This is not a live service game. People have to adjust to that. If you want this kind of ongoing content infusions, you’re going to have to support a business model that pays for developers to develop that content. RTS games just don’t support this kind of thing like RPG-type games do, nor would we want them to. Eventually the game will be complete.
Then the 200k monthly objective is not a good choice. It had better be directly sold as a dlc like before.
BTW the game used to have small monthly patches. I don’t think it’s better in every aspect but it’s more suitable if you set the community objectives like this.
2 Likes
This is sort of the issue isn’t it? As a game ages, naturally players will feel they have completed it and move on to other games. That’s ok. Developers will naturally feel they have adjusted and fine-tuned and polished things until it’s about as perfect as you can get. Eventually, the game will be done and there’s not a need for more content or balance changes. Years down the line, it’ll mostly be a handful of bug fixes, optimizations, and maybe a few QoL changes and the developers will move on. They need to continue to work on projects that pay the bills, after all.
That’s ok. That’s normal in the life cycle of software development.
Tying cosmetics to these kind of hype events is ok, but eventually, they will hit a point where there just isn’t new interest in the game and it’ll feel really bad when the monthly threshold isn’t met and the cosmetic isn’t rewarded.
Having mutators, that is, having some temporary rule-changes tied to monthly events might be a better way to inject some fresh interest into the game. As you said, new content, new balance changes are drivers of RTS interest. These appeal to your core audience as well as to the new audience, so they might be a better pathway for keeping engagement up in the long-term.
3 Likes