riccardo.deias (Project Night Developer) About the Removal of His Game

Status
Not open for further replies.

Samkiud

God of Gaming
riccardo.deias, Project Night developer, an horror indie game, has decided to remove his game from the Steam sore. His statement were published here: http://steamcommunity.com/games/ProjectNight/announcements/detail/83666641264800939

Hello guys.
First of all i want to say thank you to everyone who support me in last years.
I want say thank you to every video gamer that sended me positive or negative feedbacks.
I really appreciated your comments (not so much the insult or kidding, but, that's the life of an indie developer).
Before to think about this situation, i've waited until 50% of people like the game.
Sadly, some months ago the percentage drop under 30%.
So, i think that i've to accept that.
Feedback is not enough positive, so, i've choose to remove the game from Steam.
Now, i'm working on a smaller game.
Anyway, i'm going to reinvest your money in my next project, and i'll probably will launch a small kickstarter campaign before the end of this year.
Now, i've to say goodbye to Steam community.
Thank you for everything and see you soon.
 

CasualCastiel

Knights
Staff member
Knights
I really don't know why he has to take it out of the store just because he doesn't like the ratings. He could just hear the reviewers and actually improve on it (or leave it up as another way to be supported/earn funds and show how he can grow with the new game).
 

skelton912

God of Gaming
I really don't know why he has to take it out of the store just because he doesn't like the ratings. He could just hear the reviewers and actually improve on it (or leave it up as another way to be supported/earn funds and show how he can grow with the new game).
Very true Castiel, Seems like criticism in any way would help a game developer work. Now it might have been an issue where he felt continuing to host a subpar game could hurt his ability to find sponsors for new projects or hurt his small fan base and in the light I can understand where he might be coming from. I didn't like his last part "Now, i'm working on a smaller game.
Anyway, i'm going to reinvest your money in my next project, and i'll probably will launch a small kickstarter campaign before the end of this year." Which seems to indicate he already had a kickstarter or made funds off the subpar game and is going to use those funds for something different rather than help fix his current game...... thats kind of shady in my book. Interested info though Sam!
 

Triblaze

God of Gaming
My opinion is that he should have made his game free and kept it there. He could eventually have cleaned it up once he gained more experience. Maybe he was pressured by Valve to remove his game, but I highly doubt it because Valve is hands off most of the time. I can understand his decision though. Lots of negativity can be demoralizing. He probably wants to focus time towards a new project, start fresh with the lessons he learned, and make that his legacy. I agree though its shady with the funds though. That's not right. If you take money from a source you have to be transparent. You can't just spend other peoples money willy nilly. If it was his own cash I would respect his decision, but as it is its a bit on the line.
 

CasualCastiel

Knights
Staff member
Knights
I agree though its shady with the funds though. That's not right. If you take money from a source you have to be transparent. You can't just spend other peoples money willy nilly. If it was his own cash I would respect his decision, but as it is its a bit on the line.
While I agree that the whole funds thing is shady, I do want to remark that if people bought the game, then the money is his to do with as he pleases. By which I mean, unless he actively stated (I don't know if he did) that those funds would go into improving his current game, or the game was early access (which I also don't know if it was) it's not really that shady of him to use them for another game. Probably not nice to abandon his current game, but not that shady either.
Now, if it had been stated that the funds of that would go to fix the current game, or if it was early access, then that's another song to dance to and the whole thing would be quite wrong indeed.

Was it early access? I have no idea. :q
 

skelton912

God of Gaming
While I agree that the whole funds thing is shady, I do want to remark that if people bought the game, then the money is his to do with as he pleases. By which I mean, unless he actively stated (I don't know if he did) that those funds would go into improving his current game, or the game was early access (which I also don't know if it was) it's not really that shady of him to use them for another game. Probably not nice to abandon his current game, but not that shady either.
Now, if it had been stated that the funds of that would go to fix the current game, or if it was early access, then that's another song to dance to and the whole thing would be quite wrong indeed.

Was it early access? I have no idea. :q
True. I thought of that after I posted that. It comes down to the situation at hand.
 

Triblaze

God of Gaming
While I agree that the whole funds thing is shady, I do want to remark that if people bought the game, then the money is his to do with as he pleases. By which I mean, unless he actively stated (I don't know if he did) that those funds would go into improving his current game, or the game was early access (which I also don't know if it was) it's not really that shady of him to use them for another game. Probably not nice to abandon his current game, but not that shady either.
Now, if it had been stated that the funds of that would go to fix the current game, or if it was early access, then that's another song to dance to and the whole thing would be quite wrong indeed.

Was it early access? I have no idea. :q
Completely true. I was under the impression it was crowd funded. Never mind, he is free to do what he wants with the funds, and the people that bought the game keep access to it anyways, so there is nothing wrong with that aspect of his actions.
 

CasualCastiel

Knights
Staff member
Knights
Completely true. I was under the impression it was crowd funded. Never mind, he is free to do what he wants with the funds, and the people that bought the game keep access to it anyways, so there is nothing wrong with that aspect of his actions.
I have no idea if it was crowdfunded, though it does sound like this next one will be (and by the way he said it, it doesn't sound like the first was crowdfunded, but I might be wrong). Still, paying for a game that plays like crap or is broken isn't nice, but yeah, what can you do short of asking for a refund if you're able to. The whole thing is still a little shady regardless. I still feel he should have just left it there even if he didn't want to fix it and just put a warning for future buyers that the game wouldn't be fixed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top