2:15 This argument - that a critic putting out a creative work must think it’s better than anything they’ve previously criticized - is hilarious, and betrays that the person making the argument hasn’t done a lot of robust creating themselves. The absolute harshest critic of any creative work is going to be the person who made it. They’re going to know every flaw, contrivance, compromise, and failed aspiration. If I point out that “Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the Universe” has poor characterization for its supporting female characters, it certainly isn’t because I think there’s anything in the “Novel Drafts Do Not Steal” folder on my desktop better than Haruki Murakami’s actually published. “You criticized it because you think your thing is better.” No I don’t. I think the stuff I make is garbage. Have you ever met someone who makes things?
@@CErra310 John Romero and Dai Katana comes to mind. All the failed promises for Fable. Bob’s Game, too, though Bob probably needed some more help than just firm feedback.
And if we turn back the clock a lot more, Vincent Van Gogh never liked any of his paintings. That alone should say a lot about how at odds the creators are at their own creations, but nooooo. People these days like to say "Dev X made a game that didn't sell well, so he goes off to make fun of Dev Y's much more successful game".
As a small time writer I have felt that way forever, but then I read some of my classmates work and then say "ok maybe I am being too harsh and my stuff is just mediocre". Being a beta reader is so cool because the stuff I'm shown is usually much better on a foundational level and just needs the common writing pitfalls patched out, which I am very good at. It's a team effort. I have been told I would make a good critic due to how detail-oriented I am, and there's no way I can match what I criticize, but it's not Black and White. But you're rigbt that a hallmark of a bad writer is getting very defensive about constructive criticism, especially if they wrote, idk, My Immortal
There's also the related but separate "You're not allowed to criticise unless _you_ can do better!" nonsense. (It's kind of the inversion of "You must think you're so much better, if you dare criticise.") I can't play the violin - and yet _somehow_ I have the ability to tell when someone else is playing sour notes and making their instrument screech. I may not be able to tell the difference between the world's greatest violin player and the 100th best, but I can damn well notice when someone is doing it _wrong._ I also do not need to first supply a 5-star-rated gourmet meal, before I'm allowed to say that I won't enjoy a turd sandwich - yes, even _without_ trying it first!
I appreciate his solution to "too much money" was "here is even more stuff you can buy" and not "I made things more expensive" or "missions pay less" which I've seen a lot of developers do to balance things.
An ideal approach to any development, it is generally much easier to fix bugs if they are caught earlier on and don't have a number of other bugs piled on top of them.
As a professional game dev for 30-some years, "test early, test often" is my mantra. What sucks about most game companies is that the people responsible for dong the testing, QA, are often considered the lowest people on the dev team, barely better than the janitorial staff.
He deleted his comment, and then deleted a thread on Twitter that was much the same as the comment. Apparently, whoever counts as the PR department for the Selaco people grabbed him by the collar.
I can understand it being frustrating, especially when your studio isn't a major one so it can feel super damaging to be criticised by someone with a big platform. But yeah it's dumb to do, leaving aside how childish it is people won't look at you particularly fondly unless the person reviewing was being genuinely unfair, which I wouldn't say Yahtzee is most of the time. Maybe occasionally misses important things and blames the game but he's fairly open that it's all his perspective and acknowledges when he's wrong fairly well Hell even jokingly I've seen reactions to game criticism taken badly - that podcast where the YIIK dev complained about criticism is apparently one where you act like an exagerratedly bad version of yourself (hence the name "The Dick Show") but I still see it brought in videos on that game. Feel sorry for devs these days, hard to have discussion even when they're trying to be reasonable
I remember the Valve philosophy of playtesting - playtest early, and often. Playtesting is some of the most valuable information you could possibly find about level design, enemy design, or overall gameplay feel, as well as giving you an avenue to find and squash bugs in a timely manner rather than needing to go full panic mode because suddenly the game you thought was watertight touched water and disintegrated.
Starstruck Vagabond is a solid indie game. It's very chill and is a great "second screen" game. Yahtzee likes games you can play while listening to a podcast, and it's no surprise the game he created is so well-suited to this idea. I put in a good 4 - 5 hours so far, and will return soon. The story is easily the bit that will keep me coming back.
Another lesson to be learned: Game testing is an *actual* job. Those people are professionals, pros, and what they are pros at is breaking games. It's not just sitting around playing games for a living... it's attentively playing games so wrong *on purpose* that it breaks the game. With a lot of note-taking and maybe several flowcharts. *And* they have to do that while making it through the entire game in (usually) a few weeks while breaking it in every way possible as fast as possible. There's probably some overlap for the same skillsets of speedrunning. The "seven or eight" testers that play the game for a few weeks have to emulate what a million monkeys with typewriters will do over the course of several months. And their job needs to be taken very seriously. Which is a lesson I think some companies haven't learned, yet.
Yeah, everyone has to start somewhere when testing but you will learn overtime to play the game less and less like a normal video game and become very good at the specific act of testing and boundary pushing. I guess similar things apply to editors in general, though testing is a pretty unique beast.
It's kinda funny because "snitties" have become a bit of a running joke in my current D&D campaign. It started with a group of Yuan-ti adult entertainers that illusioned some big ol jubblies on their chests to make them more appealing to the human majority in the audience.
200% more respect for critics who also make their own stuff, regardless of what it is. Appreciation (or lack of it) for the act of making stuff always shows.
I really enjoyed this glimpse behind the curtain, and to me, it makes a lot of sense - what comes across is not jealousy that a different game sold more, but the passion and commitment of a creator invested in what they are making. Having interviewed 1980s game developers, the common problem with testing back then is that it was often down to the designers or a few people at the software company. And because they played the game regularly while it was being developed, they learned the tricks and got used to playing it - so the difficulty was raised to challenge the developers (and the game journos), and it resulted in games with a higher difficulty level. Testing is more sophisticated nowadays, but you are never going to send out a 100% bug-free game, especially one with multiple variables/characters/items. The more complex the game, the higher the number of interactions that can go wrong.
As someone who is a part of a small game testing team I can say you absolutely cannot do enough testing before your game goes to cert/release. Even small scope games can have a myriad of hidden issues that either players find or first party(sony/microsoft) finds. We do testing for 8hrs a day and there are still things that slip through the cracks.
I really like this breakdown. It about how releasing any art is showing personal vulnerability. Is chill to see Yatzee talk about it, and an interesting dive into what you can miss as a developer in the middle of the game.
I did not buy Starstruck Vagabond even tho Im a fan of Yahtzees work, precisely because it's niche appeal does not appeal to me. And that totally fine.
@@michaelwesten4624 This makes no sense, they said they don't want it so your response it to tell them to steal it and try it anyway? Don't confuse this for a moral judgement as it's more a judgement of your cognitive ability
yea. i'm in a weird space that i've been a fan of yahtzee for basically his entire video career and am curious about what kind of game he would produce, but also don't really like these types of games so i'm not sure if its worth actual money to me
The irony for me is Yahtzee already appealed to my niche with The Consuming Shadow, which I'm still playing, so there's not much need to replicate the feat.
