Op Ed

Cliffski's Blog - Kickstarting inequality.
Kickstarter is the absolute poster-child for inequality amongst gamers, based on income. Now I am definitely not a raging socialist, but I know a lot of gamers are, and I find it a bit weird that it doesn’t bug them that when these kickstarter games ship, not only will gamers with more money that them be swanning around with better outfits and weapons, (This already happens in F2P games), but some of the NPC’s will have the names of the ‘wealthy’ backers. Some will even have their digitized faces in the game. Elite is actually naming PLANETS after people who back the game with a lot of money.

Gamers say they hate in-game product placement and advertising. It compromises the game design for the sake of money. I agree. So why are we deciding that the best way to name our planets or design the appearance of our NPC’s is to put that part of game design up for auction? Why should gamers who are wealthy get more influence over a game that those who flip burgers for a living? The cold hard economic reality of the real world is bad enough without shoehorning it into games too.

View : : :
36.
 
Re: Op Ed
Nov 25, 2012, 07:59
Dev
36.
Re: Op Ed Nov 25, 2012, 07:59
Nov 25, 2012, 07:59
Dev
 
NewMaxx wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 04:43:
Dev wrote on Nov 25, 2012, 04:13:
So was my post just too long to respond to? lol

I think you made some good points, but your initial assertion of jealousy seems misplaced. I do agree, however, that the overall arguments presented in the blog are outdated or incorrect.

An example I could give is Mount & Blade, which I followed from the very start, and seeing this talented couple do it on the side with great community feedback was inspiring. Yet it wasn't until they got publisher backing and released a full version, on places like Steam, that it became profitable enough to be a full-blown occupation, which in turn enabled much faster response and rapid improvements. It's naive to think that funding isn't a huge factor or that developers can be "single-minded" and ignore their community.

So to re-iterate what I stated in my post below and on the blog, I feel that he's leaning towards the "open" aspect more than the "investment" aspect, when the reality is that the modern gaming industry for the PC is an ugly hybrid that's still very much working itself out. Yet I feel anybody who falls to the wayside in either direction will ultimately get left behind.

Community-driven is the future and to ignore disparate funding would be like Wikipedia demanding a specific donation amount, or the government charging everybody the same tax. The whole point of open is that people can be involved to a level of their choosing, and more importantly for transparency regardless of investment.
Thanks for the response.
The jealousy thing is my opinion, I admit it could be wrong.
You have a great point about Mount & Blade. And there's many other examples where a good community can help with constructive feedback.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
23.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
24.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
26.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
27.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
   Re: Op Ed
41.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
   Re: Op Ed
44.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
    Re: Op Ed
45.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
     Re: Op Ed
47.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
      Re: Op Ed
48.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
       Re: Op Ed
50.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
        Re: Op Ed
52.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
         Re: Op Ed
53.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
          Re: Op Ed
57.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
           Re: Op Ed
58.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
            Re: Op Ed
70.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
             Re: Op Ed
71.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
              Re: Op Ed
77.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
               Re: Op Ed
78.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                Re: Op Ed
80.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                 Re: Op Ed
79.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                Re: Op Ed
81.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                 Re: Op Ed
83.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                  Re: Op Ed
54.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
       Re: Op Ed
55.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
        Re: Op Ed
56.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
         Re: Op Ed
59.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
          Re: Op Ed
60.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
           Re: Op Ed
62.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
            Re: Op Ed
64.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
             Re: Op Ed
67.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
              Re: Op Ed
65.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
           Re: Op Ed
66.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
            Re: Op Ed
72.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
             Re: Op Ed
73.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
              Re: Op Ed
74.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
               Re: Op Ed
75.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                Re: Op Ed
76.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                 Re: Op Ed
82.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
               Re: Op Ed
85.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                Re: Op Ed
86.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                 Re: Op Ed
87.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                  Re: Op Ed
88.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                   Re: Op Ed
89.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
                    Re: Op Ed
46.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
     Re: Op Ed
49.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
     Re: Op Ed
51.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
      Re: Op Ed
61.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
       Re: Op Ed
63.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
        Re: Op Ed
68.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
         Re: Op Ed
69.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
          Re: Op Ed
94.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
    Re: Op Ed
25.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
29.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
38.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
2.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
3.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
4.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
6.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
19.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
   Re: Op Ed
20.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
    Re: Op Ed
5.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
7.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
8.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
9.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
11.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
   Re: Op Ed
13.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
    Re: Op Ed
21.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
     Re: Op Ed
10.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
12.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
14.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
15.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
16.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
17.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
18.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
22.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
28.
Nov 24, 2012Nov 24 2012
31.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
30.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
32.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
33.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
34.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
35.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
 36.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
  Re: Op Ed
40.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
37.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
39.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
42.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
43.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
99.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
100.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
   Re: Op Ed
101.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
    Re: Op Ed
102.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
     Re: Op Ed
103.
Nov 27, 2012Nov 27 2012
      Re: Op Ed
104.
Nov 27, 2012Nov 27 2012
       Re: Op Ed
84.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
90.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
91.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
92.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
93.
Nov 25, 2012Nov 25 2012
95.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
96.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
97.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012
98.
Nov 26, 2012Nov 26 2012