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

Games

45229 readers
1340 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
[–] LifeLikeLady@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 3 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 3 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 1 day 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 17 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm not trying to be cute. If a publishing company gives money to a developer who is a separate entity to make a game, 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.

If publishers can't simply pull out on a whim, then without some kind of limiting factor that denotes a failure to perform where by a specific time a publisher can point to that failure, it can't really be functional contract. Saying "the game must have x, y, z features" but never putting a time or budget limit in place means the developers can never have failed at implementing the features because they just haven't gotten around to it yet.

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

No, no. You're right. It is absolutely necessary to put out incomplete, buggy, unplayable "games" and force us to pay $80 to wait for them to actually finish it..........................

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

How would you, in general terms, construct an arrangement between a publisher that is funding development, and a developer? How would the agreement hold a developer to certain standards without any kind of time or budget limitations?

[–] iamthetot@piefed.ca 0 points 1 day 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.