Wasteland 2 Kickstarter

[Majek]

Still, who doesn't dare doesn't win.

Are you saying only Kickstarter contributer are getting the game? No post-launch purchase option?

 

That's even more stupid than I thought.

o.O How dumb can you be to assume that?

Edited April 18, 2012 by Majek

[Morgoth]

I didn't assume it, Gorth did.

[Gorth]

Still, who doesn't dare doesn't win.

Are you saying only Kickstarter contributer are getting the game? No post-launch purchase option?

 

That's even more stupid than I thought.

No you grumpypuss

 

I mean if nobody dared take a risk, development would never have started in the first place. If it turns out good, everybody, including the risk takers and those who watch from the sideline might benefit from it. If it's a disaster, well tough luck, no harm done.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I know the game can be ****ty. I'm happy that things like this are pointing to publishers and the industry in general that projects like this are financially viable. Jeff Vogel and a few indie can do only so much by themselves.

 

P.S. : Yes, I'm also genuinely excited about the names attached, I don't think I would have donated if it was unproven people.. managing risk and all that.

[Morgoth]

Still, who doesn't dare doesn't win.

Are you saying only Kickstarter contributer are getting the game? No post-launch purchase option?

 

That's even more stupid than I thought.

No you grumpypuss

 

I mean if nobody dared take a risk, development would never have started in the first place. If it turns out good, everybody, including the risk takers and those who watch from the sideline might benefit from it. If it's a disaster, well tough luck, no harm done.

 

I'm a customer, not an investor. When I pay post-launch after thorough reviews/investigation, I win.

[Humodour]

It's your money guys, so be my guest.

 

I just don't like that model, because by the time I paid, and by the time the product is released (say 18-24 months later), much things could have changed. Maybe you just lost your interest in that genre/or gaming totally.

 

That's fairly true. However a lot of these people are giving money on Kickstarter to support the concept and the developers, and may have significantly less interest in actually playing the game.

[Nepenthe]

It's your money guys, so be my guest.

 

I just don't like that model, because by the time I paid, and by the time the product is released (say 18-24 months later), much things could have changed. Maybe you just lost your interest in that genre/or gaming totally.

 

That's fairly true. However a lot of these people are giving money on Kickstarter to support the concept and the developers, and may have significantly less interest in actually playing the game.

Indeed, (even) I like the concept of taking Big Publishers/Venture Capitalists out of the equation. Sure, I feel a lot more comfortable giving my money to a HD remake (like the Larry ones) than a complete unknown, but when the designers are a kind of dream team for many, I can happily take that risk.

[Delfosse]

I love it when people throw money at non-existing products.

 

Then the game turns out to be **** and everybody cries.

 

This is coming from a guy who likes 99% of games and buys them all like a maniac. Well. It may actually turn out that Wasteland won't be to your liking, so you're right about not chipping in, cause it's intended for hardcore rpg fans, not for an average crysis fanboy.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Delfosse

[Malcador]

Well, if Wasteland 2 ends up being a buggy mess or poor, the reaction here will be amusing to see. Still, not seeing the donations as foolish, you can gauge how much you can tolerate "losing" well enough, I'd hope.

[Lexx]

Just see it as experiment. Either it works out or not, at least we tried.

[Amentep]

It's your money guys, so be my guest.

 

I just don't like that model, because by the time I paid, and by the time the product is released (say 18-24 months later), much things could have changed. Maybe you just lost your interest in that genre/or gaming totally.

 

I think - and this is just me - when dealing with entertainment there never is any guarantee of quality, only that you're hoping that whatever you support (at any point in the development cycle - or even after in traditional consumer relationships) turns out to your taste. For all we know we'll be dead or blind or our computers gone, or homeless; but to me the question is do I want to support a concept I like, creators I like. If I dislike the end product - well there goes the chance that I'd give future blind support for a project. But I won't regret having made a decision to support the initial project even if I'm not crazy about the results.

[Morgoth]

This is coming from a guy who likes 99% of games and buys them all like a maniac. Well. It may actually turn out that Wasteland won't be to your liking, so you're right about not chipping in, cause it's intended for hardcore rpg fans, not for an average crysis fanboy.

Tell us about your real problems, Delfosse.

[Morgoth]

Just see it as experiment. Either it works out or not, at least we tried.

Don't confuse risk-taking with naivety, ah scratch that, plain stupidity.

[Aedelric]

Your main argument seems to be that if anyone does not agree with your view of the world is stupid.

 

We all understand your point of view, most of us disagree and I doubt you will change any of our minds. The people that put down the money did it because it is one of the few, if not last chance we can get an old school hardcore rpg made.

 

If you like to tell people they are stupid for taking risks, then grab a sign and stand outside a casino all day.

[Orchomene]

It's a democratic form of patronage. It's an interesting step into a more socially involved business model.

 

Edit : When I say social, I'm talking about the literal sense, not about "social networks".

Edited April 18, 2012 by Orchomene

[Nepenthe]

It's a democratic form of patronage. It's an interesting step into a more socially involved business model.

 

Edit : When I say social, I'm talking about the literal sense, not about "social networks".

I'm sure some would say "socialist", too...

