Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
I do see developers work on games longer than they probably should, beyond the peak of sales and that "new game" bonus interest. Vampire survivors & peglin being some examples from my games list of the top of my head.
A game like roguebook I saw a clear break in the timeline where they decided to stop putting work into it when they realized it's not going to explode in interest like they had hoped.
It's probably a gamble to update a game at all past release day besides bug fixes...unless it has a monetization method in the game to bring sales beyond initial release.
I'm glad people still do the "buy to own" model of game sales because it is my favorite model as a consumer, even though microtransactions seem to be what makes huge amounts of money for large developers these days.