next »

[tieTYT]

I feel like this must be relatable to a lot of indie devs so I thought I'd share it:  http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2009/05/entitlement-issues.html

[Oxeren]

Well yeah, he makes a good point. It's important to remember, that writer/artist/developer is a person and not just your source of entertainment. The arist also has a life and belongs to himself. Sure, creative person is responsible for stuff he/she creates and for anticipation for it, but only to some extent. They can't produce qulity content non-stop just because people want them to. Rather all this pressure makes it even harder.

[wccrawford]

If you start a series, and label it as such, then the fans buy that first book with the expectation that it will get finished.  They *are* going to get upset if you don't finish it.  If you don't finish it, expect them to still be upset when you publish some other series instead.

Some will call that "entitlement" like it's a bad thing, but it's human nature.  If you can't guarantee the story will come to a conclusion, then don't write it as a sequel.

Long ago, trilogies were written with the idea that they could end at any time and each book felt whole in and of itself.  Some threads were left loose, but the reader was not left dangling forever.  These days, I see more and more series that take chances that they won't finish.  This is especially true for TV series, and has been spreading to other media.

And it's all well and good to say the author isn't there for the customers' entertainment, but the truth is that that is what the author is selling.  Abusing them is *never* okay, but telling them that you're upset they didn't fulfill expectations is perfectly normal.

[jgrams]

Hear hear. Personally I won't buy from authors who do that. At least not more than once. David Eddings, for instance. Not a bad writer, and I've read some of his books through libraries or friends, but his habit of finishing a book on a cliff-hanger is just cheap, and I won't support that with my money. Tolkien...OK, I'll give him a pass because he's dead and he did a really nice job, but I still much prefer the Hobbit to the trilogy...

But hey, whatever works for you. I know lots of people who enjoy that sort of thing.

Besides, unless you're one of those fanatical early adopters, or you can't be bothered to do your homework, it's not like anyone can really trick you into buying entertainment without knowing what you're getting these days. Easy enough to find lots of opinions online first.

[oodavid]

I read this a few months back and enjoyed Gaiman's response - I think the issues start to become a reality once your fanbase becomes big enough to include "the crazies" - I can easily imagine pre-HBO George RR Martin fans had no real problem with him taking 13 years between books. Once aligned with the steady, annual drum of TV programming people will come to expect a steadfast stream of entertainment, well boo-hoo if they don't get it.

Personally, I'm prepared to wait considerably longer for the real deal rather than some slapdash affair that the author doesn't care about. Of course, there are skilled writers out there like Stephen King and JK Rowling who can maintain a frantic pace for years, good for them, but lets not use them as a yardstick for a very personal, creative endeavour.

Gameswise, the only way big games franchises can bash out a game every year or two is to have multiple teams working on different games in parallel. Indie games by their very nature won't benefit from the benevolent dictatorships that drives these AAA titles.