22 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
22.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 10, 2022, 21:48
Kxmode
 
22.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 10, 2022, 21:48
Aug 10, 2022, 21:48
 Kxmode
 
FloodAnxiety wrote on Aug 10, 2022, 15:52:
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 20:49:
Two points worth noting (and clarifying):

1. Crowdfunding is an interest-free loan because promises and commitments are made in exchange for financial support. When indie devs make delivery promises, the crowd owns how it is delivered. For example, in my original post, Snapshot promised Steam and GOG availability at release.

2. I didn't write it's wrong to take additional funds from in/outside sources. I wrote it's wrong to use the public as an interest-free loan, provide assurances, and then sell their game to Epic for $ 2.25 million. Epic is NOT going to honor the original promises of Steam and GOG sim-ship release, and they know that. They poached the game as an exclusive because there were several thousand backers. That's potentially several thousand new EGS users held hostage because they don't want to wait a year, forced to get the game on a platform they don't want to play on.

I stand by what I wrote: "Epic may be great for indies, but their actions reveal a habit of engaging in anti-consumer behavior."
If you had to choose between Snapshot's game never releasing versus what happened, what would you choose and why? Please keep in mind that it sounds like what happened includes them offering refunds to the original backers.

Based on your replies so far... I suspect that you are going to answer that you do not think the game should be released. I'm trying to understand why you think that would be a better outcome for the original backers, for future customers, and for Snashot?

Unfortunately, the article does a terrible job describing Epic's role as a developer. This article on PCGamesN provides more clarity.

"'From our point of view that's great, because we could immediately put that money directly into game development.' The funds from Epic – said to total more than $2 million in the case of Phoenix Point – were used to outsource weapon and character customisation systems for the game. As a result, they're "now coming to the game sooner rather than later."

So this is a situation where Epic Games helped publish Phoenix Point, which is fine as a first-party exclusive on EGS.

Thumbsup
"I used to fence at Bel-Air Academy." "Oh, really? How much do you think we could get for that stereo?"
Avatar 18786
21.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 10, 2022, 15:52
21.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 10, 2022, 15:52
Aug 10, 2022, 15:52
 
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 20:49:
Two points worth noting (and clarifying):

1. Crowdfunding is an interest-free loan because promises and commitments are made in exchange for financial support. When indie devs make delivery promises, the crowd owns how it is delivered. For example, in my original post, Snapshot promised Steam and GOG availability at release.

2. I didn't write it's wrong to take additional funds from in/outside sources. I wrote it's wrong to use the public as an interest-free loan, provide assurances, and then sell their game to Epic for $ 2.25 million. Epic is NOT going to honor the original promises of Steam and GOG sim-ship release, and they know that. They poached the game as an exclusive because there were several thousand backers. That's potentially several thousand new EGS users held hostage because they don't want to wait a year, forced to get the game on a platform they don't want to play on.

I stand by what I wrote: "Epic may be great for indies, but their actions reveal a habit of engaging in anti-consumer behavior."
If you had to choose between Snapshot's game never releasing versus what happened, what would you choose and why? Please keep in mind that it sounds like what happened includes them offering refunds to the original backers.

Based on your replies so far... I suspect that you are going to answer that you do not think the game should be released. I'm trying to understand why you think that would be a better outcome for the original backers, for future customers, and for Snashot?
20.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 9, 2022, 02:19
20.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 9, 2022, 02:19
Aug 9, 2022, 02:19
 
Burrito of Peace wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 17:55:
Beamer wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 16:53:
And since when is crowdfunding a loan?

I would ask since when was crowdfunding not a loan?

Because you never get your money back.
It's more akin to charity than a loan, but it's actually just prepurchasing exception early, with some extreme prepurchase incentives, and little chance of a refund if the game doesn't get released.

Kxmode calling it a loan is outright baffling.
19.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 9, 2022, 01:13
Jim
19.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 9, 2022, 01:13
Aug 9, 2022, 01:13
Jim
 
Tenshinochi wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 21:47:
If the trend of Epic poaching KS projects continues, I would imagine it's going to get a lot harder for indies to find the initial backing they need to get into the situation where they can get a deal from Epic.
poach: means to take illegally, appropriate, or attract away from a competitor
that is used a lot with Epic model. The only time it ever applies is when there is a steam page up for the game and then they switch to Epic. So you can make that claim with Metro: Exodus, but for other games, no. It is not steam that does any funding of any projects. At all. It is fig users and kickstarter users. They might be steam users also, in which case they get offered refunds. Probably why now for most games you no longer see any mention of distribution platform.
18.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 9, 2022, 00:57
Jim
18.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 9, 2022, 00:57
Aug 9, 2022, 00:57
Jim
 