@@emilytheimp I went the other way and bought it even though I knew it wasn't in my wheelhouse. Played it for a but but lost interest. The game seems very good fornits genre but as suspected , not for me. I did want to support Yahtzee though and also I loved Poacher which was free so felt like I was just paying for all my time spent enjoying that.
Thanks for the insider perspective Yahtzee! It’s fun to know that testing isn’t just Valve’s secret weapon, but valuable for indie projects, and it’s inspiring to see a humble take from you. Hopefully it better equips future devs to handle struggles that rear their heads, both functionally and emotionally.
thank you for the reminder i need to buy this as i have watched every ZP, dev diary & Fully Ramblomatic for the last 15 years without spending a penny and this guy has earned my money
The post launch patching burnout is real. It's like running a marathon and you finally cross the finish line... Only to find you get your little 'I did it' ribbon a town away and on top of a hill. Congrats on crossing the finish line *and* getting that ribbon!
I'm a huge fan of both yahtzee the critic and yahtzee the game developer and I think the fact that you DO both is part of your appeal. As someone who actually likes Selaco and was surprised by you reviewing it at all, I think you're doing just fine
This may be presumptuous to say, but I think the biggest issues of the game being specific bug fixes from testing and a sense of " More pleas" from the audience shows The work that went into the game and Mr. Croshaw should be very proud
Game Makers Toolkit has talked a lot about how important testing is in his process, with everything from bugs to gameplay changes coming from multiple rounds of testing
3:03 "I assumed it would be fine since I've played so much of it and it seemed to perfectly well." Ahhhhhhhhh this line stuck out at me. As a software dev with 10+ years experience myself (sadly in accounting/IT, not something like game dev) I have learned time-and-again that testing your own product is almost _completely_ useless (and I was just dealing with Excel macros, basic form windows, and websites, nothing procedurally generated.) We know our own product, exactly how it's supposed to be used and work, so that when we test we only look for the intended input and output with, maybe, some small variations just to check. Then it goes live, and a user/player wipes out a central database via a horrible bug they discover because they got mad at something and smashed their keyboard on the desk. Or they copy-pasted their username, but accidentally picked up a word after that as well which isn't obvious due to the username field's size (actual issue I dealt with.) In my "what-if" scenarios where I'm a game dev (because I completely lack hope and gumption to do so IRL), in addition to standard testing I have multiple PC/console units hooked to monitors in a common hallway. All units run the current test build: half of them randomly choose input, the other half have basic AI patterns to emulate trying to play the game. If someone walking in the hall notices one of the units has gone wonky, they press a button below the monitor: this sends the inputs, seed, etc., and last half-hour of footage to testing so they can try to review and recreate the issue, and then the unit resets to have another go at it. This wouldn't replace regular, planned testing, of course, it's just an "automated" way to test what are thought to be improbables: It's the "million monkeys/typewriters" thought experiment, but applied to game testing.
0:20 And before Dev Diary, it was Extra Punctuation, except in article form rather than videos. Where Yahtzee would list additional thoughts on games he reviewed, talking about games like the DS Castlevanias, how Xenoblade X validated the Wii U gamepad and his Undertale review before the video on the subject.
Wonderful. Putting out your own game(s) shows that you understand how games work. I don't need to be able to play music to know what I like, but knowing what music is and how it works is real boon, and means that your criticism can be insighful.
Being a software developer of 30 years, nothing is more valuable than good testers. From experience, I know that I'll never do the things a good tester will do, or the user. There is just too many paths.
Honestly, since the Semi-Ramblomatic where Yahtzee basically talked about Hegelian dialectics by talking about how “punk” a game is he always felt philosophical after that point.
Yahtzee: "So I released Starstruck Vagabond some weeks ago..." Me: "Dear god...!" Yahtzee: "And I added more since!" Me: *_"No...!"_* Brb, gonna grab that real quick.
I think it’s really mint that Yahtzee has come full circle on the economy issue. His ZP review on assassins creed 2 or brotherhood I can’t recall exactly which mentions the same economy issues he experienced from the player side of things. Even down to having nothing to spend the money on. Not a callout or whatever just an interesting wrinkle on this small pocket of history. Players are great at seeing problems that devs can become blind to during development.
I really think you did a good job with Starstruck Vagabond. I finished the main story a while ago but I still come back to it for an hour or two and I really like the extra stuff you recently put in.
I for one am grateful for sprint function. Not as much on planets or aboard the ship, but on inhabited planets it is a godsend when distances are long, the towns are monotonous and I just want to see if this planet has a hairdresser so I can complete a crew request.
Devs make the worst testers. We use the program how it was meant to be used. So of COURSE it will work. WHEN WE USE IT. That's why we need USERS to do our testing. Because why would WE do ? You're NOT supposed to do THAT. But the USERS don't KNOW that. So we rely on them doing play testing to FIND all those issues we didn't account for by following paths we didn't plan to be taken because WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?! Fun times.
It is because of Yahtzee that I finally got into creating my own works. Granted, I chose to go into writing my own book (well, books, as I broke it up into three for the delusion of publishing a trilogy), mostly because I was in a position where I might have wanted to try my hand at game making but did not have enough free time for even the minimalist of attempts, but if not for all the points Yahtzee was making, even before he first started recording about working on Starstruck Vagabond, I would not have bothered. And yes, I did try out some of the early builds of it _LONG_ before the Steam release. Yeah, I found it to be quite niche, to not be something I would play regularly, that my play sessions would likely be brief (which they mostly were), and it was just not the most fun game I would play. That said, I enjoyed the nicheness of it, I still come back to it often enough, and it is still more unique than most (and speaking for myself at least, I enjoyed it more than I did Stardew Valley). That was the ultimate lesson I took from Yahtzee: even if it is only so you can have the weakest of legitimate bragging rights, just start creating, and if others like whatever it is that you created and then decided to share (ideally to the point of paying you to partake in it), that is a nice sweet bonus. Or as how I internalized it: if someone was able to make and get _50 Shades_ out there, then WTF is my excuse? And yes, I paid for the game, both during its early builds and its Steam release (hey, I have been a fan of Yahtz since the very beginning, and I enjoyed most of the games he made for Dev Diary, so it only felt fair for me to do so). Hope my payments helped go to a nice bed, pillow, and set of sheets for Yahtz to catch up on those 7-8 years of sleep.
@@doctorwhouse3881 They're currently just working titles, nothing truly set yet, though the first one might be. Hopefully, later this year, you'll find _A Chance in Hell_ available. Whether or not the other two get published, well, one step at a time. Don't worry, I have no pretensions about my writing. I highly doubt it'll make any more of a splash than any of Yahtzee's books - I'm not knocking them, I have them all, but I recognize that they're for a niche audience, which is the most I can hope for me.
Don't forget the cautionary of the Catherine Devs internally testing the puzzles so much they accended to a puzzle ability much higher than mortals like you or I But as someone who hasn't made a game, and has only developed a handful of programs, I think a good middle ground is Modular Testing. Ie, break parts up into individual game loops and those out _while_ you work on weaving them together. Then, test that woven trial while working on something else.
