this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
266 points (99.3% liked)

Games

45229 readers
1416 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 54 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Obviously, this is the only sane solution for a one-man team, but all game developers need to put their foot down and say “it’s ready when it’s ready.”

No marketing deadlines, no “crunch time,” make the game until the game is made, release it, maintain it, do it again if you think you have a good idea.

[–] darthelmet@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (4 children)

While I generally agree, I think there is some value in imposing some kind of deadline or limit to a project. Nothing is ever going to be perfect. There will always be more work that could be done on something. If you let yourself just keep going until you think it’s done it might never come out.

But it’s a balance and when publishers push those kinds of deadlines they’re not really considering that.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

True, but this developer has done this before. Theres currently no reason not to have faith in them.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago

I recently launched a business as a solo dev / founder. It was agonizing trying to get all the last details done and be happy enough to finally say, this is what I'm going to release.

I could have gone on forever if I'd let myself. Oh they need this, oh they need that!

Now that it's out, that pressure is gone, and I can just do smaller updates now which are focused more heavily on the feedback I'm getting from customers.

I probably could have released 3-4 months earlier had I been better about it.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Publishers are considering return on investment. In a model where they are providing the game budget to the studio, every delay means more money out of their pocket. Case by case it might be worth it, but just allowing developers to infinitely say it's "almost ready, just one more delay" isn't reasonable.

I know from the hard core gamer audience that discusses this stuff online there is often this vibe that nothing should be cut from games. People look at various interesting cut content and lament it for not getting enough time, but there is always going to be cut content.

If there isn't a lead on the development team putting their foot down to control the scope and focus the team, and a similar push for focus by a publisher you get a meandering unfocused project that goes over budget.

In the solo/small amateur team dev, self-publishing model that ROI pressure isn't coming externally from a separate publisher. It is means solo devs are making their first games usually on a budget of nothing, as a side project to their day jobs. In some cases like with Concerned Ape it turns out great. In many cases development comes out tediously slowly, like with Death Trash. In innumerable cases the games just die.

In cases like Wasteland 2 it was a full professional team working full time using crowdfunding. An alternate model, but still limited by budget pressure. There was no publisher to pay back, but when the crowd funding money was gone, it was gone. That game did come out and it was enjoyable, but clearly it wasn't "done when it's done" levels of polish by the team since they used the profits from the game to release a "Director's Cut" which was a whole polishing pass on the game they simply couldn't afford the first time.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

there is always going to be cut content

Or said another way, not having cut content means they released their first rough draft instead of editing and refining it.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

When it reaches the "good/mostly done but not perfect/could still be better" stage, it's time to pre-release it for alpha/beta testing while you work out the kinks and add features.

I remember playing Minecraft in alpha version before it even switched to beta. It was fine.

Even full releases can have updates and expansions to add new features, it's totally fine. But the core development of the game shouldn't be rushed just to get it published.

[–] AMillionMonkeys@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

Vaporware is an entirely different animal.

A few people seem to think I meant a game like Stardew or Chocolateir should take several years because that’s how long they take with one person. Obviously if you have a studio of people, even a small studio like early Mojang, you can get more work done much more quickly.

Obviously, I think, I mean the publisher should defer to the developers regarding how long work would take to complete, not the other way around. And no one should listen to the demands of shareholders or anyone else that is completely departed from the production process.

[–] iamthetot@piefed.ca -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That would be nice in a perfect world but bills need to be paid. I'm not defending crunch time, but not every project can afford to be "ready when it's ready". I don't think many companies would survive like that.

[–] LifeLikeLady@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Concerned ape can afford to put this game out in 2035 lol.

[–] iamthetot@piefed.ca 1 points 16 hours ago

Well yeah, but not every dev and company is ConcernedApe. I reckon the same can be said of Balatro dev, and Team Cherry, and a few others. It's awesome for them who can afford to do this, but that's definitely not the norm. Most companies can't afford to sit on a project for 8 years without releasing a product.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The above comments were talking about how this policy should apply to every game development project. Which is a nice thought, but not realistic for every situation.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh yes, I'm sure all those billion dollar companies would have all shut down by now if they had to wait a few weeks to put out a game. Putting out buggy unplayable shit was an absolute necessity.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Let's look at the initial comment in the chain:

all game developers need to put their foot down and say “it’s ready when it’s ready.”

No marketing deadlines, no “crunch time,” make the game until the game is made

It isn't saying publishers should be more flexible about deadline delays, it is saying there simply shouldn't be deadlines at all.

Shoveling infinite money at a developer who tells you it will be ready when it's ready is the Chris Roberts model of game development. While it certainly produces interesting results, it is unrealistic and undesirable to expect it as the standard.

Games that are developing well but need a little more time to fix issues should be given flexibility by publishers, but at the end of the day there are stretch ideas and content that has to be cut. Doing that cutting and keeping the project focused is what a lead on the dev team should be doing throughout the entire development. If a game has a realistic deadline given the expected scope and the dev team comes back and says they actually need another year of production, then it is worth looking into if that extra time is going to make the game a year's worth of investment better or not.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Rather than choosing an arbitrary time, you should choose a state of the game to call finished. Limited time will always lead to crunch inevitably.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

In a publisher fronting money to developer situation, without a fixed time limit (or money limit, which functionally translates to a time limit) is the publisher just infinitely on the hook to pay for dev time "until it's done"?

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Depends; do they want the game to sell or not?

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 15 minutes ago

I'm not trying to be cute. If a publisher company gives money to a developer who is a separate entity, they've got to have some kind of contract. If there is no timeline or total budget written into the initial contract, how could a publisher pull out of that agreement?

If the answer is going to be "publishers can just pull out when they feel like it" then that's neither adhering to the "let devs develop 'until it is done'." philosophy that is the entire point of this hypothetical restructure, and it for practical terms it does impose a deadline based on the publisher's patience, except now that deadline is not expressly clear and simply defined.