Kickstarter Katchup – 7th July 2012

By John Walker on July 7th, 2012 at 1:00 pm.

Lots of losses this week, demonstrating that 55% failure rate that gaming Kickstarters experience. Some aren’t surprises, others really are. But there are winners too, and an awful lot of new games appearing in the list this week.

Usual disclaimer: Featuring a game here doesn’t mean we endorse giving it your money. If there’s something you’d like to see appear, email me via my name above, but that doesn’t guarantee inclusion. And finally, be warned about “flexible funding” on some Indiegogo projects – it means they’ll get your money even if they come nowhere near their target.

The Winners

Paper Sorcerer – UltraRunawayGames

The stunning graphics seem to have convinced enough to want to see this first-person turn-based RPG come to life. It’s not quite over, but there are only hours to go and it’s well over target.

Indie Graphics Builder – Eldon Harris

There are still three weeks to go for this package of sprite-creating elements for indie developers. A peculiar idea that’s already received well over its tiny $1,850 goal.

The Losers

Retrovirus – Cadenza Interactive

Completely bemused by this one. By both how little money it raised, and how little coverage it received from the rest of the oblivious gaming press. It made it barely a third of the way to its $75k goal.

Cold Fusion – Dustin Gleaves

Stalling at the halfway point toward $15,000, it never showed any signs of life for its last couple of weeks, and didn’t feature a single public update for nearly a month. There could be a connection there, folks. Gleaves plans to retry.

Ground Branch – BlackFoot Studios

Another surprise failure – despite the ridiculously high asking target of $425,000, I thought enough people would want to see the tactical shooter re-emerge. Except it seems the big mistake was to only be planning to make multiplayer. It’s not how most seemed to want the genre, apparently.

Kenshi – Cadenza Studios

Well, sort of. This was flexible funding, meaning they get all of the $2,315 that was pledged, despite apparently needing $40,000. So goodness knows what use that’ll be.

The Players

Jack Houston And The Necronauts – Warbird Games

Goal: $56,000
Now: $30,085
Days Left: 33

Perhaps a little over-confident in the video, but a really interesting-sounding adventure based in pulp sci-fi, but with an open-ended story. And really splendidly, using miniatures and stop motion animation to bring it to life. That I want to see. It’s had a very slow week in fund raising, but there’s still over a month left to reach the modest goal.

CLANG – Subutai Corporation

Goal: $500,000
Now: $456,164
Days Left: 2

This one’s going to be incredibly close. With just a couple of days left, it’s still not quite at its enormous half-million ambition. Presumably, with the amount of work that’s clearly gone in already, it’ll go ahead without the cash – but wow, that’s a lot of cash to not quite have.

HeXit – Full Throttle Games

Goal: $75,000
Now: $20,020
Days Left: 3

Adding a couple more grand on this week, the rendered adventure is going to struggle to make it to its target, I think. Perhaps the world still isn’t ready for the return of the render.

Skyjacker – Digitilus

Goal: $200,000
Now: $82,082
Days Left: 15

Crossing the $80k line, but still not even halfway to its hefty goal, it really is hard to imagine what more the developers need to do to catch people’s attention with this one. It looks splendid, and like Retrovirus, really needs the rest of the gaming press to wake up and talk about it.

Legends Of Aethereus – Three Gate Studios

Goal: $25,000
Now: $8,212
Days Left: 14

New to the Katchup, with two weeks left, is a hack-n-slash action game that is focusing on the hardcore. Describing itself as a “high action, low fantasty RPG”, it looks very impressively detailed, and damned gorgeous, built in Unity.

Z. – Downward Viral

Goal: $100,000
Now: $42,997
Days left: 7

A week left for this CCG-meets-PC zombie project, featuring the likeness of Tim Schafer amongst a bunch of other celebs, to more than double its current pledges. Could be tough.

Exodus Wars: Fractured Empire – Membraine Studios

Goal: $35,000
Now: $6,145
Days Left: 14
WARNING: FLEXIBLE FUNDING

A turn-based strategy that looks fairly hardcore, to the point where they claim publishers aren’t interested. But you may well be.

Alpha Colony – DreamQuest Games

Goal: $500,000
Now: $73,503
Days Left: 8

One of quite a few games that’ll surely be in the losers column in the next couple of weeks, the attempt to relaunch a classic (and forgotten) game pitched ridiculously high, and it’ll take a miracle to see it turn around now. I remain extremely surprised they’ve not scrapped and relaunched with a sensible goal.

Rapid Assault – Cornered Rat Software

Goal: $100,000
Now: $23,050
Days Left: 14

The WW2 shooter reminds me of the original Call Of Duty, both in style, and perhaps more concerningly, in looks. However, it’s more of a simulation tactical shooter, focused on PvP. There’s a long way to go over the next two weeks, but they’ve seen their funds zoom up by well over $10k in the last seven days.

DIVEKICK – Adam Heart

Goal: $30,000
Now: $12,077
Days left: 25

With ages left on the clock, and already well over a third of the way there, a fighting game that began as a joke has become a real thing. They’re after the $30k to release the game on PC, after it performing really well at shows.

The Living: 30 Days To Survive

Goal: $60,000
Now: $5,985
Days left: 14

A free-to-play online survival game, that has obvious similarities to Day Z. Except the idea here is to actually survive for 30 days, in real time. There’s character customisation, which gives them the in-game currency they’ll need, along with four classes, teamwork, PvP and even politicians. You can also play as a zombie. Looks very interesting, but currently they’re only showing renders.

OuterEdge – WAK Design

Goal: $20,000
Now: $2,400
Days left: 11

Still crawling, with again well under $500 made in the last week, the voxel-based FPS survival game is going to need a big push to make it in a week and a half. They might want to consider some updates.

Coma: A Mind Adventure – Warcelona

Goal: $7,400
Now: $2,270
Days left: 10
WARNING: FLEXIBLE FUNDING

This deeply peculiar climate-changing puzzler looks fascinating. They say that however much they raise with their flexibly funded campaign will define how much they add to the game. Which basically means when you give it money, you really don’t know what you’re going to get. Which is a problem. And a shame, because it’s properly interesting.

Reincarnation: The Root Of All Evil

Goal: $15,000
Now: $11,635
Days left: 6

A really cute video featuring some decent animation (before descending into the usual recorded-on-a-shoe broken audio) accompanies a pitch for a point and click adventure. Reincarnation has already had success as Flash adventures, but now the plan is to create a downloadable game lasting at least four hours.

, , .

141 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. povu says:

    Shame about Retrovirus, it would be nice to have another Descent style game.

    • Dominic White says:

      Almost every indie site covered it, and Totalbiscuit did a lengthy video where he fully endorsed it, and yet still nobody wanted to put money down on it. Are Descent-style games that unpopular?

      • Chris D says:

        I’d suspect it’s not so much a case of them being unpopular as much as it is of them being just not popular enough.

        I imagine most people have to really want to play a game before they’ll throw down money without any guarantee that they’ll actually get to play it, or whether it will be any good.

        It’s been many years since I played Descent, so take the following with a pinch of salt, but I also wonder quite how well it would measure up to modern expectations. Descent was something of a hybrid between space-sim and corridor shooter and I don’t know how well that combination really works. I recall it being an interesting concept rather than a game I really enjoyed playing. Though, to be fair, my main recollection is of getting lost quite a lot.

        • LionsPhil says:

          Descent’s got great flowing movement, I’ll give it that. And music.

          The automap turns into wireframe spaghetti on the more complex levels, though, so if you’re spatial reasoning isn’t the sharpest, or you took a break mid-level, you’re in for pain.

      • Veav says:

        This one shocked me too. I always thought a TB endorsement was right up there with a Notch tweet or a PA front-pager, so the lack of response is a little unsettling. Another one – the devs gave away FOUR THOUSAND free copies of their previous game on reddit to drum up support, and if I read kicktraq right, saw maybe 60 new pledges in response. The whole thing just feels wrong; repeat some blather about open-world zombies, rake it in. Come up with a unique design with real potential and prove you can do it, and you can’t get the time of day.