As a college student who's dabbled into very simple programs, I can say for certain that that's easier said than done. You have a point, modular design and testing make everything easier for the long run. Problem is, you'd have to account for that from the very beginning, which most devs aren't gonna do until the benefit of hindsight smacks them in the head. Don't get me wrong, I agree with your point. It's in fact one of the very first things I learned in one of my courses. The sad reality is that it's easy for the project scope to balloon to a point where all you'll ever do is fix bugs till the end of time.
Puzzles are super tricky. Because you will get the hang of it and feel they are easy, but players will think its super hard. I am making a strategy game and I am fortunate enough that I am of medium difficulty. I am no beginer, but do not use exploits or wacky shenanigans to gain the upper hand. 50% of my players think its easy enough, 50% think its hard enough. Perfectly balanced as all things should be
@robertbernard7844 yeah, totally. My main benefit for modular design and testing, which can very easily overwhelm a solo-dev, is productivity. Ie, overlapping tasks. While you're working on o e thing, something else is cooking in the background
@@icarue993 Yeah, puzzle games are the hardest to balance as a solo dev, because it's almost by definition impossible to playtest them yourself since you already know the answer. Puzzle difficulty also tends to be a lot more binary - either they figure it out or they don't. It's hard to hit the sweet spot of people figuring it out but only after thinking about it.
This was really interesting to hear, thank you. Also, huh! I just assumed the max number of crewmembers you could get was all the crewmembers there were. Now I have even more to look forward to on my next playthrough.
It bewilders me how a large chunk of the internet is still against critics, reviewers and criticism in general. I remember the debates & discussions and it seemed clear that the critics won out, in the end. That criticism & critics is deemed valid as a standard.
Anti-intellectualism (which includes media criticism) is surging in popularity around the world. It's tricky because it includes both the stereotypical "politician ignores science", but people don't realize it also applies to the "stop criticizing things, let people enjoy stuff" people too.
I initially wasn't interested at a cursory glance, but now after seeing a bit more of it, I might consider it. I'll at least wishlist it to show some support.
I bought Starstruck Vegabond on launch day, and despite some bugs and soft locks it was the best game I’ve played all year. If you haven’t given it a go, I highly recommend it.
You know, after meticulously finding games I would actually like, with your perspective in mind very often, I'm finding myself actually avoiding or not bothering with discounts- such is my admiration for the work I can better appreciate.
I'm glad you recognize there were hiccups in launch that didn't get tested. I got softlocked when I found a random ship to loot but the quest items to progress were on the lift and then got stuck on said ship that was destroyed. So oops. Still, its a niche I like.
I think "test more" might honestly be the most important lesson to take from this. I'm trying to write a novel, and it's technically written, but I'm not satisfied enough with it to be willing to show it to close friends who have offered to provide early feedback - I get the "I need to make it as good as possible before even the alpha audience sees it" instinct, it's a killer. I doubt it's why bigger games made by entire studios tend to come out feeling entirely untested, but it's still a good lesson to take to heart. For me, maybe I should just start sharing my manuscript around with my trusted ones so they can help me fix what I'm not satisfied with about it. Thanks for the nudge, Yahtz. :)
Yahtzee fell for the old artist trap of getting used to the smell of ones own farts. Often you cant tell something is a bad idea simply because youre used to it. Like how Alien Resurrection or Rayman, both on the PS1, were also not tested until late, by which time the devs had gotten so good at their own game they didnt realise how hard theyd made it. I recall a dev diary where someone tested a game and couldnt find how to open the inventory. You fo it by...triple clicking the player character. Something they implimented early, all got used to, and just never thought of again.
Just grabbed it, gonna play it on my holiday next week. I’ve got a weird amount of nostalgia/expectation for this game that I’ve watched Yahtzee turn from a lingering side project into an actual thing!
I splurged big time on this year's Steam Summer Sale and this was one of the first things I picked up. I always find it interesting to hear the behind the curtain stuff with game dev, especially the stuff with rationale for how to approach things and how the creator and customers can be collaborative in a sense
The one thing I have learned about the internet (and multiplayer games) is that it will always attract those who take every opportunity to "elevate" themselves by talking down on others - just to compensate their own lack of purpose in the real world.
I think your shift on early access based on actually developing a game highlights a fundamental flaw with reviewers that every reviewer should take into account: the understanding that none of this is easy and assuming it is makes you a loser Reviewers do hold importance by being able to judge things in a way a designer wouldn’t; they are much closer to an average player than a designer. But so many have a tendency to make assumptions about the creation process and assume things like developer laziness when something isn’t exactly the way they want it. I think a lot of it is born out of the desire to be developers but not having the skills to do so
Early Access isn't the devs being lazy. It's them (or their publisher, whomever gave the green light for EA) being greedy. Instead of paying their playtesters or releasing a version for beta testing, they're telling people that they have to pay for the 'privilege' of testing out their jank for them. It's a trend I'm seeing in creatives across the board. They want the payout of a business while having the forgiveness of a hobby. If someone is paying money for a product or service, it' should not be on them to quality control it. If you're taking someone's money, you should be held to the standard that every business has and your customer should have normal customer protections, regardless of your business or team size. I'm not against hobby games or small teams of creatives making money off of their passion. I'm also not saying that making video games are easy. As someone who has only glanced at coding and realized I have enough trouble parsing my native language so trying to understand a computer language is just going to break my brain, I have a lot of respect towards those who _are_ able to parse it out. But as soon as you take someone's money for what you're providing, you should be held to a standard that all business should be. You should pay employees to test your games instead of having people pay you to playtest your games by throwing a "EA" tag on it.
l agree with your stance in the context of mayor studios, but i do see the use for indie developers. They (generally) cant afford to hire multiple/enough testers, so for them to have their enthousiastic fanbase test stuff for them and getting a pre-launch money boost is very valuable, and the playtesters can play the game early, be involved with the development to some degree and they got the game for a EA-price, which is usually lower than the eventual full release price. I think thats a system with merits. The developers of Hades said their game would never have turned out as good as it did without early access and patreon, and they're doing early access again for the sequel to great success so far
@@Sponsie1000 bro…that’s not my stance at all. My point was that people’s assumptions about early access being due to lazy developers comes from a place of ignorance, as Yahtzee had similar feelings about it until he actually made a game and saw it’s value. My point is that reviewers assuming laziness is pretty much always incorrect and highlights the inherent problem when reviewers try to make assumptions of game development.
@@Sponsie1000 If they need the testing, have a beta and use it for an actual beta test instead of a promotional window. Frankly if they need a money boost, then they should've planned their business expenses better. A common theory about why games are coming out worse and worse is that there's a lot of mismanagement, and underestimating the amount of money that you need to finish a project (and usually by quite a bit) is also a sign of poor management. The developers behind Hades had 2 moderately successful games before releasing Hades (Bastion and Transistor), and not only did they use EA and Patreon, they also took Epic Store's Exclusive cash injection. They're either horrible at managing their money or are pocketing it while saying that it's going towards expenses. Again, they're a business and we're their customers, so something went horribly wrong with consumer and employee protections when the playtesting employees are paying for the privilege of working on a project. And that is what Early Access is, paying for doing the company's work for them.
