BUILD0 – 39
Der Markt hat Platz und die Vergleichstitel überleben. Das Risiko ist normales Umsetzungsrisiko – die Art, die du bereits zu tragen weißt.
Beispiel Koop-Bergungssim · 24 · Konfidenz Hoch
KI-gestützte Entscheidungsengine
Beerdige schlechte Ideen,
bevor sie dein
Studio beerdigen.
Der teuerste Fehler in der Spieleentwicklung ist, sich in die falsche Idee zu verlieben. KillScore verbindet echte Steam-Marktdaten mit KI und fällt für jedes Konzept ein endgültiges Urteil, bevor du auch nur einen Sprint darauf verwendest.
127,412 Steam-Titel erfasst · Score aus Marktdaten berechnet, nie aus dem Bauchgefühl
Cozy farming roguelike with pixel art, base building and a light romance system. Solo dev, 18 months, $19.99, Steam only.
Genre: Farming SimTags: Cozy · Roguelite · PixelPrice: $19.99 Re-analyse
Verdict
Confidence High
KILL
The score is computed from live market data — the model wrote this explanation, it did not choose the verdict. A saturated farming-sim shelf and a soft, under-sold hook put this concept at the crowded end of a category that only rewards the excellent. Owner ceiling and market saturation are the two dimensions doing the damage; fix those and the number moves, but as pitched this is eighteen months spent against long odds.
72
RISK SCORE
Lower is better · 0–100
Where 72 sits on the scalethresholds at 40 and 65
72
A saturated shelf and a soft hook — this competes on the crowded end of a category that punishes anything but excellent.
Recommendations
-
01
Drop the romance system
It adds an estimated four months of scope and none of your close comparables monetise it. The measured playtime lift sits inside the noise band — you are paying for a feature the market does not reward.
Reclaims a quarter of the timeline for the roguelite loop that actually differentiates you.
-
02
Re-price to $14.99
$19.99 sits a full tier above the category mode; 71% of owners on this shelf bought at or below $14.99. The higher price invites launch-week discounting anyway.
Removes the biggest conversion drag and pre-empts the discount spiral.
-
03
Lead marketing on the roguelite loop
Your pitch buries the one mechanic that separates you from 1,143 farming sims. Comparables that led with their twist cleared the visibility threshold two to three times more often.
Improves the odds of breaking the 1,000-review visibility ceiling.
Full report continues — breakdown, comparables & revenue model
Five risk dimensions
- Review Score 78 Cozy sims average 91% positive. Tolerance for mediocrity is near zero.
- Owner Ceiling 81 Median comparable: 8,400 owners. Top decile takes 71% of the category.
- Market Saturation 88 1,143 farming sims shipped in 24 months. 61 cleared 1,000 reviews.
- Price Competition 54 $19.99 sits above the $14.99 category mode; discount pressure at launch.
- Engagement 37 Roguelite loop lifts median playtime 2.4× versus pure farming sims.
Market analysis
The farming-sim shelf is deep and unforgiving: 1,143 titles in 24 months, and the top decile takes 71% of owners. Median comparable clears ~8,400 owners.
Differentiation
The roguelite loop is the only real wedge, but it is under-sold in the pitch and overshadowed by a romance system that adds months with no measured lift.
Confidence
14 titles matched · 9 with enough reviews to measure
Inputs to the score
Tag-cluster similarity over the Steam catalogue
Key risks
- Category saturation is near the ceiling — visibility is the binding constraint.
- Price sits above the $14.99 mode; launch discounting is likely.
- Romance scope inflates the timeline with no measured payoff.
Full breakdown continues — sub-factor weights & per-dimension evidence
Closest comparables
| Title | Reviews | Positive | Owners | Rev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roots of Pardalis | 3,412 | 94% | 210k | $1.9M |
| Harvest Cadence | 1,088 | 88% | 62k | $610k |
| Moonfall Acres | 276 | 71% | 11k | $94k |
| Sprout & Sword | 142 | 58% | 6.2k | $41k |
| Tillage Deep | 61 | 76% | 2.8k | $18k |
AI-suggested comps
Roots of PardalisHarvest CadenceMoonfall AcresSprout & Sword
iOwner counts are estimates — modelled from review counts, read as a band, not an exact number.
Full comparable set continues — 14 matched, with tag overlap & release windows
Revenue estimate
$38kmedian · range $9k – $210k
$9kp10
$38kmedian
$210kp90
Break-even ≈ 3,050 units at $12.49 net
Recommendations
- 01Drop the romance system
- 02Re-price to $14.99
- 03Lead marketing on the roguelite loop
!Owner estimates modelled from review counts. Steam takes 30%; a 7.4% category refund rate is assumed.