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 13:43:
As noted by many, Snapshot used the public as a temporary interest-free loan to produce their game and then sold out to Epic for 2.25 million.
Phoenix point raised 765k from fig. while that sounds like a large amount, from what I can tell the company had two offices, one with 8 people. That really is not enough money to support the big AA title that they wanted. So they went back on their word. You can say they lied, but what it comes down to is being faced with economic realities. 2.5 million gives a lot of flexibility in terms of what they can do. The alternative would be to seek another round of crowdfunding, or to sell to a publisher, in which case they probably lose their IP. You can "blame" Epic for this, but the alternative view would be that they saved the company and the game.
17.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 22:41
17.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 22:41
Aug 8, 2022, 22:41
 
Hardline Mike wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 18:03:
Generally you gotta pay back loans. You don't have to pay back crowdfunding even if you never produce anything of value.

You do and I do because we care about our credit scores. But with no real consequence, there is no punitive reason to pay it back. It's essentially an unsecured loan so these "indie" developers are under no real obligation to pay it back or deliver anything.

Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 20:49:
When indie devs make delivery promises, the crowd owns how it is delivered.

No, no "the crowd" doesn't. That's raging, narcissistic self-entitlement. They are promises which are non-binding. Unless you have a signed, legal contract directly with the developer, you aren't guaranteed of anything. They are under no obligation to fulfill those promises if they do not make financial sense. Moreover, unless you are actively running the finance side of the developer, you aren't really in any position to determine what does, or does not, make financial sense to them. That is a general "you", by the by.
"Just take a look around you, what do you see? Pain, suffering, and misery." -Black Sabbath, Killing Yourself to Live.
Avatar 21247
16.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 22:01
16.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 22:01
Aug 8, 2022, 22:01
 
Tenshinochi wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 21:47:
While i see many people argue here about how Epic is great for indies, but I wonder how great it is for other KS projects with there being a realistic threat that the backing promises are broken/altered for extra funding. If the trend of Epic poaching KS projects continues, I would imagine it's going to get a lot harder for indies to find the initial backing they need to get into the situation where they can get a deal from Epic.
People kick start games because they want to play the game. Most don't care what storefront they can download it from, that's immaterial. As for Kickstarter failing or indie not being able to get their games kick started that's been a common myth since the beginning of kickstarter.
It was even mentioned here in the forums that Star Citizen would kill Kickstarter because of, well, Star Citizen.
Guess what, it didn't.

It's nothing to worry about.
...
- At this point, Windows is the OS equivalent of Stockholm Syndrome. -
Burrito of Peace
Avatar 58135
15.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 21:47
15.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 21:47
Aug 8, 2022, 21:47
 
While i see many people argue here about how Epic is great for indies, but I wonder how great it is for other KS projects with there being a realistic threat that the backing promises are broken/altered for extra funding. If the trend of Epic poaching KS projects continues, I would imagine it's going to get a lot harder for indies to find the initial backing they need to get into the situation where they can get a deal from Epic.
14.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 21:32
14.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 21:32
Aug 8, 2022, 21:32
 
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 20:49:
Epic is NOT going to honor the original promises of Steam and GOG sim-ship release, and they know that. They poached the game as an exclusive because there were several thousand backers. That's potentially several thousand new EGS users held hostage because they don't want to wait a year, forced to get the game on a platform they don't want to play on.

Sorry, but this is bovine dung again. It is not at all in Epic's responsibility to honor any original promises that a 3rd party has made to its backers and they did not "poach" nothing.

It lies at the sole discretion of the developer of a product where or if or when or how or at what price their product is published.
The Phoenix Point dev (Snapshot) figured that Epic made them a decent enough offer and that it would be worth pissing off a portion of their backers. Subsequently, they offered refunds to the pissed off ones.

None of that was Epic's fault. All of it was the responsibility of Snapshot Games who decided to agree to a deal with Epic. Snapshot must have concluded that this deal would be more valuable to them than "promises" made during the crowdfunding campaign. They are in extremely good company, of course, because nary any crowdfunding project has come even close to fulfilling their lofty promises (most crowdfunding projects were generously peppered with blatant lies actually).

