Dan Whitehead of Eurogamer has written a new article about crowd-funding, and talks about when the funding is not enough to make the game.
More information.
EuroGamer - When Too Much is Not Enough
- Thread starter Couchpotato
- Start date
- Joined
- April 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
Yogventures and Areal.
Didn't back either nor ever would. There is no problem with Kickstarter and crowdfunding.
The problem are people who backed those two projects. They'd back another obvious scam. But well, better they get burned trying to help, than buying greed induced scam DLC.
Didn't back either nor ever would. There is no problem with Kickstarter and crowdfunding.
The problem are people who backed those two projects. They'd back another obvious scam. But well, better they get burned trying to help, than buying greed induced scam DLC.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,459
ChaosTheory
Virtual Reality Hero
Dude, a guy got over $50k on KS to make potato salad. I'm just convinced there are enough batshit crazy people out there who are compulsive spenders, let alone folks who think they'll actually get their funded widget when all is said and done.
- Joined
- August 13, 2013
- Messages
- 2,871
I agree, but it shouldn't be Kickstarters responsibility to protect them. There are enough laws inhibiting the functioning members in the name of protecting the mentally deficient. If it smells like a scam, it probably is. That Areal one just seems like complete BS, if you put a $ in there, its a $ wasted. At least if you go in with the intent of seeing a finished product.
If people treated KS as if they were gambling, they would have a better experience.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 2,871
Matin Sanguine
Watcher
One thing that stood out to me in the article were the following quotes:
"Star Citizen is now closing in on $50m raised, yet fans complain that development on the core game is too slow."
"I'm confident that Chris Roberts knows what he's doing with Star Citizen, but that won't stop skeptical backers from wondering why more and more things are being bolted on before the game is in their hands."
As a backer since the earliest days, I'm a little surprised by the comment that backers are getting impatient/worried at how "slowly" the development is going. I mean, I've never picked up the sentiment from my interactions with the community (though it's possible it could be a vocal minority I'm not aware of); it's only been two years now and considering:
-Cloud Imperium (the developer) was created alongside the project itself, and thus had to grow into what it is today throughout it. the size of developer back then was a mere shadow of what it is today, and as a result didn't have the capacity to immediately begin full production whereas other established developers would have been able to do so.
-The rather ambitious nature/scope of the project itself that will require a lengthy development cycle
-The recent (relatively) release of the Arena Commander module, which features space combat, a rather significant core feature in itself for a space sim dontcha think?
.
And the comment on the stretch goals is a little bemusing. Sure there are major features that will have a major impact on the core components of the game (just look at the recent announcement of the addition of wholly alien languages in the $50 million goal), but recently, the trend of stretch goals has mainly been really minor, incidental things (in some cases merely just being rewards to current backers) to the scope of the overall game (unless you consider a towel, an Engine Tuning Kit, a set of armour, a space-ship commercial and an alien plant to be major addition ), or just expansions of existing content (new systems etc.).
As for the rest of the article and Kickstarter to a lesser extent *shrugs*, the risks pertaining to development remain constant regardless of funding models (running out of money, issues with development, feature-creep etc.). People need to cautious when considering projects in order to weed out dodgy-looking ones (Areal etc.) but at the end of the day, you never know what will happen.
PS: Don't consider my post to be a blind, fanboyish defence of Star Citizen, there is legitimate room for concern for things like feature-creep. My tone was more casual bemusement as I wasn't really aware of any (perceived) negative sentiment the fan base had to the development of the game with regards to slow development and stretch goals (Hell, I’m pretty sure there was a community vote a month or two ago on continuing stretch goals, with the majority saying yes on continuing).
"Star Citizen is now closing in on $50m raised, yet fans complain that development on the core game is too slow."
"I'm confident that Chris Roberts knows what he's doing with Star Citizen, but that won't stop skeptical backers from wondering why more and more things are being bolted on before the game is in their hands."
As a backer since the earliest days, I'm a little surprised by the comment that backers are getting impatient/worried at how "slowly" the development is going. I mean, I've never picked up the sentiment from my interactions with the community (though it's possible it could be a vocal minority I'm not aware of); it's only been two years now and considering:
-Cloud Imperium (the developer) was created alongside the project itself, and thus had to grow into what it is today throughout it. the size of developer back then was a mere shadow of what it is today, and as a result didn't have the capacity to immediately begin full production whereas other established developers would have been able to do so.
-The rather ambitious nature/scope of the project itself that will require a lengthy development cycle
-The recent (relatively) release of the Arena Commander module, which features space combat, a rather significant core feature in itself for a space sim dontcha think?
.And the comment on the stretch goals is a little bemusing. Sure there are major features that will have a major impact on the core components of the game (just look at the recent announcement of the addition of wholly alien languages in the $50 million goal), but recently, the trend of stretch goals has mainly been really minor, incidental things (in some cases merely just being rewards to current backers) to the scope of the overall game (unless you consider a towel, an Engine Tuning Kit, a set of armour, a space-ship commercial and an alien plant to be major addition
), or just expansions of existing content (new systems etc.).As for the rest of the article and Kickstarter to a lesser extent *shrugs*, the risks pertaining to development remain constant regardless of funding models (running out of money, issues with development, feature-creep etc.). People need to cautious when considering projects in order to weed out dodgy-looking ones (Areal etc.) but at the end of the day, you never know what will happen.
