|
Post by Samu-kun on May 22, 2016 4:16:45 GMT -8
Eh well, in terms of adding more mid-content, all of the major events of Libday still have to occur or else it won't connect with the fourth game, so it would just extend the parts that people didn't like. There's not much which can be added which people would have wanted anyways, so I think just giving the story people wanted in the form of REturn was the best option.
The general story treatments of First Arrival, Mask of Arcadius, and Liberation Day were written three years ago. You guys probably don't know what the VN market was like back then, but Sekai Project barely even existed, and Manga Gamer was just barely starting to turn a profit back in 2013. I think the market shifted too radically during the three years that it took to make the game. In today's market, you either release with AAA-tier Akibahara eroge style art and a lot of fan service or else your game will probably not sell. I would say the production of Mask of Arcadius was pretty much a massive clusterfuck where most of the team was days away from starving to death, and Liberation Day was us pretty much trying to strap on as many fancy features as possible to a story which was envisioned years ago.
I think if Mask of Arcadius was a paid product, the market reception would have been as worse as Liberation Day. MoA essentially has everything people hated about Liberation Day - the story length is a bit shorter than LibDay V2 (29k words MoA vs. 31k words LD) - no romance routes with waifus - and it ends on a massive cliff hanger which resolves nothing. Nobody just notices because it's free and it's bundled with First Arrival. (which has its own problems, but hey that's free too.)
Ultimately, LibDay was written with a vastly different market in mind. Academy and REturn were written with today's market in mind. And I bet that's what makes the difference.
Some heads at Sekai Project and myself were pretty concerned the product was going to land in a hostile market so we were not particularly surprised on release day. We were under quite a bit of pressure from the market to release another high fan service choose your waifu game like Sunrider Academy which sold incredibly well, but ultimately I chose to stick with what was originally planned for the first three games rather than redirecting the series.
In the end though, I still liked working on Liberation Day the most out of all the games I've worked on, and I think most of our fans have just become all the more dedicated to supporting Love in Space. We will always continue to produce games in our own particular style, so I don't particularly care if some people disagree with what we're doing. Throughout Love in Space's almost decade long history, its staff members are received almost every kind of insult. But for every insult, we gain ten supporters and our popularity has only steadily grown with each year, so I think we're doing something right.
|
|
|
Post by Dextix on May 22, 2016 4:47:32 GMT -8
Noone says that the main events dont have to occur. Those events are not bad. The plot you have is good. However it is ruined by the lack of content and plot holes. In the first two games these are not noticeable as much because they do not try to pull big plots.
The first game was an establishment of a premise. A first season of an anime. The second, focused more on the underlying plot. And in the third you tried to branch out, however because of the lack of build up it did not work.
I will compare your 3 games to RWBY 3 volumes. Because it seems like you almost tried to copy RWBY in its storytelling. You even finished with a finale that is so simmilar to what RWBY pulled. However, unlike RWBY, you did not have a build up to that finale, there was no tension, no real content for people to find or speculate on to answer the question "what next?". There is no build up the the "big" finale.
MoA is not comparable to LD. Because it was a better product. Even without having the second game paired with it it still is a better product. Because it doesnt try to be something its not. Its clifhanger ending is deserved, there is build up, there is character progression, there is story, there is content. These are all of the things that LD missed. The only things that improved in LD were music, visuals, combat. But story took a hit.
In a "hostile market" you have to be unique, but at the same time provide quality. Your first two games had and showed that. They gave an unique game with an extremely good story that can be expanded upon. LD especially for the price it asked, was a dissapointment.
But the last paragraph.... It makes me dissapointed....
It seems that you dont care about your playerbase at all. You dont care about constructive critisism because new players will come? Frankly, since i assume you are the writter behind the game, this is disgusting. Not only do you not show respect to your own product, but also to your own playerbase that wants you to grow.
