Have some faith people PE will be great

[GrayAngel]

I read many post on many topic people and i'm asking my self do those people really support PE with they money or just some Bio drone make account on this forum i give 175 $ and i'm sorry that i give so little because i know this game will be great whey some say let me think BG 2, ID Saga Fallout 1,2, NV, KOTOR 2 and AP( great game but with many faults thanks to consoles). You will have story that will stay with you for many years not like 99% of games right now play then forgot.

[Calmar]

 

 

... but I agree with your statement!

 

It seems people are too concerned about what could go wrong instead of looking forward to the game. There are many things that are wierd, or even not really good in the classic Infinity Engine games, but most of us love them for the many things they did really good. I have faith in Eternity being equally good and memorable.

[Sarex]

Wait and see I guess, better to have low expectations and be surprised then have unrealistic expectations and be disappointed. I had too much much hope for BG:E, and it turned out to be worse then the original.

[Osvir]

I don't feel entitled or anything but I wish to say as a member who's been here almost since the Kickstarter project began, this community has faith :=

Many of the on-going discussions I've been a part of has been great stuff for inspiration, motivation, innovation, discussions, analysis, agreements and disagreements of various system ideas, suggestions, propositions and so on and so forth.

Many say "Nay!" to my ideas as an example, but may say "Yay!" to another forum member's ideas. The negativity we see I believe isn't necessarily directed at PE but more or less towards mine, yours, some other guy or girls thoughts of what should be or not be in PE.

"I want this!" says one, and the other answers "Are you kidding me?". See where the negativity is? Though, I haven't read much around on the forums lately, but I remember this forum being very open-minded and friendly

I think people just want PE to be the best it can be, granted the resources that Obsidian has.

And to tip this post off:

Passion is in many ways strong, it has many colors and many forms. Some rage, some spit, some love, some hate etc. but fundamentally I believe all want the same thing: A good RPG. And as far as I am concerned and what I know of the project, PE looks to form into just that. Culturally it's a neat little phenomena already in my book, and it has lots of history already as a very successful Kickstarter project (as to date), which will make it even more interesting for years to come. Possibly even looking back 10-20 or even 30-40 years from now and talk about this project as... something ^^

People wouldn't be posting if they didn't have a little "faith". For what it's worth, that's what I think 

 

Have a good day, and don't forget hugs

[Karkarov]

What Osvir said.  I have no doubts the game will be great, but that doesn't mean there wont be a feature I wish was in, or one I wish they had done differently.  I just suspect that with the vertical slice in progress (almost done?/done done) they will move purely into developing the game and there will be a bit less to talk about here.

[rjshae]

I too have high hopes for this game. The updates I've seen thus far have been of high quality and I'm really looking forward to seeing it all come together.

 

What I find most concerning is the budget. This project may end up costing more than the designers expect. Plus the Kickstarter add-ons may end up costing more than expected. My fingers are crossed that it will all work out.

[IndiraLightfoot]

It has been said before, but the dev schedule for PE may also turn out to be problematic, and I am one of those who'd gladly wait a couple of months, just to make sure that as many major bugs as possible have been ironed out and that content is meaty throughout. One bad thing about NWN2 was the sense that the ending felt rushed, including the dungeons and such. Obsids, please take your time on this one. It will be worth it.   

[PrimeJunta]

I'm not too concerned about them staying on budget; Obsidian aren't new to this stuff and P:E won't have a large number of technical unknowns, so it shouldn't be too hard to budget.

 

As to the schedule, they already mentioned immediately after the KS -- unofficially -- that April 2014 isn't realistic, because they exceeded their target by nearly a factor of four.

 

What's more, Obsidian's bad old days of buggy messes are fairly far behind. They've demonstrated that they can deliver quality unless the publisher arbitrarily shifts deadlines forward and/or skimps on QA -- which obviously won't be an issue this time around.

[Greydragon]

Everyone remembers the glorious potential of the rushed mess that was KOTOR2:SL. What we are staring down the barrel of is a similarly epic game that, thankfully, won't fall into the same pitfalls. Take as much time as you need Obsidian, to polish the game to it's full potential. As long as I'm still alive to get it, everything is perfect.

 

 

Er ... I'd better start laying off the cholesterol and salt. Just to be safe. More exercise, thats the ticket!

 

(Day of release): too busy in a gym to play ... irony.

[Ignatius]

Just coffee for me.

[Malcador]

I read many post on many topic people and i'm asking my self do those people really support PE with they money or just some Bio drone make account on this forum i give 175 $ and i'm sorry that i give so little because i know this game will be great whey some say let me think BG 2, ID Saga Fallout 1,2, NV, KOTOR 2 and AP( great game but with many faults thanks to consoles). You will have story that will stay with you for many years not like 99% of games right now play then forgot.

Oh well, gee thank God you decided to tell us this - I was getting worried.