It wasn't the friendliest of moves by Snapshot for sure but how does that preclude their head honcho from having a positive opinion on Epic? If anyone would read the actual article, instead of just the headline, you might even find he gives a solid line of reasoning for it, too. Epic exclusivity deals have been "enablers" for many indie devs to do things they could not have done without the additional funding. Simple as that.
13.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 20:49
Kxmode
 
13.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 20:49
Aug 8, 2022, 20:49
 Kxmode
 
Two points worth noting (and clarifying):

1. Crowdfunding is an interest-free loan because promises and commitments are made in exchange for financial support. When indie devs make delivery promises, the crowd owns how it is delivered. For example, in my original post, Snapshot promised Steam and GOG availability at release.

2. I didn't write it's wrong to take additional funds from in/outside sources. I wrote it's wrong to use the public as an interest-free loan, provide assurances, and then sell their game to Epic for $ 2.25 million. Epic is NOT going to honor the original promises of Steam and GOG sim-ship release, and they know that. They poached the game as an exclusive because there were several thousand backers. That's potentially several thousand new EGS users held hostage because they don't want to wait a year, forced to get the game on a platform they don't want to play on.

I stand by what I wrote: "Epic may be great for indies, but their actions reveal a habit of engaging in anti-consumer behavior."
"I used to fence at Bel-Air Academy." "Oh, really? How much do you think we could get for that stereo?"
Avatar 18786
12.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 19:14
12.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 19:14
Aug 8, 2022, 19:14
 
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 13:43:
As noted by many, Snapshot used the public as a temporary interest-free loan to produce their game and then sold out to Epic for 2.25 million. It goes against everything crowdfunding stands for, and Julian Gollop has NO RIGHT to claim "Epic has been great for many indies" at the expense of tossing backers under the bus who helped make his game a reality. My respect for him has diminished even more—the unmitigated gall of the guy. Epic may be great for indies, but their actions reveal a habit of engaging in anti-consumer behavior.

Frankly, this is a huge amount of bullshit. The vast majority of devs seeking crowdfunding MUST obtain other means of financing because almost no game can be made from the paltry sums raised on Kickstarter or Fig.
Crowdfunding has mostly been used as a marketing tool or as a means to present a viable investment case to outside investors.

The original Divinity Original Sin for example was 75% complete when Larian did the crowdfunding campaign for the game. They claimed the funds would be necessary for additional polishing but in reality I'm sure they just used it as a marketing vehicle because KS was all the rage at the time.
Chris Roberts ran the Star Citizen campaign telling people that he would use the crowdfunding funds in order to make a case to raise a ~$20 million total budget from investors if the KS goal would be reached. The cf campaign was never intended to fund the entire project. In spite of the massive success of the crowdfunding, Roberts has still partially "sold out" to investors in the meantime.

This list could be continued ad infinitum. Nearly all of the big and popular crowdfunding projects have had additional funding from inside or outside sources. It is ridiculous to claim that bringing on outside funds "goes against everything crowdfunding stands for".

The Phoenix Point creator is right. Epic is an awesome company for indies. Like a previous poster, I also like to support special games via EGS purchases so that the devs get the most amount of money. I recently preordered Plague Tale Requiem from the EGS for just that purpose.
11.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 18:16
11.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 18:16
Aug 8, 2022, 18:16
 
Dirk wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 13:08:
The competition that EGS is bringing to the market is really good. Steam obviously has more features and functionality to offer developers and publishers, but Valve also takes a much larger cut. I really wish Epic would further develop their store platform even more to make finding games easier, and fix the overall performance issues of just perusing their store. Free games are just a nice bonus.

The best thing they've done is financially support the development of games for these indie developers, where without it their games might never have been made. That this deal comes with timed exclusivity really bothers a lot of folks, but to me it seems a fair trade in exchange for seeing games get created that might not otherwise ever have seen the light of day.
These facts are known to all.
But facts never won over dogmatic unmovable beliefs, where theories supplant life necessities.

Creators and their hard work should ever be the priority, and any help should be gladly welcomed.
Eager anxious entitled buyers cool down, *you* aren't betting your livelihood and future on your passion.
Avatar 58799
10.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 18:03
10.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 18:03
Aug 8, 2022, 18:03
 
Burrito of Peace wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 17:55:
Beamer wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 16:53:
And since when is crowdfunding a loan?

I would ask since when was crowdfunding not a loan?