You think steam upvotes show the success of your product? You are dead wrong. Steam has only 2 ratings. Negative and positive. No middle, no inbetween. Even those that gave positive reviews wanted more, more content and more story with quality. Yet it seems that you will simply ignore all of that since you think your product is the best. This kind of viewpoint ruins games and franchises if you have not noticed. The failure to take any kind of critisism and consider your own failings..... And here i actually thought, that something good may come out of this, yet it seems that you dont care even a bit. Disgusting....
|
|
|
Post by admiralcheese on May 22, 2016 8:25:13 GMT -8
Someone taking pride in their work and being okay with not everyone loving it is not caring about your player base at all?
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 22, 2016 8:55:45 GMT -8
I agree that Dextix is taking Samu's words out of context. And I disagree wholeheartedly with the premise behind some posts here, that there is some sort of natural law, some bill of rights that requires that all fans' whims be unfailingly catered to and that their wishes are coequal to what a writer wants to do.
To my mind, this attitude is very reminiscent of those extreme idol-otaku who think that because they've shown some devotion and bought some CDs that they have the right to control how the objects of their affection live, to demand that they remain pure, virginal, and prevented from having any sort of normal social life. It betrays an extremely unpleasant sense of self-entitlement and a delusional view of reality that has no basis that I can understand.
I can scarcely believe this needs pointing out, but LiS has much more skin in the series' success than any fan does. If their games don't sell, then they're out on the street and probably in hock as well. Fans, meanwhile, may be saddened (although the attitude of some people on this board makes me question whether they might not indulge in schadenfreude instead), but they won't be starving.
I'm a simple-minded man, but when I see one person with skin in the game and another person with none but only a big mouth, my sympathy runs to the one with skin -- and the one who's actually doing the work. These veiled hints at market blackmail by some supposed silent majority are contemptible. It's all very well to talk about how easy it would be to add some more story arcs, but talk is cheap. Let the fans who think it's a walk in the park write up their own scenarios and post them here for other fans to appraise -- if they dare. LiS is a business, and if there are some halfway competent efforts that get the job done, then I'm sure they would be happy to use those scenarios and give cowriter credit.
|
|
|
Post by Dextix on May 22, 2016 8:59:53 GMT -8
Someone taking pride in their work and being okay with not everyone loving it is not caring about your player base at all? There is pride. And then there is arrogance. For me, it seems like this is going into the second route. I have read far too many statements like that from big and small companies alike. Stating that "haters" will not stop them and that they will have even more fans. This results into ignoring critisism, into complacency. From the message we can understand that the guy/gal says that the fans support them very much and are dedicated thanks to LD, and that they dont care if someone disagrees with what they are doing and i quote "We will always continue to produce games in our own particular style" which wouldnt be bad after first two games but scares me after this one. It seems that the guy/gal still ignores that despite the positive reviews on steam, the story still suffers and is still not good. This post just reeks of arrogance. Edit: No, all fans should not be catered to. But if many fans show their displeasure about the story and give constructive critisism on it, it should be at least considered, which doesnt seem to be the case in this time. Hell i can be ignored, and i dont want everything to cater to me. But the story is objectively bad from storytelling perspective and many people besides me have pointed that out already. Also, you dont have to be a game creator to be critical of games. You dont have to be a writer, to be critical of stories and you dont have to be a chef to be critical of food. Just because you arent the one making the product, doesnt mean that you mean nothing or that you know nothing. And yes, it is quite easy to add or imrpove the current storyarcs. Why? Because there is so much untnapped potential here, which can be tapped in with some imagination and work. If you want you can read some of my posts that i will make about the state of the story and what could have been possibly done. I already did one thread on it. Again, they are just suggestions and examples of untapped potential in the series that could have been effectively used from a storywriters perspective. , Although, i will apologise, if my words or behaviour seem a little out of line. It is my usual writting and debating style, plus i really like the series, and really dont like the writer. So i apologise if i am a tad rude and overbearing with my writing.
