27 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >
 |
| 27. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 12:10 |
Jensen |
|
|
wtf_man wrote on Jul 5, 2013, 09:25:
So, lets say they didn't have any other projects profits to dump into this? What then?
...
One doesn't spend money that they don't have. I suppose the second half will have to be a text adventure if the early access totally fails. When that happens, I'll consider the project mismanaged. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 26. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 09:25 |
wtf_man |
|
|
Jensen wrote on Jul 5, 2013, 02:48:
They haven't run out of money!!! They could still choose to scale it back. They believe in their game so much that they are putting all their other profits into the game. How is that an issue to you?
They still have to RAISE money, which is why they are trying to sell 1/2 of it early to non-backers. Why would a Non-Backer buy half a game that they weren't all that interested in, in the first place? This plan will fail.
So, lets say they didn't have any other projects profits to dump into this? What then? It comes right back to the original point that they shouldn't have built this big of a game with the budget they got.
Some restraint and accountability would go a long way in providing trust for future projects. It's called fiscal responsibility. One doesn't spend money that they don't have. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 25. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 07:54 |
Smellfinger |
|
|
Jensen wrote on Jul 5, 2013, 02:48:
That's a dumb distinction. Time=Money.
Time tends to equal too much money in this bloated and decadent industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 24. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 06:35 |
Dmitri_M |
|
|
| Perhaps too many failed Kickstarters will teach us why traditional game development is run by bean counting MBA grads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 23. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 04:06 |
Falaffel |
|
|
| Sad as the missmanagement is people need to calm down. So the game got delayed, that happens all the time. It will be the end product that matters, if that is up to par then this little debacle will be all forgotten. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 22. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 02:48 |
Jensen |
|
|
wtf_man wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 20:48:
I'm more pissed about them running out of money than another delay. Sorry, to me that is majorly irresponsible. That's a dumb distinction. Time=Money.
They haven't run out of money!!! They could still choose to scale it back. They believe in their game so much that they are putting all their other profits into the game. How is that an issue to you?
The only thing that they haven't met is their release date. That would only concern me if it was a Hardware project, because Hardware can become outdated very quickly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 21. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 01:34 |
Cutter |
|
|
So long as you have your core game and stretch goals laid out it's not a problem look at DOS, PE, etc. Core game in place. Each stretch goal was for something specific in addition to that. That's how you do a KS/build a game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Hey! Nobody calls Moe St. Cool a phony!" |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 20. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 5, 2013, 01:19 |
eRe4s3r |
|
|
The thing I don't get is why anyone is surprised ^^ the KS blurb made it clear they had no real plan going forward, not for 400k and not for 3000k. All the while expectations raised skywards. I hope this won't affect Project Eternity in the same way (Given they asked for 1.1m and got 4.1m)
Should we expect a game of a scope x times larger just because it got more money? The answer is a clear NO. More money can always be put in many things, art, voice recording, more fleshed outness of the existing content, higher density of lore and stuff. But the game scope should have been set in stone.
Kickstarter is a devious trap for some developers. Never try to play catch up to ever changing expectations. Pitch your thing, and remain true to your pitch. No matter the money.
Sidenote: I had a good laugh reading the comments on Eternity latest update: Crafting and Item Degradation. I see they bring out the community whoppers now... don't think you ever will find an agreement over item degradation yes/no ^^
This comment was edited on Jul 5, 2013, 01:28. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 19. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 21:09 |
wtf_man |
|
|
I'm 31 minutes into the latest episode... they just started discussing the scope problem.
I'm not happy about the delay either... but it all meshes with Tim designing way too much game for the budget he got. And really... I didn't sign up for what I'd consider to be a AAA scoped adventure game. Like I said... I can understand them wanting to enhance it since they got 3M vs. 400K... but it's like Tim was in a candy store and went totally overboard. So, yeah... I'm very disappointed in him. I think they would have done better with something more reasonably scoped, in order to get a better name for themselves, and more of their other projects sold. They blew it, for the most part, IMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 18. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 20:54 |
Sepharo |
|
|
wtf_man wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 20:48:
I'm more pissed about them running out of money than another delay. Sorry, to me that is majorly irresponsible.
Ahh, your post made it seem like you were mad about the game being better quality and longer than you anticipated.
edit: Are you watching the documentary? I feel like I've got my money worth out of that already and I suppose the longer the game takes to make the more documentary episodes too  An epic LucasArts + DoubleFine style Adventure game can take as long as it wants in my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 17. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 20:48 |
wtf_man |
|
|
Sepharo wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 20:36:
You were mistaken then. The game was significantly ramped up during the very successful Kickstarter and this was communicated in the updates. You should've got out then if you were only interested in a short Adventure game.
IMO, "ramped-up" != Running out of money and not even having half a game, yet.
They got over 8x more than what they asked for. That doesn't mean make 16x more game.
