How come this gem only have 1000 owners?

[Tidal_Rider]

I found this game a couple of months ago during PSN sales.

 

My god it is beautiful and so well made. Rogue-like and turn based. Good unlocks to help future runs, and not super difficult.

 

I was searching for a sequel, but no word on it.

 

Why is this not played more?

[Finch_III]

Agreed! I recently polished off the platinum for this, and I was pleasantly surprised at how complete it was for an indie. I think I picked it up for £5, so it was a bargain. 

 

Well balanced, some nifty mechanics and just the right amount of challenge for a more 'relaxed' rogue-like, in my opinion. Definitely worth buying for people who like a rogue-like dungeon crawler. 

 

If I had any criticism, it's that I never really felt the need to use the 'elemental' side of things. A lot of the trinkets and/or weapons relied on you building very specific 'water/fire/earth' builds. Typically, I just ignored all that and pumped all of my effort into maximising physical damage where I could.  

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Finch_III

[freddie1989]

I mean gameplay looks like something from 1990 so that might be part of it

[Vault-TecPhantom]

55 minutes ago, Tidal_Rider said:

Rogue-like and turn based.

 

Aaaand that's when I checked out. Not for me.

[Finch_III]

10 minutes ago, freddie1989 said:

I mean gameplay looks like something from 1990 so that might be part of it

 

That's pretty much what indies are though? They're small developers with small budgets.

Like, I sorta know where you're coming from. When I first heard about 'indie' games, and saw stuff like Super Meat Boy, Braid and Limbo, I wasn't interested at all. They just looked like platformers from when I was a kid. I didn't really see what the fuss was about. 

 

But after playing stuff like Slay the Spire, Dead Cells and Return of the Obra Dinn, I had a much bigger appreciation for indie games. It actually seems to be indies that are taking the risks nowadays, rather than churning out the same rehashed, formulaic mechanics you see in modern AAA games. Each to their own though, obviously. 

[freddie1989]

16 minutes ago, Finch_III said:

 

That's pretty much what indies are though? They're small developers with small budgets.

Like, I sorta know where you're coming from. When I first heard about 'indie' games, and saw stuff like Super Meat Boy, Braid and Limbo, I wasn't interested at all. They just looked like platformers from when I was a kid. I didn't really see what the fuss was about. 

 

But after playing stuff like Slay the Spire, Dead Cells and Return of the Obra Dinn, I had a much bigger appreciation for indie games. It actually seems to be indies that are taking the risks nowadays, rather than churning out the same rehashed, formulaic mechanics you see in modern AAA games. Each to their own though, obviously. 

 

I get your point but Stray is an indie for example and look how beautiful that looks. Surely we are past the point where games look like this. 

[DEI2EK]

Simple answer is too many games not enough time, and there are so many games coming out some gems just get buried under the pile.

[Vault-TecPhantom]

6 minutes ago, Finch_III said:

 

That's pretty much what indies are though? They're small developers with small budgets.

Like, I sorta know where you're coming from. When I first heard about 'indie' games, and saw stuff like Super Meat Boy, Braid and Limbo, I wasn't interested at all. They just looked like platformers from when I was a kid. I didn't really see what the fuss was about. 

 

But after playing stuff like Slay the Spire, Dead Cells and Return of the Obra Dinn, I had a much bigger appreciation for indie games. It actually seems to be indies that are taking the risks nowadays, rather than churning out the same rehashed, formulaic mechanics you see in modern AAA games. Each to their own though, obviously. 

 

I disagree. That seems to be the sentiment shared amongst hardcore indie fans but I think gamepass - with how many indie games it has that is now accessible to people who don't usually play indie games - is exposing that indies can be just as shallow and soulless as any bad AAA game. Your average AAA stereotype is one filled to the brim with microtransactions, is borderline unplayable at launch and bloated as hell to brag to investors about playtime. Your average indie stereotype is one with a retro, pixelated art style and simplistic platforming puzzles trying to ape decades-old game designs while delivering surface level and often disingenuous social and political commentary. Point is, there are good and bad games in all tiers of development. Don't get duped by this myth that a lower budget game is inherently ripe for a more meaningful gaming experience.