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 22, 2016 9:48:12 GMT -8
Fair enough, Dextix; I dare say I could have been more civil myself.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 22, 2016 11:39:45 GMT -8
Eh well, in terms of adding more mid-content, all of the major events of Libday still have to occur or else it won't connect with the fourth game, so it would just extend the parts that people didn't like. There's not much which can be added which people would have wanted anyways, so I think just giving the story people wanted in the form of REturn was the best option. The general story treatments of First Arrival, Mask of Arcadius, and Liberation Day were written three years ago. You guys probably don't know what the VN market was like back then, but Sekai Project barely even existed, and Manga Gamer was just barely starting to turn a profit back in 2013. I think the market shifted too radically during the three years that it took to make the game. In today's market, you either release with AAA-tier Akibahara eroge style art and a lot of fan service or else your game will probably not sell. I would say the production of Mask of Arcadius was pretty much a massive clusterfuck where most of the team was days away from starving to death, and Liberation Day was us pretty much trying to strap on as many fancy features as possible to a story which was envisioned years ago. I think if Mask of Arcadius was a paid product, the market reception would have been as worse as Liberation Day. MoA essentially has everything people hated about Liberation Day - the story length is a bit shorter than LibDay V2 (29k words MoA vs. 31k words LD) - no romance routes with waifus - and it ends on a massive cliff hanger which resolves nothing. Nobody just notices because it's free and it's bundled with First Arrival. (which has its own problems, but hey that's free too.) Ultimately, LibDay was written with a vastly different market in mind. Academy and REturn were written with today's market in mind. And I bet that's what makes the difference. Some heads at Sekai Project and myself were pretty concerned the product was going to land in a hostile market so we were not particularly surprised on release day. We were under quite a bit of pressure from the market to release another high fan service choose your waifu game like Sunrider Academy which sold incredibly well, but ultimately I chose to stick with what was originally planned for the first three games rather than redirecting the series. In the end though, I still liked working on Liberation Day the most out of all the games I've worked on, and I think most of our fans have just become all the more dedicated to supporting Love in Space. We will always continue to produce games in our own particular style, so I don't particularly care if some people disagree with what we're doing. Throughout Love in Space's almost decade long history, its staff members are received almost every kind of insult. But for every insult, we gain ten supporters and our popularity has only steadily grown with each year, so I think we're doing something right. Samu... The entire point of a DLC story-arc IS to add to the story WITHOUT changing the major events of the game - I've said it ad nausium, but LOOK AT MASS EFFECT; they did a crapton of DLC for their series and they didn't have to alter any of the major events in the series. And the whole reason people didn't like those parts of LibDay is BECAUSE they're so short and have no build-up - people wouldn't have called the Chigara thing a "railroad-shotgun romance" had it been given longer to develop, people wouldn't have called Asaga's changes a heel-turn had we seen her wrestling with her own conscience, people wouldn't have said Kayto suddenly became an idiot if they saw him have a moment or so of reflection and self-decision, ect. If you actually believe that, you haven't read any of the feedback that was given - because this doesn't fix the story they have in LibDay. If anything, [RE]Turn is salt in the wound that makes it seem you're rather make AU's instead of fix your main product. That's semantics, Samu - it doesn't matter if you pre-wrote it because (A) execution determines things more then pre-planning and (B) you yourself admitted to cutting out entire arcs of story as far back as MoA, so being pre-written obviously doesn't mean it's not subject to change. And you're only incriminating yourself worse because you're now basically admitting you decided to pile on gimmicks instead of focus on the actual story - and for the record, what you're saying is pretty much a big misnomer; if you're game is just an "eroge style art and a lot of fan service"... it actually WON'T have that big a chance to sell because it needs to make you have something to CARE about it