discussion What kind of game update do you prefer?

[Lurkabowa]

My answer isn‘t located on the polls, but any update speed is fine, so long as the games completed and the quality of the work is retained. Even if there are major delays. I can wait just like my doggo does for me… except also pooping on the floor. I wont do that.

 

[WhiteFireDaemon]

All things being equal, a faster update is always nice. It also helps to keep the "when's the update?" trolls at bay. That said, update frequency doesn't really correlate to quantity or quality of update. It tends to vary a lot from dev to dev. Either way, I'll gladly take what I can get. Fast or slow is still better than nothing.

 

[Zauldjamin]

slow update for me

 

[asdasc]

slow updates usually would have more content so.. yeah

 

[Darth Chaoz]

Quality over rush.

 

[gremlin42]

Yeah, quality every time. People need to remember that devs have lives too and shit happens to them just like everyone else. If it takes time they should take the time and do a proper job.

 

[AlBetGam]

Frequency is less important for me than consistency. I want to be able to trust that the dev is still working on it, that the quality of each update stays high, and ideally that my saves from last time are still good and I don't have to restart.

 

[-Bonk-]

In a perfect degenerate world, i would get an update direct deposited every week
like my paycheck. In reality....It all depends on how many games you are currently
enjoying. For me it has been a windfall over the last few weeks. I was in a holding
pattern which allowed me to become active on forums, now i have updates on :
-SSP
-Amnesia
-The Assistant
-New Years Daye
and a couple more

 

[MattShizzle]

In between. 1 month with only a few minutes worth of play isn't worth it, but 6 months+ is too long - you end up forgetting too much.

 

[rockstar]

quality over quantity

 

[Ira]

Big updates, assuming they're good, of course.

 

[patinhas]

I don't particularly like to be always updating, so longer and slower is the best for me. However, sometimes it gets so slow that I'm afraid the game will never be updated again (that combined with "radio silence" devs is very bad for my interest in the game).

 

[Terranorm10]

I don't mind waiting a while. Nothing is worse than starting up a game and thinking, wait that was it? As it takes you back to the menu

 

[b0bb09189]

I think 3 months is a decent enough amount of time to produce an update with a significant amount of content.

 

[bos420p]

Fast updates as long as it is enough content. If the update is less than 5 minutes of content it feels like a waste of a download. Some of the best games have long update times but good content updates. The problem is the longer it takes to release the update the more concerned people get that its abandoned.

 

[User_105724]

slow update, if there is at least 1 hour of content.

 

[Solamenteforjogos]

I like slow updates since I have very little time to play games. Slow updates with a lot of content give me more time to catch up with the current version of the game

 

[tecoteco]

I take the point about the dev vanishing, but as I play many games I'd rather wait for a big update than a small frequent one. In fact I often wait for 2-3 updates before installing for games which are updated like that.

 

[Seo In-guk]

Well, since I don't pay, I can't insist that you hurry up and I just have to wait.

 

[mchlladams638]

above all else transparency and communication of the update progress.

I prefer slower updates with more content for each update