PS: Don't consider my post to be a blind, fanboyish defence of Star Citizen, there is legitimate room for concern for things like feature-creep. My tone was more casual bemusement as I wasn't really aware of any (perceived) negative sentiment the fan base had to the development of the game with regards to slow development and stretch goals (Hell, I’m pretty sure there was a community vote a month or two ago on continuing stretch goals, with the majority saying yes on continuing).
ChienAboyeur
SasqWatch
- Joined
- March 29, 2011
- Messages
- 6,265
The guy is selling a happening. He was lucky enough the hype train moved on for his project.
His KS project is clear and backers will get what they backed for. A lot of some already received what they were told.
It is the tipping mentality at work: the guy made them laugh, they dropped a coin.
Video game projects are far from being as transparent as this potato salad social joke.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2011
- Messages
- 6,265
D
DArtagnan
Guest
There's no way Star Citizen will realise anything even close to what they're talking about or promising at release.
But, you know what? I'm sure it'll be great and that they're pouring heart and soul into it.
If the result isn't, at least, better than any other space trading/combat game out there - I'll be surprised.
THAT is all that matters to a rational person.
But, you know what? I'm sure it'll be great and that they're pouring heart and soul into it.
If the result isn't, at least, better than any other space trading/combat game out there - I'll be surprised.
THAT is all that matters to a rational person.
Last edited:
Matin Sanguine
Watcher
100% in agreement there (particularly the second line, which is a sentiment I echo as well), I'm fairly sure that they've stated that several of the major features will be introduced after the initial release.
Personally, I'm less interested in the whole "MMO Space Sim" part of the game than I am in the single-player (particularly the Squadron 42 campaign) which, considering this game is from the same guy who did the Wing Commander series, is guaranteed to be at least interesting. The multiplayer part is probably something I'll screw around in for a bit, but I have commitment issues when it comes to MMOs
.Couldn't have said it better myself.
Realistically speaking, there is a chance that the game won't be all that it's cracked up to be. However, having been exposed to snippets of their design process leaves me with a fair degree of confidence as well that they'll at the very least pull some intriguing twists on the Space Sim genre, while delivering an overall satisfying product (barring freakish mismanagement of course
)If the worst comes to pass and Star Citizen is never released, I'll at least have a brushed metal citizen card as a memento for my troubles
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Agreed
It's really about whether you, as a potential backer, expect your developer to have no dreams or bold ambitions.
Personally, I don't think any vision is interesting without dreams - and in my world, dreams are made up of passion and desire.
I don't want to back a modest and by-the-numbers design, because I'm hungry as a gamer. I want true evolution - I want revolution if I can have it.
I'm not here to relive the same games over and over, and I don't want tiny incremental and safe steps.
There's no dream that survives contact with reality -and that's something you're going to have to accept, if you're going to get any kind of significant evolution.
Does that mean it's wise to just add major goals over and over? Of course not. It must be tempered with a level of pragmatism and insight. That's when something like Star Citizen becomes a project made up of faith and trust.
Do I believe Chris Roberts is realistic enough to, eventually, cut back and focus on getting the job done - once he knows what's realistically possible? Yes - I trust that.
Do I believe there will be missteps and broken promises? You simply can't avoid that with dreams and bold visions. It's impossible.
The very simple conclusion is that if you want more than tiny steps and safe designs, you have to accept you're taking a chance.
Is it possible that Star Citizen won't ever be made? Yes. Is that likely? No, I don't think so.
But 10% of their vision is still significantly more evolution than any other space game in development that I'm aware of.
That's worth the risk - and then some.
It's really about whether you, as a potential backer, expect your developer to have no dreams or bold ambitions.
Personally, I don't think any vision is interesting without dreams - and in my world, dreams are made up of passion and desire.
I don't want to back a modest and by-the-numbers design, because I'm hungry as a gamer. I want true evolution - I want revolution if I can have it.
I'm not here to relive the same games over and over, and I don't want tiny incremental and safe steps.
There's no dream that survives contact with reality -and that's something you're going to have to accept, if you're going to get any kind of significant evolution.
Does that mean it's wise to just add major goals over and over? Of course not. It must be tempered with a level of pragmatism and insight. That's when something like Star Citizen becomes a project made up of faith and trust.
Do I believe Chris Roberts is realistic enough to, eventually, cut back and focus on getting the job done - once he knows what's realistically possible? Yes - I trust that.
Do I believe there will be missteps and broken promises? You simply can't avoid that with dreams and bold visions. It's impossible.
The very simple conclusion is that if you want more than tiny steps and safe designs, you have to accept you're taking a chance.
Is it possible that Star Citizen won't ever be made? Yes. Is that likely? No, I don't think so.
But 10% of their vision is still significantly more evolution than any other space game in development that I'm aware of.
That's worth the risk - and then some.
I haven't followed Star Citizen's development closely. So is this Squadron 42 campaign actually going to be an RPG? Or will it be more of a space shooting and trading game?
D
DArtagnan
Guest
It'll be more like a modern Wing Commander than anything else. You could consider it a military career that's optional - and which takes place before you enter the persistent universe, which is where the RPG aspects come into play.
That said, it's much less of an RPG than it's a space/trading game. The persistent universe is like a large-scale Freelancer with a ridiculous amount of depth and detail.