Personally, I prefer larger content. Why get frequent updates if they barely have anything new worth playing or if anything "new" is just 5-10 mins worth.
-
Uploaders Wanted! HERE(Click) -
If you donated for a rank, please send Mr. Tearson a DM with proof and by starting a conversation. THE DM HERE(Click)
Updates and their content - Fewer content but frequent updates or larger content but slower updates?
- Thread starter Rogaldorn777
- Start date
- Replies 75
- Views 1K
I prefer Slower updates and longer content as long as it wont get abandoned.
My Best Deal does the fewer content frequent update and look how slow the progress in the story.
Live to Fight on the other hand does Slow update and little to none new content lmao.
My Best Deal does the fewer content frequent update and look how slow the progress in the story.
Live to Fight on the other hand does Slow update and little to none new content lmao.
Hahaha.. I get you! Live to Fight's story premise was quite interesting to me when I started but now it's really turning stale.
Yeah I'd go with the "larger content but slower updates" option as well. That way you can look forward to the game, spend enough time on it to be memorable, and play other games in the gap.
Honestly.. its a balancing act. Decent amount of content and play time
It's frustrating getting interested in a game only for it to be abandoned a few updates later
U are patient
Unfortunately I'm not patient like u guys
BIgger updates at a slower rate is way better.
For a lot of games I will wait for a few updates between downloads. The changelog is always helpful when deciding whether an update is worth downloading.
For a lot of games I will wait for a few updates between downloads. The changelog is always helpful when deciding whether an update is worth downloading.
Or worse, when it is almost finished and only needs the ending and polishing, more than once I have seen long games that do not add the corresponding endings.
As I don't play unfinished games, longer waiting for bigger updates is fine for me.
But as others said before, silent abandoning of promising projects is the worst.
But as others said before, silent abandoning of promising projects is the worst.
Generally as a player, I'd rather wait longer for a release with more content. I can see why some projects might need more frequent releases with less content, though, to keep subscribers happy. Many people are impatient, and if they have to wait too long, even for more substantial content, they'll cancel their subs, and so the dev loses money.
Longer release cycles definitely. I routinely skip releases in games where I know each update will be underwhelming. You want to have time to immerse yourself in the story/action which won't happen when it's 10 minutes of new stuff.
In fact, I've become so accustomed to skipping small releases there are games I've forgotten I play.
In fact, I've become so accustomed to skipping small releases there are games I've forgotten I play.
Bigger and slower updates is my prefered schedule as long as the dev is consistent. To me the best devs are the ones that keep fans updated weekly/bi-weekly about the next update no matter how long the update takes.
Yeah definitely slower updates (even only a few per year is fine) and more content.
A lot of games nowadays push out updates with one or two scenes max, which doesn't let you get into the story after the previous update.
A lot of games nowadays push out updates with one or two scenes max, which doesn't let you get into the story after the previous update.
In between. Too little it's like a few minutes of play time - too long and you forget what happened.
Similar threads
- Poll
