Just how big a game are we talking about here?

[Gyges]

lets try this another way: how many deep rpg's have been made which take most players less than 20 hours on the first play through?

 

the shortest one i can think of is fallout 1, and that took me well over 20 hours to finish on my first play through

 

edit: so, if they are making a deep rpg, chances are it will also be over 20 hours.

Yeah, but 20 hours are nothing for a classic (text-driven) isometric RPG. It took you already hours reading all the dialogue....

 

 

But I join the question stated above about the minimum sum for creating a game of the size of BG 2 and the depth of PST!

 

Aye, i will reach into the deepest pits of my pockets if this becomes a reach goal. Then again, ill be throwing more money into the rpg wishing well once i see some more info on them anyway. How much depends entirely on what more they reveal about their vision.

[descalabro]

I'm thinking this will be, at best, the size of the first Icewind Dale, unless the funding continues to grow at this pace.

[Chaos Theory]

One thing folks I think are forgetting is that we need not fund the entire game. $2-3 million is enough to get started on a BG-esque game, but it's going to cost quite a bit more to finally get the product out the door. At that point, Obsidian I'm sure has its own financial resources to spot what it needs to finish it-- especially knowing that there will be a bit of a profit from the sale of the game upon release (at least from those of us who didn't pre-purchase via KS).

 

My point being that the Kickstarter campaign shouldn't have to raise 4, 5, 6+ million dollars to make a game in the scope of a BG, PS:T, etc. They just needed enough to get started and convince the execs that their project had at least a moderate chance of financial success.

 

I think that question has been answered.

[NateOwns]

I am currently expecting 50 hours, I was expecting 30-40 based on hitting the initial goal, and I expect am additional 5-10 out of stretch goal 2.

[Tigranes]

I'm not sure about the 'financial resources' The whole problem of the current industry model is that very few developers ever have surplus cash in that sense; they live hand-to-mouth. Dev X signs up with Publisher Y in 2012 for a game. The contract says Y will give them $ for X to make the game, plus a bonus if the game does well on metacritic or something. X generally uses all that money to pay their employees to make the game. Game is released; it misses metacritic by a point or something; they get nothing of the profits. They have just made a game that sold maybe a million copies, but financially, they're the same place they started in: no money.

 

Now, it is different sometimes with, say, Valve or Blizzard, or in the old days like Origin or John Romero. But I don't think Obsidian would have millions of dollars to do something like that, not without risking the company's survival.

 

If they release Eternity and they sell enough copies to turn a profit, then that's different. That money will go to them, and we might see a very novel sight - people who made popular games making a profit.

 

Edit: for the length, I'm sure I said this already, but "hours" is a notoriously shaky thing. It took me under 10 hours for Jade Empire; it took more than 20 for others. BG2 is a "100+ hour epic" but can take other people less than half that. What I expect is a little smaller than IWDs or PST, or a similar length if they get good funding. BG2 is anomalous in the history of gaming, and Bioware themselves said it was insane and they're not sure how it all worked out.

[ilhdr]

One thing folks I think are forgetting is that we need not fund the entire game. $2-3 million is enough to get started on a BG-esque game, but it's going to cost quite a bit more to finally get the product out the door. At that point, Obsidian I'm sure has its own financial resources to spot what it needs to finish it-- especially knowing that there will be a bit of a profit from the sale of the game upon release (at least from those of us who didn't pre-purchase via KS).

 

My point being that the Kickstarter campaign shouldn't have to raise 4, 5, 6+ million dollars to make a game in the scope of a BG, PS:T, etc. They just needed enough to get started and convince the execs that their project had at least a moderate chance of financial success.

 

I think that question has been answered.

 

This ^^ Obsidian is not a garage developer. They should have in-house money on it and revenue to end it development cicle.

