Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 57 of 57
  1. #41
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Sic View Post
    All this Kickstarter talk is silly.

    People just don't understand what Kickstarter or crowdfunding is. Therefore they should stop talking.

    First of all, going to Kickstarter doesn't entail getting money only from Kickstarter.

    Somewhere along the line people have gotten confused.
    It was probably in the first paragraph of DF's Kickstarter, where they said "With this project, we're taking that door off its hinges and inviting you into the world of Double Fine Productions, the first major studio to fully finance their next game with a Kickstarter campaign and develop it in the public eye."

    Let me say that again. You did not buy a game. You invested in the development of it. The potential best case scenario for a return on that investment is getting to download a high quality game. That is all.
    That can't be why people are getting angry though. Because from a purely 'I bought the game' perspective, backers are benefiting. They're getting more than they paid for. 75% more to be exact, which is a huge win for backers. So there must be something else going on here.

  2. #42
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Malawi Frontier Guard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,219
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post
    There's about 20 hours of documentary footage we've seen detailing the scoping and design process, so I'll say 'yes'.
    I see. Also I'm not very good at combining reading and replying because you adressed this in one of the first paragraphs of the OP, even using similar wording to mine.

    Go on then.

  3. #43
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    Doesn't that only apply to physical goods and not to the game itself?


    I might be inclined to agree but this time they knew exactly how much money they had and were going to build a game within the confines of it. They had no plan for the Kickstarter pitch except to make a classic point and click adventure game within the scope of the funding they received. And then they failed by a significant margin - 75% of the content needing to be cut is a huge chunk of the game which goes beyond unpredictability into the realm of bad planning. I think all of us understand that things can go wrong, and predicting budgets with creative endeavours like this one isn't easy, but that excuse only holds up for so long. To suddenly not be able to fund 75% of your game from your starting budget isn't a simple case of things running over budget.

    This is why publishers aren't all bad - they can at least hold developers accountable for screw-ups. With Kickstarter, not only are they accountable to nobody, but the community will split into two as people alternatively crucify and defend them to the death.
    Holy hell. With those numbers, the ability to fund the rest of the game through post-release sales has seriously been put in doubt in my mind.

  4. #44
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,327
    Quote Originally Posted by Sic View Post
    Again, Kickstarter is just one source of money. It is never the only source of money when a company of a certain size creates a game.
    Somewhere along the line people started thinking the developer owed them something, and even worse, they started thinking they owed them something specific.

    Your investment is minuscule, and you don't have a say in this project at all, and that is, of course, how it should be. The developers are being absolute angels for considering your contribution as worthy of even a mention. Not to mention that you didn't buy anything. You invested in an idea. Let me say that again. You did not buy a game. You invested in the development of it. The potential best case scenario for a return on that investment is getting to download a high quality game. That is all.

    You paid for the toilet paper Tim Schafer uses in a fortnight. You can't expect any form of control over anything.

    I've been talking about all of this as if you had some sort of legal contract with the developer. That you actually invested in an idea. Well, you didn't. You donated money to it. You gave that idea a kick start.

    What Double Fine is doing now is obviously not optimal. It very much is a case of poor planning. But that doesn't involve you. Double Fine are acting like they are, because they're good guys, and they understand that a lot of backers are bellyaching jerks in need of comforting.

    Doing this is quite the endeavour for a company their size, and it was always going to be hard. That they got caught up on economical snags isn't at all surprising.

    What is surprising is all the people donating money in their direction acting like Double Fine pissed in their cornflakes.

    So, yeah, the grumbling around here and other gaming sites is pretty embarrassing. We should be having Double Fines back, we should be supporting them in trying to go through with their insane project. We should be celebrating independent development and economical independence for developers.
    This post is a whole mess of a rant. Here's my attempt to untangle it:
    Yes, the creators of a kickstarter do owe people something. They owe them what's listed the reward tiers. It is a legal contract, especially since both sides sign a ToS, as judges have found in the past. In this case, at the very least they owe them "the finished game in all its glory." Although that says nothing about the size and quality of the game.

    Kickstarter is not an investment. I don't know why, but gamers and technophiles have started using this word when they really mean consumption. Backing a project is usually an act of delayed consumption unless no rewards at all are chosen (which does happen). In that case it is a donation. Investing, spending with a promise to receive later, and even patronage are entirely different acts. The closest example, patronage, is vastly different from investing. Under patronage, you pay money and in return you get a piece of creative expression. When investing, you spend money to help purchase something that will will both make more things and give you your money back.

    And kickstarter is the only source of money for many, many projects, most notably Obsidian and Harebraned Schemes.

    And no, the creator is not required turn over creative control to backers, but allowing some input is both smart and polite.

