Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Report this Comment
Use this form to report the selected comment to the moderators. Reporting should generally be used only if the comment breaks forum rules.

30. Re: Double Fine Crowdsourcing Feb 9, 2012, 18:39 ASeven
Kosumo wrote on Feb 9, 2012, 17:19:
Total bullshit - gamers giving you as much money as you need to finish the project? Sound like Duke Nukem Forever - they had little to no publisher oversite and look where that ended up. Also L.A. Noire - I'd say (for what I've read) that that game would have failed huge if not for Rockstar input.

While I see this a good for some, it's far from the be all and end all.

It will also be abused by some devs.

(I liken this to when a airport charges you for a departure tax to fund airport up grades - any other business would have to weight up the business case for it and then get a bank loan ..... And since I have to use the airport for work (there is no choice) I must pay - I call this extortion)

Like I've said, if the models catch on and are proved fairly reliable (No business model is entirely reliable in the end) I can see that easily happen. But only if it catches on and that means both gamers and devs trust in it sufficiently to be a success.

You have Tim Schaffer's example, he's near $1M now, if he hasn't surpassed it already. If you have the reputation and the name to stand by it it won't be hard to get crowdsourcing funds fast right now.

If the model is proven to be fairly reliable without too many huge bumps in the process then it's business logic in action, why use a middle man that despite funding you will take a large cut and meddle in your development process if you can appeal to gamers and they might fund you and you keep all the profits to yourself after the game's release? But again, the big if is if this model is proven successful over time. If not, well, other models will spring up and publishers will hold on for a little while longer. But it's undeniable the industry is certainly walking towards ditching publishers as more devs find being indie far more attractive than being published. The main reason devs use a publisher is to get financial backing which still is the biggest weakness of the indie model. Take that away and you'll hardly find any decent reasons to use a publisher. Any clever developer will either discipline itself or find someone to discipline their group to meet deadlines at a reasonable rate, any silly developer will not. I mean, it's not like publishers do enforce that kind of discipline successfuly, the industry is painted with stories of overspending, stupidity and missing deadlines on any game being made under the wing of a publisher.
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.


Blue's News logo