Edited September 20, 2012 by ilhdr

[Chaos Theory]

I'm not sure about the 'financial resources' The whole problem of the current industry model is that very few developers ever have surplus cash in that sense; they live hand-to-mouth. Dev X signs up with Publisher Y in 2012 for a game. The contract says Y will give them $ for X to make the game, plus a bonus if the game does well on metacritic or something. X generally uses all that money to pay their employees to make the game. Game is released; it misses metacritic by a point or something; they get nothing of the profits. They have just made a game that sold maybe a million copies, but financially, they're the same place they started in: no money.

 

Now, it is different sometimes with, say, Valve or Blizzard, or in the old days like Origin or John Romero. But I don't think Obsidian would have millions of dollars to do something like that, not without risking the company's survival.

 

If they release Eternity and they sell enough copies to turn a profit, then that's different. That money will go to them, and we might see a very novel sight - people who made popular games making a profit.

 

Edit: for the length, I'm sure I said this already, but "hours" is a notoriously shaky thing. It took me under 10 hours for Jade Empire; it took more than 20 for others. BG2 is a "100+ hour epic" but can take other people less than half that. What I expect is a little smaller than IWDs or PST, or a similar length if they get good funding. BG2 is anomalous in the history of gaming, and Bioware themselves said it was insane and they're not sure how it all worked out.

 

Wow, I never knew you guys played things that close. No rainy day fund? Not that I thought you'd be rolling in loot, but... Have you tried selling interns into slavery to raise some cash?

[Tigranes]

Keep in mind I don't work in their offices or anything. For the most part my information just comes from being around for a long time. Maybe they do have $, but what I described is pretty much how all developers operate, which is the terrible thing about the industry.

 

Interns don't go for much these days. I guess Sawyer could sing for cash.

[ilhdr]

I'm not sure about the 'financial resources' The whole problem of the current industry model is that very few developers ever have surplus cash in that sense; they live hand-to-mouth. Dev X signs up with Publisher Y in 2012 for a game. The contract says Y will give them $ for X to make the game, plus a bonus if the game does well on metacritic or something. X generally uses all that money to pay their employees to make the game. Game is released; it misses metacritic by a point or something; they get nothing of the profits. They have just made a game that sold maybe a million copies, but financially, they're the same place they started in: no money.

 

Now, it is different sometimes with, say, Valve or Blizzard, or in the old days like Origin or John Romero. But I don't think Obsidian would have millions of dollars to do something like that, not without risking the company's survival.

 

If they release Eternity and they sell enough copies to turn a profit, then that's different. That money will go to them, and we might see a very novel sight - people who made popular games making a profit.

 

Edit: for the length, I'm sure I said this already, but "hours" is a notoriously shaky thing. It took me under 10 hours for Jade Empire; it took more than 20 for others. BG2 is a "100+ hour epic" but can take other people less than half that. What I expect is a little smaller than IWDs or PST, or a similar length if they get good funding. BG2 is anomalous in the history of gaming, and Bioware themselves said it was insane and they're not sure how it all worked out.

 

But if they gain nothing of the profits how they can pay the people or pay the bills?

 

And to where the money from the sales goes? I doubt any developer would work for free on this basis.

[Merin]

I realize I never answer the hours part.

 

For the money they are getting and from what they are saying, I expect they initially planned on a game that would probably take (understanding that different players play games faster and slower) about ten hours for a playthrough.

 

Depending on where stretch goals go, they may go higher. Since we hit the 1.6 goal, I'm thinking about 15 hours of gameplay. And if they hit 2.2 I think suddenly it expands a bunch and you might see a 30 or even 40 hour game at that point.

 

But to think that they were shooting for a 50 hour game (again, average run times) with 1.1 million is dreaming. If you need 50 hours, pull your donation.

[Tychoxi]

A) I'd much rather play a short but excelling game, than an "epic" piece of crap (I just can't help but lol when people go "OMG Oblivion is so amazing I dumped 210 hours into it!"). Now, examples of short games that extirpated excess filler in favor of a excellently paced and thematically fulfilling experience that come to my mind (like Portal or Bastion) are not RPGs, this is because the true RPG is - among a few other points - a non-linear, open ended (inherently doing away with any pacing) experience that presents several themes to explore, which drives into my next point:

B) In my mind it's always been pretty clear this game will be pretty big.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Tychoxi

[Chunkyman]

I realize I never answer the hours part.

