I think I've got about 6000-6500 hours in the engine. It's not an accurate reflection of what I should have achieved but it was a decent run and I learned a lot anyway.
I've got a few serious long term projects, one of which is a boomer shooter that has been in development since about 2022-2023. I chose s&box because it was new back then, was changing a lot, and it was exciting. And I was familiar with Source.
I have made some serious progress on my projects lately and I can see them being positioned on a storefront like Steam. That has led to the feeling of sunk-cost fallacy and I'm starting to feel a bit dumb.
There are some things on my mind:
1) The platform is going nowhere, regardless of what I build. I'm not too fussed about this because it's clear the platform is a structure for rapidly-prototyped minigames, easy to jump in and out of. This isn't the reason I got involved and I just want to clarify that I always got into this engine as a way to make my own long-term larger projects that I could publish on Steam. So my projects are not really suited for this kind of platform or audience anyway - even if it is failing. But still, it definitely doesn't look good, and takes a lot of confidence away that I have in the company building all this.
2) There is still no concrete official statement about self-publishing. This is the main reason my review on Steam switched over from recommended to not recommended. This really needs to be clarified and is the reason I'm making this last-ditch post to bitch about it. When can we expect an official statement that isn't "ask us first"? Really with the way the platform is headed I think focusing on engine use and licencing is FP's best bet. If you are serious about opening this up, everybody needs to know where they stand.
3) Games are now greenlit before entering the playfund. This is a blessing and a curse. I'm already very aware of the nepotism that is in this community and the favouring of close mates or community members is not unheard of. But I also think that's fairly normal in these kinds of smaller communities. Regardless there is no clear process established yet that goes over any of these to instill confidence against inherent bias. There's also no clear rules on what's allowed and what isn't. It all seems discretionary. Does Facepunch handle the greenlight decision? Is it handled by the community? Votes? We all saw how that worked with the jam.
4) For exporting your game, this discretion goes even further. Firstly, you have to contact garry via email to submit your game that you already paid to put up on Steam. Then, they have to contact Valve to approve the licence. This seems fairly reasonable (albeit backwards, shouldn't you approve before I pay to stick it on Steam?) until you realise that the games currently on Steam made in s&box are still waiting for release or greenlight with no movement there. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but I cannot find any information on what kind of response these teams have had. It all seems like radio silence or ambiguity. Are there any movements there? Does anybody know what is or isn't allowed? What is the process involved and is there a checklist?
5) The engine is perpetually touted as "royalty free" which is really redundant if you've got extra hoops to jump through to get your game on Steam. I'd rather pay you royalties than have the ambiguity while I'm working. Cross my toes and hope it gets approved? Why would I do that?
To be clear I have never been a victim of game-breaking updates or API changes. I've always kept my code fairly agnostic and never really tried to do overly weird shit with the engine. So I'm not complaining about that. I'm also not bothered about politics or discourse.
I'm just wondering why people who are making larger games with small teams shouldn't jump ship to another engine. What motivation is there to stick around exactly? I'm putting all this work in but there's no guarantee a) it'd be greenlit and b) I'd get to publish on Steam. This makes larger projects untenable, but now I'm in too deep, because I thought after 3-4 years you'd have something more than "send us an email and we'll figure it out".
Maybe I'm overthinking this and should just start porting over to Unity anyway. I'm writing this out because it's frustrating. But something's gotta give. I'm putting way too many hours into something that looks like it's falling to bits. If you gave us actual steps and processes, requirements, or things that are or aren't allowed, maybe I wouldn't be so keen to jump ship, but it all looks so grim, and with Unity 7 round the corner, what's the point?
Basically I feel like I'm stuck in Limbo and I've also read the same frustrations elsewhere. Am I in the minority?
I've got a few serious long term projects, one of which is a boomer shooter that has been in development since about 2022-2023. I chose s&box because it was new back then, was changing a lot, and it was exciting. And I was familiar with Source.
I have made some serious progress on my projects lately and I can see them being positioned on a storefront like Steam. That has led to the feeling of sunk-cost fallacy and I'm starting to feel a bit dumb.
There are some things on my mind:
1) The platform is going nowhere, regardless of what I build. I'm not too fussed about this because it's clear the platform is a structure for rapidly-prototyped minigames, easy to jump in and out of. This isn't the reason I got involved and I just want to clarify that I always got into this engine as a way to make my own long-term larger projects that I could publish on Steam. So my projects are not really suited for this kind of platform or audience anyway - even if it is failing. But still, it definitely doesn't look good, and takes a lot of confidence away that I have in the company building all this.
2) There is still no concrete official statement about self-publishing. This is the main reason my review on Steam switched over from recommended to not recommended. This really needs to be clarified and is the reason I'm making this last-ditch post to bitch about it. When can we expect an official statement that isn't "ask us first"? Really with the way the platform is headed I think focusing on engine use and licencing is FP's best bet. If you are serious about opening this up, everybody needs to know where they stand.
3) Games are now greenlit before entering the playfund. This is a blessing and a curse. I'm already very aware of the nepotism that is in this community and the favouring of close mates or community members is not unheard of. But I also think that's fairly normal in these kinds of smaller communities. Regardless there is no clear process established yet that goes over any of these to instill confidence against inherent bias. There's also no clear rules on what's allowed and what isn't. It all seems discretionary. Does Facepunch handle the greenlight decision? Is it handled by the community? Votes? We all saw how that worked with the jam.
4) For exporting your game, this discretion goes even further. Firstly, you have to contact garry via email to submit your game that you already paid to put up on Steam. Then, they have to contact Valve to approve the licence. This seems fairly reasonable (albeit backwards, shouldn't you approve before I pay to stick it on Steam?) until you realise that the games currently on Steam made in s&box are still waiting for release or greenlight with no movement there. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but I cannot find any information on what kind of response these teams have had. It all seems like radio silence or ambiguity. Are there any movements there? Does anybody know what is or isn't allowed? What is the process involved and is there a checklist?
5) The engine is perpetually touted as "royalty free" which is really redundant if you've got extra hoops to jump through to get your game on Steam. I'd rather pay you royalties than have the ambiguity while I'm working. Cross my toes and hope it gets approved? Why would I do that?
To be clear I have never been a victim of game-breaking updates or API changes. I've always kept my code fairly agnostic and never really tried to do overly weird shit with the engine. So I'm not complaining about that. I'm also not bothered about politics or discourse.
I'm just wondering why people who are making larger games with small teams shouldn't jump ship to another engine. What motivation is there to stick around exactly? I'm putting all this work in but there's no guarantee a) it'd be greenlit and b) I'd get to publish on Steam. This makes larger projects untenable, but now I'm in too deep, because I thought after 3-4 years you'd have something more than "send us an email and we'll figure it out".
Maybe I'm overthinking this and should just start porting over to Unity anyway. I'm writing this out because it's frustrating. But something's gotta give. I'm putting way too many hours into something that looks like it's falling to bits. If you gave us actual steps and processes, requirements, or things that are or aren't allowed, maybe I wouldn't be so keen to jump ship, but it all looks so grim, and with Unity 7 round the corner, what's the point?
Basically I feel like I'm stuck in Limbo and I've also read the same frustrations elsewhere. Am I in the minority?

