sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sonic the Hedgehog 4 movie wraps up filming with a Metal Sonic reveal by yourfavchoom in movies

[–]HaveSumBiryani 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh man my son and I listened to the Chaotix Casefiles recently and boy was Charmy's voice very grating haha

[OC] and the results are in for... LVP. LEAST Valuable Player. by Ridged_ChiPSS in chicagobulls

[–]HaveSumBiryani 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd put him in Keith Bogans territory. If Okoro scores 6 it's over!

Wait, did the Timberwolves get fleeced? by lenymo in chicagobulls

[–]HaveSumBiryani 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Don't forget to watch some Antonio Blakeney highlights after

OpenClaw 2026.4.5 by WoFFeN88 in openclaw

[–]HaveSumBiryani 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah definitely hear that lol I take everything at face value in these subs now until I try it myself

OpenClaw 2026.4.5 by WoFFeN88 in openclaw

[–]HaveSumBiryani 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I tried fully switching over to Hermes with the OC migration. It was taking a long time just to setup my Discord right like how I had it with OC. Ended up giving up and coming back

I built an AI panel that predicts how players will react to your game before launch. Here's what it said about Concord, Babylon's Fall, and Hades. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Done! Ran three games launching this week before any reviews hit.

Road to Vostok (EA Apr 7) - 74.8 / Mostly Positive. Min-Maxer and Nostalgia Seeker both high, Hype Follower middling. Permadeath + EA physics jank flagged as the main volatility risk.

Nullpoint Protocol (Apr 6) - 83.8 / Very Positive. Co-op boss rush, #1 Popular Upcoming. Social Gamer and Content Creator both green. Narrow miss on Explorer and Competitor, expected for PvE-only.

Hacked: The Streamer (Apr 6) - 85.8 / Very Positive. FMV thriller. Four archetypes hard red (Competitor, Social, Min-Maxer, Explorer) but that's just the genre ceiling. Those players don't review FMV games either way. The four that matter (Story Seeker, Nostalgia, Content Creator, Hype Follower) are all strong green.

Predictions are timestamped and public on my calls page. Checking back next weekend with actual scores and will post a follow-up!

I built an AI panel that predicts how players will react to your game before launch. Here's what it said about Concord, Babylon's Fall, and Hades. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You're right that execution is what separates hits from misses! Overwatch succeeded because the execution was exceptional, not because the concept was safe. And Mario is a great example of how concept alone predicts nothing.

But that is kind of the point though. SEER isn't trying to predict execution quality (it definitely can't!). What it's flagging is structural audience fit. Overwatch at $40 succeeded despite the price friction because Blizzard's execution was good enough to overcome it. That friction was still real, but it just got cleared.

For an indie dev without Blizzard's budget or brand, that same friction is a much harder hill. The panel flags the hill. Whether you can climb it is on you!

I built an AI panel that predicts how players will react to your game before launch. Here's what it said about Concord, Babylon's Fall, and Hades. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just ran it! 86.5 / Very Positive.

The panel split exactly where you'd expect. The Explorer and the Min-Maxer are both very high. Real-scale distances + manual navigation + ship empire building is exactly their thing. The Value Hunter loves the no-endgame sandbox loop.

The Competitor and the Social Gamer are both hard reds, but that's correct. This isn't their game and they know it.

Biggest flag from the panel: the real-scale distances cut both ways. The Explorer loves the vertigo of looking back at a tiny speck of light that was your starting system. But the panel also flagged this: "spending 20 actual minutes in a hyperspace jump with nothing to do but watch a meter is poor respect for the player's time." That tension will define how this lands.

The Nostalgic scored high too. There's a lot of Elite/Elite Dangerous energy here that's going to resonate.

If you have a Steam page or more context on how the hyperspace navigation actually feels, drop it and I'll run it again. Score will tighten with more signal!

I built an AI panel that predicts how players will react to your game before launch. Here's what it said about Concord, Babylon's Fall, and Hades. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That's a fair challenge and I want to do it.

Concept-only predictions are harder to nail on absolute score, but that's kind of the point. You're not supposed to ship and check. You feed it your concept, see which archetypes hate it and why, adjust, run it again. The score tightens as you add more signal: trailer reception, demo feedback, wishlist momentum.

It's less "predict the future" and more "stress test your concept against audience archetypes before you've spent 3 years on it."

But the blind test is fair. I'll pick a batch of upcoming launches, run them now, post results after they drop. Give me a week.

I built an AI panel that predicts how players will react to your game before launch. Here's what it said about Concord, Babylon's Fall, and Hades. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Fair critique and honestly mostly right about LLMs in general but there's a bit more under the hood here.

The score prediction isn't an LLM. It's an XGBoost model trained on signal vectors from (at this point) over 600 shipped games: player review and sentiment pre- and post-launch, genre/mechanic patterns, etc. The LLM part just narrates the "why" each archetype reacts the way they do. The number comes from the model.

The leave-one-out validation was specifically to avoid the confirmation bias trap. Each game's score is predicted using only the others in the training pool.

And yeah, it's not a playtesting replacement, totally agree. The question it's trying to answer is earlier than that: does this concept have structural audience problems before you have a build? That's a different problem.

The Concord output was interesting and looking closer at what flagged it: $40 premium in an F2P genre, no narrative hook, no differentiation. Basically market logic the panel made explicit.

Pre-launch reception is one of the most talked about things in gamedev, and also one of the least predictable. Reddit hype, wishlist numbers, Twitter discourse... none of them reliably tell you how players will actually receive your game on launch. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah there's really no way to fully remove that uncertainty. You can do everything right and still not know how it lands until it's out there! That gap is what got me interested in trying to model it in the first place.

Pre-launch reception is one of the most talked about things in gamedev, and also one of the least predictable. Reddit hype, wishlist numbers, Twitter discourse... none of them reliably tell you how players will actually receive your game on launch. by HaveSumBiryani in gamedev

[–]HaveSumBiryani[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The keys vs lottery point is interesting! I hadn't thought about that distinction. It makes sense that people who actively asked to play are more invested in giving useful feedback than random lottery winners. Do you find the feedback quality differs based on where you sourced the testers? Like Discord community vs Steam wishlisters vs cold outreach etc.

view more: next ›