[Dreakon13]

19 minutes ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

and bloated as hell to brag to investors about playtime

 

I have no comment on this game in particular, but that's not a brag to investors.  That's because the customer demands/refuses to buy games that aren't either endless to some degree or tens to hundreds of hours and bloated to all hell.  I've heard people who honestly think $1 per hour or more is a way of measuring a games value.  This is the bed we made ourselves.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Dreakon13

[ExHaseo]

The fact that it has 1000 owners here means it's pretty successful for an indie game. Remember, PSNP doesn't really track that many players. I'll show you what I mean.

 

In March 2023, there were 108 million active users on PSN. PSNP only tracks 5.92mil profiles total. That's roughly 5.5% of just the active users in a month. Many of the profiles here are likely inactive too. Personally, I have 4 profiles tracked here, with only one being active most of the time. My main one, one for self boosting, one for replating games, and a JP account.

So if 1000 owners is roughly 5.5% of the total owners, you could say it sold around 18,000 based on these numbers. Even then, I'd be willing to bet the number is much much higher. Since like I said, many of the profiles here aren't active, plus that's only sales on PS. It was also released on other platforms, and was on Game pass for at least a while (not sure if it still is or not). So they got paid for that and many more people played it there too. 

[Vault-TecPhantom]

3 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

I have no comment on this game in particular, but that's not a brag to investors.  That's because the customer demands/refuses to buy games that aren't either endless to some degree or tens to hundreds of hours and bloated to all hell.  I've heard people who honestly think $1 per hour or more is a way of measuring a games value.  This is the bed we made ourselves.

 

That's also true (and I too have heard people use the "$1 dollar an hour" way of measuring a game's value), but just very recently we had EA gloating in an earnings call that Jedi Survivor saw more time spent in-game from players than Fallen Order - the latter of which has far less content. 

[Finch_III]

35 minutes ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

 

I disagree. That seems to be the sentiment shared amongst hardcore indie fans but I think gamepass - with how many indie games it has that is now accessible to people who don't usually play indie games - is exposing that indies can be just as shallow and soulless as any bad AAA game. Your average AAA stereotype is one filled to the brim with microtransactions, is borderline unplayable at launch and bloated as hell to brag to investors about playtime. Your average indie stereotype is one with a retro, pixelated art style and simplistic platforming puzzles trying to ape decades-old game designs while delivering surface level and often disingenuous social and political commentary. Point is, there are good and bad games in all tiers of development. Don't get duped by this myth that a lower budget game is inherently ripe for a more meaningful gaming experience.

 

Oh for sure there is trash at all levels. I'm not saying ALL indie games are awesome and ALL AAA games are formulaic garbage. There are a lot of AAA games that I really like. Similarly, I said I wasn't impressed with 'simplistic platforming puzzlers' like Super Meat Boy, Braid or Limbo. They're not my thing

 

I wouldn't even call myself a hardcore indie fan tbh. I tend to play them a lot mostly out of convenience. I don't have a lot of time to jump into 60-100+ hour games. 

 

However, I stand by the idea that, on average, big AAA games tend to tinker around the edges of successful formulas. It's a sensible, low-risk strategy given how devastating an 'unpopular' game can be for a developer's bottom line. There are exceptions though, like Resident Evil reinventing itself every few iterations.

 

This is all slightly off-topic anyway. My original comment was mostly defending games that have old-school graphics and/or gameplay – they can still be great!  

Edit: Admittedly, Crown Trick is not the hill I intend to die on, in terms of examples of 'indie greatness' though haha. 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Finch_III

[Dreakon13]

12 minutes ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

 

That's also true (and I too have heard people use the "$1 dollar an hour" way of measuring a game's value), but just very recently we had EA gloating in an earnings call that Jedi Survivor saw more time spent in-game from players than Fallen Order - the latter of which has far less content. 

 

If that's the mindset of the customer though, it stands to reason companies and investors like to hear it being exploited (for lack of a better term).  Especially if they can accomplish it through repetitive content and fluff, meaning cheaper, fewer assets, requiring less development work.