Full model continues — monthly curve, wishlist inputs & sensitivity ranges
Roguelike deckbuilder crossed with an auto-battler. Synergy-driven unit drafting, PvE ladder, pixel art. Two devs, 14 months, $16.99, Steam.
Genre: DeckbuilderTags: Roguelite · AutobattlerPrice: $16.99 Re-analyse
Verdict
Confidence Medium
PIVOT
The score is computed from live market data — the model wrote this explanation, it did not choose the verdict. The core idea is sound and the deckbuilder-autobattler crossover has real room, but two dimensions drag a workable concept into the middle: scope creep from the PvE ladder, and a synergy system that reads as derivative of the category leader. The report names exactly what to change — address both and this moves toward BUILD.
54
RISK SCORE
Lower is better · 0–100
Where 54 sits on the scalethresholds at 40 and 65
54
The idea holds; the scope does not. Two dimensions drag a workable concept into the middle.
Recommendations
-
01
Cut the PvE ladder
The format lives on daily seeded runs and draft-driven PvP. The PvE ladder adds months of content the audience is not asking for and dilutes the loop your comparables actually retain players with.
Refocuses scope on the replayable core and shortens the road to launch.
-
02
Differentiate the synergy archetypes
Three of your archetypes read as near-copies of Draft & Doom, and reviewers of the category leader punish "me-too" synergy systems hard. This is the single change that moves the verdict.
Gives the game a defensible identity instead of a middle-of-the-pack score.
-
03
Hold price at $16.99
$16.99 lands exactly on the deckbuilder mode. The band supports it and there is no structural pressure to discount at launch.
Protects margin without costing you conversion.
Full report continues — breakdown, comparables & revenue model
Five risk dimensions
- Review Score 62 Deckbuilders average 87% positive — a high bar, but reachable.
- Owner Ceiling 55 Median comparable: 24k owners. A healthy mid-tier ceiling.
- Market Saturation 68 312 deckbuilders in 24 months; the autobattler twist is thinner ground.
- Price Competition 40 $16.99 sits right on the category mode. No pressure.
- Engagement 44 Synergy drafting lifts session length well above the genre median.
Market analysis
312 deckbuilders shipped in 24 months, but the autobattler crossover is thinner ground. Median comparable clears ~24k owners — a healthy mid-tier.
Differentiation
The synergy system is the wedge, yet three archetypes read as near-copies of Draft & Doom. Sharpen them and the verdict moves.
Confidence
19 titles matched · 12 with enough reviews to measure
Inputs to the score
Tag-cluster + mechanic similarity
Key risks
- The PvE ladder adds scope the format does not need.
- Synergy archetypes lack a clear identity versus the leader.
- Confidence is medium — only 19 close comparables.
Full breakdown continues — sub-factor weights & per-dimension evidence
Closest comparables
| Title | Reviews | Positive | Owners | Rev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Draft & Doom | 2,140 | 89% | 95k | $1.1M |
| Synergy Spire | 770 | 85% | 28k | $300k |
| Auto Coliseum | 512 | 79% | 16k | $150k |
| Deck of Fates | 198 | 73% | 7k | $60k |
| Tactics Tavern | 88 | 64% | 3.1k | $22k |
AI-suggested comps
Draft & DoomSynergy SpireAuto ColiseumDeck of Fates
iOwner counts are estimates — modelled from review counts, read as a band, not an exact number.
Full comparable set continues — 19 matched, with tag overlap & release windows
Revenue estimate
$120kmedian · range $30k – $540k
$30kp10
$120kmedian
$540kp90
Break-even ≈ 2,100 units at $14.19 net
Recommendations
- 01Cut the PvE ladder
- 02Differentiate the synergy archetypes
- 03Hold price at $16.99
!Owner estimates modelled from review counts. Steam takes 30%; a 7.4% category refund rate is assumed.
Full model continues — monthly curve, wishlist inputs & sensitivity ranges
Four-player co-op deep-space salvage sim. Physics-based hauling, procedural derelicts, voice-driven chaos. Small team, 20 months, $24.99, Steam.
Genre: Co-op SimulationTags: Co-op · Physics · SurvivalPrice: $24.99 Re-analyse
Verdict
Confidence High
BUILD
The score is computed from live market data — the model wrote this explanation, it did not choose the verdict. Only 38 four-player salvage sims shipped in the last two years and the owner ceiling is a long way from crowded, so measured risk is low across every dimension. What is left is execution risk — netcode quality and cross-play — not market risk, which is exactly the kind of risk a team already knows how to carry.
28
RISK SCORE
Lower is better · 0–100
Where 28 sits on the scalethresholds at 40 and 65
28
Room on the shelf and a proven format. Low measured risk across every dimension.
