Playing other Kickstarter funded games makes me nervous

[Jobby]

 

 

 

I have to admit i don't frequent Bioware forums anymore as (for me) their games have lost their soul as the years go on, I would like to think/hope that Kickstarter could generate enough momentum through reputable projects/companies to provide a genuine alternative to conventional publishers though.

It won't. What it will do, and is already doing, is create an outlet for side projects.

 

 

You probably right as the inner cynic in me already knows, but a man can hope surely?

 

It's only cynical if you let that GAMING IS DYING attitude fester. Just enjoy games. Don't make it any more complicated.

 

I mean, unless you want to spend your days blaming EA for the ills of the world. 

 

 

Gaming as I once loved it as a child/teen isn't dying, its dead.

 

Doesn't mean I don't put faith in the occasional game/project now and again but there was once a time when I could pick up just about any RPG randomly in a shop and know that I was in for an exciting story and interesting gameplay.

 

Don't get me wrong i still enjoy games I just don't love them like I used to, not because I'm and miserable old bastard (well perhaps partially) but becuase they just don't have the same appeal anymore, I suppose the best illustration would be Metal Gear Solid (PS1) Vs MGS4, I mean wtf

 

Regarding Kotor 2 I'll have to give it another go, the game was horrendously unreliable for me with constant crashes, game breaking bugs etc, I barely even remember the story or the chars it just became a chore to get it finished.

[Pipyui]

 

But, yeah, people do tend to act like "Oh no! EA are the BORG! Resistance is futile! ASSIMILATE!", instead of just acknowledging that, yes, there was a statistical spike amongst big companies in poor game development decisions.

EA hasn't exactly been my fave company for a long while, but they're not the devil.

 

Google, on the other hand ...

 

On a related tangent, I actually respect that Google has managed to remain fairly non-evil despite it's size and market value so far.  On the other hand, I use DuckDuckGo for all my searching, and try (vainly) to avoid many Google services, so I don't trust them either.

 

I mean, unless you want to spend your days blaming EA for the ills of the world. 

 

How can I not when EA is the progenerator of global warming, mortality, terrorism, child abuse, and the ever-present feeling of worthless self-significance and crippling solitude that haunts me day and night?    Edit: Forgot terrorism, can't forget terrorism

 

...

Edited January 28, 2014 by Pipyui

[Osvir]

So... it's biased via the facts? It's not a negative article or a smear job.

 

Also, Kickstarter is more like in its tweens. The idea of big companies or names doing Kickstarters is a relatively new thing. 

Sorry about that. Also that's what I meant (big companies+Kickstarter combo = infancy/new thing).

 

So here's the one you posted. January 18th, 2014.

 

Here's the link to his previous analysis. November 10th, 2012.

 

Aaand back to October 2nd 2012.

 

 

And here's UnSub on brokenforum. September 16, 2012.

 

EDIT: Judging by his opinions/posts and previous articles I am getting this slight feeling he's on a bit of a witch-hunt/he is biased. Though, it is still an interesting article.

 

EDIT: I've got to stop doing this but, I read on a little bit further in the forum and he has some valid points~ it is also a cynical article, which isn't negative by any means but I still think that there is some obsession going on about "delivery dates".

 

For instance, haven't we said on this forum that we are okay with PoE taking longer? Are we at fault or is Obsidian at fault? I don't think anyone is at fault. We'd get a bigger game, Obsidian can work longer. These are things that his data can't take into consideration. How many other Kickstarted projects have communities that are okay with it taking longer?

 

Or will **** simply hit the fan in April on these forums? Maybe. Obsidian has given us great updates on the project, but from my previous post where 2 guys ask if this "Project 1" is finished 2 years later (when it seems it is) I'm getting a feeling not everyone reads every update. Then again, I can't read the contents of the specific update on Project 1 because it is only available to backers.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Osvir

[Bryy]

 

How can I not when EA is the progenerator of global warming, mortality, terrorism, child abuse, and the ever-present feeling of worthless self-significance and crippling solitude that haunts me day and night?    Edit: Forgot terrorism, can't forget terrorism

 

...