 

EDIT: And I'm not sure if that's a mis-type but how is Jedi Survivor having far more content a bad thing.  More content isn't inherently bad, it's the quality of the content and how much its just being forcibly rehashed to pad the playtime that matters IMO.  Of course companies/investors/studios like to hear people are spending a lot of time in their games.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Dreakon13

[fbdbh]

Never heard of it, but thanks for the recommendation.

 

Indie games will die or succeed on good word of mouth, so keep reminding people if you love something. This looks like something I'd enjoy, so thanks again!  

 

1 hour ago, Finch_III said:

 

That's pretty much what indies are though? They're small developers with small budgets.

 

Indie just means independent. They can have any kind of budget. Maybe not corporate marketing money, but they're also not obligated to please as many people as possible with one product or brand, and can make something really specific and niche.

[DrBloodmoney]

Indies often struggle for oxygen on PSN - particularly given the sheer volume of games on there, and the unfortunate backlash that has been caused by the shovel ware glut, as games that might previously have been given the old collage try by people just sampling something random on a whim, have most likely disappeared, as those folks got burned one too many times by cynical products masquerading as games.

 

There's also the "dis looks old, Lulz" folks, who seem to care more about flashy graphics than good gameplay.

It is what it is - you can't force people to change their minds on that one  - you just have to hope it'll happen organically, when specific Indies that do manage to break out into the mass consciousness, and become mega-popular (the Hades's and the Bastions, or the Limbos, or the Braids or the Mark of the Ninja's etc.) manage to change that sentiment over time, and convince people to give the non-"AAA" blockbuster type games a chance.... as it only takes a few great experiences for someone to realise the truth:

That the indie scene is flourishing in a way the AAA scene is really struggling to match these days. 

(I say this a someone who loves both when they do them well, and hope they both produce great games as long as I'm alive!)

 

I've certainly played a fair few great games - particularly in recent years - that struggle to hit 1000 owners on this site... while simultaneously seeing total garbage-fires get ownership in the tens-of-thousands!

 

 

Honestly, a little game like this one, really needs "champions" - folks who dug it to spread the word...

 

...exactly like you're doing here! ?

 

I'd never even heard of it, and I've already added it to my "have a look" pile based on this thread - so kudos for spreading the good word!

[Finch_III]

6 minutes ago, fbdbh said:

Never heard of it, but thanks for the recommendation.

 

Indie games will die or succeed on good word of mouth, so keep reminding people if you love something. This looks like something I'd enjoy, so thanks again!  

 

 

Indie just means independent. They can have any kind of budget. Maybe not corporate marketing money, but they're also not obligated to please as many people as possible with one product or brand, and can make something really specific and niche.

 

Perhaps I should have said 'smaller' rather than small. 

 

Frankly, I don't think we have enough breadth in terminology when we talk about indies. 

 

Comparing a game like Stray, which has like two dozen people working on it, to a game like Return of the Obra Dinn (one dude haha) probably isn't fair.  

 

 

[Vault-TecPhantom]

7 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

If that's the mindset of the customer though, it stands to reason companies and investors like to hear it being exploited (for lack of a better term).  Especially if they can accomplish it through repetitive content and fluff, meaning cheaper, fewer assets, requiring less development work.

 

EDIT: And I'm not sure if that's a mis-type but how is Jedi Survivor having far more content a bad thing.  Of course companies/investors/studios like to hear people are spending a lot of time in their games.

 

I never said that Jedi Survivor having more content was a bad thing... I simply mentioned Jedi Survivor because EA used its playtime as a flex during an earnings call while ignoring the elephant in the room that Survivor has more content than its predecessor, and therefore its playtime is likely a result of that rather than enjoyment alone like EA was making out. That's not to say that Survivor is bloated (I wouldn't know) but EA's comments in the earnings call gives us a window into the mentality behind why AAA games are getting longer and longer. It's to brag to investors which you seem to agree with me on now? I've also agreed that a lot of customers do equate quantity with quality so I'm not really sure what there is to argue about here... Anyway, this is way off-topic now so I'm gonna bounce.