Recommendations
-
01
Ship the physics chaos as a feature
The jank moments are your clip-shareable surface. Comparables that leaned into the chaos — rather than sanding it down — drove the bulk of their wishlist growth organically, for free.
Turns your biggest QA worry into your cheapest marketing channel.
-
02
Commit to cross-play at launch
Four-player co-op audiences expect it, and its absence caps the reachable player pool. Retrofitting cross-play after launch is materially harder and riskier than building it in from the start.
Protects the top end of the owner estimate, where the real upside sits.
-
03
Hold price at $24.99
The co-op band tolerates $24.99 and buyers expect it. Underpricing here leaves revenue on the table without buying any meaningful extra reach.
Captures the full value of a format the market already pays for.
Full report continues — breakdown, comparables & revenue model
Five risk dimensions
- Review Score 24 Co-op physics sims average 90%+ and this niche forgives rough edges.
- Owner Ceiling 30 Median comparable: 120k owners; the ceiling is far from crowded.
- Market Saturation 22 Only 38 four-player salvage sims shipped in 24 months.
- Price Competition 35 $24.99 is within the co-op band; buyers expect it.
- Engagement 20 Voice-driven chaos drives clip-sharing and long sessions.
Market analysis
Only 38 four-player salvage sims in 24 months and the ceiling is far from crowded — median comparable clears ~120k owners, with outliers past a million.
Differentiation
Physics-driven chaos and voice-led moments are exactly the clip-shareable surface this niche rewards. The format sells itself.
Confidence
9 titles matched · 9 with enough reviews to measure
Inputs to the score
Tag-cluster similarity, recent releases
Key risks
- Cross-play is expected at launch; its absence would cap reach.
- Server / netcode quality is the real execution risk.
- The long tail depends on content cadence after launch.
Full breakdown continues — sub-factor weights & per-dimension evidence
Closest comparables
| Title | Reviews | Positive | Owners | Rev. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salvage Crew | 9,800 | 95% | 1.2M | $14M |
| Derelict Divers | 3,200 | 91% | 340k | $4.1M |
| Void Haulers | 1,450 | 88% | 120k | $1.4M |
| Scrap Run Co | 640 | 82% | 38k | $360k |
| Orbital Wreckers | 210 | 77% | 12k | $110k |
AI-suggested comps
Salvage CrewDerelict DiversVoid HaulersScrap Run Co
iOwner counts are estimates — modelled from review counts, read as a band, not an exact number.
Full comparable set continues — 9 matched, with tag overlap & release windows
Revenue estimate
$1.8Mmedian · range $420k – $6.2M
$420kp10
$1.8Mmedian
$6.2Mp90
Break-even ≈ 2,000 units at $17.49 net
Recommendations
- 01Ship the physics chaos as a feature
- 02Commit to cross-play at launch
- 03Hold price at $24.99
!Owner estimates modelled from review counts. Steam takes 30%; a 7.4% category refund rate is assumed.
Full model continues — monthly curve, wishlist inputs & sensitivity ranges
Die Entscheidungsengine
Drei Ergebnisse. Null Unklarheit.
Eine einzige Kennzahl entscheidet über das Ergebnis. Der Score ist reine Arithmetik, keine subjektive Meinung. Niedriger ist immer besser, denn der Score misst die Marktsättigung: wie viele Wettbewerber deinen Zielraum bereits besetzen.
PIVOT40 – 65
Eine oder zwei Dimensionen bringen ein ansonsten tragfähiges Konzept um. Der Bericht benennt sie, damit du genau weißt, was du vor der Festlegung ändern musst.
Beispiel Deckbuilding-Autobattler · 53 · Konfidenz Mittel
KILL66 – 100
Die Kategorie ist gesättigt, die Decke niedrig oder beides. Dieses Spiel auszuliefern kostet dich achtzehn Monate, die du nicht zurückbekommst. Besser, du erfährst es heute.
Beispiel Gemütliches Farm-Roguelike · 72 · Konfidenz Hoch
Jedes Urteil trägt ein Konfidenzniveau.
Wenn es zu wenige Vergleichstitel gibt, um eine Zahl zu rechtfertigen, sagt KillScore das offen, statt zu bluffen. Eine 44 mit niedriger Konfidenz ist eine Rechercheaufgabe, keine Entscheidung.
Hoch14+ Vergl.
Mittel6–13 Vergl.
Niedrig< 6 Vergl.
„Nur 3 Titel der letzten 4 Jahre passen eng genug zu diesem Konzept. Behandle den Score als Richtungsangabe.“
So funktioniert es
Drei Schritte, rund neunzig Sekunden.