I think that your own game develop does highlight the difficulty of addressing a criticism you often levy: that money is only spent on upgrades that result in more money. As dev that makes sense, you’re creating an exponential economy. But as a player who is spending longer maintained runs (vs a dev repeating sections at a time), this becomes more salient. And you have highlighted here just how hard that is to fix. It sounds like in your later patches you made a lot of improvements. The issue with these types of games’ endgame is that since there is no true ending, the game has infinite endgame. Stardew Valley constantly needs more endgame updates because of it and you’re seeing it here too.
Yahtzee learning first hand how some of the best testing is done by letting people loose for a greater duration of time. They'll find a host of things, and keep finding them. However the show does have to go on eventually. So don't feel bad. Sadly, we can't stop being human so things will bug us despite all our rationale saying it shouldn't. However it is ultimately, petty to attempt to discredit your remarks simply with "well you're just jealous yours didn't do as well.' because it reveals the one making that claim has no idea of differing tastes or target audience and that some games simply sell more than others because they're targeting a different audience. Just get some rest old chum. You deserve it.
Bit of a slow starter, just started playing Starstruck Vagabond and am very much enjoying it! The art style and aesthetics are a delightful homage to Sierra Online games in certain respects but the gameplay and flexibility of the player's choices on the narrative are very modern. Well done!
I ended up buying Starstruck Vagabond a little while after release because I had an urge to get back into Hardspace: Shipbreaker. While playing I ended up wanting something with more space traversal. Then I remembered Starstruck came out and it ended up being the exact kind of game that I wanted at that time and I greatly enjoyed it.
Nice to see you took the criticism on the cheek and kept it moving. I might actually check out starstruck after I clear out my backlog including Blasphemous 2, Doom 3, the modern shadow warrior trilogy, the master chief collection, black mesa, half life 2 episodes 1 and 2, forgive me father 2, postal brain damaged, chutes and ladders, hopscotch, tiddlywinks
I was always gonna buy this game, whether it genuinely appealed to me or not, because I like to see how much Yahtzee practices what he preaches. I know he's got the writing chops, and I played Trilby back in the day (is that ever gonna get maybe a free Steam release? Loved that game, for all its flaws!) So I can definitely see the potential! I got Starstruck Vagabond on this most recent sale, so I'm excited to try it!
I think this is fascinating to see. The genuine assessment from the creator and his thoughts and such. I Think that's super interesting and I'm glad you're doing it. I've been doing big early access help with a tiny indie roguelike called Rogue Voltage (Which I think Yahtzee would love but shh) and seeing all the thought processes and balance ideas go out is truly mind boggling in the scope
I can respect a critic who puts out their games. If they're willing to put themselves on the line to gain the same kind of criticism, may you give others and receive praise. good for them. I can respect that
From what I hear from quite a few of the ones who were offended by the Selaco Review, it wasn't the review itself that offended them, but the part at the start where he talks about the game's art and it's not a "real job". They're focusing on the part that's not about the game for some reason...
One important aspect of letting people test your game: try your best to watch your test players, but NOT SAY ANYTHING unless absolutely necessary. If you tell people how to proceed past the instructions you forgot to add in / avoid the thing you know is glitchy, you'll just end up missing the stuff the testers would've dug up if left to your own devices. Watching someone get completely stuck or try to do the completely wrong thing tells you what you need to fix before you let the real players loose.
LOLed at the funny bits of this, especially, "Or just be one of the lucky bastards to snag one of these codes". :D Very nice! Also the unsound effects! XD
I thought I was searching for "Starstruck Vagabond" when I had, in fact, searched for: "Vagabond Starship" by accident. Much to my surprise that is also the name of a game on Steam!
I liked the base game, but I was still working through it. Glad to hear there are new updates. I will definitely be jumping back in once I have a chance.
Grab Starstruck Vagabond while it's 20% off during the Steam Summer Sale! store.steampowered.com/app/2448930/Starstruck_Vagabond/
Yeah, I'll check it out. Seems pretty interesting.
I'll give it a try. I am curious on Yahtzee's developer side
2:15
This argument - that a critic putting out a creative work must think it’s better than anything they’ve previously criticized - is hilarious, and betrays that the person making the argument hasn’t done a lot of robust creating themselves. The absolute harshest critic of any creative work is going to be the person who made it. They’re going to know every flaw, contrivance, compromise, and failed aspiration. If I point out that “Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the Universe” has poor characterization for its supporting female characters, it certainly isn’t because I think there’s anything in the “Novel Drafts Do Not Steal” folder on my desktop better than Haruki Murakami’s actually published.
“You criticized it because you think your thing is better.” No I don’t. I think the stuff I make is garbage. Have you ever met someone who makes things?
The people who think their own works are fantastic masterpieces are the ones who regularly produce the absolute worst shit imaginable.
DmC
@@CErra310 John Romero and Dai Katana comes to mind. All the failed promises for Fable. Bob’s Game, too, though Bob probably needed some more help than just firm feedback.
And if we turn back the clock a lot more, Vincent Van Gogh never liked any of his paintings. That alone should say a lot about how at odds the creators are at their own creations, but nooooo. People these days like to say "Dev X made a game that didn't sell well, so he goes off to make fun of Dev Y's much more successful game".
As a small time writer I have felt that way forever, but then I read some of my classmates work and then say "ok maybe I am being too harsh and my stuff is just mediocre". Being a beta reader is so cool because the stuff I'm shown is usually much better on a foundational level and just needs the common writing pitfalls patched out, which I am very good at. It's a team effort. I have been told I would make a good critic due to how detail-oriented I am, and there's no way I can match what I criticize, but it's not Black and White. But you're rigbt that a hallmark of a bad writer is getting very defensive about constructive criticism, especially if they wrote, idk, My Immortal
There's also the related but separate "You're not allowed to criticise unless _you_ can do better!" nonsense. (It's kind of the inversion of "You must think you're so much better, if you dare criticise.")
I can't play the violin - and yet _somehow_ I have the ability to tell when someone else is playing sour notes and making their instrument screech. I may not be able to tell the difference between the world's greatest violin player and the 100th best, but I can damn well notice when someone is doing it _wrong._ I also do not need to first supply a 5-star-rated gourmet meal, before I'm allowed to say that I won't enjoy a turd sandwich - yes, even _without_ trying it first!
6:20 "Should I... keep the hat on?" ~words uttered around the Yahtzee household once a week in pitch blackness.
underrated comment
I appreciate his solution to "too much money" was "here is even more stuff you can buy" and not "I made things more expensive" or "missions pay less" which I've seen a lot of developers do to balance things.
"test early, test often" it's what made valve games so enjoyable
An ideal approach to any development, it is generally much easier to fix bugs if they are caught earlier on and don't have a number of other bugs piled on top of them.
