The $4.0m Stretch Goal - Enhancing the Whole Game

[Hassat Hunter]

It means they enhance the game?

 

There; that wasn't so difficult.

[Amentep]

It means they enhance the game?

 

There; that wasn't so difficult.

Is it like those male enhancement ads proliferating on commercial TV?

[Hormalakh]

it's a very difficult thing to pin down, amentep. It's like that saying "Art is never finished, only abandoned." Polish cannot be measured or quantified in any realistic way, but ultimately it goes back to how long they can spend on re-iterating weaker aspects of the game, working on the beta, fixing bugs, and adding smaller side-quests.

 

If you've ever played any of the older IE games, you'll notice that pretty much all of them have two mods: the fixpack, and the unfinished business packs. That money will likely go to making those mods less and less necessary by working on those aspects so that most of what they design will go into the game, and the game will "feel" satisfyingly finished and complete. Artwork will get that second (or third) paint over.

 

More money means more time to work on the game. This can mean pushing back the deadline (as was what happened) or putting in more man-hours (more eyes to look at the game) befor the deadline.

Edited April 8, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Lephys]

Well, I suspect the expectation by most contributors is that every dollar above the minimum needed to fund the Kickstarter will be used to improve and enhance the game. Thus it is not really a new goal; it's a goal to "not add anything new".  For the love of all things holy, make us stop adding new features. Pleassseee...

. Sort of. But, it sort of is a new goal. If you're raising money for a buffet dinner, and you expect to have 10 dishes for everyone to eat, and you want to set a goal for improving the whole buffet, you'd still have to specify where the ceiling would be for that. I mean, sure, if they give you 20 extra dollars, you're going to spend it on SOMEthing. But, you can't just evenly distribute that between all 10 dishes, necessarily. So, that's the purpose of the goal at that point, as an actual "goal" marker.

 

Sure, functionally, and relative to the previous stretch goals, it says "money after this point will be spent on general improvement of what we've already got at this point, rather than on raw new features/components," but the specific money value serves the purpose of saying "Ideally, if we got to this point, we could improve all 10 metaphorical dishes, instead of just some of them."

 

Basically, if you get 5 more man-hours worth of funding, and it takes 5 man-hours to add in some more weapons to the existing weapons categories and such, then you can't take that funding and improve BOTH the weapons AND the stronghold AND the dialogue/quests. You have to pick one. Whereas, if you get two "blocks" of funding, you can pick two out of the three (I realize it's not perfectly equal in cost for each component improvement... it's just an example). So, telling people what it would take, budget-wise, to make a significant improvement to all of them, that's useful information. And it's a goal. It's just a slightly different goal. It's not a "if we don't hit this number, we can't do anything" goal.

[Silent Winter]

 

It means they enhance the game?

 

There; that wasn't so difficult.

Is it like those male enhancement ads proliferating on commercial TV?

 

Yes, the game is going to be longer and harder as a result

[Lephys]

Yes, the game is going to be longer and harder as a result

If you're interested in work, I could use some help around the forge.

[CoryStarkiller]

They talked in interviews about having things they would like to have in the game ranked as Level A, B, or C. Level A stuff is a top priority to have in the game, Level B is important but less so than A. Level C is stuff that they do, if the time allows for it.

 

Level C is the extra animations, sound effects, etc. We won't notice specifically that this was added or if it is missing, but the end result will be a better game. It's stuff that was talked about in pre-production, but is the first stuff cut for time/budget(aka the last stuff that gets worked on). The higher that last goal makes, the more of the Level B and C ends up in the game.

[PrimeJunta]

As I recall, the KS was shooting up way faster than they expected and they just ran out of ideas for a final stretch goal. Putting in that one was more of an expression of exuberance than an actual goal.

 

If it were an actual goal, yeah, it wouldn't be much of a one, I agree. But then a friend of mine ran for the university student council with the slogan, "More of everything for everybody, or at least lots."

[BruceVC]

romance

 

Romance? Did someone mention Romance...excellent idea. Who is keen for another Romance thread and a discussion of the importance of Romance in RPG? Who is with me !!!!

[Hassat Hunter]

Yes, the game is going to be longer and harder as a result

Now not for 1M, no, not even 900K. NO, NO, not even 700K. NO! ORDER FAST AND GET IT FOR 500K. GUARANTEED!

Order fast and we'll throw in FREE FULL INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC!

 

But that is not all... for the first few thousand callers we give away DEVELOPERS COMMENTARY!

So, what are you waiting for, go pick up that phone and call 555-OBSIDIAN and get your enhancements FOR ONLY 500K!

Give yourself long long nights of pleasure, don't stop and pick up that phone and ORDER NOW!

 

Warning: Project Eternity may reduce your social life for weeks, may lead to anxiety, tension and impatient waiting periods till it arrives. We're not responsible of lack of RPGs you want to play afterwards tainted with old outdated mechanics as questmarkert, levelscalers of mass-effect-wheels.

[Lephys]

Romance? Did someone mention Romance...excellent idea. Who is keen for another Romance thread and a discussion of the importance of Romance in RPG? Who is with me !!!!

It was a typo. "Roe-"mancers -- magic-users who control/invoke fish eggs.

[Quetzalcoatl]

I'm not bitter about it, but that last stretchgoal was just a marketing gimmick; all funding was to go into making Pillars of Eternity a (better) game anyway.

