Show more

Me: I never want to write a domain-specific language again. I'll just use Python.
Five minutes later: Can I add switch statements to Python? Can I put decorators on if statements? I bet I can make it happen.

Ima start writing some code this month, I promise, but I have to have at least a rough outline of the puzzle structure first.

Anybody else do the thing of starting a git repo and then just editing the notes file for a month, so the log looks like 75 commits of "Notes." "More notes." "Puzzle notes."

But I am not at this point concerned with exactly how to separate people from their money - up-front, micro, subscription, whatever. My question is how do we rebuild a marketplace where games have medium-sized satisfied audiences at all. We currently seem to be aggregating towards many cult favorites (three devoted players each) and Fortnite (all the rest of the money).

Moodboarding "tron window ui" is a terrible cliche, but I can't stop. Orange and cyan are my spirit waveguides.

Thus the discussion turns to publishers and their fan bases, and other communities of curation. This is an indirect answer to the comments I saw on (e.g.) the "Post-apocalypse" article, saying (e.g.) "stupid devs are marketing only via twitter and the indie festival circuit". I think this is not unreasonable! And I don't just say that because I'm planning to do it myself!

I guess my conclusion is that if you put your work in front of the largest possible group of customers, you discover that they are a boring mob who only want cheap crap. This has been your Wednesday Obviousness, join us next week as we discuss whether water is wet.

Anyhow, the underlying question here is "Why do you believe that games are an avocation which people can make a living at?" I'll leave it at that.

No, this thread isn't going anywhere in particular, I'm maundering.

A large part of "people value it" is network effects, i.e. "people value what other people already value." This is why I am still hosting games on Steam despite everything. There *is* network effect there, and it's for legitimacy and presence in the greater conversation, not just money. (Although the money isn't zero, which is nice too.)

Now, the obvious question is, why should I charge money for a game if I've given up on the idea of making a living that way? Should I go for free-to-play Itch releases? This is messy and may represent a place where I am still emotionally stuck to something. But I would like to create work which people both play and value. I can't take dollars out of that equation.

I still want to make games. (Or, perhaps I should say, I am still inextricably invested in the idea that I need to make games.) I still think I can reach a small interested fanbase.

I got a day job last year, but it was already clear before that that I was not going to make a living creating games.

So I was talking to someone who did 3D-printed sculpture for a living, and describing the recent indiepocalypse links, and she said yes, that happened in 3D printing land. For a while you could make money. Then everybody discovered how easy and fun it was, and now essentially nobody can make a living at it. (A couple people can; thousands *think* they can but are wrong.)

Somebody tell me what the next platform is going to be after Switch finishes indiepocalypting, because I have no idea what to implement this thing for.

I'm still messing around with a cyberspace hacking game idea. I have half an outline and some notes on economics.

Clearly I have now conquered Mastodon with that "edge case" snuffleupagation. Now to deploy this social preeminence to spotlight... um...

I have been programming since like 1985 and I just realized this minute that a "corner case" is, like, where an edge case hits another edge case and gets even weirder. I've been using "edge case" and "corner case" as synonyms without ever thinking about it.

Show more
Gamedev Mastodon

Game development! Discussions about game development and related fields, and/or by game developers and related professions.