View Single Post

Default 

December 19th, 2013, 13:20
Originally Posted by ChaosTheory View Post
I guess, a couple things…

1) I'm not giving another dime to Obsidian until I see the finished, polished Pillars of Eternity.
Better to sit tight and be ready to call any state of the final version of Pillars of Eternity polished.

When KS started to grow in importance for video games funding, some, on this site, argued on the risk of seeing developpers take the money and run away to the Bahamas. To which I retorted that the opportunity of getting one year to two years of work paid upfront was too good an opportunity to be spoilt with unthoughtful behaviour.

This vision of developpment, wishing for episodic dealing of a video game, is a fine way to make the most out of a crowdfunding method. If this ever passes, they will collect two, three or four years of upfront paid work, a luxury in these times.

Obsidian are composed with seasoned professionals so the production quality of their products is going to be at least good. They secured enough proficiency in various domains involved in computer video games to ensure that part.

Will their game be ever polished in the way they will give out their best? No because of the structure of a crowdfunding project.

As soon as the project is released, they enter the path of diminishing returns and will have to cope with any failure in their developpment choices.
Much more demanding and frustrating than switching to the elaboration of a new KS project that will start up afresh, full of enthusiasm, free of past mistakes and coming with plenty of promises.

Their rationale for explaining the necessity of an episodic game does not stand as their games, due to the fundamental differences in budget, are not to rival AAA projects in terms of content.
Why should three millions budget games compete with 100 millions budget games in terms of content? You expect something else from small budget games.

But, when the whole of it is put back in the context of a crowdfunding system, it makes sense as it could ensure that a developpment team secures several years of work, releasing projects with good production quality and moving on to the next without being bothered with facing the burden of the past.
Always restarting, always finding back the period of enthusiasm, of hope and positive energy that characterize the launch of a new concept and project.

Way better than being compelled to service and support a software whose limitations are known.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#30

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,078