early access and was marketed as a 1.0 product despite clearly not being anywhere close to ready.
That is why it’s being labeled as a scam.