        • HexagonalBolts says:

          From a complete outsider’s perspective who has no nostalgia, has just skimmed quickly through the videos and knows nothing about the history of these games: Retrovirus just looks like a crummy and extremely uninnovative shooter. People like me are probably needed to drum up the necessary cash.

      • LintMan says:

        Don’t forget that Miner Wars 2081 is a Descent-style game currently under development and which IIRC actually includes a few people from the original Descent team. They’re not on kickstarter, but they’ve been soliciting pre-orders for ages.

        Having preordered that game, I had less interest in Retrovirus. I wonder if anyone else thought the same thing.

        But then again, when I first saw Retrovirus mentioned, I though their “a six-axis shooter” subtitle was a reference to the PS3 controller, and it was some sort of console-style arcade shooter game.

        • Tortango says:

          Thanks for posting this! I’d never heard of miner wars and this looks like something I’ll enjoy.

      • Turin Turambar says:

        Being honest,this RPS article was the first post I saw about the game. I totally didn’t know it. I didn’t got to see the WTF video.

        There are too maay kickstarter projects!
        A pity, this one which included an alpha demo to show off it wasn’t smoke should have been funded.

      • Premium User Badge

        Cross says:

        I played the Alpha and was unimpressed. It was bland and repetitive in it’s gameplay, the camera angle, objective markers and map design worked together to make it really confusing and it just wasn’t at all engaging, with the story having bugger-all impact and the “narrator” being more of a nuisance than anything else.

    • wodin says:

      I personally can see why it failed as I never saw the potential either some have.

    • The First Door says:

      It would be nice to have another descent style game, but I’m really not convinced this was it.

      I was going to put money down on it until I played the Alpha which completely put me off of the game. The level and enemy design was rubbish, even accounting for it being an Alpha. It played much more like an FPS than a 6DOF shooter because most of the levels were either horizontal or (rarely) vertical and you couldn’t roll when horizontal. Plus having tiny annoying jumping enemies you can’t really see is a sure way to piss me right off.

    • DrozzRith says:

      A shame indeed, though the only game I’m TRULY interested in right now is Legend of Aethereus.

  2. pakoito says:

    Divekick is an inside joke from the fighting game community. Over the past years, Divekick has been a movement most high-tier characters had, and a gamechanging one. With this game they try to both mock this trend, while also making a half decent “mindgame”.

    Still a joke, tho.

    • Baines says:

      For something that started as a joke, Divekick is a completed game. More than complete, considering the original joke was to have two nearly identical characters, and it currently has around five characters.

      A game that in the past would have been released for free.

      But they want $30,000 to release it? Plus another $10,000 to release it with netcode. (And will presumably sell it for $10 a copy, considering the $10 pledge is described as effectively being a pre-order.)

  3. Corrupt_Tiki says:

    It’s a shame to see Ground Branch fail.
    Again I think MP only hurt it very bad. Although I can sympathise, smart AI is something that most AAA games fail to get right. Usually they too are only a step up from the old Podbots of cs days.

    • Valhuen says:

      Backed Ground Branch, but TBH did so reluctantly as it was only MP. Hopefully they take the message to heart and re-launch at some point with a SP & MP game ala the original Rainbow Six & Ghost Recon titles.

    • WhiteKnight77 says:

      BFS wants to license an AI system that has the smart AI people are wanting, but again, that takes money above and beyond what is needed for a typical MP game. BFS wants to have a complete game in the sense that it has both MP (including Coop) and SP, but if needing to raise the extra funds by doing the MP only WITH basic Coop, then that is one way to do so and what they were trying to do so with the KS campaign.

  4. Premium User Badge

    dangermouse76 says:

    55% failure ? Wonder how that compares to mainstream game releases 1. making it out the door in the first place and 2. making it’s money back ?

    • TillEulenspiegel says:

      There’s no real comparison. It’s a completely different process where “failure” happens much much earlier.

      Kickstarter is more analogous to a writer shopping around a spec script. Stuff like that, as far as I know, doesn’t really happen in the mainstream games industry.

      • LintMan says:

        Well, the scary part to think about is that many of those mainstream games fail because they run over their budget and then are forced to release prematurely by their publishers who funded the development.

        It this case, it is essentially the supporters who provided the funding. But what will happen if a KS game goes over budget and runs out of money? I hate to think it, but given the somewhat unpredictable nature of software budgeting, it seems inevitable we’ll eventually see the spectacular failure of a KS project or two. (I’m not trying to be down on KS here – I’ve backed a whole bunch of projects already. But I try not to get too invested in any one project, and tend to prefer projects that are already well along and/or are by people with substantial proven success).

        • MondSemmel says:

          But there have been several mentions since then, e.g. by the devs of Larian Studios and the Wasteland project, that having a publisher a) often inflates a game’s budget (because the publisher, rather than the dev studio, often makes stupid decisions like increasing the voice budget out of proportion for the game). Also, advertising budgets sometimes get thrown away, too…

          There will be kickstarter failures, sure, but publishers don’t necessarily improve the budget process.
          And statistically speaking, it’s all but guaranteed that some of the small kickstarter projects will have to close simply due to health reasons, accidents, etc. – if the one dev in a one-man-team cannot work anymore, the project is over.

          EDIT: Wow, do I feel bad about writing that last paragraph after reading the Jetpack 2 devblog. http://www.jetpackhq.com/blog/
          In this case, _before_ the kickstarter, development stalled for quite a long time after the dev developed serious health issues culminating in neck surgery…

  5. jellydonut says:

    The biggest problem is that Ground Branch is so far along! I mean, it’s practically there for us. :c

    I have to agree though, I enjoyed Raven Shield much more as a co-op game than a PvP game.

  6. asshibbitty says:

    Thats a lot of stuff. Skyjerker is a game that should get made. Sucks that you can’t rely on KS to fund good looking things. Was interested in the fantasy thing, then skipped forward and saw the lady in fur armor or whatever that was. They’ll probably attract more backers with this than they’ll lose, 

    • malkav11 says:

      To be honest, I’ve been aware of Skyjacker for a long time but I’m not a big space sim guy and I’d already done my part to see the genre revitalized by supporting Starlight Inception…granted, the decision to go with that one was kind of arbitrary, but Skyjacker’s talk about open-ended adventuring and procedural content is the sort of thing that puts me -off- a project, personally. But I don’t think I’d ever quite realized what they were doing with the game’s art. Good lord, it looks gorgeous and that weird organic-ish ship design makes me super happy. So I’ve finally backed it. Too little, too late, probably. But I wonder how many other people didn’t know about the art.

      • Premium User Badge

        Man Raised by Puffins says:

        Good lord, it looks gorgeous and that weird organic-ish ship design makes me super happy.

        Yes, this. It’s really not my type of game at all, but the mad art, bleepy-bloopy music and silly voice acting really make it. Shame not enough people seem to agree.

      • asshibbitty says:

        Good point about ship designs. Most KS entries I come across are programmer’s friend art at best. The ones that are technically alright are almost always unexciting and not evocative at all, which is odd for such a competitive and saturated environment. It’s like, here’s some guy with a beard talking and here’s some text for you to read, and here are our orks and elves, yep we have ‘em. In the indie world it seems beard takes precedence over art.

        • Jay says:

          “It’s like, here’s some guy with a beard talking and here’s some text for you to read, and here are our orks and elves, yep we have ‘em.”

          You realise of course that this’ll be going through my head every time I watch a KS video from this point on.

          As a sort-of wannabe indie type I concur about the beards. I’d say more, but they’d set the razors on me.

        • TillEulenspiegel says:

          In the indie world it seems beard takes precedence over art.

          Shaving and arting both require effort. Programming is more fun.

      • LintMan says:

        Yeah, Skyjacker’s ships look awesome. I don’t know why this project doesn’t get more notice.

        What’s wrong with “open world” and “procedural content”? Personally I think that stuff can be great if it’s well done.

