Update #70: New Year Project Update

[Jobby]

If the stretch goals include pre-orders for people who missed the kickstarter then with a bit of pr they could go pretty far, I don't think it should be limited to just those who have already paid for the game at any rate.

 

That's prolly not the case anyway just the expression "additional strechgoals" conjures an image (in my mind) of existing backers shelling out cash for extra t-shirts etc..

[Pipyui]

Let me get this straight. You think that by answering yes for more stretch goals for the game, that you have to put in more money?  Or the only people who can contribute in a monetary sense are the only ones who should be voting Yes? That's really gone over my head.

 

Almost.  Far be it for me to speak for others, but when Obsidian starts a poll asking whether or not we would like more stretchgoals, I get the impression that they're asking "Would you like to put money towards more stretchgoals if we make them available?"  They want to know what the public demand for them are, and whether it's worth their time to consider further goals.  So I imagine that they're not just asking "Do you want to see more stretchgoals?" but "Would you be willing to pay towards more stretchgoals?"

 

If Obsidian wants an impression of how many people are willing to pay more for stretchgoals, then I shouldn't answer positively to the poll.  On the other hand, I don't want to answer negatively to the poll either.  I'm not against there being more stretchgoals available, and hence likely a release date for PoE being pushed back.  It doesn't sound altruistic, but if others want to make my game better on their own behalves, I'm all for it.   I myself just can't justify putting forward (much) more money, stretchgoals or no.

 

I just don't want to give Obsidian the impression that there is more demand (money-throwing demand) for strechgoals than there is.

[rjshae]

For me, the motivation for anteing up more money would be: does the added content significantly increase and further improve the gaming  experience? (This includes replay value.) If they added, say, +20% more play time and increased the number of interesting character combinations, then I wouldn't have much hesitation to increase my contribution by 15-25%. That's a drop in the bucket for a game I really want to play. I might be more hesitant if they came back asking for the same amount as the original game funding.

 

My $.02 worth.

[Ffordesoon]

Seeing as I backed at the $1000 tier, I probably would not up my pledge, but the folks who paid a halfway reasonable amount might want to.

[LadyCrimson]

If Obsidian wants an impression of how many people are willing to pay more for stretchgoals, then I shouldn't answer positively to the poll.  On the other hand, I don't want to answer negatively to the poll either.  I'm not against there being more stretchgoals available, and hence likely a release date for PoE being pushed back.  It doesn't sound altruistic, but if others want to make my game better on their own behalves, I'm all for it.   I myself just can't justify putting forward (much) more money, stretchgoals or no.

 

I just don't want to give Obsidian the impression that there is more demand (money-throwing demand) for strechgoals than there is.

That's pretty much the reasoning of why I haven't voted in that poll, either.

 

Am I against them offering new stretch goals? Nope.

Am I actually going to increase my personal pledge/cash spent? Extremely unlikely at this point. Stretch goals are never my ultimate motivation to begin with and I've pretty much spent what I'm willing to spend.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Let me get this straight. You think that by answering yes for more stretch goals for the game, that you have to put in more money?  Or the only people who can contribute in a monetary sense are the only ones who should be voting Yes? That's really gone over my head.

 

Almost.  Far be it for me to speak for others, but when Obsidian starts a poll asking whether or not we would like more stretchgoals, I get the impression that they're asking "Would you like to put money towards more stretchgoals if we make them available?"  They want to know what the public demand for them are, and whether it's worth their time to consider further goals.  So I imagine that they're not just asking "Do you want to see more stretchgoals?" but "Would you be willing to pay towards more stretchgoals?"

 

If Obsidian wants an impression of how many people are willing to pay more for stretchgoals, then I shouldn't answer positively to the poll.  On the other hand, I don't want to answer negatively to the poll either.  I'm not against there being more stretchgoals available, and hence likely a release date for PoE being pushed back.  It doesn't sound altruistic, but if others want to make my game better on their own behalves, I'm all for it.   I myself just can't justify putting forward (much) more money, stretchgoals or no.

 

I just don't want to give Obsidian the impression that there is more demand (money-throwing demand) for strechgoals than there is.

 

 

It feels like you're reading between the lines when it's not required. The question is quite simple and I don't see it as a conditional question. Also, voting yes doesn't mean you have to put money in. There's no lying there. If anything, it may encourage people who have been holding off and not backed the game to put money in now. Just like the original Kickstarter. You're voting could actually sway other people who haven't backed the game. So in a way, your vote has helped to fund the game even more without you putting money in yourself.