Generally you gotta pay back loans. You don't have to pay back crowdfunding even if you never produce anything of value.
"It's like you have a neon sign that just says 'raw dog me! I'm a bottom!'" -Queen Maeve
Avatar 43041
9.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 17:55
9.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 17:55
Aug 8, 2022, 17:55
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 16:53:
And since when is crowdfunding a loan?

I would ask since when was crowdfunding not a loan?
"Just take a look around you, what do you see? Pain, suffering, and misery." -Black Sabbath, Killing Yourself to Live.
Avatar 21247
8.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 16:53
8.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 16:53
Aug 8, 2022, 16:53
 
Snapshot also got purchased by Embracer. Is that being complained about? Does crowdfunding preclude devs from getting additional funding elsewhere?

And since when is crowdfunding a loan?
7.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 16:23
7.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 16:23
Aug 8, 2022, 16:23
 
Kxmode wrote on Aug 8, 2022, 13:43:
As noted by many, Snapshot used the public as a temporary interest-free loan to produce their game and then sold out to Epic for 2.25 million. It goes against everything crowdfunding stands for, and Julian Gollop has NO RIGHT to claim "Epic has been great for many indies" at the expense of tossing backers under the bus who helped make his game a reality.

This is an interesting take. Can you help me understand this perspective? I've never heard of this stigma that something crowdfunded couldn't or shouldn't be sellable? Is this something new? Is it something Snapshot promised they wouldn't do up front? Why is it frowned upon? How have the original crowdfunded backers been tossed under the bus?

I always thought people seek crowd funding because it may be easier than securing other types of funding, and I thought people choose to crowd fund projects because they want to see that project get created. I've never heard of people who crowd funded a project getting upset because the project got additional funding from else where, nor do I understand why that would upset them?

Genuinely curious.
6.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 14:23
6.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 14:23
Aug 8, 2022, 14:23
 
For indies that are self published I always try to buy them through Epic simply because the devs get a higher percentage of the sale.

I'm not sure why anyone cares which launcher launches their games, but as someone who actually backed Phoenix Point I can say they gave out Steam keys once they were available and they did offer refunds. I ended up with 2 copies of the game (Steam one went to a friend) it's just that the Steam ones came later.
5.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 13:43
Kxmode
 
5.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 13:43
Aug 8, 2022, 13:43
 Kxmode
 
The first two frequently asked questions answered on the Fig crowdfunding were:

Will the game be on Steam? Yes, Phoenix Point will be on Steam, and we will provide Steam keys to backers who want to receive their game this way.

Will the game be on gog.com? Yes, Phoenix Point will be available through gog.com, and we will provide keys for backers who want to receive their game this way.


The FAQs help answer backers' concerns. There was no mention of Epic's store in the FAQ. Snapshot Games promised Steam and GOG as part of the launch day platforms, which undoubtedly affected people's decision to back the project. After switching to EGS exclusivity, Snapshot did not attempt to offer refunds to people who felt cheated. Removed. They did offer refunds.

As noted by many, Snapshot used the public as a temporary interest-free loan to produce their game and then sold out to Epic for 2.25 million. It goes against everything crowdfunding stands for, and Julian Gollop has NO RIGHT to claim "Epic has been great for many indies" at the expense of tossing backers under the bus who helped make his game a reality. My respect for him has diminished even more—the unmitigated gall of the guy. Epic may be great for indies, but their actions reveal a habit of engaging in anti-consumer behavior.

This comment was edited on Aug 8, 2022, 15:05.
"I used to fence at Bel-Air Academy." "Oh, really? How much do you think we could get for that stereo?"
Avatar 18786
4.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 13:08
Dirk
 
4.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 13:08
Aug 8, 2022, 13:08
 Dirk
 
The competition that EGS is bringing to the market is really good. Steam obviously has more features and functionality to offer developers and publishers, but Valve also takes a much larger cut. I really wish Epic would further develop their store platform even more to make finding games easier, and fix the overall performance issues of just perusing their store. Free games are just a nice bonus.

The best thing they've done is financially support the development of games for these indie developers, where without it their games might never have been made. That this deal comes with timed exclusivity really bothers a lot of folks, but to me it seems a fair trade in exchange for seeing games get created that might not otherwise ever have seen the light of day.
3.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Aug 8, 2022, 13:05
3.
Re: Quoteworthy Aug 8, 2022, 13:05
Aug 8, 2022, 13:05
 
Someone showing up at your door with a free bag of cash is great for anyone.
"It's like you have a neon sign that just says 'raw dog me! I'm a bottom!'" -Queen Maeve
Avatar 43041
22 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older