 

Someone once wrote on Kotaku that EA would kill their own children if it meant more profit.

 

I... I think that day I lost a little faith in humanity.

[Lephys]

Someone once wrote on Kotaku that EA would kill their own children if it meant more profit.

I dunno about that. Maybe someone else's children, to whom they had no personal attachment.

 

No, no, I know it isn't that bad. I'm with you there. Some people start thinking that they're literally evil. Like, their goal is to do terrible things. But, really, it isn't. Worst-case scenario, they're greedy and/or oblivious to the negative effects of some of their priorities on the quality of their products. I might go so far as to say that they might do anything they can get away with within the context of normal project development. In other words, as long as it seems like it'll sell well, they'll make any amount of terrible decisions regarding a project.

 

I really just think big companies kind of lose touch with the human factor. I don't think they mean to, and it's not like they're just excused or something, but, they don't SEEK OUT evil or bad game design. They just... start assuming too many things.

 

It's kind of like whenever you're really hungry, and you go to a buffet or some party where you're just going to prepare a plate of food, and you almost always put much more food on the plate than you can actually eat (without getting a stomach ache). And, you keep sort of thinking "I'll just not get quite so much this time," but then you still end up doing it anyway.

[Bryy]

I think EA is caught in a deadly cycle: they're in the red and the only way they see to get out of it is DLC. But enough about that. 

 

The Banner Saga is by far the best Kickstarter game at this point. 

[Hassat Hunter]

Since the Kotor vs Kotor 2 comparison seems inevitable, I'll just leave this here:

 

Should have used TSLRCM so Sion's entire face was on the shot, not just partial .

Then again, you probably plucked that of the net XD

 

Regarding the ongoing discussion;

AAA games don't really need kickstarter to die a horrible death. Their graphics run, resulting raising cost, and resulting lack of innovation (since you can't risk new stuff since it's so expensive with modern day graphics) will be their own downfall eventually, kickstarter or no.

 

And for me, it can't come soon enough...

[Mr. Magniloquent]

The problem with EA has to do with what makes EA successful; that is, the role it holds in the gaming economy. EA is so large and has aquired so much property, that there is no true direction for the company. Between its metastic size and broad portfolio, the only way it can exist is through the volume of its sales. The best way to accomplish this, is by grasping at the low hanging fruit of many trees--ergo; the lowest common denominator of consumers. Furthermore, its economies of scale better enable it to pursue endeavors that are graphics heavy, which only perpetuates the kind of product it is capable of offering. The kind of art found in Obsidian's narratives and writing cannot dwell within such a machine, particularly because of the inherently inefficient nature of creativity and art itself.

 

Behold McDonalds. The quality is low--if sometimes servicable, consistent in nature, the price is attainable, and the products are accessible. This mix has made McDonalds the most dominant global brand such that it is found and recognized over the entire planet. Such is EA. Nothing will be able to compete with the scale of EA without first becoming EA. Blizzard nearly became EA's competitor, though instead chose to willfully congeal with EA like a freshly spilt beverage does with the hemogeneous expanse of saccharin constituting any cinema's floor.

 

Kickstarter will never produce what today is regarded as a AAA game. Rejoice in this.

[Karkarov]

Or will **** simply hit the fan in April on these forums? Maybe. Obsidian has given us great updates on the project, but from my previous post where 2 guys ask if this "Project 1" is finished 2 years later (when it seems it is) I'm getting a feeling not everyone reads every update. Then again, I can't read the contents of the specific update on Project 1 because it is only available to backers.

Well first....  That dudes charts are factual, and you can't deny it.  Will some of the projects he is currently counting as "failures to deliver" pan out?  Yes.  But I think anyone who believes the majority of kickstarted games that had successful campaigns will be delivered and will be quality products is... well... kidding themselves and should stop drinking the kool aid.  The vast majority of video game kickstarters will never pan out, or will turn out to be bad games.  That is just the cold hard reality, it is how the real world works. 