first. In a market that over-saturated, you need to have something unique - something to make people care - or it's just going to get lost in the mix; anyone can throw boobs at the screen Samu, but if you don't give them something to make them care about it then they'll just go somewhere that does. 90% of those "eroge" you mentioned have GOOD STORY behind them to make you care (Dracu-Riot, Comu:Black Dragon in a Gentle Kingdom, ect). No, Samu - because Mask of Arcadius was GOOD. I actually think it - especially if combined with First Arrival - would have outperformed Liberation Day, because it fulfilled more of it's premise and potential then LibDay did. It's not really shorter and it delivers a more powerful kick, and it didn't cram a romance down people's throat the way LibDay did with Chigara as opposed to build up a slow bond, and the cliffhanger revealed A LOT (the truth of Diode, the long-hinted connection between Chigara and Arcadius, how PACT had such advanced weapons of destruction available to them, ect). It did more with less whereas LibDay did less with more - it gave you fleshed-out characters that had degrees of nuance and subtlety to their characters; none of them felt fake or stereotyped. Hell, break off [RE]Turn from LibDay and it would out-perform LibDay's sales as well. To be blunt, you completely and utterly misinterpreted the issue - MoA had everything LibDay did but EXECUTED IT BETTER. Samu... at this point, that just sounds like an excuse. Academy and [RE]Turn would do better because you actually showed CARE for the damn story - something it doesn't look like you did for LibDay. Hell, if anything, you said you made LibDay for todays market with all the gimmicks you put into it, so you're contradicting yourself. If the market was "hostile", it has nothing to do with what you seem to think - it was because the damn story flopped. Sunrider Academy did well NOT because of fanservice and waifus - it did well because it gave you the GOOD CHARACTERS and GOOD STORY that made you give a damn and made any fanservice feel satisfying. Fanservice for it's own sake is mindless, repetitive and runs a bigger risk of driving people away because it's more jarring and immersion-breaking - they're going to ask "why"? And you're contradicting yourself again - if you "chose to stick with what was originally planned for the first three games rather than redirecting the series", WHY DID YOU CHANGE THAT GAME TO MATCH WHAT YOU CLAIMED WAS "TODAY'S MARKET"? If you believe that then, again, you've not even bothered to look at the feedback they gave you - they were supporting you because they felt you were willing to compromise and fix your mistakes. You've just said you aren't. What you were doing right was adding content - what you're doing wrong about it is not putting that work where people recommended it should go most; the mid-game.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 22, 2016 11:54:54 GMT -8
I agree that Dextix is taking Samu's words out of context. And I disagree wholeheartedly with the premise behind some posts here, that there is some sort of natural law, some bill of rights that requires that all fans' whims be unfailingly catered to and that their wishes are coequal to what a writer wants to do. To my mind, this attitude is very reminiscent of those extreme idol-otaku who think that because they've shown some devotion and bought some CDs that they have the right to control how the objects of their affection live, to demand that they remain pure, virginal, and prevented from having any sort of normal social life. It betrays an extremely unpleasant sense of self-entitlement and a delusional view of reality that has no basis that I can understand. I can scarcely believe this needs pointing out, but LiS has much more skin in the series' success than any fan does. If their games don't sell, then they're out on the street and probably in hock as well. Fans, meanwhile, may be saddened (although the attitude of some people on this board makes me question whether they might not indulge in schadenfreude instead), but they won't be starving. I'm a simple-minded man, but when I see one person with skin in the game and another person with none but only a big mouth, my sympathy runs to the one with skin -- and the one who's actually doing the work. These veiled hints at market blackmail by some supposed silent majority are contemptible. It's all very well to talk about how easy it would be to add some more story arcs, but talk is cheap. Let the fans who think it's a walk in the park write up their own scenarios and post them here for other fans to appraise -- if they dare. LiS is a business, and if there are some halfway competent efforts that get the job done, then I'm sure they would be happy to use those scenarios and give