As a professional game dev for 30-some years, "test early, test often" is my mantra. What sucks about most game companies is that the people responsible for dong the testing, QA, are often considered the lowest people on the dev team, barely better than the janitorial staff.
@@stevejakab274 Valve would probably suggest getting the janitorial staff in on it too, but point taken. :^ )
Yahtzee didnt mention that one of the people getting pissy about the selaco review was one of the devs
He deleted his comment, and then deleted a thread on Twitter that was much the same as the comment. Apparently, whoever counts as the PR department for the Selaco people grabbed him by the collar.
Wasnt it a positive review?
@@eetuhalonen9902 It was, mostly, but a few people thought it wasn't positive enough.
@@eetuhalonen9902 You know how some people get, no middle ground allowed between utter perfection and complete trash.
I can understand it being frustrating, especially when your studio isn't a major one so it can feel super damaging to be criticised by someone with a big platform.
But yeah it's dumb to do, leaving aside how childish it is people won't look at you particularly fondly unless the person reviewing was being genuinely unfair, which I wouldn't say Yahtzee is most of the time. Maybe occasionally misses important things and blames the game but he's fairly open that it's all his perspective and acknowledges when he's wrong fairly well
Hell even jokingly I've seen reactions to game criticism taken badly - that podcast where the YIIK dev complained about criticism is apparently one where you act like an exagerratedly bad version of yourself (hence the name "The Dick Show") but I still see it brought in videos on that game. Feel sorry for devs these days, hard to have discussion even when they're trying to be reasonable
I remember the Valve philosophy of playtesting - playtest early, and often. Playtesting is some of the most valuable information you could possibly find about level design, enemy design, or overall gameplay feel, as well as giving you an avenue to find and squash bugs in a timely manner rather than needing to go full panic mode because suddenly the game you thought was watertight touched water and disintegrated.
Starstruck Vagabond is a solid indie game. It's very chill and is a great "second screen" game. Yahtzee likes games you can play while listening to a podcast, and it's no surprise the game he created is so well-suited to this idea. I put in a good 4 - 5 hours so far, and will return soon. The story is easily the bit that will keep me coming back.
huh i was under the impression Yahtz made a more involved game, now i have to check it out.
"you're just jealous" is such a moronic and childish accusation.
You're just jealous you didn't think to say it first.
Most arguments eventually devolve into name calling, TBF.
Yo mama.
There, the argument has devolved further!
@@GeekOfArabia Who Asked?
Even further still.
Welcome to the modern world, where everything is always someone else's fault and ignorant behavior is actually encouraged.
Another lesson to be learned: Game testing is an *actual* job. Those people are professionals, pros, and what they are pros at is breaking games. It's not just sitting around playing games for a living... it's attentively playing games so wrong *on purpose* that it breaks the game. With a lot of note-taking and maybe several flowcharts. *And* they have to do that while making it through the entire game in (usually) a few weeks while breaking it in every way possible as fast as possible. There's probably some overlap for the same skillsets of speedrunning.
The "seven or eight" testers that play the game for a few weeks have to emulate what a million monkeys with typewriters will do over the course of several months. And their job needs to be taken very seriously. Which is a lesson I think some companies haven't learned, yet.
Yeah, everyone has to start somewhere when testing but you will learn overtime to play the game less and less like a normal video game and become very good at the specific act of testing and boundary pushing.
I guess similar things apply to editors in general, though testing is a pretty unique beast.
I thought the "snakes with tits" comment was done in the typical facetious Yahtzee humor but there is actually a snake with tits 🤣👏
I mean, X-Com is a thing, and sci-furry is not exactly new.
I wonder what Brennan Lee Mulligan would think about it
Well... Dammit, where's my wallet.
@sweskey Wasn't it pretty well explained as a holdover from the human DNA they had from their Xcom1 versions?
It's kinda funny because "snitties" have become a bit of a running joke in my current D&D campaign. It started with a group of Yuan-ti adult entertainers that illusioned some big ol jubblies on their chests to make them more appealing to the human majority in the audience.
200% more respect for critics who also make their own stuff, regardless of what it is. Appreciation (or lack of it) for the act of making stuff always shows.
I really enjoyed this glimpse behind the curtain, and to me, it makes a lot of sense - what comes across is not jealousy that a different game sold more, but the passion and commitment of a creator invested in what they are making. Having interviewed 1980s game developers, the common problem with testing back then is that it was often down to the designers or a few people at the software company. And because they played the game regularly while it was being developed, they learned the tricks and got used to playing it - so the difficulty was raised to challenge the developers (and the game journos), and it resulted in games with a higher difficulty level. Testing is more sophisticated nowadays, but you are never going to send out a 100% bug-free game, especially one with multiple variables/characters/items. The more complex the game, the higher the number of interactions that can go wrong.
RedLetterMedia made Space Cop and I still love hearing their opinions on movies
"Artisanal coffin maker" sounds like a badass job title.
Isn't that a serious occupation in... maybe Ghana?
As someone who is a part of a small game testing team I can say you absolutely cannot do enough testing before your game goes to cert/release. Even small scope games can have a myriad of hidden issues that either players find or first party(sony/microsoft) finds. We do testing for 8hrs a day and there are still things that slip through the cracks.
Because your average player will do the dumbest things you'll never think of out of sheer curiosity and boredom.
I really like this breakdown. It about how releasing any art is showing personal vulnerability. Is chill to see Yatzee talk about it, and an interesting dive into what you can miss as a developer in the middle of the game.
holy shit Yahtz, managed to pick up a code on the 4th attempt, lucky me!
Heck yea, enjoy the long weekend!
Nice to see Starstruck Vagabond getting some QoL updates. I was put off by some steam reviews mentioning the issues that have already been addressed
A shout out for hard-working little Toffee as well, it's pretty full on being a dog
Really enjoying the open and honest approach to game development. Giving a lot more insight for people looking to give this a go themselves.
I did not buy Starstruck Vagabond even tho Im a fan of Yahtzees work, precisely because it's niche appeal does not appeal to me. And that totally fine.
@@michaelwesten4624 This makes no sense, they said they don't want it so your response it to tell them to steal it and try it anyway? Don't confuse this for a moral judgement as it's more a judgement of your cognitive ability
yea. i'm in a weird space that i've been a fan of yahtzee for basically his entire video career and am curious about what kind of game he would produce, but also don't really like these types of games so i'm not sure if its worth actual money to me
The irony for me is Yahtzee already appealed to my niche with The Consuming Shadow, which I'm still playing, so there's not much need to replicate the feat.
@@emilytheimp I went the other way and bought it even though I knew it wasn't in my wheelhouse. Played it for a but but lost interest. The game seems very good fornits genre but as suspected , not for me. I did want to support Yahtzee though and also I loved Poacher which was free so felt like I was just paying for all my time spent enjoying that.
Is it coming to Switch?