    We should only be celebrating creator control if it works. The publishing model is unquestionably broken right now, the explosion of three genres onto kickstarter (RPGs, Adventure, and Space Sims) makes that pretty clear. But Kickstarter is only objectively better if it works; if the product is better and more creative.

    And I am a backer, and I'm not worried about this in the slightest, and I did recognize the risk inherent to backing. I think that they've made one or two mistakes (one of which is the dubious 75% claim), but generally they've been more honest than other companies and that has hurt them. But this whole post acts like we should be thanking them for the privilege of giving them our money, and show overwhelming gratitude if they give what they said they would give out of nobless oblige.

    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    Alternatively, Kickstarter is poorly explained and people have become so caught up in "Throw money at this project because advertising!" that nobody's sure what it should be.
    This kickstarter was not poorly explained. They were incredibly explicit about the risks, more so than other project creator I've seen including the quite open and excellent Project Eternity.
    Quote Originally Posted by gundato View Post
    Honestly, I am inclined to agree with you. I really don't get the big deal, and most of their good will dried up after Jack Black: The Video Game in my eyes. But people have a tendency to show loyalty to the devs whose games they have to say "Well, the game isn't great, but..." for.

    On a related note: Why the hell am I supposed to give a crap about American McGee? In the dude's entire career, he did one game that wasn't outright bad. And that was 13 years ago.
    It could be that you are the only one that can clearly evaluate quality or it could be that tastes are subjective. Their less impressive stuff, like Costume Quest, still made me smile and laugh a couple times. I loved Stacking and Psychonauts. Stacking was an Adventure game where I enjoyed the mechanics rather than playing in spite of the mechanics. I haven't played Trenched or Brutal Legend (except for the really good demo). Psychonauts was fun and funny.

    And American McGee was a pretty bad choice of examples. His best game is mediocre and overly dramatic, but had some pretty textures. And Kickstarter is reflecting that; it's trending towards half of what he asked right now, and will probably bottom out lower than that.

  5. #45
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,039
    I would have been happy just with whatever game + documentary that 400k would have funded. Expanding scope and piling on stretch goals is adding to many additional variables that can delay a project. Get what you promised out the door. Then if you really want to add more content, make more to help sell future copies or sell it as DLC.

  6. #46
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Internet View Post
    This kickstarter was not poorly explained. They were incredibly explicit about the risks, more so than other project creator I've seen including the quite open and excellent Project Eternity.
    The Kickstarter proposal was paper thin, it literally was "We're going to make a classic point and click game." No indication of what the game was about, or how it would work, or anything except it's a classic point and click. That's all anybody backed. There's a big difference between that and say for example Planetary Annihilation where they had some of the gameplay idea hashed out and you had some idea of the style of the game. It was funded on Schafer's name alone, because there was nothing there to look at! It advertised Schafer's promise to make some sort of adventure game, as opposed to the many other Kickstarters which at least had a plot or game design doc to post up!

    As for the risks involved - amusingly, the word 'risk' appears only once in the entire Kickstarter page, and it refers to the developers taking risk in some sort of creative orgy of free money. Anything said post-campaign is irrelevant when it comes to backer decision-making, since the funds have already been taken.
    Nalano's Law - As an online gaming discussion regarding restrictions grows longer, the probability of a post likening the topic to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea approaches one.

  7. #47
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Internet View Post
    And I am a backer, and I'm not worried about this in the slightest, and I did recognize the risk inherent to backing. I think that they've made one or two mistakes (one of which is the dubious 75% claim), but generally they've been more honest than other companies and that has hurt them. But this whole post acts like we should be thanking them for the privilege of giving them our money, and show overwhelming gratitude if they give what they said they would give out of nobless oblige.
    I'm a little bit worried. I'm fine if they do exactly what they say, my issue is that they've run into budget issues while just at the tail end of the scoping process. They're now ploughing all their excess money and additional pre-order money into making the entire thing. The issue is what happens if something else goes over budget/schedule? I sort of expected pre-orders for additional money to come in at some point, but I expected that point to be a couple of months away from launch in order to do some extra polishing. They've basically exhausted their last avenues for funding (short of getting a publisher) very early on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moraven View Post
    I would have been happy just with whatever game + documentary that 400k would have funded. Expanding scope and piling on stretch goals is adding to many additional variables that can delay a project. Get what you promised out the door. Then if you really want to add more content, make more to help sell future copies or sell it as DLC.
    Isn't that sort of what they're doing though? Albeit not at that small a level, but they're putting out half the game then selling the other half as DLC...

  8. #48
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    3,857
    I backed the DF Adventure just because I wanted to see Kickstarter become another way for smaller dev companies to gather funding for games. I have very little interest in the actual game that comes out of it. I'm slightly worried now that depending on how this plays out, it'll potential ruin the idea behind kickstarting games as everyone points towards DF as being the first big success at Kickstarter but then becoming the first big flop too.


