Fractured Reality - Update# 2, Catch-22

Couchpotato

Part-Time News-bot
Joined
October 1, 2010
Messages
36,386
Location
Spudlandia
Ross Tunney of New Reality Games has posted the second update for Fractured Reality with news on the games slow funding, or as he calls it Catch-22.

It's called a catch-22, I believe!

At least, that's what the Americans say. So! We have something of a speedbump here!

The momentum of the campaign has reached a snail's pace, in spite of my efforts to badger the games press into covering the project.

The main issue here, I think, besides being largely an obscure developer, is that we simply don't have enough to show, at a polished enough level, to entice would-be backers to jump off the fence onto our turf.

Therein lies a deeper problem - there's no more money 'in the pot' to pump into this game. I've literally spent every last penny of my savings getting this game to the level it's at, and it doesn't seem like enough. For now, at least.

In short, I think it's going to take a small miracle for this campaign to reach funding! The majority of existing backers are loyal DH fans, with newcomers only making up the minority.

I have two options before me:

1. Continue working on FR at a glacial pace, due to lack of funds, in the hope that maybe when we come back we'll see more interest. If the campaign were moving at a steady pace at least, I'd consider re-launching straight away, but that would seem to me to be an inefficient use of resources.

2. Put FR on the back-burner for a while, and return to making classic 2D games.

I've leaning quite close to option 2, for several reasons.


  • Less costly to make - The funding goal for FR is the BARE minimum we'd need to scrape this project through to completion. And let's face it, £35,660 is a lot of money to ask for. We'd need to entice 3,566 backers at the basic tier.
  • I can once again focus more on story - Writing is my passion, and it shows through in NRG's games. By spending too long on other aspects, such as getting to grips with Unity, animating, tweaking, mapping, etc, I think I'm stretched way too far.
  • Die-hard DH fans are alienated - I can sense that FR simply isn't to the taste of the loyal fans; those people who made NRG possible. I thought that they might be tempted into taking the plunge with 3D, but that doesn't seem to have been the case.
  • I prefer making 2D games - Truth be told, 3D seemed like natural progression for the company. But in hindsight, I ask myself 'why?' Does 3D make the story better? Does 3D make the game mechanics better? All 3D does is increase the size of your potential market, but at what cost? Tens of thousands of pounds. Does it scale? It doesn't seem to.
So, what now?

Don't get me wrong, Fractured Reality has tons of potential, and I think that when it does finally see a release, it's going to be epic, not to mention popular. Evidently, we're just not ready to take on a project of this scope.


Fear not! NRG is going to continue making awesome classic RPGs. In fact, work has already begun on Data Hacker: Reboot...
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,386
Location
Spudlandia
Hmm, being an indie dev myself, and considering my own experiences with fund-raising, I think the biggest problem is fairly obvious: too much ambition, too little resources to do it.

I think that indie development is not about creating yet another game based on one's all-time favourite, but experimenting with fresh ideas that major studios find risky to tackle.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
824
Agreed. Way too ambitious, and combined with serialization. Plus the presentation needs a tighter focus—there's a lot of material here that could go into the updates. It is asking much of a reader to process without first gaining our interest. (E.g. they don't need to sell the reader on video rpgs or Kickstarter.) Can they boil it down and sell it to us in just a few paragraphs without a lot of esoterica?
 
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
5,531
Location
Seattle
I think that indie development is not about creating yet another game based on one's all-time favourite, but experimenting with fresh ideas that major studios find risky to tackle.

Vogel had an article or interview where he touched on that. He rolled the dice on Nethergate and it didn't do well. The problem is, a lot of indie developers lack the funds to stay afloat when a game really tanks. They still have bills to pay and 1 game tanking could mean the end, which isn't the case for major publishers.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
831
Location
North Carolina, US
Vogel had an article or interview where he touched on that. [...] ...still have bills to pay and 1 game tanking could mean the end, which isn't the case for major publishers.

Thanks for the Vogel article, I'll check on that.

Regarding the 1 game-principle, I have to disagree on that.
I sincerely believe that a well-defined game idea could be developed on the budget, if the presentation is right.
My personal experience is that it's always the presentation that sucks the money, not the core idea. So, if you are developing a game that relies on presentation (yep, jRPGs are just that), you will be doomed from the get go.

Do not do that. It will always fail.
Try something that is realistic to develop for a 2-person team.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
824
Back
Top Bottom