Kxmode wrote on Mar 2, 2016, 10:45:
eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 2, 2016, 06:21:
The problem is that if you had any idea how game development works you'd not be surprised at this at all.... even decent indy devs can end up running themselves against a rock, feature creeping and never ending up with a fun product that's worthy to be released. Game development isn't a science where you mix ideas and suddenly they produce a fun game out of thin air once you input X amount of money.... and "street cred" means jack shit nowadays. The digital sales landscape has drastically changed the past 2 years.
What you say and mean is total nonsense. Just because you don't like crowdfunding games we should wipe these above mentioned games out of existence or what? Because that would have been the result had your oppinion any sway in gamer communities (thankfully most of us are old enough to know what patience means, and we don't cry over 20$ lost on 1 project of 20 ,p)
Btw, FIG and all those other platforms that are not KS and indiegogo are another matter imo.
With all due respect there's a huge difference between patience and expectation. My patience is based on the expectation of what the company pitches to me (the backer), what they say to the media, and in dev videos. I can assure you that my reaction to crowdfunding and early access is a product of their failure to deliver on their promises.
It's based on experience. Every single project I backed has yet to be fully released. I've backed non game projects like an animated series called Hullabaloo; created by former Disney animation professionals. If a few of these projects missed their target date or were released late I wouldn't mind, but virtually all of them have done this proving to me that for the most part crowdfunding is a dismal failure. Basically the only thing that I backed that turned out to be successful was MADE, a video game museum in Oakland, California. They were raising funds to keep their museum open for the next few years.
I really appreciate your point of view on this matter but you have to understand something. When someone is repeatedly lied to, taken for a sucker, not given what they paid for according to the pitch eventually this erodes trust. When these pitch people make promises to potential backers they better deliver. So until I see more evidence of companies actually delivering on their promises I stand by what I said. I will not back crowdfunded or buy early access games.
I always respect your opinion
I know you had a ton of bad experiences, and I can't blame you for being doubtful of the whole system, but for many of us we had no such thing. I didn't back a single thing (yet) that didn't deliver exactly what was promised (for Star Citizen I am suspecting I get way more, and maybe something different, than I ever wanted). Sure the time-frame was out of whack often, but I worked on enough indy games to know that a sudden increase in scope (or the discovery that what you made SUCKS) can completely wreck your entire timeplan.
The problem is, it seems, that you funded projects you really wanted to come to fruition that severely
understated the money they needed and thus are always at the fringe of collapse. $80,000USD for Hullabaloo for example threw up all the red flags for me. There is no way you make animated hand-drawn (whatever that means) movie for 80k -tax -fee.. so they got 470k.. but imo that is still only half to a third of that they really had needed.
Basically I can understand you though. If I had such a bad streak I would not crowdfund either. Currently I have 4 projects still ongoing.. 2 really low impact indy games (1 seems to be on track, 1 seems dead), Star Citizen, and that vampire sidescroller whose name I always forget ;p
So far my success chance was thus... 91% .. I am very VERY picky with my pledges though. For example I looked at that animated steam punk movie back when it was funding phase and dropped it because I thought the entire first notion was wrong. They seemed to have no idea what (HD) animation actually costs.