Jump to content

Eternitude

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About Eternitude

  • Rank
    Motley Fool of the Obsidian Order

Profile Information

  • Location
    State of Perpetual Adolescence

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. ...and now, not so much. I'm confused where the thread went. Oh well.. Lost it's way, time to go to forum thread heaven (or hell as the case may be....)
  2. You can still go to : http://eternity.obsidian.net and use the paypal donations (right column) to pledge and choose your reward level.
  3. But, it CAN be, and isn't crowdfunding one of the new tools that RPG fans can use to foster and cultivate these attributes in our favorite developers, without interference from publishers? It is very clearly evident, and exactly one of the reasons that crowdfunding could gain in acceptance and popularity with fans. It empowers them and gives them a connection directly to the developers when backing the content they love. Look, I have obviously been influenced in this converstation by some of the great points you and a few others have made, and certainly have to defer to your studies in economics. I have definitately curbed my originally soaring estimates of the potential upper limits of crowdfunding. However I just can't bring myself to the conclusion that we are closer to the upper limits now at $4M than say a few years from now as knowledge of the concept grows and we start tapping into a great pool of potential backers. You see I am not prepared to say you are *wrong*, but I just don't know how you and some others can be so comfortable using the word *never* when describing potential [video game] funding levels. At what point does *possible* become *never*? 6M? 8M? 12M? 15M?
  4. Well, as a $500 backer, I wouldn't exactly call myself the negative type. I have mostly agreed with Veeno on the potential of crowd funding growth in the future, but I do have to acknowledge some of the good points that have been brought up by the others who are little more pessimistic about the future of crowd funding.
  5. Why don't we ask them? (Scroll down to the comments.) Ummm, wow. Its hard to believe those people are gamers, they are the most understanding and patient people who have ever spent money on a game that has disappointed them.....I'm shocked, hahaha.
  6. Although I believe crowd funding has lots of room to grow and has potential to change the way a lot of games are developed, there are pitfalls. The story of Haunts just fell into my lap today. Fully funded Kickstarter game lost some key personnel and will probably fail. I wonder how those backers feel about funding another game.
  7. Part of "managing my expectations" that I spoke about in the OP has definitely led me to be resigned to the fact that this may take 2 years or more. I am *practicing* being happy that Obsidian won't have a publisher breathing down their backs to release the game before it's polished.
  8. While I believe crowd funding has much more potential at providing significantly higher funding goals without requiring anywhere near the *majority* of end users as backers, these are really good points. You don't necessarily want too many backers, as that does cut into profit (assuming of course all the funds are used in development), and after a successful campaign or two the developer would probably have less need to use crowd funding. Both these factors would tend to limit crowd funding a bit...yes....good points.
  9. I am not prepared to stipulate this as an absolute law of nature. Who's to say for sure that the concept can't attract higher fractions of end users? Honestly it doesn't really need to be anywhere near the *majority* to achieve higher funding goals. I believe you underestimate the power of swag, sir.... Especially the ability to participate in the Alpha and Beta testing
  10. Your points have all been valid, thoughtful, and well communicated. However, I still believe you (along with the analysts) are undervaluing the *potential* of crowd funding, both in it's funding capacity and in it's ability to give voice to the end user. We may also be underestimating the discontent many gamers have with several publishers and the fact that they may be all too happy to bypass them. I am not saying anything is guaranteed, far from it, but I am also not going to say crowd funding is *guaranteed* to not achieve higher funding goals.
  11. Dudes, take it easy. I was more trying to convey my irritiation with so called industry "experts, analysts, insiders" hating on the crowdfunding concept more than me asking the question. I asked it more in a hypothetical conversation starting sense because I was interested in what the community forum had to say. If you read my final paragraph it communicated that I was content and had confidence with what Obsidian could do with $4M with realistic expectations.
  12. I think the main point may have been lost in the symantics of the argument. I do tend to agree with you that the funds available in the two pools you noted above don't overlap sufficiently to complete the picture. However, I believe it is just as implausible to assert that crowdfunding will never be able to achieve [video game] funding levels of $20M or more due to this singular argument.
  13. Are you saying that you believe, even as the potential awareness, popularity, and acceptance of crowdfunding may increase, that it will *never* be able to achieve funding goals of $20M+? Veeno was just stating that it was a possibility, and I really can't find a compelling reason to say it will forevermore be impossible.
  14. Exactly! That's why I got irritated and considered them just fearful and resistant to the idea that crowdfunding *could* change video game development profoundly. The "middlemen" are probably going out of their minds right now considering the implications. Also Veeno, you hit the nail on the head! Who's to say as crowdfunding gains popularity and acceptance that it could not achieve funding of $20M, $30M, $40M and beyond?
  15. I have read several articles that were written lately about the crowd funding success of PE, and in a few of them they have interviewed an industry "expert", "insider", or "analyst". The message that these people seem to convey is that while the funding campaigns were exciting and successful, "true" Triple A titles often have budgets of $20M+ and they don't really see this new form of funding as a significant paradigm change in Video game production. Of course I found that my first response was to get irritated at the comments, and start wondering if the industry "expert", still believed the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth as well. Still after the irritation past, I did try to think about it objectively and the thought did creep in.....is $4M really enough to deliver a Triple A gaming experience? I also realize that a highly enthusiastic, passionate fan community waiting 18 to 24 months for their dream game can really inflate their expectations to an unreasonable level. None the less, for my part, I am pretty confident that a small but talented group of developers like Obsidian, excited to be working on an IP that they OWN, with ambition and efficiency should be able to squeeze every last ounce of value out of that $4M to deliver a fantastic game. However, I believe I still have to be mindful that $4M may be considered a "limited" budget and actively manage my expectations. What do you think?
×
×
  • Create New...