▲ 69 r/gamedev

Why do we spend so much time studying successful games, but almost none studying failed ones?

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like every successful indie game gets a dozen breakdowns and postmortems, while the ones that fail just quietly disappear. Which is kind of weird, because failure is probably what most of us will experience at some point. Feels like there's a lot we're not learning.

reddit.com
u/ResidentAccording256 — 4 days ago

I spent way too long using the Top Charts the wrong way.

I used to think I was doing market research.

I'd open the App Store, spend a few minutes scrolling through the Top Charts, convince myself I understood what people wanted, then move on to the next app idea.

Looking back, I was mostly just staring at a leaderboard and making up explanations in my head.

It felt productive.

It wasn't.

The thing I completely missed was that rankings are just snapshots.

They show what's visible today, but they don't tell you:

what's quietly gaining momentum

what's slowly losing traction

or what's only there because of a feature, paid acquisition, or a viral moment

Once I realized that, the questions I asked completely changed.

Instead of asking "What's #1?", I started asking things like:

Which apps have been climbing steadily instead of exploding overnight?

Which categories seem healthy over time instead of reacting to short-term trends?

Do downloads and revenue move together, or tell different stories?

Does the growth actually last?

One thing that surprised me was how often the "boring" apps turned out to be the interesting ones.

Some of them never appeared near the top of the charts.

But every week they'd move up a little.

No huge launch.

No viral post.

Just slow, consistent progress.

Looking back, those were often the products that had actually found a real audience.

The opposite happened just as often.

An app would suddenly jump into the Top 20, everyone would start talking about it, and a week later it was already falling back down.

If I'd only looked at that one day, I would've completely misunderstood what was happening.

That changed one habit for me.

I stopped treating rankings as answers.

Now I treat them as starting points.

A chart tells me where to look—not what to build.

Curious how other founders think about this.

Before you spend weeks (or months) building something, what signals do you trust the most?

User interviews? Competitor research? Reviews? Something else?

u/ResidentAccording256 — 6 days ago

A simple checklist I use to validate mobile app ideas

I like building small mobile apps on the side, and one thing I've learned is that coming up with an idea is the easy part.

​

Figuring out whether it's actually worth building is much harder.

​

After chasing a few ideas that went nowhere, I started spending about 30 minutes researching before I write a single line of code. It's become a habit that's saved me a lot of time.

​

Nothing fancy, but these are the four things I check before deciding whether an idea is worth building.

​

1. Check if people are actually downloading similar apps.

​

No competitors doesn't always mean opportunity—it often means there's no real demand.

​

2. Read the 1–3 star reviews first.

​

That's usually where users reveal what's missing or frustrating. Some of my best feature ideas have come from those reviews.

​

3. Look at publishers, not just individual apps.

​

If the same publisher has multiple successful apps in the same niche, it often suggests there's enough demand to support more than one product.

​

4. Ask yourself one question:

​

Why would someone switch from the app they're already using?

​

If I can't answer that confidently, I keep researching instead of building.

​

This simple habit has probably saved me more time than anything else.

​

Curious what everyone else uses for app market research. Any tools worth checking out?

u/ResidentAccording256 — 14 days ago
▲ 2 r/SaaS

What's a lesson that completely changed how you validate SaaS ideas?

For me, it was realizing that building isn't validation.

​

A few years ago, if I had an idea I liked, I'd spend weeks building an MVP and convince myself I was "validating" it.

​

Most of the time, I wasn't.

​

Now I try to answer a few questions before I write a single line of code:

​

Is this market still growing, or has it already peaked?

​

Are new competitors still entering, or is the space dominated by a few mature players?

​

What do users complain about most in reviews?

​

How often do the leading products actually improve their product?

​

More importantly, are people paying for solutions like this?

​

I've found that spending a day researching usually saves me weeks of building the wrong thing.

​

I'm still figuring out my own process, though.

​

What's one lesson that completely changed the way you validate new SaaS ideas?

​

I'd love to hear what actually works in practice rather than the usual "just talk to users" advice.

​

reddit.com
u/ResidentAccording256 — 15 days ago