[Naurgalen]

I have 100% trust in the team. :D

[rjshae]

Everyone remembers the glorious potential of the rushed mess that was KOTOR2:SL. What we are staring down the barrel of is a similarly epic game that, thankfully, won't fall into the same pitfalls. Take as much time as you need Obsidian, to polish the game to it's full potential. As long as I'm still alive to get it, everything is perfect.

 

 

Er ... I'd better start laying off the cholesterol and salt. Just to be safe. More exercise, thats the ticket!

 

(Day of release): too busy in a gym to play ... irony.

 

There are certain realities that can not be ignored in a commercial business.

 

'Take as much time as you need Obsidian' == LARGER budget

[Lephys]

There are certain realities that can not be ignored in a commercial business.

 

'Take as much time as you need Obsidian' == LARGER budget

 

Alright, let's go with "Take as much time as you're able, Obsidian." There are plenty of factors at play there. 1 dollar does not always equal the same amount of productivity. Progress and creativity fluctuate. Some things that often get compressed by publishers' somewhat arbitrary (at least regarding the benefit of the project's creative development) deadlines don't need to be compressed strictly because of money. It's because the people making decisions don't want to go any longer without firing up the income. Not necessarily because they literally don't have the resources necessary to allow for spending any more time on polishing and bug-removal, etc.

 

Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Lephys

[SophosTheWise]

 

 

Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials.

 

 

Of course, but the people that make the game aren't only paid for making a game with their computers and other physical materials, but also for their time. Salary is part of a budget and if you take more time it takes more money for the salary of your employees.

[PrimeJunta]

'Take as much time as you need Obsidian' == LARGER budget

It's not quite as simple as that, actually. Sometimes taking more time will save money, or will yield much greater value for money. Most projects start out with a very small team (the research/design/early development/pre-production/whatever phase), then expand to a bigger team (full development), and then tapers off again in the final production/beta testing/release/whatever phase (not counting testers, which cost less per hour than designers or programmers). The early small-team phase costs comparatively little per day compared to the full production and release phases, and by being extra super careful in that phase you can avoid really costly problems later on.

 

IOW, pushing the schedule forward by 50% doesn't necessarily increase costs by 50%. It might be as little as 10%, depending on the trajectory.

 

Bad things only happen if the project goes south in the full production or release phase. That's when big chunks of stuff get cut, things go over budget, and you get rushed, buggy releases, or projects get killed off altogether. I would wager that most of us working in software will experience at least one project like that, and believe me it ain't fun... and once you've survived it, you do your damnedest not to do it again. You also learn to recognise many of the warning signs and take corrective action early on.

 

The senior Obsidian devs working on P:E are certainly crusty enough to have been there and done that. I have little doubts about them being able to handle the project management and budgeting end of this particular exercise.

[Sarex]

Alright, let's go with "Take as much time as you're able, Obsidian." There are plenty of factors at play there. 1 dollar does not always equal the same amount of productivity. Progress and creativity fluctuate. Some things that often get compressed by publishers' somewhat arbitrary (at least regarding the benefit of the project's creative development) deadlines don't need to be compressed strictly because of money. It's because the people making decisions don't want to go any longer without firing up the income. Not necessarily because they literally don't have the resources necessary to allow for spending any more time on polishing and bug-removal, etc.

 

Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials.

 

As far as I know they get a monthly paycheck, so time/money relation is fixed. I could be wrong about the monthly paycheck though.

[moridin84]

 

Alright, let's go with "Take as much time as you're able, Obsidian." There are plenty of factors at play there. 1 dollar does not always equal the same amount of productivity. Progress and creativity fluctuate. Some things that often get compressed by publishers' somewhat arbitrary (at least regarding the benefit of the project's creative development) deadlines don't need to be compressed strictly because of money. It's because the people making decisions don't want to go any longer without firing up the income. Not necessarily because they literally don't have the resources necessary to allow for spending any more time on polishing and bug-removal, etc.

 

Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials.

 

As far as I know they get a monthly paycheck, so time/money relation is fixed. I could be wrong about the monthly paycheck though.

 

 

I am... pretty sure you aren't wrong. 

 

People generally need money for various things, such as feeding their children. Being part of a kickstarter doesn't change that. 

[Lephys]

If you would be so kind, please point out exactly where I didn't literally state that the relationship between time and money in this context is, in a sense, fixed.

 

Also, Obsidian is a functioning entity that wasn't founded by Project:Eternity's Kickstarter funding. Thus, it makes perfect sense that they could provide a buffer of funding, if the Kickstarter funds were to actually run out and the game really needed another month of polishing. Especially if the cost-benefit ratio is high enough in favor of benefit.

 

Essentially, time factors into the decisions behind the spending of money, as well. Things like "Go ahead and hire a bunch more animators, and let's start pumping out all the animations in the game, since we said we'd release the game on a specific date," as opposed to "Hmm, we really need to spend more time on these animations BEFORE we hire all those artists and exhaust our funding, even if that means delaying the release a bit."

 

You see... the relationship is fixed, but the specifics are not. You can spend $1 million over the course of a year, or over the course of 4 months. It really depends on a lot of specifics. So, taking your time on a game doesn't necessarily mean increasing your allotted budget.