 

I personally back VERY few kickstarters and it is always from people who either have a bang on campaign that shows progress already being made or developers I already trust.  Way too many people back when it is nothing but a speech from some guy who hasn't made a decent game in 10 years (or ever) while they flash concept art on the screen.  Personally I backed Wasteland 2 for very little and I wish I could have that money back because all evidence is showing that game is going to turn out pretty par.

 

Long story short Kickstarter will never produce a Mass Effect or a GTA or any other large budget game.  When you back you need to be ready to accept the fact that the game might suck, and that it may never be delivered in the first place.  Because those are the two most likely results of a successful video game kickstarter.

[Jobby]

For all EAs flaws and lack of creative design Fight Night Champion was pretty good (if you like boxing) and managed to model the sport in a fairly realistic and fun manner, not everything they release is watered down piss.

[Jobby]

I don't think anyone looks to kickstarter to create a GTA and certainly not a ME, a BG2 would be nice though :D

Edited January 28, 2014 by Jobby

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Or will **** simply hit the fan in April on these forums? Maybe. Obsidian has given us great updates on the project, but from my previous post where 2 guys ask if this "Project 1" is finished 2 years later (when it seems it is) I'm getting a feeling not everyone reads every update. Then again, I can't read the contents of the specific update on Project 1 because it is only available to backers.

Well first....  That dudes charts are factual, and you can't deny it.  Will some of the projects he is currently counting as "failures to deliver" pan out?  Yes.  But I think anyone who believes the majority of kickstarted games that had successful campaigns will be delivered and will be quality products is... well... kidding themselves and should stop drinking the kool aid.  The vast majority of video game kickstarters will never pan out, or will turn out to be bad games.  That is just the cold hard reality, it is how the real world works. 

 

I personally back VERY few kickstarters and it is always from people who either have a bang on campaign that shows progress already being made or developers I already trust.  Way too many people back when it is nothing but a speech from some guy who hasn't made a decent game in 10 years (or ever) while they flash concept art on the screen.  Personally I backed Wasteland 2 for very little and I wish I could have that money back because all evidence is showing that game is going to turn out pretty par.

 

Long story short Kickstarter will never produce a Mass Effect or a GTA or any other large budget game.  When you back you need to be ready to accept the fact that the game might suck, and that it may never be delivered in the first place.  Because those are the two most likely results of a successful video game kickstarter.

 

You are a sensible guy! I've maybe taken a chance on a few too many (like a dozen) and bought some others as a slacker backer or a regular customer. My record so far:

-Legends of Dawn: a dud

-Expedition: Conquistador: quite nice

-Shadowrun Returns: decent, but short

-Project Giana: very neat

-Battle World Kronos: old-school, but fun

-Consortium: entertaining, like an interactive Star Trek-episode

-Divinity: Original Sin: seems very promising, it's in early alpha right now

 

The point is, KS is not a shop, it's a place where you support strangers with money and hope for the best.

Edited January 28, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Mr. Magniloquent]

The point is, KS is not a shop, it's a place where you support strangers with money and hope for the best.

 

It's philanthropy brought world wide to and through the masses. Much like donating a small sum to your local art gallery/museum.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Mr. Magniloquent

[Spacefarer]

There have been some games on Kickstarter that have been less than hoped for, but when it comes right down to it I paid $25 or so for those games.  In that regard, they were worth it.  It's not like dropping $60 on a failed blockbuster (looking at you, SimCity).

[Death Machine Miyagi]

Behold McDonalds. The quality is low--if sometimes servicable, consistent in nature, the price is attainable, and the products are accessible. This mix has made McDonalds the most dominant global brand such that it is found and recognized over the entire planet. Such is EA. Nothing will be able to compete with the scale of EA without first becoming EA. Blizzard nearly became EA's competitor, though instead chose to willfully congeal with EA like a freshly spilt beverage does with the hemogeneous expanse of saccharin constituting any cinema's floor.