        • malkav11 says:

          Because if that’s the focus, then I tend to assume that interesting story content and unique mission design are not. Actually, I don’t have anything particularly against open worlds (though I find them more interesting as a living, emergent world that serves as a backdrop to more linear content rather than an end to themselves as in Crackdown or Just Cause 2), but procedural content generation is, imho, a flytrap for idealistic designers. It’s simply not at a point where it can come close to replicating the entertainment value in a carefully handcrafted scenario, and it’s best used for a quick skeleton on which to hang handcrafted elements, or some basic gap-filling (e.g. Skyrim’s procedural sidequests or randomly chosen locations for predetermined quest items).

          Furthermore, in a space game context, I feel like the X series does a pretty good job of delivering contemporary expansive, open-ended, largely procedural/emergent gameplay, while mission-driven games all but ceased to be after Freespace 2.

          • Veav says:

            In Skyjacker’s case the procedural content serves to both flesh out the open world and pad out side missions, but the story missions are all hand-crafted. So it’s kinda like Skyrim in that one small particular regard.

  7. tangoliber says:

    I hope that Gentrieve 2 will miraculously get some publicity and meet its goal. Procedurally generated FPS Metroidvania, designed for speedruns.
    The game will still get made, but the 5k funding goal will apparently go towards paying artists.

  8. Hoaxfish says:

    with all the coverage, you missed the end: Dead State ended yesterday with ~300K of their 150K goal

    though you did list it as a winner on the 23rd june

    …wait, is winners “passed their goal” or “successful finish”?

    • fiddlesticks says:

      The most important thing about the Dead State Kickstarter is that they received $330k, which means animals are in. Animals! Sure, that whole focus on choices and consequences combined with strategic turn-based combat and well written, complex NPCs is nice and all, but come on, Animal Buddies! I can’t wait to fight zombies with my war elephants.

      Well okay, more dogs than elephants. But still, a man can dream.

      • Subject 706 says:

        They should totally have a circus as a location. Where you could get an elephant, equip it with a ball and chain to swing with its trunk. Zombie smash time!

        Pledged 50 bucks and its great that they made it to the animal stretch goal!

      • Premium User Badge

        Wisq says:

        I just hope Dead State didn’t get ripped off. They said that they got three $5k pledges in the last minutes, which says to me that either there were three semi-rich people who really wanted those animals … or three fraudsters (or possibly even one with three accounts) who figured they could boost them to the next stretch goal and then fail to actually make good on their payment.

        It’s not like they could really back down, either. They’d lose too much face by reneging on a stretch goal, even if it was fraudulently reached.

        So yeah, just hoping that isn’t the case, because it would be a real souring of the community spirit.

        • Hoaxfish says:

          Kickstarter processes payments on successful projects, not promises.

          Xenonauts had a bit of follow-up on outstanding payments (payments errors, etc) for at least a couple of days after the event.

          If it turns out Dead State didn’t make as much money as they thought due to withdrawals, I think they’d have a good reason for saying the stretch goal hadn’t actually been met.

    • LintMan says:

      Yeah, I was wondering why Dead State didn’t get a mention last week when it was still in the thick of its strech goal run.

      Even if a project was already listed as a “winner”, I think if it has an active set of interesting, reachable stretch goals, it should keep getting mentioned here until it’s closed.

      And about those three 5K last-second donors, I was also thinking the same thing – that there’s a good chance that they were fake, which is a real shame if true. I hope it isn’t.

    • explodeydendron says:

      I’m surprised he didn’t mention the success of Dead State (or more importantly, last week). It seemed like a somewhat spectacular finish, with the multiple last-minute 5k pledges getting them to one of their final stretch goals.

      I first learned about Dead State from this site, so why the blackout?

  9. Lurid says:

    No love for Jetpack 2?

  10. AngryTiger says:

    Legends of Aethereus looks intresting, too bad they don’t offer DRM free version, lost my pledge.

    • jakobrogert says:

      We do offer DRM-free and LAN-enabled copies specifically through Kickstarter.

    • Shadram says:

      My first thought was: ‘Legend of Aetherius looks interesting, shame they felt the need to have the Captain of the Guard wear a gold bikini.’

  11. Jay says:

    Fair dues to Paper Sorcerer, but the tiny target and the whole first-time developer thing still gives me a bad feeling about it. I haven’t seen many first-timers finish a significant RPG project from the ground up. Even if you’ve got some idea what you’re letting yourself in for, creating all the art, music and code for a game of that level takes an investment of time and effort far beyond what most can imagine, even with a base engine like Unity. It does look interesting though, I do hope he makes it.

    I kind of came around to the idea of Cold Fusion once I got over my preciousness about RPG Maker projects, but then once I did I still struggled to find much more than some pretty concept art. Nothing about the game art showed anything like the same degree of effort, with what looked like quite a lot of stock assets and next to no attempt to unify the style with the concept work. There’s a few other ways to go with minimalist sprites beyond the classic Squaresoft look, and almost anything else would’ve worked better. Couple that with the awful lack of updates and it kind of doomed itself, really.

    BS predictions time – I think Clang! is pretty much a sure thing, they’ve got some way to go, but given the interest and past support I’m all but sure they’ll make it with a big final push. Hexit, on the other hand, is done for.

  12. Unaco says:

    Ground Branch baffled me. I know from the games they namechecked, and from what other people told me, what they were going for… but was never really told that by the Devs. Whenever I read or watched anything from them, I was bombarded with double talk and jargon and pronouncements about how real and immersive and not like other shooters it would be. But not really told or shown why. Take that ‘Natural Order of Realistic Gameplay’ (NORG) video. Some guy made the acronym/phrase, and he’s really proud of it. Does it have a meaning? “Forget about that, and here, look! We have 3 tiered (wedding cake?) specialists not only advising on our game, but actually in our computers, checking every bit for authenticity”. It’s a great ‘baseplate for development’, apparently.

    I was a huge fan of Ghost Recon and SWAT and the very first Rainbow6 games, and I’d love something in the vein (I think) they were going with this… A step away from the Call of Duty/Battlefield mould, but also a step away from the ARMA mould. Some of the best fun I’m currently having with ARPS is Team v Team missions, where we can use some tactics and the like against each other (Cacheola, Cratesistance, Internecine)… so Multiplayer only wouldn’t have been an issue for me. But the tone and the way they were putting the game across just failed for me.

    • Shooop says:

      This was exactly my same problem with it. They had all the jargon and $10 words, but didn’t show anything more compelling than people shooting at pop-up targets. Players want to know how the weapons behave, what equipment they’ll have, what kind of movement they can do, etc. The only thing they kept saying when anyone asked “How’s it going to play?” was “Realism!”

      It was like they didn’t even understand what kind of game they were making.

      • BOTA49 says:

        It’s a catch 22. If they had more to show, they wouldn’t have needed Kickstarter money, however if they didn’t have anything to show other than concept art and maybe some renders then everything would be in each individual persons imagination on how they want it play out. It’s a damn shame, too, because for those of us who have been around since the projects first announcement in 2007 when it was nothing more than an idea on a scrap of paper we know what the project is all about, and after years of discussions on the forums about how this or that would be handled, we had a rather good idea of how this would turn out. Its hard to convey all that knowledge in a KS, at least without presenting a wall of text (which was already another issue with this KS to begin with), but if you’ve been around since the project initially started and saw the things in the original donators forums, you’d understand that John knows exactly where he wants this project to go.

        I’ve said this for several months now, too many people look at Kickstarter as a way to preorder games with some special bonuses rather than what it really is – a way to fund a project or idea that doesn’t have many other options.

    • defunkt says:

      I’d love a game with Ground Branch’s focus but took issue with the amount of money they wanted for a multiplayer-only shooter on Unreal (not a platform that elicits much excitement here). Of course it’d cost all of that and more for a studio to make but they have investors who need a return on the capital they’ve risked where Black Foot Studios were basically looking to have the Internet gift them a half-million dollar business – in that respect I think it is they who have misunderstood Kickstarter. Compared to what a couple of amateurs can achieve in no time at all with the Unity SDK (i.e. Intruder or Elite Squad) the progress BFS had made in 5 years didn’t paint them especially deserving of such a windfall. Not much point in backing ‘professionals’ if what that boils down to is eveything taking twice as long and costing four times as much.

      That said I’m also surprised at the number of gamers that are still primarily into singleplayer or playing against bots, to me it was what we did before the Internet.

