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

Op Ed

Thanks nin.

The PA Report - How Valve “devalued” video games, and why that’s great news for developers and players.
Those seem to be wise words, and gamers are increasingly sensitive to the price of the games they play, but when you look at the data you see that Valve has done something magical: The company has found a way to charge less, and earn more. This isn’t a purely selfish move, as developers also praise the pricing structure of these sales. The issue of game pricing is much more complex, and mysterious, than most are willing to admit. - We Don't Need Game Publishers, Hardware Makers or Retailers.
But something critical has changed. While publishers, retailers and hardware makers might still be adding value, they are no longer required. Using the miracle of the internet, game creators can make videogames — good ones! — and sell them to game players without any involvement from traditional publishers, retailers or hardware makers. And when creators don’t have to put their work through the gauntlet of middlemen, with everybody down the line taking their cut of the profits, they can sell those games much more cheaply.

The PA Report - The ugly side of Kickstarter- the risks in backing game dev campaigns are greater than you think.
Of those projects that do manage to ship, some will be good games and some will be awful, with most winding up somewhere in the middle. This is the reality of game development in the real world, and projects funded by Kickstarter are no different. The unfortunate truth is that many backers of game projects are buying the ability to wait 18 months to play a mediocre game.

34. Re: Op Ed Apr 19, 2012, 11:51 Creston
Beamer wrote on Apr 19, 2012, 11:36:

We're kind of saying the same thing.

I know, but I'm at work, and I'm bored.

I mean business plans and milestones more for physical projects, but games to a lesser extent. As the article Blue linked mentioned, some of these projects are coming from people that haven't released anything that think they can make the best FPS ever for $325k. Well, I'd like to know that they've actually sat and thought about where this money is going and why they feel that is the right amount to ask for. We've all read that Kotaku article about the idiots that offered t-shirts without even bothering to price t-shirts and shipping ahead of time! They offered a perk at a new tier without understanding how much additional money they'd actually get from people jumping to that tier. And it was, I think, for an iPad game, yet they didn't even have iPads to develop on, which is another thing I think people should have known ahead of time.

Right, but that's not something inherently against the Kickstarter model. That's just stupid people giving money to stupid people. I don't think you're ever going to get away from that, no matter what model is funding the (potential) production.

Seeing a budget doesn't make us publishers, it just makes us educated.

Well, to an extent; the thing is, I don't have a clue about game budgets. Is a year a realistic time for Double Fine to make an adventure game from scratch? I'd be doubtful, but Schafer and his guys say they can do it, and they're the ones with experience in the matter.

When Weisman said he needed 400,000 to make a Shadowrun game, I was extremely skeptical, since how on earth can you make a game for 400,000? Then I started thinking that if he makes it through crowd funding, he doesn't need to pay for the 900,000 roaches that work in EA's corporate departments (ie, the marketoids and the lawyers and all those other cocksuckers that are a total zero-sum addition to anything), he doesn't have to pay for the $45M "THIS IS THE NEW SHIT!" marketing budget, and hey, who knows... maybe a dedicated dev really CAN make a game for half a million bucks?

In the end, I trust that those guys love this type of game, and the properties, enough that they are being very realistic.

But again, I'd only ever back a game from a guy that I can trust in such a way. I'd never back a new studio. And maybe people will get burned by these new studios enough that they'll become more careful with who they give money too.

We know that, at the very least, they've given thought to this other than sitting around going "well, there's three of us, and we would need 6 months to do this I think because I can code about 1 line per second, and we're each worth $100k/year, so we should ask for $150k!" That's a project almost doomed to fail. But another project where a guy actually plays the role of project manager and figures out a timeline and milestones and someone (maybe the same guy) thinks about what expenses will come up and does some at least reasonable estimating for all of them has a much better chance of succeeding.

But in the end, I still have to take his word for it. And if that word is from someone I don't know, I'm just not going to give him any money.

It's far more true for the people making physical goods, but still true for people making games.

I'd never kickstart anything except games. People kickstarting physical goods are insane imo.

Avatar 15604
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
    Date Subject Author
  1. Apr 18, 21:07 Re: Op Ed mag
  2. Apr 18, 21:17  Re: Op Ed Sepharo
  3. Apr 18, 22:22   Re: Op Ed RollinThundr
  4. Apr 18, 22:30    Re: Op Ed ASeven
  5. Apr 18, 23:02    Re: Op Ed Sepharo
  7. Apr 18, 23:41     Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
  10. Apr 19, 00:35      Re: Op Ed Creston
  12. Apr 19, 02:22       Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
  13. Apr 19, 03:02        Re: Op Ed The Half Elf
  14. Apr 19, 03:36         Re: Op Ed Wowbagger_TIP
  15. Apr 19, 03:46          Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  16. Apr 19, 04:05          Re: Op Ed killer_roach
  37. Apr 19, 12:04           Re: Op Ed ASeven
  17. Apr 19, 05:08          Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
  19. Apr 19, 07:11           Re: Op Ed briktal
  20. Apr 19, 07:24            Re: Op Ed InBlack
  21. Apr 19, 07:28             Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
  27. Apr 19, 11:23             Re: Op Ed Creston
  29. Apr 19, 11:29              Re: Op Ed Beamer
  31. Apr 19, 11:31               Re: Op Ed Creston
  33. Apr 19, 11:43                Re: Op Ed Beamer
  39. Apr 19, 12:05                 Re: Op Ed Creston
  41. Apr 19, 12:50                  Re: Op Ed Beamer
  24. Apr 19, 11:17           Re: Op Ed Creston
  26. Apr 19, 11:21            Re: Op Ed Beamer
  30. Apr 19, 11:30             Re: Op Ed Creston
  32. Apr 19, 11:36              Re: Op Ed Beamer
>> 34. Apr 19, 11:51               Re: Op Ed Creston
  35. Apr 19, 11:54                Re: Op Ed nin
  40. Apr 19, 12:07                 Re: Op Ed Creston
  45. Apr 19, 20:05                  Re: Op Ed Dev
  46. Apr 19, 21:19                   Re: Op Ed Parallax Abstraction
  47. Apr 19, 21:43                    Re: Op Ed nin
  43. Apr 19, 18:55                 Re: Op Ed Retired
  38. Apr 19, 12:05                Re: Op Ed ASeven
  42. Apr 19, 15:00              Re: Op Ed eRe4s3r
  18. Apr 19, 07:05         Re: Op Ed Dev
  6. Apr 18, 23:34   The risk of failure IS greater than you think. IMAPC
  8. Apr 19, 00:26    Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. PropheT
  9. Apr 19, 00:34     Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Retired
  11. Apr 19, 01:56    Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Cutter
  22. Apr 19, 10:07    Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Prez
  23. Apr 19, 11:11     Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Beamer
  25. Apr 19, 11:19      Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Wowbagger_TIP
  28. Apr 19, 11:24       Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Beamer
  36. Apr 19, 11:54        Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Wowbagger_TIP
  44. Apr 19, 19:58      Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Dev
  48. Apr 20, 00:07       Re: The risk of failure IS greater than you think. Beamer
  49. Apr 20, 07:44 Re: Op Ed Dades


Blue's News logo