Thanks for the insider perspective Yahtzee! It’s fun to know that testing isn’t just Valve’s secret weapon, but valuable for indie projects, and it’s inspiring to see a humble take from you. Hopefully it better equips future devs to handle struggles that rear their heads, both functionally and emotionally.
Thing I learned from RuneScape oddly enough: You always need a money sink.
thank you for the reminder i need to buy this as i have watched every ZP, dev diary & Fully Ramblomatic for the last 15 years without spending a penny and this guy has earned my money
The post launch patching burnout is real.
It's like running a marathon and you finally cross the finish line... Only to find you get your little 'I did it' ribbon a town away and on top of a hill.
Congrats on crossing the finish line *and* getting that ribbon!
I'm a huge fan of both yahtzee the critic and yahtzee the game developer and I think the fact that you DO both is part of your appeal. As someone who actually likes Selaco and was surprised by you reviewing it at all, I think you're doing just fine
Its refreshing to see your postmortem here rather than having to track it down, thanks a ton yahtz!
This may be presumptuous to say, but I think the biggest issues of the game being specific bug fixes from testing and a sense of " More pleas" from the audience shows The work that went into the game and Mr. Croshaw should be very proud
Well, I respect your gumption in addressing the issues that popped up. Shows dedication to the craft.
Game Makers Toolkit has talked a lot about how important testing is in his process, with everything from bugs to gameplay changes coming from multiple rounds of testing
I want more of the behind-the-scenes with SV on the compromises and choices that need to be made even after the game is launched. Fascinating.
3:03 "I assumed it would be fine since I've played so much of it and it seemed to perfectly well." Ahhhhhhhhh this line stuck out at me. As a software dev with 10+ years experience myself (sadly in accounting/IT, not something like game dev) I have learned time-and-again that testing your own product is almost _completely_ useless (and I was just dealing with Excel macros, basic form windows, and websites, nothing procedurally generated.) We know our own product, exactly how it's supposed to be used and work, so that when we test we only look for the intended input and output with, maybe, some small variations just to check.
Then it goes live, and a user/player wipes out a central database via a horrible bug they discover because they got mad at something and smashed their keyboard on the desk. Or they copy-pasted their username, but accidentally picked up a word after that as well which isn't obvious due to the username field's size (actual issue I dealt with.)
In my "what-if" scenarios where I'm a game dev (because I completely lack hope and gumption to do so IRL), in addition to standard testing I have multiple PC/console units hooked to monitors in a common hallway. All units run the current test build: half of them randomly choose input, the other half have basic AI patterns to emulate trying to play the game. If someone walking in the hall notices one of the units has gone wonky, they press a button below the monitor: this sends the inputs, seed, etc., and last half-hour of footage to testing so they can try to review and recreate the issue, and then the unit resets to have another go at it.
This wouldn't replace regular, planned testing, of course, it's just an "automated" way to test what are thought to be improbables: It's the "million monkeys/typewriters" thought experiment, but applied to game testing.
0:20 And before Dev Diary, it was Extra Punctuation, except in article form rather than videos. Where Yahtzee would list additional thoughts on games he reviewed, talking about games like the DS Castlevanias, how Xenoblade X validated the Wii U gamepad and his Undertale review before the video on the subject.
Wonderful. Putting out your own game(s) shows that you understand how games work. I don't need to be able to play music to know what I like, but knowing what music is and how it works is real boon, and means that your criticism can be insighful.
2:57 This is really solid advice. Much better to do that soon before all the technical debt piles up. Forever Winter is doing that.
A post-mortem while the game's still fresh!
After yeading Yahtzee's Jacques McKeown books, the fact that Zoobs are in this game made me smile
Thanks
Just started Starstruck Vagabond this week. I enjoy the references to the Will Save the Galaxy serries
Being a software developer of 30 years, nothing is more valuable than good testers. From experience, I know that I'll never do the things a good tester will do, or the user. There is just too many paths.
Thanks!
Holy shit Yahtzee is now a Philosophy RUclipsr
Open your ears dawg he has always been pondering
@@karlgerg2626 philosophy 101 is not a major. This guy had to defend a fucking thesis.
Honestly, since the Semi-Ramblomatic where Yahtzee basically talked about Hegelian dialectics by talking about how “punk” a game is he always felt philosophical after that point.
Yahtzee: "So I released Starstruck Vagabond some weeks ago..."
Me: "Dear god...!"
Yahtzee: "And I added more since!"
Me: *_"No...!"_*
Brb, gonna grab that real quick.
If this is, as I assume, an Expiration Date reference, I insist that this become a standard meme template.
Huh, Starstruck Vagabond giving Yahtzee a more positive look at Early Access was not what I was expecting to wake up to today.
Good thing you made this video. The game came out when I was on vacation and I completely forgot about it when I came back
I think it’s really mint that Yahtzee has come full circle on the economy issue. His ZP review on assassins creed 2 or brotherhood I can’t recall exactly which mentions the same economy issues he experienced from the player side of things. Even down to having nothing to spend the money on.
Not a callout or whatever just an interesting wrinkle on this small pocket of history. Players are great at seeing problems that devs can become blind to during development.
I really think you did a good job with Starstruck Vagabond. I finished the main story a while ago but I still come back to it for an hour or two and I really like the extra stuff you recently put in.
I for one am grateful for sprint function. Not as much on planets or aboard the ship, but on inhabited planets it is a godsend when distances are long, the towns are monotonous and I just want to see if this planet has a hairdresser so I can complete a crew request.
4:17 I maintain that this is one of the best lines in a game full of best lines
Devs make the worst testers.
We use the program how it was meant to be used. So of COURSE it will work.
WHEN WE USE IT.
That's why we need USERS to do our testing.
Because why would WE do ?
You're NOT supposed to do THAT.
But the USERS don't KNOW that. So we rely on them doing play testing to FIND all those issues we didn't account for by following paths we didn't plan to be taken because WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!
Fun times.
So many games to play but Starstruck is definitely going to be on my next Steam purchase spree
It is because of Yahtzee that I finally got into creating my own works. Granted, I chose to go into writing my own book (well, books, as I broke it up into three for the delusion of publishing a trilogy), mostly because I was in a position where I might have wanted to try my hand at game making but did not have enough free time for even the minimalist of attempts, but if not for all the points Yahtzee was making, even before he first started recording about working on Starstruck Vagabond, I would not have bothered.
And yes, I did try out some of the early builds of it _LONG_ before the Steam release. Yeah, I found it to be quite niche, to not be something I would play regularly, that my play sessions would likely be brief (which they mostly were), and it was just not the most fun game I would play. That said, I enjoyed the nicheness of it, I still come back to it often enough, and it is still more unique than most (and speaking for myself at least, I enjoyed it more than I did Stardew Valley).
That was the ultimate lesson I took from Yahtzee: even if it is only so you can have the weakest of legitimate bragging rights, just start creating, and if others like whatever it is that you created and then decided to share (ideally to the point of paying you to partake in it), that is a nice sweet bonus. Or as how I internalized it: if someone was able to make and get _50 Shades_ out there, then WTF is my excuse?
