People say, can’t they add this or do that

[Pelican Press 0]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

“People say, can’t they add this or do that”

Ever wonder why your brilliant suggestion for Helldivers 2 hasn’t made it into the game yet? Johan Pilestedt has some thoughts about that. The Arrowhead Game Studios boss recently dropped some truth bombs about player expectations versus development reality.

Turns out, adding that “simple” feature you’ve been requesting all along might not be so simple after all. Who could have predicted that game development involves more than just pressing the “add cool stuff” button?

And it is this disconnect—between what players think should be easy and what actually breaks developers’ brains—that has never been more apparent than in today’s live service era.

The “just add it” mentality meets development hell

Players love throwing around suggestions like confetti at a Super Earth victory parade. Want permanent SEAF soldiers? Easy! More weapons? Obviously! New planets every week? Why not! The reality check hits differently when you understand the actual complexity involved.

Pilestedt recently explained this phenomenon to

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, highlighting how player assumptions rarely align with development realities:

People say, ‘can’t they add this or do that,’ Most of the time, all of the decisions that you make, especially the larger the game gets, have so many consequences that cascade, making something that seems easy really hard, or something that seems really hard to be super simple. It’s unintuitive unless you’ve worked in games to see how they’re created.

That cascading consequence concept hits particularly hard with Helldivers 2. Adding permanent SEAF troops isn’t just about copy-pasting existing code. It involves rebalancing entire difficulty curves, reworking mission structures, and ensuring the feature doesn’t break the core gameplay loop that makes the game special.

The movie analogy Pilestedt uses perfectly captures this disconnect. Players see the final product and assume adding features works like directing actors—just tell them what to do and they’ll perform.

If you think about when movies are made, you get an actor and they’re there and you tell them what to say. But games are so meticulously crafted. You have to build the actor from the ground up for them to even be able to perform those lines.

This explains why seemingly obvious additions take months to implement. Every new weapon needs balancing, testing, and integration with existing systems. Every new enemy type requires AI programming, animation work, and careful placement within the game’s ecosystem.

When content hunger meets development sustainability

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

The live service model has created an insatiable monster that feeds on constant updates. Players consume content faster than studios can reasonably produce it, leading to unrealistic expectations about development timelines.

Other developers echo similar frustrations about player assumptions. The accessibility of game development tools has created a dangerous side effect—players who know just enough to make completely wrong assumptions about complexity:

It’s now very easy to acquire enough knowledge to make broad incorrect assumptions about how easy a given task should be.

— David Szymanski (Iron Lung, Dusk).

Helldivers 2 exemplifies this perfectly. The Heart of Democracy update reinvigorated the community, but history suggests this honeymoon ******* won’t last. Players will consume the content, demand more, and the cycle continues.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png">

Maybe that’s actually healthy, though. Arrowhead‘s approach of delivering substantial updates rather than constant small additions (that would otherwise turn out to be “lackluster”) might be the smarter long-term strategy. Quality over quantity prevents developer burnout while maintaining the game’s integrity.

The alternative—rushing content to meet unrealistic player demands—leads to crunch culture and ultimately worse games. Sometimes the best thing developers can do is ignore the loudest voices demanding immediate gratification.

What’s your take on the balance between player expectations and development reality? Share your thoughts below, and let’s discuss whether patience really is a virtue in gaming.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

#People #add

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

0

• Quote