      • Jay says:

        It’s a common misconception it seems, but singleplayer gamers are by far the majority, even still. The classic example people bring up is Demigod, a near-enough multiplayer-only game that has little more than a barebones training mode for SP, but the figures they released showed only slightly over 20% of people who bought it even tried to play online. Not regularly played multiplayer, but played a single game online, ever.

        (Edit: article link)

        That’s only one example, and so hardly representative, but I don’t think it’s nearly as much of an anomaly as people would think.

      • jsonedecker says:

        Defunkt….You can continue to slag us on the Bohemia forum, but I won’t let you do it anywhere else. It’s fine you don’t like our game or the KS idea. Got it. But let’s make a few things clear….

        How in the world do you think we were looking for a free handout and the internet to “gift us” anything? How are we any different than any of the other KS campaigns out there? Tim Schaefer asked for $400k. Shadowrun asked for $400k. Why is it that it’s ok for them to ask for that to make a game but it isn’t for us?

        You say:
        “Of course it’d cost all of that and more for a studio to make but they have investors who need a return on the capital they’ve risked ”

        So how exactly does that make us any different again? Just because there is an investor involved, it’s ok that games take money to make. But otherwise it doesn’t cost anything to make a game. That’s what you are saying. One of the most absurd comments I have seen in a while.

        And stop with the “what amateurs can accomplish with Unity BS”. What have those 2 actually accomplished? Try selling what they have for $$. The second you charge for something people become a a whole lot more critical of what you have. There are some great free mods out there. And even great completely free to play smaller games. But they are rough, don’t have a lot of unique features and are not something 99% of the people messing with them would touch once they had to pay money for it.

        And I can’t begin to explain how frustrated I am with the fact that people seem to think GB has been in development for 5 solid years. It has been explained over and over again that we have not been working on it full time. We all have jobs and families to support. There have been times when the game sat for 3 months of no work. Others where it’s been a couple hours here and there. We never once announced a product, gave a delivery date and didn’t deliver. It’s always been an ongoing fluid development process where we haven’t been able to get the funding to work on it full time.

        “Deserving of such a windfall” …. really? You act like we were buying a lottery ticket. I can clearly see that you either don’t like us, don’t care for Kickstarter in general or both. Seriously.

        • defunkt says:

          “Just because there is an investor involved, it’s ok that games take money to make. But otherwise it doesn’t cost anything to make a game. That’s what you are saying. One of the most absurd comments I have seen in a while.”

          The investors who’ve been paying the wages own the IP and all profits arising and if the game fails they lose their money, you intend to use KS to pay yourself a wage *and* own all the IP at the end of it and if the game fails you’ve risked very little – I can’t believe more people don’t apply this yardstick. Long time ago now but when my father decided he wanted to get into business he took a night-shift in a bread factory to keep the family liquid and that’s how he got to spend his days building a business, nobody was going to plop the capital in his lap. Along with comparing your project to an outlier like Wasteland you really ought to look at the capital one or two guys can get built in evenings and weekends; here’s another one (also on Unity) from Drunken Lizard Games. To have got this far since whichever month it was last year that they started makes them pretty driven in my book and driven is a quality I like to see in people who’re looking for a financial leg-up. If they (or Elite Squad) presented an appealing and less generic vision of where they wanted to take these projects I’d have no issue backing them and I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t say it can only be done with $425K.

          Finally a contrary point of view != slagging.

          • jsonedecker says:

            Ok, so now we see that you simply don’t like Kickstarter and don’t see the effort that we have put into the game to this point. KS is no different than getting investment money with regards to your ideals about “a free ride in business”. The only difference is the “investors” don’t expect a ROI other than the reward they signed up for. It doesn’t make the developers any less of a legit business than say A tech entrepreneur that gets VC to cultivate an idea. It’s just different expectations.

            So it appears that you don’t think we have put in enough effort to justify investment. I don’t really care to spend the time to convince you otherwise.

            Cheers.

          • WhiteKnight77 says:

            It’s better to be though of as stupid than open one’s mouth and remove all doubt. You have done exactly that as you have no idea what BFS intends to pay themselves with any monies earned from Ground Branch. The fact that no publishers would touch it unless it became the next CoD or BF killer speaks about what publishers and investors are wanting. So, when a publishing entity does not want to back BFS, that’s fine. Why can’t BFS keep any funds earned with their original IP (notice that there are few original IPs being created nowadays) ? They are investing in their company themselves for now and have done so for years. Every penny they earn over what is needed to feed, clothe and house their families have been sunk into the development of GB as well as some working pro bono. So much for your father working a night job to make the family business solvent, BFS is doing the same thing.

            BFS at least will remain true to their beliefs and not string gamers along about what the game will be. Have gamers been lied to by BFS? No. Have gamers been lied to by other companies? Daily and here is the kicker, BIS has lied to you and they have not given you the product that you seek.

            The very game you love so dearly has had to be fixed my modders and not the company that built the game. It still has a clunky interface that dates back to the OFP days. It is just as clunky as I found VBS1 to be. Still, BIS can’t fix the game. Why should you keep paying them for their mistakes?

            BFS used the KS campaign to help raise funds to finish a game, not just show investors something. BFS does have playable content, but you failed to see that through your ArmA II clouded eyes.

    • WhiteKnight77 says:

      The devs did tell you what they were doing with GB, but you didn’t read or understand what they were saying. It sounds like you just relied on the video to tell you something instead of reading the KS page or visiting the Ground Branch website where everything is spelled out in even more detail.

      • Unaco says:

        I watched 2 videos, read at least 1 interview, 2 articles and a lot of the page. Is it my fault I didn’t get the information, or is it their fault for not conveying the information to me in a timely and succinct fashion?

        Edit: I wasn’t the only one who felt this way. Several people in RPS Steam Chat have said they were also somewhat unsure of how the game was going to do what it was planning to do. And so where the majority, going by the (low) number of backers and money pledged.

        • WhiteKnight77 says:

          BFS was upfront about telling everyone that the stated goal was to raise money to hire an animator to take all the mocap footage (also seen in the first video) and make it all right. They wanted to get the MP and basic Coop (UT bots) made so that they could raise the rest of the funds to complete the SP and COOP that needs the advanced AI that people want nowadays so the game could be finished.

          Animations are needed for the full game, both MP as well as SP, but the more expensive AI that people want are only used in half the game, SP. Would you rather have an SP/Coop game that looked crappy and animated in a crappy way with advanced AI or would you rather have a game that looked good and was animated properly that had just basic AI that would include the advanced AI at a later date?

          • Unaco says:

            I’ve already stated my opinion on the Multiplayer/Singleplayer thing, you didn’t read or understand what I said. To repeat, from my OP…

            “Some of the best fun I’m currently having with ARPS (RPS ArmA2 group) is Team v Team missions, where we can use some tactics and the like against each other (Cacheola, Cratesistance, Internecine)… so Multiplayer only wouldn’t have been an issue for me.”

            I didn’t care about AI, or whether it was SP or MP only, or what they were doing with the animations. What I wanted to know was how was the ‘realism’ that they kept talking about going to be implemented. They didn’t get that across to me… they failed at it. They talked about NORG and how they don’t just have Operators advising, but actually involved and such. But they didn’t tell me about the mechanics, game modes, what sort of tactical scale and scope there would be, etc etc.

  13. Premium User Badge

    Rikard Peterson says:

    Hexit: “Perhaps the world still isn’t ready for the return of the render.” I think it’s more due to the game not looking particularly interesting. Sure, the game they’re describing might turn out as good as Blade Runner, but it may also turn out to be completely boring. The team has no history to convince us otherwise, and a video that tries to sell the idea with pictures of a pretty girl isn’t helping. (Not that I don’t like looking at pretty girls, but you get my point. Hopefully.)

  14. Jimbo says:

    Skyjacker is gonna come out at this point anyway, right?

    • Zeewolf says:

      Looks that way to me.

      Also, about Skyjacker: “work your way up to the top, not by deliveries and fetch-quests, but through brutal missions like assassinations, sabotage, kidnapping, robberies, infiltrations and extractions.” … yeah, well, no thanks guys. That’s not for me. Also, the space combat videos haven’t really impressed me. I want dogfighs, not turkey shoots.

