there are examples of abandoned games getting new update out of nowhere by miracle (curse of pleasure for example) , so you could say its better to leave the game rather then making it shit. But I dont know if I really agree with this as it breaks my heart to see good game getting abandoned where you had high hopes for it (like that one Hand Drown Naruto game, I forgot how was it called, it had original characters as MC, and god tier animation.) So its sometimes bettet to do short but sweet game, end it and let players move on rather then make them forever sad over what it could have become.
Abandoned Games
- Thread starter Dean
- Start date
- Replies 2K
- Views 26K
Overall, I'm in the minority on this one. Abandoned is bad, but rushed is worse.
For me, the rushed ending is always lacking and ends up frustrating me more than the unfinished one because it puts an end to the thing. The unfinished one I can play again and think about other endings.
The only situation where an unfinished game is worse is when there is a gigantic cliffhanger that I don't know how to undo... That's the worst.
For me, the rushed ending is always lacking and ends up frustrating me more than the unfinished one because it puts an end to the thing. The unfinished one I can play again and think about other endings.
The only situation where an unfinished game is worse is when there is a gigantic cliffhanger that I don't know how to undo... That's the worst.
liking a unfinished/abandon game or a rushed ending?
it really depends:
- in what state was the game abandoned?
- is there enough content to keep me playing for a few hours?
- are the characters solid?
- and so on....
i normaly take a game with a ending over a abandone one. but if the game is good....
it really depends:
- in what state was the game abandoned?
- is there enough content to keep me playing for a few hours?
- are the characters solid?
- and so on....
i normaly take a game with a ending over a abandone one. but if the game is good....
Damn, I am kinda surprised the answers are 50/50 for both.
I was expecting most people to prefer rushed ending, which is disappointing but at least gives you a closure (which I disagree with, but most people prefer it).
To me it's simply better when a game/developer breaks your heart once by abandoning it. Whenever you get rushed unsatisfying ending, it just sours the game whenever you think about it/want to replay it.
I was expecting most people to prefer rushed ending, which is disappointing but at least gives you a closure (which I disagree with, but most people prefer it).
To me it's simply better when a game/developer breaks your heart once by abandoning it. Whenever you get rushed unsatisfying ending, it just sours the game whenever you think about it/want to replay it.
well i can understand you. but the game has to be in a state that is playeble and has the story/characters far enough to care for.
if the game is in that state, then i can choose a abandoned game over a rushed and shitty ending.
I think I'd rather have a rushed ending than the game just dropped, then you at least get some kind of closure for the game.
To me, rushed games are preferable mostly due to the fact that almost every finished game feels at least a bit rushed. I am clearly a bit harsh here but, at least on the spot, I am hard pressed to think of a single game that has a natural and sensible ending in the same vein as their (more common) great beginnings.
Tricky question.
I think I prefer a rushed ending, at least if the game already has gone on for a while.
Abandoned after the first release or so I couldn't care less. But after several releases it really annoys me.
Still when it's a really good game there always the hope that the dev will pick it up again.
Or someone else but that is extremely rare since most devs want to their own thing.
I think I prefer a rushed ending, at least if the game already has gone on for a while.
Abandoned after the first release or so I couldn't care less. But after several releases it really annoys me.
Still when it's a really good game there always the hope that the dev will pick it up again.
Or someone else but that is extremely rare since most devs want to their own thing.
I would prefer a game be abandoned. Rushing the ending would ruin any attachment to the story and characters, that the dev created in the first place. At least with an abandoned game, the dev can always come back and continue working on it.
Oh wow, that's a difficult question. I would normally say I'd rather have a sudden ending than Limbo. But then I think of GoT Season 7 and 8 and suddenly Limbo doesn't sound so bad after all... 
I think I'd rather have abandoned than have the whole story destroyed with an inappropriate ending.
I think I'd rather have abandoned than have the whole story destroyed with an inappropriate ending.
Bad endings just sour my view of the entire game. Abandoned games just make me think back a year on and say "huh, guess they never finished that." Though I rarely even start games that have been "officially" abandoned
i prefer Abandoned, if not for just that sliver of hope of ressurection
(ideally with some amount of content to tide people over)
but to be fair, there are some games that need any kind of ending, stuff rolling around the same mud for years on end like a telenovela
(ideally with some amount of content to tide people over)
but to be fair, there are some games that need any kind of ending, stuff rolling around the same mud for years on end like a telenovela
Game being abandoned due to burnout or real life problems and even death have been the silent killers of some of the most entertaining games.
Then there is the absolute shitshow of rushed endings of some of the most high profile games ever where the creator just ran out of ideas on how to tie up the endings of too many LIs, changed the storyline to suit his high profile patreons or just was in over his/her head.
But the thing I absolutely loathe are the games whose creators have milked the games for close to 5+ yrs without any meaningful updates.
Then there is the absolute shitshow of rushed endings of some of the most high profile games ever where the creator just ran out of ideas on how to tie up the endings of too many LIs, changed the storyline to suit his high profile patreons or just was in over his/her head.
But the thing I absolutely loathe are the games whose creators have milked the games for close to 5+ yrs without any meaningful updates.
Abandoned games are worse, it's even worse if the creator abandons it without word or reason which is sadly most of the time...
Im not sure, but sometimes it feels they loosing interest in what theyre doing, maybe they burn themselves out, dont know where to go with the game and maybe are to embarassed to speak out about it.
In a lot of "rushed ending" games there is no difference from abandoned games.
They just made a little more work rather than let the game collect dust but it's still the same other than it can claim the "finished" tag.
At the end of the day both are bad
They just made a little more work rather than let the game collect dust but it's still the same other than it can claim the "finished" tag.
At the end of the day both are bad
Yup, i've seen some that update maybe 4 times a year with maybe 1 scene added, but if they're making hundred or even thousands it's good for them I suppose.