Geneforge - Kickstarter Campaign in February

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Nice to know. Because when KS and the crowdfunding movement were launched, it was insisted that it was meant first to allow devs creative licence far from the shackles imposed by the big, bad corp publishers. It was about providing devs with a platform to innovate, to add.
…
Years later, it appears that the heavy crowdfunding structure like KS is in fact made to provide security to devs so they can repeat the same old, all over again.

I see no reason why it can't be both? I know YOU aren't a fan of Kickstarter or the "design by committee" concept, and I can even agree with some of your points in regards to the second point. I have however enjoyed several games that couldn't have been made without KS, most of them not innovative at all, but more a modern take on old principles.

There are exceptions though, games that really tried to do something new. Some turned out great and many not at all. That's a risk I'm still willing to take much of the time, if not quite as often as I did a couple of years back.

On topic; While I enjoyed Geneforge I don't think I'll conribute to the KS, might buy it when it's finished though.

Originally Posted by Kylex
Crowdfunding exists for people to minize or eliminate their personal risk when doing business projects. There is absolutly nothing wrong here, it is the intention of this concept.

Sorry, I'm with rune on this one all the way (but then I've been griping about Spiderweb's business model for 1/5 of the time he's been making the exact same game).

I want to say I don't care about him using crowdfunding, as long as he's honest about what he's doing, but I guess his fanbase must know what he's doing by now.

Originally Posted by rune_74
This is taking advantage of fans and people in general…

Nobody is fooled. This dev is plain to read, even when not paying attention, his moves are predictable. He hides nothing. His supporters consent willingfully and in knowledge to the scheme. That is the way they want business to be done. That is a business model they support.

A pyramid scheme at the end of the day as this model can not expand to every one on the planet but nevertheless, this guy does not take advantage, he is carried by an army that wishes the model apply to themselves.

Originally Posted by TomRon
I see no reason why it can't be both? I know YOU aren't a fan of Kickstarter or the "design by committee" concept, and I can even agree with some of your points in regards to the second point. I have however enjoyed several games that couldn't have been made without KS, most of them not innovative at all, but more a modern take on old principles.

Considered the large volume of products that got crowdfunded, it is not possible to expect a few good products out of it. They can not redeem the whole crowdfunded scene as a whole.

There are exceptions though, games that really tried to do something new. Some turned out great and many not at all. That's a risk I'm still willing ty o take much of the time, if not quite as often as I did a couple if years back.

Which ones.

As to the rest, put in context, no, it can not be both. First because the crowdfunded scene has not born many innovative products so few this scene can not be characterized by innovation and multiple other causes like weeding out the bad offers, the poor products, the claim that big bad corps are suppressing creativity (when FIFA is renewed each year more than any of the products sold by this dev) and more than anything because entire societies were wiped out on the ground they did not produce anything adding to humanity. If the major KS addition to humanity is a multi billion dollars print to serve the same purpose…

We knew this was coming, I normally don’t like it when Jeff recycles content, but gene forge was a really cool game. It’s been a long time and I could totally get into replaying it with new mechanics. So I’d be reasonably excited to play this. Gene forge 2-4 on the other hand, if he remakes those I might skip them.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Considered the large volume of products that got crowdfunded, it is not possible to expect a few good products out of it. They can not redeem the whole crowdfunded scene as a whole.

Which ones.

I would agree on your first point if I found most of the games I backed to be bad. I don't, most of them are decent to great, I just don't claim they're innovative (I would put games like Torment, WL2 and PoE in this category, several others as well but those are the more known titles as far as I recall.) SOME games have also been horrible, broken or not completed at all. But I would call those games few compared to the ones that have delivered (I might have been lucky if course but I doubt it).

In regards to which ones I actually found to be innovative and original? FTL and DOS comes to mind, and probably Star Citizen too IF it ever gets completed. There might be others but those would be my picks.

Originally Posted by TomRon
I would agree on your first point if I found most of the games I backed to be bad. I don't, most of them are decent to great,

It takes the number of backed projects to match the number of crowdfunded projects.
Nobody claims that out of 1000 crowdfunded projects, it would not be possible to find 50 to 60 half decent products.

In regards to which ones I actually found to be innovative and original? FTL and DOS comes to mind, and probably Star Citizen too IF it ever gets completed. There might be others but those would be my picks.

FTL is barely a crowdfunded project as it was nearing completion when the campaign was launched.

Nevertheless, innovation requires to name the innovative features.

Originally Posted by duerer
I'd say, a graphical DEmake of the original Geneforge would be a winner -- all you need is to DOWNgrade the graphics to tasty pixel art.
This way the presentation would be "tasteful retro" instead of butt-ugly, and hey, it might win a few more new fans for this great game.

I just wanted to say that I agree with this 100%. Let great oldschool games have great oldschool looks!

Originally Posted by rune_74
I can't think of one company that recycled the same game with three different versions and called them new games.

Ellis Studios

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Nevertheless, innovation requires to name the innovative features.

I disagree, it doesn't have to be specific features that are innovative, it can also be a mix of features that while found in earlier games haven't been combined in a certain way, or on a different scale.

Take DOS. It's not like any other games I've played. Sure, if you only look at the big picture (turn based, semi-open world, interactive environments, story, character progression) it doesn't sound like anything new. But it sure felt new to me. The sum of the components is larger than the parts.

That is a loose benchmark to use when assessing innovation. And certainly not one used commonly, especially when it came to wipe out societies deemed to be not innovative.

I have just started replaying Geneforge 1 and was surprised how the graphics hold well in this. I even forgotten that the manual is built-in within the game, and how the tutorial makes the game very accessible. Good times!

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
That is a loose benchmark to use when assessing innovation. And certainly not one used commonly, especially when it came to wipe out societies deemed to be not innovative.

Innovation simply means a new way of thinking, a product doesn't have to be ground breaking and full with never seen before features to be innovative. It also includes taking things one step further than they've gone before, or combining them in new ways like I said.

And that IS the commonly used meaning of innovation.

Originally Posted by SpoonFULL
I have just started replaying Geneforge 1 and was surprised how the graphics hold well in this. I even forgotten that the manual is built-in within the game, and how the tutorial makes the game very accessible. Good times!

Got some great news, soon you will be able to kickstart a remake of it and play it all over again.