 

For the money they are getting and from what they are saying, I expect they initially planned on a game that would probably take (understanding that different players play games faster and slower) about ten hours for a playthrough.

 

Depending on where stretch goals go, they may go higher. Since we hit the 1.6 goal, I'm thinking about 15 hours of gameplay. And if they hit 2.2 I think suddenly it expands a bunch and you might see a 30 or even 40 hour game at that point.

 

But to think that they were shooting for a 50 hour game (again, average run times) with 1.1 million is dreaming. If you need 50 hours, pull your donation.

 

I'm an extremely slow player (I waste huge amounts of time fiddling with my inventory, amongst other things), so 50 hours for someone like me would be probably 25 for a normal gamer. The game will satisfy me (in terms of length) if at the end I'm not like "Seriously, that was it? I barely just started!".

[Tigranes]

But if they gain nothing of the profits how they can pay the people or pay the bills?

 

And to where the money from the sales goes? I doubt any developer would work for free on this basis.

 

Imagine a developer makes game A during 2012; releases it at the end of the year.

 

By and large, the money they are paid by the publisher supports their costs during 2012. When the game comes out, those payments cease. They might get a small (and I mean small) cut of the profits or a flat sum, usually based on metacritic / sales. But generally, what they need to do is make sure they have another contract lined up, so that as soon as game A is finished, they can start making game B in 2013; and then, they'll be paid by the new publisher for that.

 

The rest of the money from the sales goes to the publisher, the distributor, the middleman like game stores, etc. Yes, it really is like that. If you buy a $50 game, you will very rarely see the developer take $20 or $30 of it. You can find more exact breakdown of who gets how much on Gamasutra, but the basic gist of it is that counter-intuitive as it may seem, most developers really do live hand to mouth; even if your game just sold pretty well, if you don't have another contract lined up, you might need to let people go. (Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

[Grimlorn]

One thing folks I think are forgetting is that we need not fund the entire game. $2-3 million is enough to get started on a BG-esque game, but it's going to cost quite a bit more to finally get the product out the door. At that point, Obsidian I'm sure has its own financial resources to spot what it needs to finish it-- especially knowing that there will be a bit of a profit from the sale of the game upon release (at least from those of us who didn't pre-purchase via KS).

 

My point being that the Kickstarter campaign shouldn't have to raise 4, 5, 6+ million dollars to make a game in the scope of a BG, PS:T, etc. They just needed enough to get started and convince the execs that their project had at least a moderate chance of financial success.

 

I think that question has been answered.

Yeah but if they have to go to execs for more money, the execs will want the IP and they'll own it. Rather keep it with the developers instead of the publishers who would eventually turn it into an action RPG series.

[ilhdr]

But if they gain nothing of the profits how they can pay the people or pay the bills?

 

And to where the money from the sales goes? I doubt any developer would work for free on this basis.

 

Imagine a developer makes game A during 2012; releases it at the end of the year.

 

By and large, the money they are paid by the publisher supports their costs during 2012. When the game comes out, those payments cease. They might get a small (and I mean small) cut of the profits or a flat sum, usually based on metacritic / sales. But generally, what they need to do is make sure they have another contract lined up, so that as soon as game A is finished, they can start making game B in 2013; and then, they'll be paid by the new publisher for that.

 

The rest of the money from the sales goes to the publisher, the distributor, the middleman like game stores, etc. Yes, it really is like that. If you buy a $50 game, you will very rarely see the developer take $20 or $30 of it. You can find more exact breakdown of who gets how much on Gamasutra, but the basic gist of it is that counter-intuitive as it may seem, most developers really do live hand to mouth; even if your game just sold pretty well, if you don't have another contract lined up, you might need to let people go. (Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

OK, but without a publisher contract right now, how will they maintain the studio until project eternity see the light?

Edited September 20, 2012 by ilhdr

[Merin]

For the money they are getting and from what they are saying, I expect they initially planned on a game that would probably take (understanding that different players play games faster and slower) about ten hours for a playthrough.