 

This is where the analogy breaks down. Increasingly, EA's products aren't serviceable. They're downright bad, forcing features on gamers that they don't want and trying to gouge them for every micropayment they can dream up. Their prices are inflated, as well.

 

McDonalds will give you a cheapo hamburger. They won't demand you add pickles to every order or give you a plain burger and bun then demand micropayments for every condiment. EA often seems downright hostile to their customers in a way that has nothing to do with their size and everything to do with their awful business decisions.

[Karkarov]

McDonalds will give you a cheapo hamburger. They won't demand you add pickles to every order or give you a plain burger and bun then demand micropayments for every condiment. EA often seems downright hostile to their customers in a way that has nothing to do with their size and everything to do with their awful business decisions.

Trust me if you knew the margins on that "cheapo" hamburger you might not feel the same way.  So while mcdonalds won't charge you for your pickle remember this.... they don't give you a discount for leaving it off either.

[Sir Chaox]

 

McDonalds will give you a cheapo hamburger. They won't demand you add pickles to every order or give you a plain burger and bun then demand micropayments for every condiment. EA often seems downright hostile to their customers in a way that has nothing to do with their size and everything to do with their awful business decisions.

Trust me if you knew the margins on that "cheapo" hamburger you might not feel the same way.  So while mcdonalds won't charge you for your pickle remember this.... they don't give you a discount for leaving it off either.

 

 

Well said... But I still got lunch for 99 cents!

[Bryy]

I may have lied.

 

Giana Sisters beats out Banner Saga, but only due to production value. That game is friggin' gorgeous, and you forget that it was made for only $135k+ after taxes and fees.

[TGammet]

I've been lucky. So far of all the games that came out that I backed, I feel like I got my money's worth. Of course since I only paid like $15-25 for these games, I was already expecting them to be of a budget quality to begin with. Same is true for POE. I'd love to see something to the same scale as those old classics, but those games were not sold at such a budget price so I am not going to expect that much.

 

I was not pleased to see Broken Age or Broken Sword 5 be broken into multiple pieces. It's my hope that POE doesn't go that route.

[Sight Unseen]

Broken Age is a much different case than Pillars of Eternity for a number of reasons. I backed both games and have been intently following both games and I LOVED Broken Age Act 1 but they did things so much differently. Let me briefly go through this.

 

1. Broken Age was kickstarted prior to ANY pre-production of any kind. They didn't even know what their game would be about, what mechanics it had, what story it would tell. they only knew that it would be a point and click adventure game. So when the game got funded they had to devote months and months toward coming up with a good idea, making the story, making all the puzzles, etc. Pillars of Eternity, however already had a substantial amount of pre-production finished and I wouldnt be surprised if they put $1-2M of their own money into pre-production before they even announced the kickstarter. The world was well realized, their goals were well defined and they had a pretty good idea where everything was going.
2. Broken Age made their own engine for the game pretty much from scratch. They took an indie open-source engine and heavily modified it to work with their game. While this may help them in the long run since they now have a new engine they can use for future games, it was a large up-front expense that was not strictly necessary. Project Eternity is simply using the Unity Engine which is a well established and reliable engine at this point.
3. Voice Acting. Eternity isn't going to be fully voiced ( I don't think anyway) Broken Age is. It's WAY more expensive to voice and write dialog than it is to just write it, and if you are going to only be voicing the important parts, you can write TONS of dialog pretty cheaply. (EDIT: I do think though that Double Fine probably got lucky with a lot of their voice acting and had a lot of celebrities do voices for them on the cheap simply because they wanted to be a part of the game, so this may not be as big a factor as it could have been)
4. Experience and comfort zones. While Tim Schafer is renowned for making adventure games, the fact is that this is the first one that he's made since Grim Fandango, and his first point and click game in 16 years. Double Fine studios have NEVER made an adventure game before. Obsidian makes RPGs. It's what they do. This is right in their wheelhouse and they'll have a much better feel for pacing and scheduling and executing.
5. No major bottlenecks. One of the big problems with Broken Age was them deciding to base their entire games' visuals on Nathan "Bagel" Stapley's artwork. This created a severe bottleneck because Bagel had to hand draw most of the artwork. They eventually split it up more and had other artists and animators mimicking his style but this was still a major slowdown and bottleneck for production, which costs money. Project Eternity, as far as I can tell, has none of these bottlenecks.
6. The documentary. While Eternity IS getting a documentary, I highly doubt it will be as long or cost as much as Double Fine's one since it will likely be only one or two hours long, compared with the hours and hours of video the Double Fine team is making.

