Waverly/Raven

Someone in our official discord server just called both of our games "dead" today to our faces even though we update them 2-3 times a year. It's insane.

With Minecraft it also feels weird because sometimes they add things that have a massive impact (copper bulbs, crafters) and other times stuff that just feels... kinda pointless tbh (archeology, armadillos)

Absolutely fair. It sucks! It's ok for something to just be done!

I would go a bit far and suggest that people fear the death of their things they enjoy, and because of that, constants updates prolongue that sentiment.

I think this is a dangerous expectation for non indies as well. I think Nintendo has been using the update system in a really nice way to give games a bit more depth after release, but they also have a very defined scheduled of what they'll do and when they'll stop to move the teams into new projects. It's incredibly disappointing to me to see the fanbase treat this as the game being abandoned and to keep demanding extra updates for games that traditionally weren't live games at all (and here I'm mostly talking about Animal Crossing, but somehow I've seen this sentiment even with Zelda. Zelda!! The game that is so big I can't finish it!!)

absolutely pickles my puzzler now that people used to complain games were released early access or unfinished and now they want the early access experience of not knowing exactly what you're getting and sporadic gamechanging updates

i really languished in the mines of this exact same poison for a few years on my own game, Joylancer. back in 2014, i watched as early access progressively drifted into the same waters of the burgeoning "live service" craze that would follow. i saw this exact thing coming a mile away, and was hoping to get the jump on it before it became standard.

and ironically, that idea is exactly what put a standstill on the project for so many years -- until recently, where i have spent a lot of time trying to undo the "lessons" that i learned from the late 10s about making games "last forever" by just updating them with random stuff as often as possible.

there is still a part of me that likes the fact that you have the freedom to update a game whenever you want with new stuff, but it has become impossible to not think about the stuff you ranted about here whenever i think about my own design process. thanks for writing this.

The only advantage I can think of for indies to pivot to live service games (or games with consistent and frequent updates past its launch) is that it prolongs the “shelf life” of the game. Like, for most small devs they have one window to push their game before focusing on something new. This way, they (hopefully) keep an active audience over a longer period of time in the hopes that its popularity snowballs through player evangelists and word of mouth. Keeping it in the conversation. And this is all done with updates and change logs as opposed to like, big effort and high cost ads and marketing campaigns.

Should every game do this? Does every dev need to do this? Absolutely not. But I feel like a lot of studios are on financially shaky ground, and the idea of having a project that could lead to more long-term stability is an enticing one (even if I don’t agree that’s the right solution)

George Lucas seems to feel that movies are never finished =)

I notice this massively in the FH/IT community as a long-time player. Back in the day, these games were almost never updated but thrived on the creativity of their communities - people would make big role-play groups, host parties, fill every corner with chatter and imagination. Now some of my favourite servers (FHU included, I am not a developer) are constantly empty because everybody declares them "dead" for not recieving constant updates from development teams of unpaid volunteers.

For some added historical context, I started hearing "dead game" about 10-11 years ago with the advent of two things: steam early access, and accurate concurrent/peak player count statistics for multiplayer games on steam. That combined with the shitty entitled "consumer rights" gamer mentality that had been festering for a while led to the whole thing where some steam forum jackass complains that there hasn't been an update in a week and everyone piles on and starts theorycrafting without so much as two facts to rub together. I do personally think steam (and its feeder communities on 4chan and reddit) is where this really got going and where it thrives today.

It is incredibly important to understand that when you see opinions like this posted, they are being posted by lazy assholes who want something for nothing. They and their opinions can fuck off into the sun.

Some devs may choose to do this. Other devs may decide to say "The End" and move on to making new and interesting things for people to enjoy. Both choices are THEIR choices. And if some players don't like them, and wish to try to guilt-shame the devs into giving them free stuff, they can book a ticket on a rocket right now.

People do this with non-game software too which feels more normalized but also is weird to me. Like. Some program that hasn't seen an update in 15 years that i can run to analyze my disk usage... dead? hardly, its still analyzing my disk usage just like it was 15 years ago lol

I really unironically feel like an old man whenever any subjects like this come up, but... back in my day, vidya games came out finished and stayed finished, dagnabit. And if ya wanted more stuff in a game, you'd hafta wait until the developers released the game all over again, finished from the start again but with newfangled content. That's what Capcom did throughout the nineties for their Streets Fightin' games and it worked for them, by cracky! patooies tobaccy into a brass pot