    *EDIT*

    I didn't back their second project, because although it sounded ok, the troubles the first were going through didn't make me want to put down another bit of money on it. KS was already becoming what I hoped it would.
    Last edited by Jesus_Phish; 08-07-2013 at 03:24 PM.
    "Halo is designed to make the player think "I look like that, I am macho sitting in my undies with my xbox""

    Steam ID

  9. #49
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,327
    Quote Originally Posted by soldant View Post
    The Kickstarter proposal was paper thin, it literally was "We're going to make a classic point and click game." No indication of what the game was about, or how it would work, or anything except it's a classic point and click. That's all anybody backed. There's a big difference between that and say for example Planetary Annihilation where they had some of the gameplay idea hashed out and you had some idea of the style of the game. It was funded on Schafer's name alone, because there was nothing there to look at! It advertised Schafer's promise to make some sort of adventure game, as opposed to the many other Kickstarters which at least had a plot or game design doc to post up!

    As for the risks involved - amusingly, the word 'risk' appears only once in the entire Kickstarter page, and it refers to the developers taking risk in some sort of creative orgy of free money. Anything said post-campaign is irrelevant when it comes to backer decision-making, since the funds have already been taken.
    They said "either this game'll be great or it'll be a spectacular failure and it'll be caught on camera for everyone to see." Also, what's the worst that can happen implies that something bad will happen. That's a pretty blatant acknowledgment of the possibility of failure.
    Last edited by Internet; 08-07-2013 at 12:41 PM.

  10. #50
    Moderator Anthile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    People's Republic of Germany
    Posts
    1,995
    I think one thing people need to learn about Kickstarter is that it's not a store. You're not simply purchasing a product. The problem is that many producers (it's not limited to games) treat Kickstarter like a store and the projects that are closest to giving people the illusion of buying a product instead of potentially tossing money into a furnace tend to be the most successful.
    to wound the autumnal city.

  11. #51
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Kadayi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lagoon West, Vermilion Sands
    Posts
    4,201
    Quote Originally Posted by calabi View Post
    Its pretty easy to predict the budget for a game. Its also easier to stick to a budget. Games can be scaled up or or down more easily than movies. You can remove sections and cut back features.
    Because they all come in under budget just like most new business ventures....
    Why yes you're right I'm deliciously evil

    Tradition is the tyranny of dead men

    Steam:Kadayi Origin: Kadayi GFWL: Kadayi

    Probable Replicant

    *blush* I'm flattered by the attention boys, but please let's not make the thread about liddle old me

    Quote Originally Posted by Finicky View Post
    Kadayi will remain the worst poster on the interwebs.
    Gifmaster 4000 2014 Year of the Gif

    He who controls the Doge controls the universe

  12. #52
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Sparkasaurusmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,259
    When you donate to public radio you get a mug or t-shirt. If you donate and don't get a mug or t-shirt, I don't think many would be too upset, because they weren't BUYING a mug or t-shirt, they were donating to NPR and were 'promised' a mug or t-shirt in return. So something like... T-shirt is to NPR as adventure game is to DF's Kickstarter.

  13. #53
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,039
    Quote Originally Posted by deano2099 View Post


    Isn't that sort of what they're doing though? Albeit not at that small a level, but they're putting out half the game then selling the other half as DLC...
    They are releasing half the game as Steam Early Access so they can get Early Access Funds to help fund the rest of it.

    Now if they had released a game on time and on budget, then developed DLC (or a 2nd episode or a sequel) for it, with the right wording, I'm sure there would be a lot less outcry. Backers got a game. If they liked it they be interested in a sequel/DLC being developed and purchase that. DF would just have to make sure to say they are not cutting anything out of the game but using up their entire budget into the release. But I think Tim has a bit of Molyneux syndrome in him. Fable games still turned out to be all right games, despite not including a lot of what was promised. Tim was in the position to develop an Adventure game with the funding they got, but blew it.


    With Massive Chalice this almost feels like it could be a Ponzi Scheme. The new Kickstarter is likely funding the previous one that went over budget.

  14. #54
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,039
    http://www.google.com/ released an adventure game!

  15. #55
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Moraven View Post
    They are releasing half the game as Steam Early Access so they can get Early Access Funds to help fund the rest of it.
    But that's just wording. It's going on early access but it's not going to be a beta as such, it's going to be a polished, complete first half of the game.

    Had they just pushed out that half of the game to backers and Steam, and said "there you go, that's what the funding paid for, we're making a second part but you'll have to buy that separately" then people would have been a lot more angry.

  16. #56
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Sparkasaurusmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,259
    hahaha Kinda reminds me of Machinarium...but obviously not as awesome.

  17. #57
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,327
    It's a cute little diversion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •