Just adding this that big M posted in a Steam thread.
"Man, this thread… no need to get all heated over game discussion. Not like anything said here is going to hurt GD’s feelings.
Why are we not just jumping on GD2 - for one thing, I’ve been making ARPGs for like 18 years and I need a break. I think also to really improve upon GD and compete with D4 and whatever PoE is doing next, we’ll need to make a big investment and have some fresh ideas. We’ll also need to either overhaul our engine or jump into Unreal or whatever. On that topic, someone mentioned going to Unreal, which would certainly almost guarantee great graphics… however, ARPGs require some special consideration when it comes to engine architecture and Unreal is not natively designed for that type of performance. The tools are also not great for an ARPG. We’d have to do some engine work and a lot of tool work and after that, we’d be starting from scratch in terms of ARPG combat / features. It would be a lot less work to overhaul GD.
Also, 5% engine fee would be millions of dollars and it’s not like we can just assume in advance we’ll get some sort of offer for an exclusive that is worth enough to offset, which I am doubtful would be the case.
On the other hand…“But GD is an old engine and…” Do you know how old Unreal is?! Part of what has kept up from making major graphics updates to GD is that we are burdened with having to support the specs we put out years ago, for older directX versions and operating systems. We can’t just update the game in a way that will break it for existing users who have to play on older machines. A jump to a sequel though gives us an opportunity to start fresh, cut support for older shader models and directX versions, hardware specs, and allow us to greatly modernized the engine. If you scrap the renderer and start over there, it’s not like the age of whatever you keep matters - it’s basically like a new engine. Beyond the engine component, we have an entire ARPG codebase we can then use, which cuts out a ton of work. Even if we go in a direction drastically different from GD, there are a lot of fundamentals to ARPG gameplay that take time to program and get working just right. It would be easier and lower risk to start from a point of being able to say “what do we want to change, cut, add” to an existing codebase.
Not sure what direction we’ll go in terms of engine but it’s not a straightforward choice. There are big pros and cons either way.
GD is also still doing quite well - last year was our highest earning year by far and this year it looks like we’re on track to meet or exceed revenue from 2016, when GD released.
As someone pointed out above, we have no investors or publisher and I am the sole owner, so you can imagine I’m doing pretty okay and my biggest motivation is not to maximize profits at this point. And really, that’s great for fans because chasing profits often leads to decisions that are not beneficial for players.
Why a town builder? Well, I loved the genre when I was younger and I’ve always wanted to make one. I also wanted to take a break from such content-heavy games as ARPGs and do something that was more pure gameplay. I also think it is almost guaranteed to break even and will probably make a pretty nice profit. I also wouldn’t say town builders don’t sell - just look at Banished, which has sold around 2m copies. Sure, no town builder has numbers like the Diablo franchise but there isn’t actually a lot of competition in that genre compared to ARPGs. We have two huge competitions with Diablo and PoE, plus various smaller ones, and ARPG players will often stick to a game for years. Wolcen was lucky to release when they did but if we start on GD2, it’s very likely, we’ll be releasing alongside the next Diablo (again) and whatever PoE does next.
One thing I think a lot of people fail to consider when they look at financial success of games is the development cost. Sales don’t directly equal profit - profit is what you’re left with once you deduct dev costs from sales revenue. So there is something to be said for a project that maybe has lower sales potential but also has a much lower development cost. As far as this city builder goes, we won’t need to sell that many copies to break even, so I think we’re almost guaranteed to make a nice profit on it.
Finally, while we do intend to return to GD in the future, we don’t want to be a one-trick pony. There is definite value and stability in establishing multiple successful franchises vs. just churning out the same game year after year, hoping people don’t get tired of it. The idea that a developer who made ARPGs can only make ARPGs is a very publisher-like sentiment. We ran into this very skepticism when we pitched Titan Quest and the problem then was - we were known as RTS designers. Yep, at Iron Lore, Brian Sullivan and myself only had experience on RTS and publishers weren’t sure we could manage to make a successful ARPG. Now you’re telling me I can’t make a strategy game and have to stick with ARPG?! Haha, not sure I want to know what you’d say then if we told you what else we were working on…
Anyway, sorry no GD2 yet but hope that answers some of your questions. Don’t worry, we’re not about to go bankrupt anytime in the foreseeable future. We’ll get back to GD before too long."
“Haha, not sure I want to know what you’d say then if we told you what else we were working on…”
Well, you won’t find out until you tell us now will you. 
Come on big M, spill the beans.
If you won’t do that (and no I don’t really expect you to) just give us more info about the town builder. Is it close to being released? Will it ever be released?
Crates has their vision of what they can add as well as improve, so I am very intrigued.
