Hacker News Reader

Comment by z3t4 | Hacker News Reader

In this day and age having over 400 actually paying customers is a lot! Even having 400 free users would be a lot. Now the question is - do they play the game ? Any number above 1% is good, so if there are 4 players spending a lot of time - it's a good sign. If possible ask them what they think is good about it, then update the marketing material to showcase what is good about the game.

View on HN

I agree. And actually shipping a game that anyone will pay for puts you in very rare territory. The world is full of game designer wannabes.

Why are they wannabes? I don't understand why you would insult people who are trying to put out a product but failing.

There's a lot of low-quality Unity games on Steam, largely because they automated the new game system so that all it takes to publish a game is paying $100. There are some legitimate game designers putting in effort, but some 'publishers' have hundreds of these games and are often just copies of each other but with different assets.

For anyone doubting how simple this is, you can buy entirely pre-made games and template games in the Unity Asset Store for anywhere from $25-$500 depending on how polished the asset is.

...and then, something like this [0] happens:

1) create overpromising marketing campaign/kickstarter for a MMO

2) slap together some random assets

3) ???

4) receive VC

5) profit..

[0] https://www.pcgamer.com/dreamworld-infinite-world-mmo-kickst...

Isn't this just the game version of (1) start a new fashion "label", (2) buy Facebook ads, (3) drop ship from China when / if you get actual oorders?

They are wannabes because it makes the author of the parent comment feels better.

Anyone who isn't objectively the best at something is probably automatically a wannabe. So at the end of the day it's just a wannabe calling everyone else wannabe. Don't waste time on understanding people like that.

That's a mentality that broods on the internet and it's so counter-productive, you see it in all kinds of groups. Your car only producing 400hp not 1000hp? Lame. Not deadlifting 300kg? Not good enough. Not making 6 figures? Why even work!

I think it's because what tends to get 'promoted' on the internet is exceptional situations, I think people can get caught up in the thought that exceptionalism is all that's good enough. Spend enough time in real communities though and you realise that the world is full of people having a blast just doing their best, and that there are a million different ways to enjoy and be successful at different hobbies/careers.

It's called elitism, and by far one of the most toxic elements of the tech community imho

Elitism is a problem, but so is egalitarianism.

Just because we all tried, doesn't mean we should all be rewarded and congratulated for trying. Results matter.

So, balance somewhere between the two is best.

I don't think that's a reasonable analysis. Wannabes want to achieve notoriety but aren't prepared to, or can't, do what it takes to get there. A subjective analysis clearly shows they're not going to "make it" - and if they did some introspection they would realise it too. That's a wannabe, and the World does seem to be chock-full of wannabes.

Some people just want to make great games, don't care about getting famous, etc.; they're not wannabes.

Some people want to do a job, get paid; they're not wannabes.

Some want to be famous and rich, and have the chops to go with it; they're not wannabes.

@Karsteki, I don't think it's intended as an insult, it's more "being realistic, most people making games won't succeed because 'everyone' wants to succeed and most don't really have what it takes".

The moment you said "subjective analysis" already invalidated the rest of your argument and supported what I said -- you are just saying it's okay to use you a set standards that are not universally accepted to judge others. It's probably not your intention to come across that way, but it is exactly this type of thinking that brews toxicity.

The OP of that "wannabe" comment could have finished the sentence without saying anything about wannabes and still get the same point across. So why bother calling everyone else who can't get their games paid wannabes?

Do we have any evidence that these wannabes are not "some people just want to make great games, don't care about getting famous"? What's wrong with wanting to become famous as a goal in the first place? Who decides who has the chops and who doesn't?

You simply can't unless you are objectively the best at something. The complexity in deciding what is objectively the best makes such efforts futile, and therefore everyone who thinks it's okay to call others wannabes is just conveniently glossing over the fact that they are also wannabes by someone else's standard.

It’s when the product is so bad that any objective observer would skip it.

Like, I get that those people believe they’re delivering the next divine gift, but…

I don't think of "wannabe" as a particularly savage insult. I wannabe a beautiful singer, but I am not.

How about dreamers?

The fact that you avoided using "wannabe" as a noun to describe yourself in that contrived example says a lot.

Thanks :-} A lot more than 1% is playing :-}

I appreciate your positive reply. We could all honestly use more of that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com