discussion How long is too long for a game to have an update...?

[RedOwl]

6 months is a breakpoint for me, even if it has a lot of content it´s horrible to not remember anything

Exactly! You might as well start a new game at that point. I'm willing to allow one restart. After that I don't have the patience.

 

[falseside]

I would rather have 1 year no update to get to completion than 1 week for a tiny update.

 

[ejt2223]

I much much much much prefer monthly updates, even if they are smaller. There are certainly really special games that I'm invested in where I'm willing to wait a few months between updates, but that's a long wait for me. So for example, if there is a game that I really like which has monthly updates, I'll be a subscriber on Patreon to support the game, and I'll generally stay subscribed. But if there is a game I love which only does updates once in 3-6 months, then I'll subscribe the month an update comes up, show the dev a little love, then cancel the subscription for the subsequent months. Those devs would take much more of my money if they cut the update into smaller chunks and fed it to me monthly. I totally get the desire to have quality meaningful updates, but my attention span is too short for that.

 

[ss60455]

3 months seems about right

 

[Magician5513]

It is difficult to decide. There is a thin line between a very good (long wait) content update without too many bugs and milking with a very small update...

 

[Gazon731]

For a quality game but done by hobbyist - 2 updates per year is tolerable.

 

[malvius]

I agree with a lot of people on here who said it entirely depends on the quality and size of the updates, if the dev is actively communicating with the community and whether its paid/patreon'd or just a hobbyist

 

[Mart]

How I can play loli game again

 

[bobbybob202]

3 months of waiting I lose interest.

 

[WigglyWorld84]

No real set time for me... but if too much time passes and I forget about them, oh well.

 

[DAmarillo]

4 months anything beyond that just slap the abandoned tag on it and be done lmao

pretty much agree, unless the Dev has a timeline of when the updates come.
but if they've missed a deadline and gone dark

 

[misaki002]

I check out my favourite games once per year (depending on current month) and i have a lot of fav games so i dont really game... for an Abandoned games or On Hold i wait for a month, because once or twice it happened to me that they came back online. After that if they come back alive i hope that i will randomly find out

 

[pi00tr]

3-4 months is the ideal time to get a properly sized update out imo

 

[MattShizzle]

More than 3 months really, otherwise you forget stuff. More than a year is absolutely ridiculous. 6 months to a year there better be a lot of content and some reminders of what happened before. Starting over from the beginning after like half an hour or more play is unacceptable. Especially when they fuck around with stuff and make you have to restart.

 

[User_81442]

Depends on how big the updates are tbh. I can deal with 6 months if the updates are big for example. If it goes over that though its sometimes hard to justify unless the game gets completed in that time.

 

[stangnomez]

Depends on the game. Some games are worth year+, some are forgettable within a month.

 

[penny0x]

3 months should be long time to add enough content to push for new version update. Waiting for long def. Makes me forget about certain games

 

[Franek60]

4 months is OK if the updates are major - include a lot of new content, story arc etc. If the updates are smaller then probably 2 months for a few scenes/lines is just not worth it

i agree with that assesment

 

[Bollagus]

3-4 months, depending on the quality of the upload. Been through enough of games that gives 3-5 minutes of play after 6+ months.

 

[Paiopony]

If the game is good I don't mind how long it takes, I can entertain myself by playing others, but I guess after one year maybe I lose interest