 

When Obsidian put out more stretch goals in the original Kickstarter, it encouraged people to put money in. eg. Linux and Mac? You now have Linux and Mac users donating. There may have been other stretch goals which tipped the balance of someone thinking of backing the game to actually backing the game. When Obsidian released these stretch goals, the original backers didn't have to put more money in. There was no obligation. 

 

If you've got people wanting more stretch goals and holding off voting because they see the poll as some conditional question when it's not, then that sends a terrible message to Obsidian imo. If Obsidian wants to get an impression of how many people are willing to pay more for stretch goals, then they would have polled differently. Personally, I think Obsidian should just put the stretch goals up on the Backer Portal and release an update about it. It may sway some people in putting in money that at the moment probably wouldn't including new people who haven't backed the game. At the moment, there's uncertainty which doesn't send a good message considering nearly two months has passed when the poll went up.

[Bwe]

I could not agree more with all other fans here: landscapes art and character sheets are awesome. And if the later come with loads of statistics ... better ! By the way creatures and character animations are really nice too, definitely 2014 will be a loooong year waiting

 

On remark: I am not sure about the PoE logo design ... Is it definitive ?

[Godfather101]

hmm, is there any news, when the MCA arcanum playthrough will continue?

5 Months till the last Arcanum Vid seems a little bit long.

[Pekachon]

Yes, first post here. 

To the guy who said that most backers don't put in the effort. Has it occured to you that maybe some backers are willing to allow developers complete creative freedom with their game and see how it turns out? Yes I know, completely crazy, right? Also, what these forums would look like if all the 70 k backers started posting at least one reply per thread. Not pretty.

And yes, there will probably be a nerd-rage no matter what when this game comes out. Know why? Cause among those 70 k people there are several factions that want a different experience from it. And some consider themselves somehow better and\or more priviledged than others.

Peace.

[JFSOCC]

he hates playing it so  doubt he's going to finish.

[Clean&Clear]

Great update! The character sheet and environment look awesome. Keep up the good work.

[Ffordesoon]

In re the "But multiclassing!" argument:

 

If you have to build a character out of multiple classes to get the build you want in the IE games (muscle wizard, for example), doesn't that indicate that the classes in the IE games are overly rigid?

[StrangeCat]

Yes, first post here. 

To the guy who said that most backers don't put in the effort. Has it occured to you that maybe some backers are willing to allow developers complete creative freedom with their game and see how it turns out? Yes I know, completely crazy, right? Also, what these forums would look like if all the 70 k backers started posting at least one reply per thread. Not pretty.

And yes, there will probably be a nerd-rage no matter what when this game comes out. Know why? Cause among those 70 k people there are several factions that want a different experience from it. And some consider themselves somehow better and\or more priviledged than others.

Peace.

 

Well Said!  I don't know what's worse the wannabe cynical lunatics of the Codex or the Geek Rage of this forum.

But Passion in a project can bring out the best in people^_)

 

Let's see some more pictures Devs!

[FlintlockJazz]

I don't think it's fair to say that those who didn't vote over stretchgoals simply don't care.  You don't need to follow the development of a game to prove that you care about it, and occasionally we even see forum memebers who pop back in after a haitus imposed to not spoil themselves of PoE.  I'm not saying that it's wrong per se, just that it's unfair given that we are 100% ignorant of the circumstances of others.

 

On my own account, I did not vote in the stretchgoals poll.  (Hold on, put the stones down a moment)  Not because I "didn't care," but because I was and am ambivalent on the matter.  I am on a tight budget, and have given as much as I can reasonably justify to back PoE.  So when the devs ask if I would be interested in relinquishing more towards stretchgoals, I can't just answer "yes, more stretchgoals!" without the will / cash to back the stance.  And on the other hand, I don't want to give the message that I don't want more stretchgoals - if others want to back further developments on their own (and my ) behalves, I'm all for it; but I can't then tell the devs - looking for public demand - "yes, I want more stretchgoals" if I'm unwilling to put money towards them myself.  (Alright, you may throw stones now)

Yep, I have commented in that thread but not voted, since my personal take on it is that if they get extra money and want to try it sure but not bind themselves to definitely doing it when it could end up being better spent elsewhere.  I also wouldn't personally up my pledge amount now, spent way too much on it as it is! (More than my actual pledge level shows, I also donated via GameBanshee's one as well).

[magicwallis]

I finally backed because of this update. Almost asploded with excitement. Now I can't wait ARGH! 

[Ffordesoon]

Oops, posted in the wrong thread.

[Archmage Silver]

Really nice work with the character sheet UI.