      • Veav says:

        Have you seen the latest video? The original demo had the AI nerfed to high heaven – the ships would target your wingmen, always, before targeting you. There’s a patch out now to switch up difficulties so they actually pay attention to you (and lots of it).

    • Veav says:

      Without crowdsourced funding they’d have to look for investors elsewhere to help buy licenses, keep the lights on, and pay for things that can’t be done in-house. It’ll come out eventually, but succeeding on kickstarter would make that happen faster, make sure it’ll stay DRM-free, keep editorial control within the dev team, etc.

  15. hemmingjay says:

    How could you miss Cult: Awakening of the Old Ones? http://cultrl.wordpress.com/
    It made 650% of it’s target funding.
    So, what kind of game is this, exactly?

    Cult is primarily a role-playing game, but it also draws on elements from other genres, including strategy, simulation, and adventure. In terms of what you’ll be able to do in the game, well…

    Custom-tailor the life story and personality of your adventurer, or let the game randomly create it for you.
    Explore dungeons and hunt for loot, artifacts, and powerful spells in traditional roguelike fashion.
    Build a house, a castle, or even a city. For larger projects, you’ll need to hire companions (or convert minions).
    Craft everything from weapons and armor to furniture and food. Use it to outfit your personal entourage or army, or trade it away for riches.
    Establish yourself as a local power. Eventually, you could become a political player, the leader of a powerful religious sect, or even a king.
    Wander the world and discover civilizations with vastly different cultures, governments, and traditions. Hunt or tame fantastical creatures that are nothing like anything you’ve ever seen on Earth!
    Revive banished gods from their hiding places within ancient ruins and harness their forbidden power for your own purposes.

  16. MadTinkerer says:

    Once upon a time there was a shareware game called Jetpack for the PC. In my household, we considered it on the same level as legends like SkiFree, and is one of very few shareware games we actually registered. All told, it was a frickin’ magnificent game with a great level editor and perfect puzzle-action-platforming gameplay. Then the guy who made it got sucked into database programming for big business or some other boring crap that isn’t video games. And a year or two ago I stumbled across his website where he said he was making tech demos and he posted a couple and then the site wasn’t updated much.BUT GUESS WHO’S BACK:

    IT’S THE JETPACK 2 KICKSTARTER

    Click that link. Do it. DO IT. Don’t read any further. Don’t look at Steam sales. If he makes the goal, we’ll have Jetpack 2 BY CHRISTMAS. I don’t know if that’s a deliberate nod to the Christmas Jetpack standalone level pack, or just how the schedule worked out, but JETPACK 2 BY CHRISTMAS IF THE GOAL IS MET.

    I want Jetpack 2 by Christmas. This must happen! BACK THE JETPACK 2 KICKSTARTER!

    EDIT: Ninja’d by Lurid. Yeah, come on guys. I’m not the only Jetpack fanboy here!

    • Phantoon says:

      HOLY MOTHERFUCKING SHIT THIS IS THE GREATEST NEWS EVER

    • MondSemmel says:

      Hey, thanks for mentioning this. I might actually back this. Jetpack was part of my childhood memories, but I only remembered that after you mentioned the game here.

      [x] I nominate this project for the Kickstarter Katchup. Reason: The original game was excellent, and it’s the same dev making an updated version – I think that counts as enough pedigree. More importantly, its kickstarter target actually sounds as if it could succeed…

  17. Binman88 says:

    Maybe I’m wrong, but “The Living” looks like a total scam to me. Seriously: look through their page and tell me what would convince a person that this is a project that will ever even get off the ground? Balance that against everything going against it: wishy-washy statements about what they “hope” to do, no gameplay footage, a website that has been in existence for about a month but is being used as proof that the game is totally “in progress”, ambiguous reasoning for their 60K target. I feel like they’re hoping people will be swayed by the presentation of their official-looking art. Other than that, I see no substance there at all. Also: estimated delivery for alpha access is Dec 2013, with the game’s estimated delivery at Dec 2014. Will $60K – taxes, – cuts really pay the wages and for resources of even a small group of people to develop a game over a two year period?

    • Jay says:

      I’m not sure I’d go as far as ‘scam’, but it does seem to be pretty naive, at least.

      I’d agree that the lack of anything beyond concept art is troubling, alongside the extremely vague descriptions of gameplay elements that would be difficult to design and balance even for a highly experienced, tested team. And considering the investment of resources needed in real terms for a project like this, the money being asked for, even for a playable alpha, seems bizarrely small. I guess that’s where the F2P model comes in.

      So yeah, hmm…

      • Binman88 says:

        Fair enough. I doubt it’s an intentional attempt to defraud people, but it’s naive to the point of being dishonest about what they can achieve, which colours it as a bit of a scam in my eyes. Like you say, there’s bound to be a lot of design and balance issues along the way, and it seems weird that they’re already announcing a gear pack (the first update on their page) when there doesn’t even seem to be an actual game yet.

        In fairness, their twitter account is promising an early, playable build of the game in the coming days. I’m just surprised they have no mention of it on their Kickstarter page. I feel like a studio should have everything in motion when they land a project on Kickstarter. If a playable build was on the horizon, why wouldn’t they wait the week or so until it was ready before launching? Right now it seems they’re trading simply on ideas and artwork.

  18. MistyMike says:

    Most of this games look strikingly generic. I truly can’t fathom why people are handing out money on a mere promise, instead of going the usual route of waiting for the release, reviews and opinions and deciding on the purchase afterwards. Are people really so excited to play another h&s Legend of Aetherus (which looks common as a tavern whore) that they throw money at the devs? This is just silly.

    • MegaMouth says:

      People aren’t just buying games, they’re backing projects and games that they want to help. If everyone waited until after launch, it wouldn’t be called crowd-funding. Also, what tavern are you hanging out at? I would love to meet tavern whores that hot!

    • smg77 says:

      I think KS is great for niche games that wouldn’t have a chance of finding a traditional publisher deal. I donated to Skyjacker this week (my first ever KS donation) because I love open-ended space games and outside of the X games there aren’t a lot of options.

  19. BurningPet says:

    There’s also Cult – Awakening of the old ones on the winners side with 34,000 $ pledged. considering he aimed for 5,000 to 10,000 at best, this is quite extraordinary. plus, it also says that you do not have to be a super experienced or well known developer to succeed in kickstarter.

    • hemmingjay says:

      This is high praise from the creator of the awesome game Towns! And yes, it inspiring that Lord Dullard(Dave) was able to get 650%+ of it’s target funding.

    • Torgen says:

      Oh! Will we see the fear mechanic in version .50 of Towns?

  20. Premium User Badge

    Wisq says:

    Kenshi’s an odd one. I do like what they’re doing, but I’ve already bought the game, and I suspect that goes for a lot of other fans too. Hopefully this doesn’t disrupt their plans too much.

    (Mind you, Xenonauts did the same thing, and managed to raise $150k. So, who knows?)

    • sPOONz says:

      Kenshi is a game that REALLY interests me. Im disappointed to see its funding has not skyrocketed like I thought it would. Funny, when you realise your tastes are in the minority.

      Tho you have mentioned Xenonuats also, which Im really interested in too. High five Wisq!

  21. pkt-zer0 says:

    “despite the ridiculously high asking target of $425,000″

    I don’t get this. If it takes 300K to make a small adventure game with a handful of people (see: Double Fine), how is this figure “ridiculously high” for a tactical FPS? Compared to the tens of millions of dollars publishers spend on the mainstream FPS titles these days, it’s rather tiny.

    • Jay says:

      High by Kickstarter standards, certainly, where they seem to have a ceiling of about 500K. But yeah, anything under a million isn’t going to get you much of an FPS these days.

  22. Brendie88 says:

    Maybe you missed this one because it’s pretty new, but it looks interesting:
    Moon Intern

    Most of the backing rewards consist of getting your pixelated face and personality into the game. Kinda cool. And they say they made 15% of the goal in the first day, which is encouraging.

