Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
@stux@mstdn.socialScope Creep is a Poison, Here's the "Antidote" (tips)
- 5 Tips to Overcome Scope Creep
The guy in this video also gives the tip to work on more or smaller projects while working on your "main project"
The past time I've shared a lot of progress for various games I was making and basically this where components that where used in my main project but where small separate games on themselves
The point is.. Game development can be incredibly overwhelming and tear you down super quickly
Most projects of indiedevs will never see the light of day unfort
The past year I've made 6 and released 5 games so far but all relative smaller ones
The same amount of time I worked on a MMORPG that was barly done for a quarter but seemed endless
Ofc my first choice would always be building a MMORPG but in reality there's a good chance that will drain your creativity and leave you with nothing but a hole of time
Looking back, I spent so much time making the engine honestly one of the most impressive quickbasic RPG engines but even to an extent when the more impressive RPG engines on MS-DOS, but really I had more than enough game engine to put together a game with about 10 hours gameplay that probably would have been pretty popular out there in the wild. Instead I was always looking at the games like final fantasy that you could play for hundreds of hours, and the game engine that was perfectly acceptable for a 10-hour game was completely inadequate for a 200-hour game.
But defining your scope is one of the core things in project management, and at the time I had absolutely no concept of project management so the game was always doomed to failure.
Unpopular opinion (?):
Video games were of of a better standard when they couldn't receive updates. Then studios / indie devs spent time and effort making sure it was as good as they could the first release.
Of course, "better" is hard to measure when games and the tech used to make them has changed so much.
But I'd be interested to see what the latest Elden Ring or Final Fantasy would look like if the studio knew they could never send out game updates and patches.
@matt I agree 
I did the same with a few games 
Knowing i could update so i rushed it out of the door to have something
The only thing that held me back a little was knowing that i screw up save games, and that's a no no
Games back then were not bug free, you were just stuck with a broken game if it didn't work on your specific system.
A lot of games that exist now, would not have any chance under that ecosystem. No Minecraft, no BG3, probably not even Elden Ring. Many others would be much simpler, because a lot more effort would be spent on mitigating risk.
@matt
I don't think it's an unpopular opinion at all.
Things were way stricter because when submitting gold, factories would start to press discs/cartridges and distribute manually. This was expensive.
This is a way more delicate issue if you used a buggy build. Sometimes, it had catastrophic consequences (I remember Myth II's discs breaking PCs when being uninstalled).
So, having better standards was actually a necessity, an obligation, compared to now.
@matt I guess the closest you can get from a similar experience to what you say is to get games without day-one patches. That is, install from the disc without applying patches, or somehow get a digital 1.0 copy of a game (or first release at the very least).
You will see there probably the most interesting quirks. You might also see, potentially, some downright broken games...
Would not be the same, but closer I guess.
@glitchypixel For sure 
but taking a digital 1.0 copy of a game and then pulling the plug on the internet will give you a snapshot of the actual first release... but maybe not what they would have released if they knew that was the case.
There'd be more care and attention to the final product. Kinda like a Pixar movie - once it's out there at cinemas, I guess the only time for edits is when you next publish the release (on streaming services, or on BluRay).
@matt yup it's definitely not a perfect analogy, hence the "close" addendum.
I don't know if the process for videogames will be ever like that unless we lose the internet and reset everything anew. I think this still happens on specialized devices with built-in software (not games though). This probably also happens on physical games, like boardgames.
I'll mention that game quality in terms of it's design is a different matter. Many games from that era pass the technicals, but are terrible.
@glitchypixel Thanks for the input - I have barely scratched the surface of game development and don't know too much about it - so nice to hear someone more qualified than me from gamedev.place get involved in the conversation 
@matt No problem :). I'm not an expert at all though.
I want to add that if you want to submit to consoles, there are still a list of requirements that a game "must" pass before submission. They are called XRs, TRCs, etc
These are technical though, nothing about game quality. It's ensuring the game does not crash, all achievements, elements and technologies required by the company are used and work, multiplayer, etc
Mobile, steam and others rarely do have anything that demanding in comparison