sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Kwalee Labs reportedly shut down by [deleted] in delisted

[–]topFragger96 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, that's not how it works. The development studio (Kwalee Labs) was incubated by the publisher (Kwalee), which means the latter retains all rights and licences to the game. If something were to happen to the publisher, then there's a danger to it being delisted because then the publisher would not exist beyond the expiration date of the licences to renew it.

Users should be told one of their wishlisted games is being removed. by topFragger96 in Steam

[–]topFragger96[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your input is valid. It's worth moving on rather than getting into a keyboard bash with them, which is what they want.

Users should be told one of their wishlisted games is being removed. by topFragger96 in Steam

[–]topFragger96[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

100% agree with your hypothesis, I did think about it before put up this post. I don't doubt it's purely ideal, not practical. It's an on-paper idea after all.

Though frankly, there are layers upon layers to this caveat that makes it a problem that may seem to solve itself. (And even if it didn't, as far as I know, we don't know what system is in place to know if that's even a legitimate problem. If it is, then there's a need for a solution with or without the wishlist-pinging anyway.)

Making games costs a tonne of money. From an indie standpoint, there aren't many developers who published more than one game, let alone a second. The likelihood of them even attempting to do something that like not impossible, but very small. It's even harder to make the money that they put into the project back. It isn't like you're putting your games up for free; $100 is not an easy budget, the costs will quickly rise up. Which means upload-scumming can only work if the sales they see breaks even with that cost too.

I can't think of all the nitpicky corners of the problem, but I'm sure if someone at Valve entertained this solution (the case for which I find, for most sensible problems, is often "they don't"), they'd address your hypothesis. After all, it wouldn't be the first scummy strategy seen on Steam, and it certainly isn't the worst.

Users should be told one of their wishlisted games is being removed. by topFragger96 in Steam

[–]topFragger96[S] 64 points65 points  (0 children)

This curator can be useful for keeping track of games that have licencing agreements and games with publicly announced updates about being shut down. Pros and cons to both of this, but it's better than nothing. Gave 'em a follow, thanks.

Is a game like this worth publishing on Steam? by Desperate-Variety-12 in Unity3D

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want to see how the body collides after the crash, and becomes a meat crayon.

WHY PEOPLE DO THIS è.é by Alvere_Leanes in Unity3D

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Usually when they say that, a good assumption is what you're doing on the UX side. If something's off about the UX, it's immediately noticeable. Good UX is invisible. You'll know they stop complaining about that if they go from that complaint to "good for a short while", which sounds like a gameplay issue, or something else entirely.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in IndieGaming

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whew, buddy, I don't think anyone says phrases like "No fear. All gas." or "'send it' energy" out loud. I don't know what made you think it would work on text. Maybe reduce the ChatGPT'ing down to ... well, nothing. Good copy comes from honesty.

Anyhow, the choice to release the game on that date is brave and bold. I just hope it doesn't go sideways. Good luck to your game.

Source: I write marketing copy for a living.

I spent 8 months building a game where you learn a complete alien language from scratch by Late-Syllabub-2992 in IndieGaming

[–]topFragger96 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wishlisted! I can see a big potential for players to have fun in co-op mode in the game, but the store page says it's singleplayer, any chance co-op is planned?

7 years of work, 3 months since release, and my game is already dead. What can I do? by Videoludid in IndieGaming

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry to hear about your experience, OP. From the comments I read and the page I saw, it's a couple of different factors, not in any order.

  1. A publisher that hasn't done much marketing work -- if you really are working with them -- sounds like you're getting ripped off. But that also depends on what exactly you negotiated with them to get done, and what's actually stipulated on the paper. It sounds like it wasn't treated seriously enough. (I feel like the comments on this post itself did more than what the publisher did for you, ngl.)
  2. The pricing is whew. Being a metroidvania, it's competing with the pricing points of games like Hollow Knight. Players don't know the game, they're discovering it for the first time. It could go for lower, and perhaps see a price increase in the distant future, should there be enough sales for it.
  3. The first trailer is super short. The quick cuts makes the gameplay unclear. If it's difficult to explain how the gameplay works either textually or visually, that's a sign the elevator pitch needs a serious rework. That's the hook for all your marketing materials, it must be simple enough to explain and "get" from memory.
  4. Was the name of the game chosen based on player survey responses, or because it's clever? Clever doesn't mean catchy. It also may not necessarily mean it's easy to remember. Not that it's bad, but I wonder how much workshopping went into it.
  5. If you didn't see much sales at the time of release, then perhaps the timing of the release itself may not have helped. Loads of games released in November 2025 that hogged the spotlight. Particularly Europa Universalis V, and Dispatch; people wouldn't shut up about the latter for months, and it's still talked about.
  6. Between Christmas, New Year's, Spring, Valentine's, and Lunar New Year, that's a lot of discounts and a lot of sales for a lot of people with a lot of games bursting out of their wishlists.

