[hwbunny]

95 % of games are boring, and unoriginal. Why? Because most of these people, who create these games are entrepreneurs. They only see the possible money from these. These games have no heart whatsoever, why? Because good games need passionate people, not blue collar suits.

There are 1 million subscribers at the gamedev reddit. It's ridiculous, and when people ask something, they get total balooney, ridiculous botlike answers.

[jayd16]

Games are boring and unoriginal because it's incredibly hard to make original, engaging content no matter who you are.

[hwbunny]

I don't think that's the case. Just look at the 90s, early 2000s.

[bnralt]

Being passionate doesn’t guarantee a game being a success, though. Look at a game like Knights of the Chalice 2. It's definitely a labor of love, and many people who play it think it has the best DnD combat of any game out there, and maybe some of the best turn-based combat as well. It has mediocre graphics, though, and a high price point, so it’s had extremely slow discoverability. It also has a somewhat niche audience (people really into complex DnD combat), so it’s not clear how much of an audience is out there even if discoverability wasn’t an issue.

[hwbunny]

People are in their own bubble and believe everything that people say to them on the internet. People lie all the time, plus they don't want to create friction by saying that a specific game is, well, shit. That game is built on already outdated foundations. You need to give something to users that will stimulate them.

[somenameforme]

That price point is one of the most ridiculous I've seen, and is just lighting money on fire! The game looks great (erm.. so to speak) - clearly extremely heavily influenced by the Gold Box games, but I have no clue at all what the dev was thinking with that price. I am his demographic, and I'm not even considering the game at that price.

[johnnyanmac]

most games are made by entrepreneurs because the best creators are either in industry, too broke to afford to create and took some different job, burned out of the industry for a myriad of reasons, or are one of the few gems out there (which may or may not be hidden).

>It's ridiculous, and when people ask something, they get total balooney, ridiculous botlike answers.

This isn't limited to r/gamedev. Reddit is asking the blind to lead the blind, and maybe once in a blue moon you get an actual expert to help. They often leave once they realize everyone else is blind and questioning their experience, though*.

Sadly, the best place to find the best answers is to find people live. Be it in town, during a conference, or just hoping they accept a cold invite on their social media and choose to respond.

>I don't think that's the case. Just look at the 90s, early 2000s.

yes, you neede to know someone at Nintendo (or later, Sony) just to get your game in there, know how to make your own assets and levels without a high grade commercial engine, and get Nintendo/Sony to approve it. There were a lot of gatekeepers to making an indie game back then, so there were almost none.

Meanwhile, Shareware was hard to profit off of on PC (remember, it was not commonplace to have a digital wallet back then). There may be some great games, but few would be profitable without launching on console, being on store shelves, and overall supporting a propreitary machine.

(*me being an example. Though calling myself an "expert" is an overstatement. 10 years in industry isn't nothing, but also is far from authority level in any technical field).