-
01
Beschreibe das Konzept
Ein Absatz genügt. Genre, Hook, Preis, Umfang, Plattform. Unser Vision-AI-Modul analysiert auch Screenshots und Key-Art.
Gemütliches Farming-Roguelike mit Pixel-Art Analysieren -
02
Abgleich mit 127.000 Steam-Titeln
Die Engine findet echte Vergleichstitel nach Genre, Tag-Cluster, Preisband und Release-Fenster und misst dann fünf Dimensionen an ihnen.
127.412 Titel durchsucht 1.143 in der Kategorie · 14 enge Vergleichstitel -
03
Das Urteil erhalten
Score, Aufschlüsselung in fünf Faktoren, Vergleichstitel mit Rezensions- und Besitzerdaten, eine Umsatzschätzung und konkrete Empfehlungen.
KILL 72
Das Risikomodell
Fünf Messgrößen, entnommen dem Regal, in das du willst.
Jede Dimension stammt aus Echtzeit-Steam-Daten von Titeln, die tatsächlich mit deinem konkurrieren. Sie werden gewichtet, summiert – und das ist der Score. Nichts sonst berührt ihn.
- Rezensions-Score
- Welche Qualitätslatte deine Kategorie bereits durchsetzt und wie weit die Überlebenden darüber liegen.
- Besitzer-Decke
- Die realistische Obergrenze der Verkäufe, abgeleitet aus der Besitzerverteilung vergleichbarer Releases.
- Marktsättigung
- Wie viele Titel zuletzt in diesen Raum kamen und wie wenige davon Sichtbarkeit erreichten.
- Preiswettbewerb
- Wo dein Preis gegenüber dem Kategorie-Modus liegt und welcher Rabattdruck daraus folgt.
- Engagement
- Mediane Spielzeit und Bindungssignale für die Spielschleife, die du bauen willst.
DimensionsdetailMarktsättigung
88/100 Risiko · größter Beitrag
- 1,143veröffentlicht, 24 Mon.
- 61über 1.000 Rezensionen
- 5.3%durchbrechen Sichtbarkeit
Warum vertrauen
Die KI erklärt. Sie entscheidet nie.
Sprachmodelle sind überzeugend und unbeständig – eine furchtbare Kombination für eine Go/No-Go-Entscheidung. Also teilt KillScore die Aufgabe in zwei Teile. Der Teil, der zählt, ist Arithmetik, die du morgen erneut laufen lässt und dieselbe Antwort erhältst.
127,412Steam-Titel erfasst
0KI-Einfluss auf den Score
100%reproduzierbare Urteile
Entscheidungs-Pipelinedeterministisch
Scoring-Engine
72
Marktdaten · kein Modell im Kreislauf
Sprachmodell
schreibt die Begründung
nur Lesezugriff auf den Score
KILL
„Sättigung und Besitzer-Decke dominieren hier. Die Roguelite-Schleife ist dein einziges echtes Alleinstellungsmerkmal – und genau das begräbt dein Pitch.“
Das Score-Feld ist ab der Engine unveränderlich.
Preise
Günstiger als ein verlorenes Jahr.
Indie
$14.99/mo
Solo-Entwickler und Zweierteams, die entscheiden, was als Nächstes kommt.
- 10 Analysen / Monat
- Vollständige Risiko-Aufschlüsselung (5 Dimensionen)
- Build- / Pivot- / Kill-Urteil
- Top-10 vergleichbare Steam-Spiele
- LLM-Begründungszusammenfassung
- Vision AI (optional +5 $)
- Berichte dauerhaft gespeichert, als PDF exportierbar
- Support
Studio
$149.99/mo
Teams mit einem Portfolio, die mehr als ein Spiel pro Jahr veröffentlichen.
- 100 Analysen / Monat
- Vollständige Risiko-Aufschlüsselung (5 Dimensionen)
- Build- / Pivot- / Kill-Urteil
- Vollständige Vergleichstitel mit Umsatzdaten
- LLM-Begründungszusammenfassung
- Vision AI (optional +50 $)
- PDF-Investorenbericht
- Support
Investor / Publisher
$499one-off
Due Diligence für ein fremdes Portfolio oder ein Board, das Belege will.
- Einzelner Tiefenbericht
- Investorentaugliches PDF-Briefing, sofort teilbar
- Vollständige Vergleichstitel + Marktdaten
- Executive-Risikozusammenfassung
- Methodik-Anhang – jede Zahl bis zur Quelle nachverfolgbar
- Vision AI (optional +250 $)
- Support
Die nächste Entscheidung sollte auf Belegen ruhen.
Nicht auf Optik. Nicht auf Optimismus. Nicht auf der lautesten Stimme im Raum.