I try and visit games about once a year or so. Too frequently and there's not much meat on the bone from updates. If there's been no update in a year? Yeah, that's too long.
Depends. I dont have problem waiting for a whole year if the update is big and good enough. But if i have to wait 1 month to get 20 images in the update, then no thanks. So basically i would say the time waiting should be corresponding to the content and its quality in the update.
2-3 months but I usually wait until there are some updates before I return to the game because sometimes there is not enough content to download it again.
But actually a year is an overkill.
I agree with most people who say over 3 months, but i understand most of these games take a long time when very few are working on them also they don't get paid enough
I always judge that based on three things. The first is communication from the dev. The second is the how big is the update. The third is quality. For the most part I tend to say 6 months.
I join the "3-4 months" club. If the dev gives regular updates about progression and a longer waiting time is reasonable, I'm also patiently enough to wait longer. "Dev silence" is the worst. If a dev decides to abandon a game or doesn't have time to continue the development, he / she should say it.
That depends on what you feel a game is worth. That being said the tyrant just posted a update after over a couple years absence so you can never truly know. I'm waiting for a creator by the name of pixil to update a wife and mother fan art game called final task hes been quiet since like 8 months or so. I dont know how much longer ill wait for this game to update.
It depends on the quality of the game. If its clear it has a lot of good renders and has an indepth story, it can take longer. But if its some low quality beat-ur-meat and leave game, I expect shorter updates.