 

For what it's worth, since Josh is so focused on the importance of initial design and planning before actually "manufacturing" the game components, I don't think we're in trouble here. I think they're basically taking their time as much as they possibly can, already. Which is a very good thing.

[rjshae]

 

'Take as much time as you need Obsidian' == LARGER budget

It's not quite as simple as that, actually. Sometimes taking more time will save money, or will yield much greater value for money. Most projects start out with a very small team (the research/design/early development/pre-production/whatever phase), then expand to a bigger team (full development), and then tapers off again in the final production/beta testing/release/whatever phase (not counting testers, which cost less per hour than designers or programmers). The early small-team phase costs comparatively little per day compared to the full production and release phases, and by being extra super careful in that phase you can avoid really costly problems later on.

 

Oh sure, if you plan out the time you need properly you can sometimes end up saving money. Sometimes trying to tighten up the schedule can likewise end up costing you a lot more. But this is not the same thing as saying you can take an indefinite amount of time to get something done. Doing that can significantly increase your financial risks.

 

For me it'd be okay if Obsidian took an extra month or so for a couple of heads to work out the significant known issues. That wouldn't incur a major overhead, and you'll like need those coders to work on fixing the discovered bugs anyway. Releasing a polished product would likely help with sales to people who didn't contribute to the Kickstarter (or at least it wouldn't hurt... *COUGH*Crafty Studios*COUGH*), and hopefully provide momentum for the sequels.

[Sarex]

If you would be so kind, please point out exactly where I didn't literally state that the relationship between time and money in this context is, in a sense, fixed.

 

 

"Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials."

 

This is what confused me. No matter how productive (or unproductive) they are, they still get paid monthly. The only way they could prolong the development/production time is if they cut the number of people on the project, ie. they had less people to pay each month.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Sarex

[Ffordesoon]

@OP:

 

I think anyone who pledged money to PE has faith in Obsidian on some level, but there's a difference between faith and blind faith. Raising any concerns we might have on this forum is eminently reasonable. Some people here have perhaps gotten a bit too negative in the heat of passion, but in general, talking about the fears (and hopes!) we have about the game is good for everybody.

[Naurgalen]

 

If you would be so kind, please point out exactly where I didn't literally state that the relationship between time and money in this context is, in a sense, fixed.

 

 

"Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials."

 

This is what confused me. No matter how productive (or unproductive) they are, they still get paid monthly. The only way they could prolong the development/production time is if they cut the number of people on the project, ie. they had less people to pay each month.

 

 

 

Money can be cut from many sources: voice actors, publicity, soundtrack, software licenses and beta testing (for example)... and reinvested in more money for salaries and other content production. At the same time, obsidian may had contracted people for speeding up production in specific things and then put them on other works. And ofcs they may invest more of their own money to finish some ideas that they know will greatly push up the quality of the game.

[Sarex]

Money can be cut from many sources: voice actors, publicity, soundtrack, software licenses and beta testing (for example)... and reinvested in more money for salaries and other content production. At the same time, obsidian may had contracted people for speeding up production in specific things and then put them on other works. And ofcs they may invest more of their own money to finish some ideas that they know will greatly push up the quality of the game.

 

Ie. remove some people from the project. As for investing their own money, I really doubt it, that is a rabbit hole that can have no end.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Sarex

[Lephys]

"Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials."

 

This is what confused me. No matter how productive (or unproductive) they are, they still get paid monthly. The only way they could prolong the development/production time is if they cut the number of people on the project, ie. they had less people to pay each month.

You think they just hire 100 people, at the beginning of the project, and then roll with that for 18 months, until the game's done? They don't do this. More time can be spent on things before they even hire more people to kick production into high gear.

 

Time equals Money. However, 1 Time does not equal 1 Money. Therefore, "take your time" doesn't mean "take your money, and multiply that by a lot more units of time." It means "intelligently don't rush this into expensive production."

 

There are a lot more factors that can rush the production of a game than just "our money supply is running low."

 

Obviously, oodles of us trust in Obsidian to already spend their money wisely, and take their time where it is highly beneficial. We're simply encouraging such decisions, and expressing our support.

 

But, yeah, taking "Hey, no need to rush" statements and acting like the only thing they can possibly mean is "just add a bunch of months of payroll onto the end of your project schedule" is mildly silly. There are methods of spending more time on certain things, to great benefit, while, overall using the same amount of money.

 

As Josh said, he considers pre-production the hard part, focusing as much time and effort into that as possible (with a much smaller crew, since it's heavily concepts and designs, instead of manpower pumping out content quantity), so that the latter portion -- production -- is actually as easy as can be. They don't get done with half the animations in the game, then go "wait, I think we've found a flaw in our animation design! We're gonna hafta change it a bit!", and have to figure all that out with a team of 50 now instead of 15, for that month, while half those people can't produce more animations until the changes are made by the design crew. Etc.

 

That's pretty simplified, and probably full of inaccuracies on a technical level, but it's things of that nature.