[Builders leave, dead game] Actually, it's about community, feedbacks and balance

But they are though, not necessarily 6 year olds, but children in general.

Unless the playgrounds you visit are more “adult oriented”

1 Like

First of all, playgrounds and games are so radically different that attempting to compare the development of either is ridiculous.

The devs have a vision and it doesn’t matter if you like it or not, the devs will attempt to go for it and it’s not gonna be the customers that are gonna dictate what the game is gonna be like in the end.

Changing the game based on feedback is the devs basically repurposing stuff that can help enhance their final goal, and not that the customers are dictating the final product.

Games are just Virtual Playgrounds and it doesn’t matter you want to accept it or try and make your own definitions to suit your arguments because the facts don’t align with your view.

The devs can have a vision and attempt to go for it ofcourse. But the customers still dictate whether that vision earns bank or not. Something that matters in real life. So regardless of what you might want to believe, guess what? the customers do dictate the result.

“A rose by any other name…”


I think an expansion or a new GD(2?) might disrupt the game’s athmosphere right now. But devs can redesign the exact same game with a new engine. They change what they wanted but couldn’t because of the technicallity, use same storyline; make some shorter or longer to be adjust or add in the future DLCs. So that it will bring new possibilities. It’s like a new version of the GD with same spirit. Right now a new DLC without changing previous gameplay may expand the world too much. And changes like making top level more to adjust gameplay doesn’t mean anygood. Adding a new area to the campaign also not imo. They only can add a completely optionable new area.
New classes? I don’t know, it may mean a really big change on the whole gears. But I guess they could change or add some skills etc to the classes. Though they still definitely can add new items to make possible some damage(or combos) type along classes. But I’m also not sure that a new GD with a new world would catch the same athmosphere with the old game. They should create a whole new storyline, whole new classes, whole new items, whole new quests and enemies thus it won’t be a GD 2. The only possible GD 2 is like I said above, to make the same game with new engine, change things doesn’t affect the whole storyline and add things that wasn’t possible before ofc they should be adjustable for the future DLCs and continue to expand it.

No, they are not.

Here’s why that doesn’t work: there are too many different opinions on what the game should be like, meaning customers can never dictate what the game should be like. it has to be the devs , or else a game is a confusing mess of clashing design choices. There HAS to be a vision for a cohesive product.

Nope. What the devs do with the feedback is up to THEM, not the customers. So no, not the same thing as customers dictating what the game should be like.

1 Like

Feel free to prove that claim. And that the earth is flat, while you are at it.

And here is why that is false.

This is not some art piece in a museum to bring stuff like “vision” into. It is a business like any other.

Yes, there will be different opinions and that is why you try your best to make as many as your customers happy, as possible.

It can never be the devs because this is not some private project that they made for themselves, even if it was one they enjoyed making and did so with passion. It is a product that they are selling with the intention to generate a profit and as such that will remain their primary goal unless they like being in debt or go bankrupt.

Or do you expect people to pay for something they don’t like because someone told them it is what they “should” like?

Customer satisfaction is something important in business. So it is not exactly a choice unless the devs want their “vision” to fail at generating a profit.

Just because the developer(s) can choose whether to do something or not does not mean that they have the option to ignore the wishes of the customer/consumer if they want to stay in business.

So, once again: “A rose by any other name…”


Just like games not being made according to the wishes of players who eat :ice_cream: in the middle of the night.




Gotta agree with Norzan and disagree with you, Maya. Well kinda. Truth is, it’s a balancing act between artistic vision and financial success. Cultural products like books, movies and videogames are not just products, or rather, they have the potential of being more, and it is the creators ultimate privilege to decide what they want to do, and the audience ultimate privilege to be interested or not.

Having a vision doesn’t automatically doom a project. In fact, it can go both ways, there is no real general rule. The goal is not always to make the most money, sometimes, making enough money…is enough. ^^

1 Like

I mean, if someone wants to adopt an idealistic notion such as this, that is fine.

But I would prefer the realistic approach.

Damn, now I want to find the post by Mediarra where he stated that he refused to do big projects for big editors because he felt Crate was doing good enough…Too late today, maybe tomorrow.

That does not contradict anything I have said though. Crate still managed to sell millions of copies. That is by no means a small number.

And not wanting to take on bigger risks and responsibilities does not mean that you are ignoring the monetary aspect of things.

1 Like

Here you go.


Children would probably want a dragon mecha that moves freely or a 100 meters long slope, but those things would probably violate a bunch of safety regulations. The point being, a playground is made for children, but children don’t know how to create one, nor the safety or quality regulations that the manufacturer most comply to. Yes, you HAVE to cater to a big enough group of people to have a successful vision, but that doesn’t mean that you have to grant everything the community wishes for. Sure, you can add some things people want from time to time, like auto-pick or healthbars; things that ended up being quite beneficial to the game, but there has to be a limit. Mainly, most people don’t know jack shit about game design and balance (even those that can be considered pro-playerd), so listening to the community about this aspect too much can be detrimental, especially if the general feedback is contradictory. There has to be a balance about listening to community feedback (that I think Crate reached quite well).


37 posts were split to a new topic: Maya Balance Thread

2 posts were merged into an existing topic: Maya Balance Thread

Now I want a dragon mecha

I would argue that it’s not even endgame that lacks content.
In a hot pursuit to balance the game arounc Crucible or SR, the main campaign is lacking heavily. I mean, we got totems, I guess, that’s okay. But it’s also utterly boring and doesn’t change anything from enemy altar too much, for example.

What devs can do, for instance, would be expanding existing roguelikes with their bosses. Things that can and should compete for the endgame like SR and Cruci, but affordable for MC runners, as well as for those, who don’t buy expansions. Anything else in this regard would be a welcomed addition.

Another thing is balance. We got new map explorations, but most of them are so small and insignificant. And a lot of new gear is lacking as well, which prohibits veterans from exploring these new lands. That’s why people are leaving, imo, because there is nothing you can do, nothing you can conquer in this game, endgame was explored to every crook and nanny, and new content is not so great to make up for it.

For me, I would consider a heavy gear and content revise at least some time in the future, but I’m no dev, so, just throwing my piece of opinion here.

The idea about more rogue dungeon floors I do like, say a inter actable pillar that instead of teleporting you out of the dungeon it takes you to another set of floors with more mutators, loot, monsters, etc…BUT

As Crate has previously mentioned that’s the function of SR.

I understand the feeling of MC but unfortunately it is unlikely to change.

1 Like

Perhaps there should exist some kind of standard test crucible with no loot rewards just to measure builds with in a consistent manner? Like build stress test mode with no rng

I feel this painful too sometimes also I play no GD stash or mods but I still wanna test and compare builds also for my own sake. Yes target dummy exists but they can not kill you

1 Like