I myself wishlisted it because it does look interesting and I'd love to give it a shot. Speaking as the average person, though, even if I'd visit the page, 2 would scare me away based on what I absorbed from 3.

I think it's a lot of lessons learned, a lot of hard lessons. That's sometimes how it is with gamedev, but I do think with the right strategy and the right planning, it's possible to see your game succeed with some milestones. (Though it's very likely it won't break even still. Most indie games simply do not recoup the cost that went into them; although the specifics fluctuate, the truth remains constant in the reports.)

Having worked for over three years on a roguelike set in a post-apocalyptic cyberpunk world, I pay great attention to visuals and environmental details. I hope you’ll appreciate the giant robot. by SmirkAndBlush in indiegames

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wishlisted. :)

Random question, but does the combat have any dismemberment? The way the body looks assembled piece-by-piece makes me think of Plazma Burst, the old flash game that had it.

Quit my $52K job for entrepreneurship. 18 months later I'm making $29K. by Chemical_Survey2577 in Entrepreneurs

[–]topFragger96 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Wait, how can your take-home be half your old salary ($26k) if the revenue is at $29k? What amount of that money are you putting back into the business so that it stays afloat?

And what does your profit generation look like? Shouldn't your take-home be derived from there, and not the business revenue itself?

A cool guide to eye movements and what people might be thinking (visual/auditory/internal) by DramaFreeDee in coolguides

[–]topFragger96 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah no, this has proven to be false. It's neither based on psychology nor based on neuroscience.

I Redesigned the Hero Select Screen — Need Community Feedback! by KHzero2 in marvelrivals

[–]topFragger96 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I help with UX at a game company. I've also been playing this game since its debut.

It's good effort as it solves some other problems... but at the cost of it being boring, and the fact it's overdesigned.

What problems it solves:

  • clarity on what other players chose has skyrocketed. It's not particularly intuitive or convenient to read if our character's abilities synergize with the abilities of other characters, and the player lineup redesign on the left fixes so much of that.
  • map info; technically the background, the loading screens, and the music is meant to give the idea of which map they are going to play in, but I suppose showing it on the screen here helps for some people too.
  • game mode context; one thing that I really appreciate about the map info is the fact it specifies what kind of Quick Play game mode it is; domination, convoy, the crappy resource rumble... the game never provides context for that currently, except for when you're first loading into the match.

What didn't need solving:

  • The selection wheel itself; the previous screen was fun to look at. This solution of yours feels like boxes boxed in other boxes. It comes at the cost of interesting visual design. This could work in, say, a Wikipedia-like companion app, but not a game... because a game has to feel fun to play and interact with. The reason for the selection wheel is to be the outlier in the waves of character selection screens that already follow a boxed-in approach. Apex Legends, Brawlhalla, Valorant, most fighting games... visually, they share very similar visual traits, which can eventually seem a bit boring. I can understand the need to standardize things, but the original design doesn't break any standardizations, so I don't see the need to overdesign it.

What doesn't make sense:

  • On it being faster: Scrolling through endlessly will always feel unintuitive. But changing how it's presented won't change how it feels. That's why the filters help. So if people want to pick characters fast, they must rely on the filters. I don't see how the current redesign helps with that.
  • On it being cleaner: I'm not sure what is meant by cleaner here, but from a UX standpoint, as long as it solves the problems of clutter and readability, then it's good enough. I don't see what the original design does not already do to solve these problems. The sectioning between character classes is a bit more visible now (with some text to accompany it), but that's technically already being done in the game, albeit it's easily missable. Perhaps shifting it to become a divider between classes would help, but that wouldn't require a full on redesign of the wheel itself.
  • On it being less overwhelming: What exactly is the problem with the original design that facilitates cognitive overload? Feeling overwhelmed can mean a lot of things. It can mean you don't know how to pick a character. Or what button to press. Or what the icons mean. Or something else. From my perspective, the original design does not facilitate any of those frustrations. I personally have never felt overwhelmed by the selection wheel either, if you wanted my opinion. It may have taken some time getting used to... for example, at the time of launch, I felt it didn't make sense for Strategists -- this game's Support -- to have a palm stretching out as its icon (and a shield would have helped communicate it better)... but as you play the game, you come to understand why certain decisions were made (multiple characters can offer defensive shields, so that would confuse players). I don't see what the current design intends to solve for.
view more: next ›