I'm more pissed about them running out of money than another delay. Sorry, to me that is majorly irresponsible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 16. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 20:36 |
Sepharo |
|
|
wtf_man wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 19:30:
Sepharo wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 15:33:
I asked this in the other thread... Is there anyone upset about how Broken Age is going that actually backed the project?
Yep.
I'm one.
I didn't catch your post in the other thread. I think I sufficiently explained why I'm upset in the other thread, so there is no need to re-hash it.
And yes... if I could get a refund, I would take it.
Ah didn't catch yours there...
wtf_man wrote:
I'm not talking about a firm release date. I'm talking about what was "pitched" in order to get you to back the project.
It was pitched as an old school point and click adventure that would only need 400k because it wasn't going to be AAA. Therefore October of 2012 was a fair estimate. They got extra money and wanted to enhance it... fine... Spring 2013 was a fair estimate. (THEY set these estimates, not me). Now we learn that they designed it so overblown (Like a AAA title) that they ran out of money.
NOBODY asked for a AAA title, nor expected one. (Let alone a AAA schedule and budget). This is NOT what was pitched.
Having no plan doesn't excuse the scopecreep.
If they put out a nice little adventure game like they originally intended.... and had it out within a reasonable amount of time within their estimates.. I'd be backing almost any Double Fine project. Now, I won;'t back any more. The trust was broken, IMO.
You were mistaken then. The game was significantly ramped up during the very successful Kickstarter and this was communicated in the updates. You should've got out then if you were only interested in a short Adventure game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 15. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 19:30 |
wtf_man |
|
|
Sepharo wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 15:33:
I asked this in the other thread... Is there anyone upset about how Broken Age is going that actually backed the project?
Yep.
I'm one.
I didn't catch your post in the other thread. I think I sufficiently explained why I'm upset in the other thread, so there is no need to re-hash it.
And yes... if I could get a refund, I would take it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 14. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 18:22 |
Beamer |
|
|
Games not coming through, or sucking, will be a problem if and when it happens.
This game risks neither of those. Backers will get it. They will love it. No one will remember the original promised date. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 13. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 18:11 |
Flatline |
|
|
Cutter wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 13:09:
And don't forget Shadowrun has been delayed twice now and they're out of money which is why it's finally being shipped.
Yeah, the first delay was when KS shattered their goal in 24 hours and they like quintupled the size of the game. They said even before the end of the KS that the schedule was going to have to change.
The second delay was a whopping month. Probably to implement VR Matrix.
And they delayed the game for a month *after* they went through the KS money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 17:54 |
Creston |
|
|
Prez wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 13:18:
Which is about as likely as Kate Upton showing up at my door dressed in a stars and stripes bikini for the 4th.
I would belt out the loudest "GOD BLESS AMERICA!" ever if that happened.
Creston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 11. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 17:53 |
Creston |
|
|
Cutter wrote on Jul 4, 2013, 13:09:
Yes, but he didn't say games, he said projects - in general. And yes, there have been a lot of problems with a lot of projects. Ouya, Pebble, DF, et al. And don't forget Shadowrun has been delayed twice now and they're out of money which is why it's finally being shipped. Look at everything that got cut from it. I have a little more faith in Fargo and co. given his history - same with Obsidian - but aside from them you can colour me wary on just about everything else coming out of KS from now on. In the next year or two we're really going to see what's what. Without some tighter standards KS may end up killing itself.
What exactly "got cut" from Shadowrun? Inventory? Shadowrun IS NOT ABOUT inventory, so I really rather doubt it was ever in there.
But hey, if you have no faith in these projects, don't back them. Wait for them to come on Steam and buy them then.
Creston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 10. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 17:45 |
Dmitri_M |
|
|
The backers are the publishers. This is a company approaching it's publisher and saying "hey this is where we're at, we need more time/funding". If the title is looking good the publisher will probably grant extra time/funding but require much closer involvement. With kickstarters the titles should be good, we know roughly what we're getting from the pitch. But if that title is crap, well unlike a publisher who has a contract with the developer he can't cut his losses and release or easily cancel, sue for breach of contract etc. We ultimately don't have that much power. This is a gamble.
If a kickstarter get's to the point of being funded initially one would hope it's already worth potentially kicking in some more cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 9. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 15:33 |
Sepharo |
|
|
I asked this in the other thread... Is there anyone upset about how Broken Age is going that actually backed the project?
The backers came up with the early release idea even before the money people at DF. In the gut wrenching meeting (actually the 2nd one like it) where DF's business types confront Tim and the team about the "too much game not enough money" problem they discuss the ideas and current/potential reactions from backers. Their foremost concerns are the game and the fans. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 4, 2013, 15:13 |
Quboid |
|
|
| The title is a bit over the top, but are you saying that people should NOT be wary when backing a crowd funded project? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
27 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
