To me that’s reasonable if it means the devs get to have a life and get to make something they really love. And it’s definitely reasonable given the fact that I paid fifteen euro’s for hundreds of hours of fun. They definitely do not owe me more, quite the opposite, really.
It’s a matter of taste. I got bored of Enshrouded after 20 hours (which is decent, and worth its money), but Valheim is easily one of my all time favourites. I find it a lot more rewarding.
I played solo deep into mistlands and now I’m rediscovering it together with a friend.
I think the devs have a pretty healthy attitude, really. Sure, they take their sweet time, but I prefer that over half-assed rush jobs and selling out. The last updates were also absolutely great and the game gets better and better. It’s in early access since forever, but it is more balanced, polished and refined than 90% of fully released games out there. And it doesn’t feel hollow after twenty hours either. It will keep fucking you up, even after hundreds of hours. It’s an absolute gem and I don’t really care if it takes them three more years to finish it…
These look nice. Haven’t seen them in the EU yet.
I wear a lot of clarks shoes and I have found that it greatly depends on the model. I have two pairs (craftdean wing, I think) that are easily six years old and I wear them a lot. Just service them once a year and they still look like new. But I owned another pair (not wings, they were dressier) that lasted me only two years. Perhaps the shoes in the outlet are not the sturdiest?
I have some wallabees and desert londons too and they used to be lower quality because the crepe sole would wear out fast. Last year I bought the black EVO versions and they barely wear out at all.
So clarks is still good in my book. I have two pairs of chelsea boots of the brand vagabond too, and they are great too!
Good chance the upper class were already familiar with the spices. The LSD and Warheads candy on the other hand…
No. This is not a “creative” way to nudge us towards the store. Definitely not. It’s just the type of monetization every gamer has been secretly yearning for, right?
I often play a game called Sailwind. Very relaxing, but impressively deep sailing sim. It’s been early access for a couple of years, but the (solo-)dev is active, new features are added all the time. If he would release a paid, cosmetic dlc: I’d buy it in a heartbeat. I think it would be nicer than to “get him a coffee” or sub to his patreon.
What I’m trying to say is: not all early access is bad, not all paid dlc is plain greed. And the combo is not necessarily toxic.
They made the game with a small team and apparently they want to finish it with a small team. I kind of respect the fact that they didn’t want to go (much) bigger, just because there was a lot of hype and money. And I also respect the fact that they don’t seem to care that it “cost them”.
If you want game development to be less about money, this is a pretty good example of what that could look like. It’s not the most efficient way of doing things, you are definitely right about that, but it’s great. And given what they have delivered so far, I think it’s hard to complain. There is a ridiculous amount of gameplay, for a low price. And everyone who bought it knows that it is unfinished.