There are likely other reasons as well but this is what I came up with off the top of my head. I wouldnt be too worried about the game. I'm sure some compromises will have to be made, but I think this game will still be great and a good callback to the old CRPGs

Edited January 28, 2014 by Sight Unseen

[Bryy]

Broken Age is a much different case than Pillars of Eternity for a number of reasons. I backed both games and have been intently following both games and I LOVED Broken Age Act 1 but they did things so much differently. Let me briefly go through this.

 

1. Broken Age was kickstarted prior to ANY pre-production of any kind. 
2. Broken Age made their own engine for the game pretty much from scratch. 
3. No major bottlenecks. One of the big problems with Broken Age was them deciding to base their entire games' visuals on Nathan "Bagel" Stapley's artwork. This created a severe bottleneck because Bagel had to hand draw most of the artwork. They eventually split it up more and had other artists and animators mimicking his style but this was still a major slowdown and bottleneck for production, which costs money. Project Eternity, as far as I can tell, has none of these bottlenecks.

These are basically my big three complaints with Broken Age, or to be more specific, Broken Age-type KS dev cycles.

 

For instance, one of the issues my project has had is that I bottlenecked us into one specific mechanic of gameplay without any real input from my lead designer. This was an incredibly stupid move done out of frustration and time crunch and is primarily the reason my thing isn't out yet. That and we gave money to the wrong people...

 

Having just now resolved my issues with BA and HIB, I just now got around to downloading my copy. So I'll give my report on the gameplay later.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Bryy

[Vreith]

What makes me worried is some of the developers is vision for future sales, it seems they apply to their budget like the bible, and they look to little more than the community that backed there games as there "market". Therefor not the small % of possible future sales of those that did not back. 

 

I hope, and feel that obsidian knows with the right approach to the level of "epic" and that there is a whole blot of market who has not given them a dime yet.

 

They can then tap (with what is still even if the 2d element game may detract) the fantasy RPG market, and the yearning from many gamers to see the genre done justice rather than the mass spammed MMO crap that exists by and large (and is failing)

Edited January 29, 2014 by Vreith

[Bryy]

It will be interesting if DF releases the financials for Broken Age, in comparison to the KS backers.

[Katrar]

The earlier poster that mentioned managed expectations as the key to enjoying this game is exactly right. I'm expecting a decent game in the spirit of the BG series, that plays at least similarly to it. I'm expecting the content to be well thought out, creative and nicely implemented. I'm NOT expecting 80-100 hours ala BG2. Fact is, they raised a lot of money but they didn't raise a LOT of money, ya know?

[Brujoloco]

I believe we all need to wait for the final product to be delivered. Any kind of speculation on our part will just be that, mere speculation. Unlike you OP, I actually believe the game will be good, simply by the mere fact it will not be vaporware, that alone, eases my fears.

 

I believe we better let it roll out first and then the devs will enhance it once they have a solid core to expand upon, its just too early to begin nitpicking on an unreleased product, I am a bit jaded of the hype, overhype, doom and gloom of say, Star Citizen to begin worrying here.

 

Relax, take a deep breath and wait. XD