And yes, I paid for the game, both during its early builds and its Steam release (hey, I have been a fan of Yahtz since the very beginning, and I enjoyed most of the games he made for Dev Diary, so it only felt fair for me to do so). Hope my payments helped go to a nice bed, pillow, and set of sheets for Yahtz to catch up on those 7-8 years of sleep.
Name of your books?
@@doctorwhouse3881 They're currently just working titles, nothing truly set yet, though the first one might be. Hopefully, later this year, you'll find _A Chance in Hell_ available. Whether or not the other two get published, well, one step at a time.
Don't worry, I have no pretensions about my writing. I highly doubt it'll make any more of a splash than any of Yahtzee's books - I'm not knocking them, I have them all, but I recognize that they're for a niche audience, which is the most I can hope for me.
Love all the hard work you have done. Excellent Dad Game for me to settle down and relax after work. Thank you
If this was a hidden ad, well, it worked!
Enjoying the game and always enjoy more thoughts about the dev cycle. Thanks!
As one of the five remaining fans of the Chzo Mythos, I'm just happy Yahtzee's developed another game.
The honesty made me wishlist it, to be honest. I like it when one can take the piss out of themself.
Don't forget the cautionary of the Catherine Devs internally testing the puzzles so much they accended to a puzzle ability much higher than mortals like you or I
But as someone who hasn't made a game, and has only developed a handful of programs, I think a good middle ground is Modular Testing. Ie, break parts up into individual game loops and those out _while_ you work on weaving them together. Then, test that woven trial while working on something else.
As a college student who's dabbled into very simple programs, I can say for certain that that's easier said than done. You have a point, modular design and testing make everything easier for the long run. Problem is, you'd have to account for that from the very beginning, which most devs aren't gonna do until the benefit of hindsight smacks them in the head.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with your point. It's in fact one of the very first things I learned in one of my courses. The sad reality is that it's easy for the project scope to balloon to a point where all you'll ever do is fix bugs till the end of time.
Puzzles are super tricky. Because you will get the hang of it and feel they are easy, but players will think its super hard.
I am making a strategy game and I am fortunate enough that I am of medium difficulty. I am no beginer, but do not use exploits or wacky shenanigans to gain the upper hand. 50% of my players think its easy enough, 50% think its hard enough. Perfectly balanced as all things should be
@robertbernard7844 yeah, totally. My main benefit for modular design and testing, which can very easily overwhelm a solo-dev, is productivity. Ie, overlapping tasks. While you're working on o e thing, something else is cooking in the background
@@icarue993 Yeah, puzzle games are the hardest to balance as a solo dev, because it's almost by definition impossible to playtest them yourself since you already know the answer.
Puzzle difficulty also tends to be a lot more binary - either they figure it out or they don't. It's hard to hit the sweet spot of people figuring it out but only after thinking about it.
@@robertgrosse4904 Game Maker's ToolKit made a series of videos representing the struggle
This was really interesting to hear, thank you.
Also, huh! I just assumed the max number of crewmembers you could get was all the crewmembers there were. Now I have even more to look forward to on my next playthrough.
It bewilders me how a large chunk of the internet is still against critics, reviewers and criticism in general. I remember the debates & discussions and it seemed clear that the critics won out, in the end. That criticism & critics is deemed valid as a standard.
Anti-intellectualism (which includes media criticism) is surging in popularity around the world. It's tricky because it includes both the stereotypical "politician ignores science", but people don't realize it also applies to the "stop criticizing things, let people enjoy stuff" people too.
I initially wasn't interested at a cursory glance, but now after seeing a bit more of it, I might consider it. I'll at least wishlist it to show some support.
I've been loving Starstruck Vagabond, excited to dip back in with the new content
I can't wait til Starstruck Vagabond is on Switch! My laptop is complete garbage!
I bought Starstruck Vegabond on launch day, and despite some bugs and soft locks it was the best game I’ve played all year. If you haven’t given it a go, I highly recommend it.
You know, after meticulously finding games I would actually like, with your perspective in mind very often, I'm finding myself actually avoiding or not bothering with discounts- such is my admiration for the work I can better appreciate.
This has been a really fun game, thanks for all the work you put into it! I’ve loved the chill environment and comedy
I'm glad you recognize there were hiccups in launch that didn't get tested. I got softlocked when I found a random ship to loot but the quest items to progress were on the lift and then got stuck on said ship that was destroyed. So oops.
Still, its a niche I like.
I think "test more" might honestly be the most important lesson to take from this. I'm trying to write a novel, and it's technically written, but I'm not satisfied enough with it to be willing to show it to close friends who have offered to provide early feedback - I get the "I need to make it as good as possible before even the alpha audience sees it" instinct, it's a killer. I doubt it's why bigger games made by entire studios tend to come out feeling entirely untested, but it's still a good lesson to take to heart. For me, maybe I should just start sharing my manuscript around with my trusted ones so they can help me fix what I'm not satisfied with about it. Thanks for the nudge, Yahtz. :)
Me: hey let's look for a video to watch while playing Starstruck Vagabond
RUclips: so there's this new Semi-Ramblomatic
Me: *clicking frantically*
Yahtzee fell for the old artist trap of getting used to the smell of ones own farts.
Often you cant tell something is a bad idea simply because youre used to it. Like how Alien Resurrection or Rayman, both on the PS1, were also not tested until late, by which time the devs had gotten so good at their own game they didnt realise how hard theyd made it.
I recall a dev diary where someone tested a game and couldnt find how to open the inventory. You fo it by...triple clicking the player character. Something they implimented early, all got used to, and just never thought of again.
Dang, that... explains a lot about Rayman 1, actually. I find that game pretty close to unplayable.
What does single-clicking and double-clicking the player character do, if you remember the inventory?
2:52 As a software developer, I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH, including to my forgetful self.
Just grabbed it, gonna play it on my holiday next week. I’ve got a weird amount of nostalgia/expectation for this game that I’ve watched Yahtzee turn from a lingering side project into an actual thing!
I splurged big time on this year's Steam Summer Sale and this was one of the first things I picked up. I always find it interesting to hear the behind the curtain stuff with game dev, especially the stuff with rationale for how to approach things and how the creator and customers can be collaborative in a sense
The one thing I have learned about the internet (and multiplayer games) is that it will always attract those who take every opportunity to "elevate" themselves by talking down on others - just to compensate their own lack of purpose in the real world.
Perfect start to the morning!
I think your shift on early access based on actually developing a game highlights a fundamental flaw with reviewers that every reviewer should take into account: the understanding that none of this is easy and assuming it is makes you a loser
Reviewers do hold importance by being able to judge things in a way a designer wouldn’t; they are much closer to an average player than a designer. But so many have a tendency to make assumptions about the creation process and assume things like developer laziness when something isn’t exactly the way they want it. I think a lot of it is born out of the desire to be developers but not having the skills to do so
Early Access isn't the devs being lazy. It's them (or their publisher, whomever gave the green light for EA) being greedy. Instead of paying their playtesters or releasing a version for beta testing, they're telling people that they have to pay for the 'privilege' of testing out their jank for them.