 

Depending on where stretch goals go, they may go higher. Since we hit the 1.6 goal, I'm thinking about 15 hours of gameplay. And if they hit 2.2 I think suddenly it expands a bunch and you might see a 30 or even 40 hour game at that point.

 

But to think that they were shooting for a 50 hour game (again, average run times) with 1.1 million is dreaming. If you need 50 hours, pull your donation.

 

I'm an extremely slow player (I waste huge amounts of time fiddling with my inventory, amongst other things), so 50 hours for someone like me would be probably 25 for a normal gamer. The game will satisfy me (in terms of length) if at the end I'm not like "Seriously, that was it? I barely just started!".

 

I tend to take longer, myself, so I see a "10 hour game" taking me like 20 minimum. I know a lot of people who finished DA:O in like 40 hours. I took 128 hours my first play. *shrug*

 

Let me also add, however, for those 10 hours I also see like an easily enjoyable two replays for most (probably like five for me.)

[Chaos Theory]

Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

I had heard that, but thought it some gamer urban legend or something. F:NV is amazing, and it makes me sick knowing the reason for the layoffs is true.

[Grimlorn]

But if they gain nothing of the profits how they can pay the people or pay the bills?

 

And to where the money from the sales goes? I doubt any developer would work for free on this basis.

 

Imagine a developer makes game A during 2012; releases it at the end of the year.

 

By and large, the money they are paid by the publisher supports their costs during 2012. When the game comes out, those payments cease. They might get a small (and I mean small) cut of the profits or a flat sum, usually based on metacritic / sales. But generally, what they need to do is make sure they have another contract lined up, so that as soon as game A is finished, they can start making game B in 2013; and then, they'll be paid by the new publisher for that.

 

The rest of the money from the sales goes to the publisher, the distributor, the middleman like game stores, etc. Yes, it really is like that. If you buy a $50 game, you will very rarely see the developer take $20 or $30 of it. You can find more exact breakdown of who gets how much on Gamasutra, but the basic gist of it is that counter-intuitive as it may seem, most developers really do live hand to mouth; even if your game just sold pretty well, if you don't have another contract lined up, you might need to let people go. (Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

OK, but without a publisher contract right now, how will they maintain the studio until project eternity see the light?

They have South Park right now. Thought they were working on something else besides PE too. So they are still doing publisher contacts right now.

[Chaos Theory]

One thing folks I think are forgetting is that we need not fund the entire game. $2-3 million is enough to get started on a BG-esque game, but it's going to cost quite a bit more to finally get the product out the door. At that point, Obsidian I'm sure has its own financial resources to spot what it needs to finish it-- especially knowing that there will be a bit of a profit from the sale of the game upon release (at least from those of us who didn't pre-purchase via KS).

 

My point being that the Kickstarter campaign shouldn't have to raise 4, 5, 6+ million dollars to make a game in the scope of a BG, PS:T, etc. They just needed enough to get started and convince the execs that their project had at least a moderate chance of financial success.

 

I think that question has been answered.

Yeah but if they have to go to execs for more money, the execs will want the IP and they'll own it. Rather keep it with the developers instead of the publishers who would eventually turn it into an action RPG series.

 

I meant the execs of Obsidian, not an external publisher. Even a smaller company like Obsidian has its "game" people and its "business" people. The game people have to convince the business people that their project is worthy so the business people can fund it. Sometimes the business people say no, so the game people rise up and eat the business people's first born child. It's a symbiosis that must not be interrupted.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Chaos Theory

[Piccolo]

If I get a good 100 hours minimum out of the game, i'll be satisfied.

 

And by that, I don't mean I expect a 100 hour-long main questline. I mean 100 hours before I get bored or feel as though i'm "done" with the game, having replayed it a few times, explored everywhere, done all the side quests at a leisurely pace, etc.

[Metabot]

Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

I had heard that, but thought it some gamer urban legend or something. F:NV is amazing, and it makes me sick knowing the reason for the layoffs is true.