cowriter credit. "Natural law"? A series depends on it's community as much as it's writing team - yet half the time it seems like you're saying the latter has the right to completely ignore the former if they choose to do so. No game can be sustainable under that kind of criteria - the whole point community forums exist IS to give feedback and opinions on what did or didn't work. "What a writer wants to do" doesn't mean they're always right, and acknowledging that - and that you likewise can't cater to them/make them thing anything is okay, because what they want might be coequal to what's best for the very story they made - is rather important. Except that it's not just one person - it's quite a lot. Just by looking at the Steam reviews shows that much - nearly every other review criticizes the mid-game story. That's not self-entitlement or a "silent majority" - it's a pretty clear general consensus on something. Say "it's diverse" or "there's no unified opinion" or whatever you want - that doesn't change the point; there's a clear general opinion on it and just ignoring it doesn't say much about the game-makers. But it's precisely because they love the series that they DON'T want that to happen - preventing that's the whole reason they even give criticism in the first damn place! Hell, that's not even unique to fans of the series - if a product's good or bad, you support or critique it. But the problem is that this is a huge misinterpretation - if someone's made a mistake, whether or not they had "skin in the game" is completely irrelevant. It's like saying you'd defend a criminal just because whatever they stole from was a project they worked on - it's BAIS to do that because it's instantly defaulting to one side over the other without looking both ways; the very thing you claimed was contemptible to do. And the whole problem with that "talk is cheep" speil - [RE]TURN EXISTS. Being rude, but he fact that work was put into an 18-ending, double-LibDay script-size spin-off means talking about what they'd have to work is academic - because they've arguably done MORE work then would be needed for a mid-game arc on a non-cannon scenario. They've PROVEN with ACTION they'd be willing to do the work - and so for the sake of correcting fan-complaints since Samu himself admitted he did [RE]Turn thinking it would solve all story-complaints (even though it's probably just going to make people hungry for a main-story update to LibDay).
|
|
|
Post by Marx-93 on May 23, 2016 2:07:40 GMT -8
Samu-kun. Just remember that there's been some that had been following you since 2014, including myself (even if sometimes I've been grumpy about it). I think I can talk with context and at the same time with some distance: specially as someone who enjoyed the story through the series but didn't think super highly about it (I would give it an 8, to say numbers).
While MoA certainly had a lot of similarities with Lib Day (forced romance, just with Ava instead of Chigara, relatively short, "cliffhanger" ending, no routes, etc), the writing, while not stellar, was leagues better. You yourself admitted that Ongess was the part you were most proud off of bthe series (and indeed in some parts of Ongess the writing got good). I wasn't particularly impressed by the story part of First Arrival, but I felt MoA tried to do things with it that were ambitious, yet also grounded. That grounded part disappeared in Lib Day, and it really felt like sometimes the story was going through the motions, awaiting the entrance of the next plot device. And I think I know clearly which anime you were trying to imitate, but I also think you got lost in that sea of cool twists forgetting the foreground and everything that was set up in the earlier 22 episodes.
Now, I don't agree with adding stuff in the middle. Before the release I would have been all for it, but as you say, I feel now it would be useless, simply adding stuff to places "that people doesn't like". I don't think the new content can overturn people's ideas about some parts, even if they make them formally a lot better. I also agree with you in the way the VN market is set; despite what some people believe, I think the latest VN releases prove that good writing alone simply doesn't sell. So I understand your skepticism in a lot this, specially with you having detailed sales data.
But that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the superior writing of MoA and I don't want it to return (or improve!) in a sequel. I wrote that review specially focusing on the writing because I realized that, while most of all the general objections (shortness, lack of routes, forced romance, cliffhanger ending) would disappear in the sequel simply due to the nature of the game, there was a chance for some of the failures there to persist.
