Stardew Valley Creator Shuts Down Rumors Haunted Chocolatier 'Will Be Abandoned,' Insisting: 'It Will Come Out When It’s Ready' - IGN
-
Two free (major) updates: 1.5 and 1.6 both came out after Haunted Chocolatier was announced.
And he's working on 1.7
-
Concerned ape can afford to put this game out in 2035 lol.
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.
-
A lot of gamers are fucking brats
-
A lot of gamers are fucking brats
Seriously, remember all the bullshit they were giving cherry for silk song and it drops and it's actually a polished fairly glitch free experience?
It's almost like if you give people the time they need, you get what was promised. Wish psychonauts 2 had more time.
-
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"?
Depends; do they want the game to sell or not?
-
Presumably if he uses the same or similar engine then much of the groundwork is already done, so I would imagine it wouldn't take quite as long. But I could be wrong.
He states in the post Haunted Choclatier uses a different engine fyi.
-
Depends; do they want the game to sell or not?
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.
-
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.
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..........................
-
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..........................
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?
-
While I generally agree, I think there is some value in imposing some kind of deadline or limit to a project. Nothing is ever going to be perfect. There will always be more work that could be done on something. If you let yourself just keep going until you think it’s done it might never come out.
But it’s a balance and when publishers push those kinds of deadlines they’re not really considering that.
I'm particularly thinking about the development history of Duke Nukem Forever...
-
At this point I just kinda expect Haunted Chocolatier to come out as a major update for Stardew Valley and not it's own game.
️ -
At this point I just kinda expect Haunted Chocolatier to come out as a major update for Stardew Valley and not it's own game.
️I'd be into it. Go to bed on the farm, wavy 90s transition, different game!
-
Oh, fair enough. Thanks