  23. wodin says:

    @pkt because it’s ridiculously high for a relatively unknown studio to ask for and it’s a huge mistake to base what to ask for on how well DoubleFine did.

    Personally I think if your not a well known studio or a huge name in the business then if you game needs that sort of money Kickstarter is nowhere near a cert. I think really developers who need around the max of $100,000 should consider Kickstarter and actually have reasonable expectations of achieving it. If your game needs $425,000 and no one really knows who you are (doesn’t mater if you’ve had parts in other games, it matters if your name is KNOW for it.

    $425,000 might not be alot for the type of game your making, it is going to be way to much to expect though through Kickstarter.

  24. AltF4 says:

    Clang should make it with a day to spare, they’re pulling really good numbers in the final stretch. I’m glad since the crappy melee system in Skyrim is a huge turn off for me, melee combat, what suppose to be the best part of the game, is the most yawn inducing.

    • Magnusm1 says:

      Where could you possibly get the impression that melee is supposed to be the best part of Skyrim? That’s just silly.

      • AltF4 says:

        As oppose to what? Terrible storyline, boring npcs, most generic and forgetful fantasy world? Or dx9 console graphics? Please tell me it’s not the music, since I can’t remember one song, even though Oblivion had dozen that stuck in your mind.

        • gwathdring says:

          I don’t like snide remarks against consoles at the best of times. But suggesting that Skyrim was particularly deficient in the graphical department is absurd. It isn’t the prettiest game available, and it put more into raw graphical horsepower than style … but there’s still a lot of both compared to pretty much every other game that came out recently.

          You don’t have to like it. It’s not my cup of tea either (or at least I suspect not). But try to keep your complaints a little more grounded in reality.

      • Jay says:

        To be fair, I definitely remember them making some big noise about how much better the melee was going to be in the previews. Particularly how much the ex-Arkane staff were helping out there.

        • dE says:

          Get out of my head, it’s ex Arkane Staff? Well that explains the similarities.

          • Jay says:

            Edit: reading up on it a little further, I misremembered it all a bit. It wasn’t ex-Arkane staff, but Arkane themselves possibly assisting in some capacity, though to what extent isn’t certain. There’s certainly an influence there like your post below mentions.

          • dE says:

            Still, pretty interesting information I wasn’t aware off.

    • dE says:

      I cringed at the melee combat in Skyrim. It seemed to want to be like Dark Messiah, but from the perspective of someone that was only told about it.

      “So in Dark Messiah, your attacks have weight and your screen moves along with them and if you an enemy, the hit had an impact too!”
      “You could do all sorts of interesting spell combinations with the environment!”
      “Occasionally, there are these kill moves where you kill an enemy in a quick and brutal fashion!”
      “And the most fun part, you can kick enemies, tossing them off cliffs and into traps!”

      Skyrims translation of that:
      Idiotic Ragdoll Physics when the HP hit zero? Check.
      Spell Combinations, well kinda like two spells at once? Check.
      Kill Moves? Oh we got plenty of those and we ain’t afraid to show them. Check.
      Kicking? What is this weird magic you talk about? Uh, magic? Fus Ro Dah! Check.

      The similiarties in the kill and swing animations to Dark Messiah were quite uncanny in my opinion. For a very brief moment I dared to dream. And then I realized most of the world actually hated Dark Messiah. Which had its short comings but I still go back for the combat from time to time.

    • geerad says:

      CLANG has now crossed the finish line: $501,128 and counting.

  25. El_Emmental says:

    Ground Branch failed… sadly it’s not surprising, they haven’t showed anything regarding their planned game design, they were just repeating “realism realism”

    Just look at Takedown (why everyone forgot about it ?), the “crowdsourced hardcore tactical shooter”:
    – they failed, they admitted they failed, it’s now an inside joke (they even kept that name in the kickstarter url), and they genuinely tried to not fail again
    – they acknowledged Call of Duty is a great game (for many people) and that they shouldn’t try to be a “R6 meets Call of Duty”
    – they acknowledged publishers can’t do a new tactical shooter because of the risks and money engaged (not because they are “evil” and all that bullcrap)
    – they showed they had a clear idea of the current state of the video game market
    – they planned singleplayer and multiplayer

    Guess what ? They barely reached their goal (200k).

    Tactical-shooter gamers got cheated out so many times, they gave up, they no longer trust the video game industry.

    This is why Takedown only got 5,423 backers, and Ground Branch, came in second, less clear, less believable, only got 1,897 backers.

    What the publishers destroyed (gamers’ trust), the indie developers will have to rebuild, brick by brick, promise by promise, apology by apology, fix by fix.

    • jsonedecker says:

      Oh but we have. The problem is most people couldn’t find 10 minutes to full READ the entire Kickstarter page and/or go look at http://www.groundbranch.com to see what it’s all about. We failed to deliver a mountain of information into a few minutes of video. But that isn’t an easy thing to do.

    • RakeShark says:

      That and someone kept posting “OMG FUND BROUND GRANCH GO GO GO ITS COOL AND WE NEED MONEY!” in every single RPS article. I can understand enthusiasm, but I can’t stand copy-pasta spam.

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        They were spamming the Steam forums too, and undoubtedly other sites.

        The spam alone was enough to turn me off of showing any interest in Ground Branch.

      • jsonedecker says:

        Well we can’t stop enthusiastic fans. :)

        We did make sure to remind people to be respectful and not to spam when talking about GB, but at the end of the day it’s up to them to do so.

        I’m the Creative Director and Founder of BFS, and all I can say is sorry for that.

  26. neonordnance says:

    WHO DO I HAVE TO FUCK TO GET A WW2 SHOOTER WITH DESTRUCTIBLE BUILDINGS?

    Seriously, there is no way I can get into a “realistic” WW2 shooter without that. Static buildings just don’t do it for me anymore. Destructible terrain is a crucial part of urban warfare.

    • MegaMouth says:

      The ARMA guys could do an awesome WW2 shooter with destructible buildings.

  27. Premium User Badge

    Lars Westergren says:

    Kickstarter is for adventure games!

    I didn’t mail this to RPS since it isn’t a PC game but rather iOS and Android. But I hope it is permitted in the comments because I think it looks promising.

    http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sfbgames/detective-grimoire-mystery-adventure-game-for-ios

  28. Jorum says:

    If I were in Neal Stephenson’s position I’d be considering giving someone $50K to pledge, in order to secure the other $450K .

    • MegaMouth says:

      There’s a 100 percent chance of it funding for that fact alone.

    • malkav11 says:

      Yet again, as I apparently have to post in every Kickstarter article, this would be a flagrant violation of Kickstarter’s TOS that would get all funding pulled. It won’t happen.

      • Phasma Felis says:

        Good thing Kickstarter has those telepathic accountants working for them who can detect where money comes from, then.

        Come on, man. We all know it’s against Kickstarter’s rules, and we all know that it wouldn’t be that hard to get away with anyway, and people surely do.

  29. TechnicalBen says:

    Retrovirus looked promising, but I’m all kickstarted out. :P

  30. AlienMind says:

    Thank you for mentioning Reincarnation, John!
    I (and Chris I presume) can now rest a little easier.

  31. Valhuen says:

    Exodus Wars looks promising, it is based off a 6mm miniature game (don’t play it myself, primarily a 15mm & 28mm gamer/painter). Already has a fleshed out background and all the designs have been released in miniature form the last few years (ala “40K lite”). Will definitely back this just to support a hobby crossover.

    Exodus Wars miniatures site:

    http://www.exoduswars.com/

    • Premium User Badge

      Trinnet says:

      It looks very promising, it’s just a shame they’re using ‘flexible funding’, a choice which seems to be in nobody’s best interest:

      Flexible funding actively discourages customers from giving money to projects which aren’t either almost at or already past their goal. It punishes customers who do commit early, leaving them stuck paying for a product which if it materialises at all will likely be less complete and take longer to get made.

      And it also hurts developers, the obvious disadvantages for customers creates reluctance to be amongst the early backers, making it hard for a project to get any momentum going.

  32. Dizzard says:

    I feel bad for retrovirus since it looks like a high quality game. It’s just not down my alley at all.