All in all, I don't want to tell you what to do or how to do it. I think that is simply out of place and rude. But I wanted to tell you wholeheartedly that I enjoyed some of the writing in MoA, and I simply want to enjoy myself with similar writing again.
|
|
|
Post by Samu-kun on May 23, 2016 3:45:09 GMT -8
Unfortunately, I don't have much time to read huge walls of text, but from what I read of your review post here, most of it seemed accurate? Ultimately, I don't think your criticisms are the reason why most of our initial purchasers left negative reviews, but it seemed like an accurate analysis of the writing style in any matter. Some parts I don't really understand, especially what you mean by "grounded." (Maybe to use a simpler term, you mean a story which explores real world political issues more) But I appreciated the time you took to write it anyways. No point dwelling too much about what has already happened though.
|
|
|
Post by Dextix on May 23, 2016 4:58:48 GMT -8
Unfortunately, I don't have much time to read huge walls of text, but from what I read of your review post here, most of it seemed accurate? Ultimately, I don't think your criticisms are the reason why most of our initial purchasers left negative reviews, but it seemed like an accurate analysis of the writing style in any matter. Some parts I don't really understand, especially what you mean by "grounded." (Maybe to use a simpler term, you mean a story which explores real world political issues more) But I appreciated the time you took to write it anyways. No point dwelling too much about what has already happened though. Im sorry, but what the guy mentioned, ARE the reasons of negative reviews. The ending was not bad, however, since it was paired with sub par writting and no build up in the mid game, people focused on critisizing it the most. Those ARE the things that people noticed, the story or lack of it. Everything else i have seen was praised (Game running like crap is an exeption). And even after giving the "improved" ending, the people who left positive reviews were still unsatisfied with the story. They were satisfied by the rest of the game and the "feeling" that you are "listening" to them and "considering" their feedback, which seems not to be the case from your statements in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 23, 2016 8:32:12 GMT -8
Samu-kun. Just remember that there's been some that had been following you since 2014, including myself (even if sometimes I've been grumpy about it). I think I can talk with context and at the same time with some distance: specially as someone who enjoyed the story through the series but didn't think super highly about it (I would give it an 8, to say numbers). While MoA certainly had a lot of similarities with Lib Day (forced romance, just with Ava instead of Chigara, relatively short, "cliffhanger" ending, no routes, etc), the writing, while not stellar, was leagues better. You yourself admitted that Ongess was the part you were most proud off of bthe series (and indeed in some parts of Ongess the writing got good). I wasn't particularly impressed by the story part of First Arrival, but I felt MoA tried to do things with it that were ambitious, yet also grounded. That grounded part disappeared in Lib Day, and it really felt like sometimes the story was going through the motions, awaiting the entrance of the next plot device. And I think I know clearly which anime you were trying to imitate, but I also think you got lost in that sea of cool twists forgetting the foreground and everything that was set up in the earlier 22 episodes. Now, I don't agree with adding stuff in the middle. Before the release I would have been all for it, but as you say, I feel now it would be useless, simply adding stuff to places "that people doesn't like". I don't think the new content can overturn people's ideas about some parts, even if they make them formally a lot better. I also agree with you in the way the VN market is set; despite what some people believe, I think the latest VN releases prove that good writing alone simply doesn't sell. So I understand your skepticism in a lot this, specially with you having detailed sales data. But that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the superior writing of MoA and I don't want it to return (or improve!) in a sequel. I wrote that review specially focusing on the writing because I realized that, while most of all the general objections (shortness, lack of routes, forced romance, cliffhanger ending) would disappear in the sequel simply due to the nature of the game, there was a chance for some of the failures there to persist. All in all, I don't want to tell you what to do or how to do it. I think that is simply out of place and rude. But I wanted to tell you wholeheartedly that I enjoyed some of the writing in MoA, and I simply want to enjoy myself with similar writing again. But that's just it - dragging in the middle was why much of the ending felt so rushed to begin with. What time it's done (before release, after release, during release) has no bearing on that - getting it done does. The parts "that people don't like" are the endgame, and it's really nowhere near as hard to overturn those ideas as you might think. If [RE]Turn - a game that has no impact on the story at all - isn't "useless", a mid-game arc wouldn't be either. And once again, that claim about the current VN market's a total misnomer - good writing is what makes games sell better then others because fanservice for fanservice's sake doesn't hook any better. It depends on how much of the game's TOTAL POTENTIAL you use, and LibDay didn't do that when it came to story even in comparison to the prior games. Also, just to note, I personally think you're wrong about MoA's "forced romance" (we had hints of Kayto having feelings for Ava all the way back in First Arrival, plus it showed that she was really more of an unresolved old flame as opposed to a forced current-tense romance - if anything MoA was building up Chigara more then Ava, or maybe even setting up choosing between the two).