[sepheroithisgod]

Probably because I have never seen a single advertisement or mention of the game anywhere on the internet before this post. Advertising is extremely important for games due to the sheer volume of games that come out on a monthly basis. combine this with the fact that you really need to dig through the PSN store to find new indie titles, and yeah, there's a reason it doesn't have a big player base.

 

I'm not the biggest indie guy so this is just my understanding from what I've seen, but the Indie market has expanded so wildly that some games that get called "Indie" need to be relabeled as AA games. For example, calling Stray an Indie project is a pretty big stretch. The explosive growth of the market has also invited a lot of low-effort titles that exploit people willing to give anything a try (and no I'm not just talking about shovelware). This hurts the reputation and can push people away from indie titles if they have one too many bad experiences.

 

I personally don't bother trying indie games unless a trailer really captures me or there is some critical acclaim behind it. Still need to play Hades.

[DrBloodmoney]

I will also just take this moment to pint out that one of the very best games I've played this year - Fights in Tight Spaces-  has only one stack, and no multi-platform versions, so there is no splitting of the player-base...

...has been out for 3 months...

... and has amassed a whopping 35 owners.

 

 

Sometimes, it's not a matter of good gameplay...

...it's a matter of literally anyone knowing your game even exists. ?

 

[Dreakon13]

38 minutes ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

It's to brag to investors which you seem to agree with me on now? I've also agreed that a lot of customers do equate quantity with quality so I'm not really sure what there is to argue about here... Anyway, this is way off-topic now so I'm gonna bounce.

 

My point is really just that it's all consumer driven, even the brag to investors.  Investors like long, repetitive, bloated games because consumers will buy more copies of it than a shorter, tighter game with the same budget spent on assets that'll only be seen/used once or twice through the runtime.

 

EDIT: In regards to full price AAA games.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Dreakon13

[freddie1989]

16 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

I will also just take this moment to pint out that one of the very best games I've played this year - Fights in Tight Spaces-  has only one stack, and no multi-platform versions, so there is no splitting of the player-base...

...has been out for 3 months...

... and has amassed a whopping 35 owners.

 

 

Sometimes, it's not a matter of good gameplay...

...it's a matter of literally anyone knowing your game even exists. 

 

Having looked into this it seems like something that belongs on a mobile phone not a games console. Would explain why it has 35 owners.

[Milktastrophe]

I've considered Crown Trick in the last couple sales but always close the tab after reading the description. It's a niche genre so it'll turn off most people. I've been over roguelikes for like 20 years now, it really doesn't help that roughly 5 out of 4 indie games are roguelikes.

 

Fights in Tight Spaces has a similar issue, it's a card game--a niche genre that'll turn off most people. Not to mention that one's $25 and never been on sale, game looks way overpriced. Maybe once it hits $5 it'll see some more owners.

[djb5f]

20 minutes ago, freddie1989 said:

Having looked into this it seems like something that belongs on a mobile phone not a games console. Would explain why it has 35 owners.

I think it has more to do with the low plat rate and high price point.  Double whammy for a lot of trophy hunters.

 

Flip those two around and voila, lots of owners. ?

Edited August 2, 2023 by djb5f

[Moridin83]

Nothing to add regarding low player count, but I wanted to throw another endorsement for this one. I thought it looked pretty good for a "retro" title. I'm personally well over the 8bit look, but good 16bit retro games are still visually fine for me. Also, it may be roguelike, or more accurately roguelite, but progression is decent and it never felt overly punishing.

 

As far as PS sales go, I think the biggest thing you need is a memorable image for the store screen. The current sale has over 1000 items. If your image in the store doesn't grab me, I probably won't even get far enough to check out the trailer. It sucks, but with so many games, your first impression is that important. 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Moridin83
Spelling

[Zid960]

Just the nature when there's so many games made constantly in the inde space. You can't play everything. Like we could in the past. I mean i looked at and bought this game. But it's in my backlog with like a 1000 other titles. I'll play it at some point. When is the only difference.