[meomao]

Well, if Wasteland 2 ends up being a buggy mess or poor, the reaction here will be amusing to see. Still, not seeing the donations as foolish, you can gauge how much you can tolerate "losing" well enough, I'd hope.

 

I spent more for games I've never have time to play on Steam sales. Or for games I've played that were a buggy mess or poor.

[entrerix]

regular developers: we won't make any more rpgs ever again

 

kickstarter developers: you want an rpg? ok, give me $15 and i will make you one, there is a chance it will be good.

 

 

my choice is easy, i would rather kickstart 100 promising rpg projects for the CHANCE to get a game that's as good as fallout or planescape torment. yeah it might not ever happen, but if there was no kickstarter, then it would DEFINITELY not ever happen.

 

baldurs gate 2 came out a looong time ago now. and there have not been any crpg's since then that have been on par with fallout 1, fallout 2, planescape torment, baldurs gate, or baldurs gate 2 (well except maybe Fallout: New Vegas, but thats an action rpg). there have been a couple pretty good crpg's: the kotors, the witchers, nwn 2 etc, but nothing truly stellar like we were seeing during the black isle days.

[Tigranes]

Oh, Morgoth isn't actually a negative nancy. He just likes certain games, and he will tell you they are great, and all the other games are kind of poo, and he will tell you they are poo and you're a silly for thinking they're not. I'm still not sure what kind of metric, if any, he uses, though, so his recommendations don't really do much for me. But that's alright.

 

Anyway, my take is that the 'normal' form of consumption in the vidgame industry is a form of investment anyway. There's a certain politics associated with it, there's a gamble on what you will get out of it, and the mechanics, the way it is set up, will encourage some games and not others. All that is true with Kickstarter, but it may end up being a very different set of rules and mechanisms. Which would be great, because then we can have a more diverse ecology of games. It's pretty naive to think that paying $50 for games you like and not paying for games you don't, is a completely neutral act that doesn't influence the way the industry works.

 

There's obviously a lot riding on DF & W2, though, because you want to pay for something that's good. If W2 disappoints like, apparently, the Bard's Tale remake did for original fans, then ouch.

[Aedelric]

I was never interested in Bards Tale, so when it was remade I ignored it. Wasteland is another kettle of fish however.

 

If people solely based the quality of a developers next product on the last regardless of the franchise, noone would have bought Mass Effect because Dragon Age 2 was a complete disaster. The fact ME3 outsold the previous two games is proof enough that it is not the case.

[Zoraptor]

I'm a customer, not an investor. When I pay post-launch after thorough reviews/investigation, I win.

So, how's ME3 working out for you?

[Delfosse]

It's a democratic form of patronage. It's an interesting step into a more socially involved business model.

 

Edit : When I say social, I'm talking about the literal sense, not about "social networks".

I'm sure some would say "socialist", too...

 

You're both right, since real socialism or communism must always be 100% democratic.

 

In a real communist world, Brian Fargo, having been raised as a "new soviet man", would feel too ashamed of himself if he didn't make one rpg after another, since everyone would be asking him to. And the state would always sponsor his games, since there would always be enough signatures on a petition.

 

In a capitalist world where profitability is everything, Brian hasn't made an RPG in what, 10 years? Well thank god kickstarter came in, at least we approached the communist utopia by a teeny tiny step.

 

In 200 years, they'll be laughing at us, looking at our current state of game industry.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Delfosse

[Majek]

in 200 years they'll be impressed how accurately we predicted the fall of man. :D

[Blodhemn]

It's a democratic form of patronage. It's an interesting step into a more socially involved business model.

 

Edit : When I say social, I'm talking about the literal sense, not about "social networks".

I'm sure some would say "socialist", too...

 

You're both right, since real socialism or communism must always be 100% democratic.

 

In a real communist world, Brian Fargo, having been raised as a "new soviet man", would feel too ashamed of himself if he didn't make one rpg after another, since everyone would be asking him to. And the state would always sponsor his games, since there would always be enough signatures on a petition.

 

In a capitalist world where profitability is everything, Brian hasn't made an RPG in what, 10 years? Well thank god kickstarter came in, at least we approached the communist utopia by a teeny tiny step.

 

In 200 years, they'll be laughing at us, looking at our current state of game industry.

Why would/should someone feel "ashamed" into doing something? Sounds more like being a slave to a system that doesn't breed creativity, moreso a manufactoring plant that breeds unrest. And I don't know if you're serious really or what but do you really think there would be such a public outcry for the government to fund an old school RPG? Lol...wut..

 

Kickstarter has nothing to do with Communism? What Government is sponsoring Kickstarter? lol - it's the result of a company making a nice move - a company that isn't as burdened by taxes as much as local businesses are. Also, since people never skimp out on putting money towards entertainment, even in hard economic times, it's pretty much win/win.

[Humanoid]

I fully accept the position that backing a game proposal on Kickstarter is not economically rational. But economically rational behaviour is what led us to the lamentable, creatively bankrupt, blockbuster-oriented current state of the gaming industry. Therefore I will embrace and celebrate the irrational amongst us - I paraphrase, but the saying goes "a reasonable man adapts to the world; an unreasonable man adapts the world to suit him - it is therefore upon unreasonable men that change depends on."

Edited April 19, 2012 by Humanoid