|
|
|
Post by Marx-93 on May 24, 2016 1:44:45 GMT -8
Unfortunately, I don't have much time to read huge walls of text, but from what I read of your review post here, most of it seemed accurate? Ultimately, I don't think your criticisms are the reason why most of our initial purchasers left negative reviews, but it seemed like an accurate analysis of the writing style in any matter. Some parts I don't really understand, especially what you mean by "grounded." (Maybe to use a simpler term, you mean a story which explores real world political issues more) But I appreciated the time you took to write it anyways. No point dwelling too much about what has already happened though. If you get it, then I won't bother you anymore. With grounded I mean that, and in general smaller twists or better readied; for example, Fontana's rebellion was foreshadowed and made sense with what was happening. Time-travel and mind-hacking can be justified but also come completely out of nowhere: they aren't part of the "normal rules" or things you can see happening normally in the setting (even if you predict them, you can't exactly predict they way they're coming because you simply don't know the rules). Not that anything not grounded is bad, but there was a kind of charm in how MoA had time between all the genetically engineered superwomen and Sharrs for a surprisingly sweet and naive childhood romance and a look at galaxy politics. I also think that a lot of the negative review would still be there, but, eh, I'm selfish and I want something that was good to be back, and it seems at least some people agree. In all cases, I don't have anything more to say; will look forward to REturn and Starnova.
|
|
|
Post by limith on Jul 4, 2016 3:04:07 GMT -8
Eh well, in terms of adding more mid-content, all of the major events of Libday still have to occur or else it won't connect with the fourth game, so it would just extend the parts that people didn't like. There's not much which can be added which people would have wanted anyways, so I think just giving the story people wanted in the form of REturn was the best option. The general story treatments of First Arrival, Mask of Arcadius, and Liberation Day were written three years ago. You guys probably don't know what the VN market was like back then, but Sekai Project barely even existed, and Manga Gamer was just barely starting to turn a profit back in 2013. I think the market shifted too radically during the three years that it took to make the game. In today's market, you either release with AAA-tier Akibahara eroge style art and a lot of fan service or else your game will probably not sell. I would say the production of Mask of Arcadius was pretty much a massive clusterfuck where most of the team was days away from starving to death, and Liberation Day was us pretty much trying to strap on as many fancy features as possible to a story which was envisioned years ago. I think if Mask of Arcadius was a paid product, the market reception would have been as worse as Liberation Day. MoA essentially has everything people hated about Liberation Day - the story length is a bit shorter than LibDay V2 (29k words MoA vs. 31k words LD) - no romance routes with waifus - and it ends on a massive cliff hanger which resolves nothing. Nobody just notices because it's free and it's bundled with First Arrival. (which has its own problems, but hey that's free too.) Ultimately, LibDay was written with a vastly different market in mind. Academy and REturn were written with today's market in mind. And I bet that's what makes the difference. Some heads at Sekai Project and myself were pretty concerned the product was going to land in a hostile market so we were not particularly surprised on release day. We were under quite a bit of pressure from the market to release another high fan service choose your waifu game like Sunrider Academy which sold incredibly well, but ultimately I chose to stick with what was originally planned for the first three games rather than redirecting the series. In the end though, I still liked working on Liberation Day the most out of all the games I've worked on, and I think most of our fans have just become all the more dedicated to supporting Love in Space. We will always continue to produce games in our own particular style, so I don't particularly care if some people disagree with what we're doing. Throughout Love in Space's almost decade long history, its staff members are received almost every kind of insult. But for every insult, we gain ten supporters and our popularity has only steadily grown with each