    It’s still a shame though, it looks like the kind of thing that should have some following somewhere.

  33. WhiteKnight77 says:

    I cannot believe half of what I see. How many people, including you, the article writer, John Walker, have any idea on how much it costs to develop a game? I would venture to say, not very many of you.

    I see people saying that Ground Branch was to be an MP only game, but there you showed how well you failed to actually read the information given you and I see people failing to read this too. Initially, GB is to be an MP only release with some basic Coop gameplay against bots. If GB had met the stretch goal of $700,000 it would include SP and Coop at release. BFS has every intention of having an SP and Coop campaign in the game. The reading comprehension of people is atrocious in this day and age.

    With games like BF3 and CoD costing $10,000,000 or more to develop, it is a wonder a company like BFS is able to develop a game for under $1,000,000 or at least 10 times less than what other developers spend. Can anyone else develop a AAA game for under a million dollars? @ defunkt, BFS has already spend thousands of dollars to get Ground Branch to a somewhat playable state, that is more than another (and it is referenced in this thread too) KS campaign had and they created what they had while working other jobs too. You want to criticize but fail to see the whole picture. Do you or anyone else here want to come home and work on something after working 12-18 hour at your day job while trying to earn the money to clothe, feed and house your family and create a game? That is what the handful of devs creating GB is doing. Unless you can walk a mile in those devs shoes, you cannot know what is going on unless you take the time to find out.

    BFS is at the point that they need the “half a million dollars” to complete the game. To license AI and finish animations and create more maps costs money. They may have misread what gamers want with all the moaning about crappy games and such who failed to back a project that offered something completely different than what they have been playing. Has gamer burnout of Kickstarter project hampered their campaign, more than likely. My opinion is that while gamers moan and complain about no ingenuity in gaming today, they could care less about it when it smacks them in the face and will still buy the same old crap that they have been moaning about for years.

    • dE says:

      What? Oh wow. So much anger in that post. I’m quite sure people know how expensive it is to make a game. Thus when people say “that’s really a lot” you absolutely have to see it in context. Which in this case is Kickstarter. Here 425.000 IS quite a lot. The only ones that got above that much money are those with big names, reputation or communities attached to them.

      On a sidenote, the project was quite a bit america centric. 10% earnings going to a charity project for US Special ops families? Uh thanks but no. No. Just no.

    • srulz says:

      @WhiteKnight77:

      Just who are you to say “Unless you can walk a mile in those devs shoes, etc2″. Can you do so? Are you one of the devs then?

      However, the hostility (or maybe you regard that as “passion”?) of GB’s “fans” are pretty much apparent in your post. For example, this statement:

      “The reading comprehension of people is atrocious in this day and age”

      Yeah, we want a single player game. But we don’t want to pour our hard-earned money into the KS if that’s not even 1 of the features we will *certainly* get. Stretch goals? No thanks. Delays? No thanks.

      Please use your obviously greater-than-the-rest-of-us reading comprehension to comprehend that, thank you.

      • BOTA49 says:

        WK isn’t a dev, but he’s one of the ones who’s been around since the company first opened it’s forums 5 years ago. I’ve known him since the Ghost Recon days, and he’s pretty passionate about realism in his games. He does have a point, although I admit he probably could have said it a little better.

        We all want a single player game, however I just cannot wrap my head around the idea of the “all or nothing” thought that people have in regards to Kickstarter campaigns. It’s like everyone expects the world out of the game, and if it doesn’t promise everything they want right from the start then it’s dismissed. Stretch goals are there for a reason, I think that’s rather apparent. If they would have asked for $700k with a guaranteed SP and coop campaign on release, I doubt it would have hit more than $500k based on reactions here and in other various forums/websites anyway. The MP part is just to get the game lifted, and it’s unfortunate that the “all or nothing” notion some people have stuck so hard that they couldn’t understand that if the game was funded, that they WOULD have received what they wanted, just not on release (and at no extra charge if they donated during the Kickstarter, no less).

        Delays? It’s part of the gaming industry. Big time devs and publishers delay titles all the time, what’s wrong with delaying content of an indie game? Unless it’s a small platforming title so many people expect things out of something like Ground Branch that you could really only get out of a title from a big time publisher or dev. Ground Branches initial release would have been similar to Counter-Strike in that it was MP only with basic bots, but, unless the game completely tanked, it would have grown into something akin to Ghost Recon or Rainbow Six.

        I hope this game gets developed more than any other title I’m looking forward to, mainly because unlike most gamers, my favorite genre has been ignored since 2007 (GRAW 2), and hasn’t had a really good title since 2003 (Raven Shield). I like ArmA for what it is, but it will never be on par with those titles as long as it tries to focus on anything and everything.

        I also believe that some things weren’t really clear during this KS campaign either, though. Such as the SP and coop being added in regardless of the stretch goal being met, just at a later date, or a rough estimate of the amount of content on the initial release. It was definitely a learning experience for those of us who are stuck 10 years in the past hoping for a style we love to make it comeback.

        • Premium User Badge

          Trinnet says:

          “We all want a single player game, however I just cannot wrap my head around the idea of the “all or nothing” thought that people have in regards to Kickstarter campaigns.”

          In this case, it’s not at all hard to imagine that there’re a large number of people who would be very excited about a game like this if it had single player, yet not at all interested if it’s MP only. They’re not being awkward or dogmatic, they’re just not being offered an experience they’re interested in.

          • WhiteKnight77 says:

            I dislike DM and TDM and prefer Coop and SP, but I can appreciate and play TvT game modes that have objectives (think siege or assassination) and there was talk about a new TvT game called Jerm VVarfare after the BFS member who thought it up (the community has had an impact in the development of GB). Still, I pledged $500 for the KS campaign even if I were not going to get what I would rather play until a later date. This is one of the reasons why I ranted so.

            I watched all sorts of people say the same thing and because they were not getting their way right off the bat, they felt it not worthy of pledging money to a worth cause. They would have gotten their game, even if not on the day of release. The sad thing is, they are willing to pay for DLC on the day of launch when that stuff should be included with the game to begin with.

          • BOTA49 says:

            That’s the thing though, they WOULD have gotten it, and for free (well, minimum $15 for a pledge). It was just a matter of waiting and a small gamble that the initial game wouldn’t take off enough to be able to create that experience, but that gamble is no different than if the game offered it at release because there is still the risk that, despite meeting the goal, that the game would cease development at some point anyway. Plus, the majority of the people I’d imagine could easily have afforded $15 on that small gamble, but since it wasn’t promised at launch nobody wanted to hear it.

            Again, I don’t understand the all or nothing approach to something like this. It’s not like they said that it would and will always be a MP only title, they specifically stated that they really wanted coop and SP (again, I have to admit it wasn’t very clear initially, but it was there nonetheless). However, I still don’t believe that if they offered MP and coop at 700k as the definitive goal and the whole shebang at 2 million (instead of being stretch goals) that they would have been funded either.

        • srulz says:

          Thank you for not being all high and mighty about this whole affair, unlike the previous poster.

          Anyway, just want to address a little something: what I mean by “delays”, are not delays for the development of the game itself, but delays in the SP portion of the game, which will be added “sometimes after launch”, which is not exactly reassuring.

          • BOTA49 says:

            Not a problem :)

            We’re all just really passionate about having a game that finally suits us, and nothing has ever come even remotely close, despite promises from other companies *evil glare towards Ubisoft*.

            Again, with the delayed SP, I understand having reserves about it, but don’t you think that putting $15 towards the potential of having it would have been better than waiting for another broken promise from another big company? Of course, that depends on how much you want new tactical shooters I guess, but I’ve always thought of it as more of an investment at the chance of having something I want instead of a purchase.

            Also, this isn’t quite directed at you, but to everyone else who got annoyed, irritated, or outright pissed at those of us who supported this game and were extremely vocal about it, I do apologize for it, but again it comes from passion and really wanting to see a game that we haven’t had in close to a decade.