 

You thought what was an urban legend? The fact that they didn't get a bonus because of one metacritic point?

Edited September 20, 2012 by Metabot

[Chaos Theory]

But if they gain nothing of the profits how they can pay the people or pay the bills?

 

And to where the money from the sales goes? I doubt any developer would work for free on this basis.

 

Imagine a developer makes game A during 2012; releases it at the end of the year.

 

By and large, the money they are paid by the publisher supports their costs during 2012. When the game comes out, those payments cease. They might get a small (and I mean small) cut of the profits or a flat sum, usually based on metacritic / sales. But generally, what they need to do is make sure they have another contract lined up, so that as soon as game A is finished, they can start making game B in 2013; and then, they'll be paid by the new publisher for that.

 

The rest of the money from the sales goes to the publisher, the distributor, the middleman like game stores, etc. Yes, it really is like that. If you buy a $50 game, you will very rarely see the developer take $20 or $30 of it. You can find more exact breakdown of who gets how much on Gamasutra, but the basic gist of it is that counter-intuitive as it may seem, most developers really do live hand to mouth; even if your game just sold pretty well, if you don't have another contract lined up, you might need to let people go. (Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

OK, but without a publisher contract right now, how will they maintain the studio until project eternity see the light?

They have South Park right now. Thought they were working on something else besides PE too. So they are still doing publisher contacts right now.

 

Also sounds like they're not involved with any current Fallout project, which is too bad. NV was better than Bethesda's FO3.

[Grimlorn]

One thing folks I think are forgetting is that we need not fund the entire game. $2-3 million is enough to get started on a BG-esque game, but it's going to cost quite a bit more to finally get the product out the door. At that point, Obsidian I'm sure has its own financial resources to spot what it needs to finish it-- especially knowing that there will be a bit of a profit from the sale of the game upon release (at least from those of us who didn't pre-purchase via KS).

 

My point being that the Kickstarter campaign shouldn't have to raise 4, 5, 6+ million dollars to make a game in the scope of a BG, PS:T, etc. They just needed enough to get started and convince the execs that their project had at least a moderate chance of financial success.

 

I think that question has been answered.

Yeah but if they have to go to execs for more money, the execs will want the IP and they'll own it. Rather keep it with the developers instead of the publishers who would eventually turn it into an action RPG series.

 

I meant the execs of Obsidian, not an external publisher. Even a smaller company like Obsidian has its "game" people and its "business" people. The game people have to convince the business people that their project is worthy so the business people can fund it. Sometimes the business people say no, so the game people rise up and eat the business people's first born child. It's a symbiosis that must not be interrupted.

I wonder if they do have money people. I always assumed that publishers were the money people. Otherwise developers could keep IPs in house.

[Hurlshort]

I'm not hung up on hours, I want a great game that keeps me engaged from start to finish.

 

It is also crazy to expect a full on epic like BG2 for $2 million. If this game comes out and is successful, then we might see enough DLC over time to make it a full on epic, but they are still operating on a small budget here. Also, taking funds from other areas is a terrible idea, they aren't going to sacrifice the company safety net (if they even have one) for this project, they shouldn't have to.

 

I'd say 20 hours is a reasonable guess for a first play through. That is fairly standard.

 

Merin is on the money when he says you are pledging Kickstarter for more than simply getting a return on an investment. We'd all be better off pledging the minimum if that were the case. We are pledging to support a vision.

[Chaos Theory]

Recently, Obsidian had to let dozens of employees go because Fallout: New Vegas only got 84 on metacritic not 85, and they did not get their bonus from the publisher. Never mind the game sold 5 million copies.)

 

I had heard that, but thought it some gamer urban legend or something. F:NV is amazing, and it makes me sick knowing the reason for the layoffs is true.

 

You thought what was an urban legend? The fact that they didn't get a bonus because of one metacritic point?

 

Yeah, I didn't realize how cutthroat and greedy people were in the game production community. I figured it was all gumdrops and teddy bears. Now it's darker to me. Much, much darker.