It's a trend I'm seeing in creatives across the board. They want the payout of a business while having the forgiveness of a hobby. If someone is paying money for a product or service, it' should not be on them to quality control it. If you're taking someone's money, you should be held to the standard that every business has and your customer should have normal customer protections, regardless of your business or team size.
I'm not against hobby games or small teams of creatives making money off of their passion. I'm also not saying that making video games are easy. As someone who has only glanced at coding and realized I have enough trouble parsing my native language so trying to understand a computer language is just going to break my brain, I have a lot of respect towards those who _are_ able to parse it out. But as soon as you take someone's money for what you're providing, you should be held to a standard that all business should be. You should pay employees to test your games instead of having people pay you to playtest your games by throwing a "EA" tag on it.
@@leadpaintchips9461 I know. My point is that reviewers like Yahtzee tend to criticize early access, only to see its value when making his own game
l agree with your stance in the context of mayor studios, but i do see the use for indie developers. They (generally) cant afford to hire multiple/enough testers, so for them to have their enthousiastic fanbase test stuff for them and getting a pre-launch money boost is very valuable, and the playtesters can play the game early, be involved with the development to some degree and they got the game for a EA-price, which is usually lower than the eventual full release price. I think thats a system with merits.
The developers of Hades said their game would never have turned out as good as it did without early access and patreon, and they're doing early access again for the sequel to great success so far
@@Sponsie1000 bro…that’s not my stance at all.
My point was that people’s assumptions about early access being due to lazy developers comes from a place of ignorance, as Yahtzee had similar feelings about it until he actually made a game and saw it’s value. My point is that reviewers assuming laziness is pretty much always incorrect and highlights the inherent problem when reviewers try to make assumptions of game development.
@@Sponsie1000 If they need the testing, have a beta and use it for an actual beta test instead of a promotional window.
Frankly if they need a money boost, then they should've planned their business expenses better. A common theory about why games are coming out worse and worse is that there's a lot of mismanagement, and underestimating the amount of money that you need to finish a project (and usually by quite a bit) is also a sign of poor management.
The developers behind Hades had 2 moderately successful games before releasing Hades (Bastion and Transistor), and not only did they use EA and Patreon, they also took Epic Store's Exclusive cash injection. They're either horrible at managing their money or are pocketing it while saying that it's going towards expenses.
Again, they're a business and we're their customers, so something went horribly wrong with consumer and employee protections when the playtesting employees are paying for the privilege of working on a project. And that is what Early Access is, paying for doing the company's work for them.
Just to say congratulations on completing the game at all. Well done! Looks great!
2:45 There’s an old saying in software engineering: “a week in production will find more bugs than a year in development.”
I think that your own game develop does highlight the difficulty of addressing a criticism you often levy: that money is only spent on upgrades that result in more money. As dev that makes sense, you’re creating an exponential economy. But as a player who is spending longer maintained runs (vs a dev repeating sections at a time), this becomes more salient. And you have highlighted here just how hard that is to fix. It sounds like in your later patches you made a lot of improvements. The issue with these types of games’ endgame is that since there is no true ending, the game has infinite endgame. Stardew Valley constantly needs more endgame updates because of it and you’re seeing it here too.
Yahtzee learning first hand how some of the best testing is done by letting people loose for a greater duration of time. They'll find a host of things, and keep finding them.
However the show does have to go on eventually. So don't feel bad.
Sadly, we can't stop being human so things will bug us despite all our rationale saying it shouldn't.
However it is ultimately, petty to attempt to discredit your remarks simply with "well you're just jealous yours didn't do as well.' because it reveals the one making that claim has no idea of differing tastes or target audience and that some games simply sell more than others because they're targeting a different audience.
Just get some rest old chum. You deserve it.
Bit of a slow starter, just started playing Starstruck Vagabond and am very much enjoying it! The art style and aesthetics are a delightful homage to Sierra Online games in certain respects but the gameplay and flexibility of the player's choices on the narrative are very modern. Well done!
Just got Starship Vagabond for the steam summer sale. I look forward to playing.
Thank you for this honest video. I had considered making the same mistake you did but I think I'll release as early as possible now
I ended up buying Starstruck Vagabond a little while after release because I had an urge to get back into Hardspace: Shipbreaker. While playing I ended up wanting something with more space traversal. Then I remembered Starstruck came out and it ended up being the exact kind of game that I wanted at that time and I greatly enjoyed it.
Nice to see you took the criticism on the cheek and kept it moving. I might actually check out starstruck after I clear out my backlog including Blasphemous 2, Doom 3, the modern shadow warrior trilogy, the master chief collection, black mesa, half life 2 episodes 1 and 2, forgive me father 2, postal brain damaged, chutes and ladders, hopscotch, tiddlywinks
I was always gonna buy this game, whether it genuinely appealed to me or not, because I like to see how much Yahtzee practices what he preaches. I know he's got the writing chops, and I played Trilby back in the day (is that ever gonna get maybe a free Steam release? Loved that game, for all its flaws!) So I can definitely see the potential! I got Starstruck Vagabond on this most recent sale, so I'm excited to try it!
I think this is fascinating to see. The genuine assessment from the creator and his thoughts and such. I Think that's super interesting and I'm glad you're doing it. I've been doing big early access help with a tiny indie roguelike called Rogue Voltage (Which I think Yahtzee would love but shh) and seeing all the thought processes and balance ideas go out is truly mind boggling in the scope
Glad this video came out as I forgot I hadn't purchased it yet. Rectified that ❤
I can respect a critic who puts out their games. If they're willing to put themselves on the line to gain the same kind of criticism, may you give others and receive praise. good for them.
I can respect that
I bought it in first week, looking forward to playing it soon!
From what I hear from quite a few of the ones who were offended by the Selaco Review, it wasn't the review itself that offended them, but the part at the start where he talks about the game's art and it's not a "real job". They're focusing on the part that's not about the game for some reason...
Purchased at game release.
*Thanks for the Content!*
One important aspect of letting people test your game: try your best to watch your test players, but NOT SAY ANYTHING unless absolutely necessary. If you tell people how to proceed past the instructions you forgot to add in / avoid the thing you know is glitchy, you'll just end up missing the stuff the testers would've dug up if left to your own devices. Watching someone get completely stuck or try to do the completely wrong thing tells you what you need to fix before you let the real players loose.
LOLed at the funny bits of this, especially, "Or just be one of the lucky bastards to snag one of these codes". :D Very nice! Also the unsound effects! XD
I thought I was searching for "Starstruck Vagabond" when I had, in fact, searched for: "Vagabond Starship" by accident. Much to my surprise that is also the name of a game on Steam!
I bought Starstruck vagabond yesterday, really enjoying it so far
will buy on switch if that's ever a thing, been a great series
You finally sold me on it. As much as I hate getting suckered in by space waifus, I get to finally meet PC Hissy
I liked the base game, but I was still working through it. Glad to hear there are new updates. I will definitely be jumping back in once I have a chance.