      • WhiteKnight77 says:

        Yeah, there is some hostility in my post and it is warranted. And yes, the comprehension level of people nowadays is atrocious and you showed that you failed to do exactly that. SP was always intended to be included in the game, it was just a matter of when. Would you rather they had asked for $700,000 during the KS campaign so SP and Coop could be included at launch? Newsflash, MP gameplay also includes Coop and yes, basic Coop was to be included in the basic release. Nowhere was it stated that there would be no Coop on release whatsoever.

        BFS could make a game with SP and Coop for release using just the standard UT bots, but that means short changing customers both potential and ones who have already stated they would buy the game right now. Instead, BFS wants to give gamers something more than the same garbage that they do complain about.

        I am not one of the devs, but I have an inkling of what is going on, more than most, as well as some others that are regulars at BFS. We have seen the development progress over the years to see what was shown during the KS campaign. BFS also has been the most open I have seen any devs be dating back to 2000-2002. All other devs, and publishers for that matter, keep a tight lid on everything until they are ready to start the real PR push. Sure they release a few CGI trailers or rendered screenshots, but BFS has shown actual playable space during development and especially with this KS campaign.

        • malkav11 says:

          I would possibly have backed Ground Branch if it had included either singleplayer or cooperative play as the primary game mode included in the base funding requested. They could then have listed the remaining game modes as stretch goals. I’m not going to back a game that, if funded, will not be a game I want to play, and since I don’t play competitive multiplayer, Ground Branch didn’t qualify. What’s so hard to understand about that?

          Kickstarting is, by its very nature, something of a gamble, but even someone willing to take the gamble that the game will be made and live up to its promised qualities would be ill advised to gamble on it including things they want that -weren’t- promised.

          • WhiteKnight77 says:

            That’s the problem. BFS can create a game with basic Coop and SP, but in today’s market, games with basic AI would be no better than the games that Ground Branch are not trying to emulate such as BF and CoD. Gamers are wanting advanced AI and that costs money.

            Gamers also want games that look good. Again that costs money. Which would you rather have first, a game that looks good with no substance (crappy AI) or a game that has great AI but does not look good? Everywhere I look, people all say that they like good looking games and gameplay is secondary. There are some of us who thing gameplay is primary over looking good, but we are few and far between. Getting the animations done and done right, which affects all parts of a game is more imperative than ensuring that there is great AI to begin with as AI only affects half the game.

            Remember that ArmAII has people complaining (or at least from what I have seen and read) about the animations and worse, the clunky command system.

          • malkav11 says:

            Again, I expect the person or persons creating the Kickstarter project to budget appropriately. If they think a singleplayer tactical shooter in the vein they described would have cost more than $425k, then by all means, ask for what it would cost. I will back projects that are looking to make a game that I want to play, the overall pricetag is not the issue. I might look dubiously at a project that’s purporting to deliver a lot more than the asked funding seems likely to be able to deliver, but asking for more than they’re likely to get won’t put me off giving it a shot anyway – it certainly didn’t with the two failed attempts at the 1986 Portal remake, which was a project I really wanted. Ground Branch was not looking to make a game I wanted to play. Stretch goals are all fine and well, but if they involve the game being something that would interest me to begin with, I’m not going to back until after they’re reached, and Ground Branch didn’t even fund, let alone hit stretch goals.

    • Jimbo says:

      Yep, 18 hours at work and then working on the game when they get home. True story.

    • gwathdring says:

      Backing a kickstarter is not a moral imperative. What you perceive as people whining and moaning and dragging their feet rather than donate to a worthy cause is largely people just not seeing it as a game they would buy were it released tomorrow. And if I’m not interested in partaking of the product, I’m almost certainly not going to donate to the product’s development.

      You seem to be taking this rather personally. Sure, people made some silly complaints about the game. Maybe it’s “unfair” that it didn’t get more support than it ultimately ended up with. But the Kickstarter came up quite a bit short. Clearly there was either too small of a target audience or some miscommunication. If the latter, communication being mutual in nature, something wasn’t working on the developer side of things either.

      You can make snide remarks about reading comprehension spew preachy invective all you want, but at the end of the day not enough people wanted to give money to a project you cared about. I am sorry you’ve been so severely disappointed and it’s great that you were so excited about the project … but righteous anger isn’t the right response to discovering your pet project was more of a niche interest than you’d hoped.

    • AlienMind says:

      “My opinion is that while gamers moan and complain about no ingenuity in gaming today, they could care less about it when it smacks them in the face and will still buy the same old crap that they have been moaning about for years.”
      Quoted for truth. Look at the still ongoing sales of BF3, they hold out the “DLC” and “Premium” carrot, and everybody forgets about the things they whined about, yesterday (Origin etc)

      • dE says:

        Rather “quoted for bullshit”. It’s the pretty idiotic, yet wide spread assumption that gamers are a homogeneous mass of tastes and preferences and speak as one. A conglomerate of uneducated stupid unison of opinion, so to speak in dire conflict with the plus one – whomever wants to feel special by going up against that perceived unity.

        There is NO such unity amongst gamers. There is no such thing as “gamers”. Every opinion, every statement is ever only representative of one single person. Statements made in contrast aren’t an indicative for widespread schizophrenia or stupid amongst the imagined gamers, but rather the result of two different entities coming to different conclusions. It’s really the root of all gamer issues and flame-wars. I occasionally forget that as well. But who am I kidding. Keep on raging about “them stupids”.

  34. marcusfell says:

    Quick and stupid question: who would back a kickstarter to end national debt?

    • MadTinkerer says:

      And how would that happen?

      The only way to reduce or wipe out the debt of a country is to get the politicians to spend less than they take in taxes. Giving more money to people who are already spending too much will just result in them spending even more.

      EDIT: Also, we’re talking about the Billions of Dollars scale here. Kickstarter is effectively invisible to politicians.

  35. CaptainDeathbeard says:

    Dude what is your problem with flexible funding? Whats wrong with the developer getting a little extra money to help make the game if they are up front and honest about it?

    • InternetBatman says:

      I believe his problem with flexible funding is that projects can take your money even if they don’t get enough money to make a quality product. I tend to agree with him. The goal is a form of quality control, albeit an imperfect one, and giving a few thousand to a game that needs a few hundred thousand is a bad idea.

    • malkav11 says:

      There’s nothing wrong with flexible funding, per se. But it’s important to note that that’s what’s being used because people used to Kickstarter are used to paying only when a project successfully funds.

    • LintMan says:

      The general premise of kickstarter et al is that the developer states they need $X amount of money to complete their project. You then donate money to help them reach their goals, and in return you will receive the rewards specified, which very typically includes a completed version of the project.

      As a donator, you are assuming the risk that the developer will not complete the project and will fail to provide the promised rewards. This is a matter of trust – there are no refunds. But at least you know that you won’t pay any money out unless enough is collected to actually finance the project to full completion, so you can reasonably expect the developer to achieve their goals.

      With flexible funding, the developer gets your money regardless of whether or not it reaches any of its stated goals or targets. If it does not reach them, the ability of the developer to provide the promised rewards is now questionable. While you can say “every little bit helps”, this starts making things look more like donations, as the “reward” part becomes more suspect.

      Now, asking for donations isn’t bad, per se. but there is risk that people expecting the traditional ks model will be surprised and angry to discover that they paid their money but won’t be getting the rewards they were promised, at least not anytime soon.

      This is also bad for developers, because now there is incentive to backers to “wait and see”, and only back the project after it has already reached its goal, to avoid giving money to an unsuccessful project.

  36. zaik says:

    Cult came out at 680%, and the Repopulation came out at 212%. Both had to add last minute stretch goals that they didn’t meet but decided they’d add in anyway after it was all said and done.

    For what it’s worth, The kickstarter for Kenshi seemed to be more for gauging interest and drumming up publicity than actually funding the game, the guy has been selling preorders that work more or less off the same concept Minecraft did for a while now.

  37. PPOY52 says:

    Clang made it! :D

  38. juffs says:

    I can’t wait to see DiveKick fail – Adam “JW” Heart is a prick and a moron.

  39. dhankinson says:

    THANK ALMIGHTY GALACTIC LORD XENU!!!!!!!! CATSUP! It’s glorious, harmonious, tombstonious CATSUP!!!! yum