year, so I think we're doing something right. The market has definitely changed from what it used to be. MoA was the first anime game I remember seeing on Steam. Now I see so many that I want to add it to my list of "do not recommend to me" tags. Game development is hard, and I know the industry doesn't pay well. I commend everyone for making it so far and for providing MoA/FA for free and it's really enlightening to read about the development process in order to get a better understanding of the priorities and demands that ultimately led to where LD is today. On the topic of what would the market pay for. That's an interesting question. I'm going to start off by saying I'm probably not your typical market audience, so YMMV. Kamidori and Muv-Luv Alternative are two eroge games I enjoyed and neither of them for AAA-tier art or romancing with waifus. Kamidori had far better gameplay, crafting, and combat mechanics than Fire Emblem at the time (pre-Awakening era). It had good art, and plenty of fanservice scenes but those weren't the main reasons why I played the game for 160+ hours. Muv-Luv Alternative on the other hand is a very, very, long LN with good story that with basically one eroge scene that probably didn't even need to be in the VN. Gameplay is one aspect that I feel Sunrider differentiates itself from other VN, because it has one. Sunrider's tactical gameplay is the most challenging TRPG I've played because performing poorly means you can't continue down the line (unless you lower the difficulty). This segment of the English market doesn't get much competition afaik (Sakura Dungeon being the only thing that comes to mind and the impression I got from reviews were mixed on gameplay so it kind of defeats the purpose?). Imho, having passable art, but great gameplay, story, and replayability leads to good reviews for an indie game (maybe not sales as you said, I don't really have industry knowledge of sales figures and there are always games with good reviews but poor sales). I never heard of a game with all three getting bad reviews because of art. Most games I can think of that get 2 of the three also get good reviews. On the other hand, I know gameplay is holding the game back development wise due to the engine, so that may not be a direction economically feasible to invest in. Similarly because the art in LD is better than in MoA, lowering the bar for art in the 4th game will probably result in negative reviews (unfortunately in my opinion as I'd rather see improvements to story and replay ability). As for story, MoA felt longer for me than LD despite, as you say, having less text. I think the reason why it felt longer was due to it being the start of an arc. It wasn't clear which choices would have what outcome and thus it gave a feel of more possibilities. Furthermore there were much more short scenes on the Sunrider between the crew with (semi) interactive dialogue. Sunrider as a series has many promising story aspects and like others have mentioned, it was disappointing to have the story of the series suffer in LD. More character development would have been appreciated, which, incidentally in the next game, can be tied to replayability. As much as I enjoyed REturn, the core plot points were quite similar (very well written according to the Choose Your Own Adventure writing guidelines to branch out and then back in). You can add a few "route only" unique scenes/levels (not just endings) in the next game to make each route more unique (doesn't have to be romancing either!) and encourage replayability. Or you can go the route Kamidori did with 3 different storylines (PACT, Alliance, Neutral, or something like that) and I'd be really happy. That'd be way over my expectations, and probably out of your budget. On the topic of fanservice. Honestly, it wouldn't really matter if there were more or less. It actually felt a little weird in LD. You get the really early bath scene that came out of nowhere, and then pretty much not much until the end (in the censored version idk maybe there is more in the non censored version), so it wasn't clear if the game was trying to be fanservice heavy or not. Despite all the uproar in the West over fanservice getting removed from Fire Emblem Fates, it still sold well. Lastly, I hope LiS makes a sequel to Sunrider some day that's better than the predecessors. _________ Incidentally on the topic of the engine, I don't know the economics of it, but I would definitely consider changing the engine if you plan to have more than 1 more game. As much as I like python, ren'py is really not up to the task.
|
|