How so? I think something like 'up your pledge to add another level to this mega dungeon' fits the definition of a marketing gimmick much closer. Whereas a stretch goal of simply enhancing the game is both more 'boring' and more realistic.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[rjshae]

I'm more curious how the fanbase will react if PE retail sales do as well as anticipated yet Obsidian comes back for another Kickstarter.

 

It will be troubling times for the Kingdom, I'm sure. Whiners will whine; moaners will moan, then they will back it anyway.

 

Point is, demonstrating that you can fulfill your Kickstarter pledges should indicate that you are a horse worth backing.

Edited April 9, 2014 by rjshae

[The Mist Devil]

Whiner or wiener?

 

http://youtu.be/0KltdN7TKDw

Edited April 10, 2014 by The Mist Devil

[Stun]

I don't mean to be that guy, but I don't think the $4 million stretchgoal really meant anything at all

Well, I wouldn't call live instrumentation "nothing at all". It's kinda a big deal for Audio enthusiasts like myself. An RPG's mood music can make or break the experience. Of course, if the music in this game cost them a half a million dollars, then it had better be something extraordinarily fantastic.

 

Anyway, to the Thread starter: I kind of agree with your concern here. But look on the bright side, at least Obsidian was razor-like specific with all their other stretch goals. Imagine if they weren't. Imagine if they had decided, instead, to make all their stretch goals look like this.

 

^Check that out. Look at the sheer number of vague, unaccountable, intangible salesman fluff InExile used to acquire the funding for Torment. Almost every single stretch goal was: "deeper story!", "even more deeper Story!", "Expanded reactivity!" and "The expanded reactivity is expanded even more!" <gag>

Edited April 11, 2014 by Stun

[Hiro Protagonist II]

rofl.

 

I did notice that the story was getting deeper and deeper, that eventually it ended up so deep they couldn't go any deeper. So they changed it at the 4.25m stretch goal as 'longer story'.

[Lephys]

We shall all drown in an ocean of story. And if we make it to the surface, it will now be a longer swim than it would have been to make it to shore.

[Archmage Silver]

We shall all drown in an ocean of story. And if we make it to the surface, it will now be a longer swim than it would have been to make it to shore.

 

Plus the giant-statue-guy will probably smack you right back to the beginning anyway.

 

That said, I supported this stretch goal originally and will continue to do so. What should it encompass then? I'm willing to let Obsidian determine that. It's their game, so they should know what kind of enhancements suit it best.

 

Should Obsidian go into more detail about the enhancements, in my opinion? Yes, provided that the enhancements are something you can point a finger at and say, "there, look!". I don't think they should spend an inordinate amount of time documenting each minor improvement for a public update though.

[Wizaerd]

[deleted]  wrong forum... sorry 'bout that

Edited April 11, 2014 by Wizaerd

[Ffordesoon]

In inXile's defense, they did go into more detail in the text that accompanied the stretch goals, and it's not as if anyone was backing a Torment successor for combat or crafting or something "game-y."  If you're a Torment fan, you're a fan because of the story and the way it was told.

[Lephys]

I just really don't see how the intrinsic problem here isn't just "how do we know they aren't lying?", regardless of what they're saying. I mean, what's the difference between "at this amount, we'll hire George Ziets to write for the story!" and "at this amount, we'll have a deeper story!"?

 

How do you know they didn't already hire him, and just wanted an excuse to entice another $100,000 out of you? You don't. Just like you don't know they were only going to spend X amount of time on the story before, but are now going to spend X + 1 time on the story because they reached the stretch goal.

 

Sure, it's nice to have a specific distinction between what was there before and what the stretch goal's improvement will bring, but, a lot of times, a game development strategy doesn't really work that way.

 

I dunno... maybe they could've listed stuff in man-hours? "We'll spend 60 more man-hours on character backgrounds!"

 

But, it's a bit silly to act as though allocating more time and resources (thanks to a reached stretch goal providing more time and resources) is somehow a fictional/non-viable improvement. As if they just start working on things, then stop when they run out of money (at whatever point they're at) and release the game, and don't actually have things budgeted and allocated.

[600lbpanther]

I just really don't see how the intrinsic problem here isn't just "how do we know they aren't lying?", regardless of what they're saying. I mean, what's the difference between "at this amount, we'll hire George Ziets to write for the story!" and "at this amount, we'll have a deeper story!"?

 

How do you know they didn't already hire him, and just wanted an excuse to entice another $100,000 out of you? You don't. Just like you don't know they were only going to spend X amount of time on the story before, but are now going to spend X + 1 time on the story because they reached the stretch goal.

 

You can never defeat the "what if" argument and I do not say that in a rude or condescending tone.  You just cannot defeat it.  I can say "what if this" and someone can counter "what if that".  I did not start the thread trying to insinuate some conspiracy because, again, it is the "what if" argument.

 

That being said:  $500,000 in a $4,000,000 game is a pretty substantial increase to the game.  If it were $30,000 I would not have asked the question.

I do not work in the gaming industry but I did attend Full Sail for a computer animation degree.  I do not say that to impress you but to impress upon you that the teachers (who are required to have real world experience in the gaming industry...well that is the lie they sold back then at least) stressed time and time again that the industry is extremely deadline driven.  However, this can be said for all industries.  When you are held to a deadline:  you typically have an outline (at the very least) of the goals, with dates to be completed, and the goals should be able to be measured.  Perhaps, as people have stated before, this is a goal that affects all other goals and allows more time for polishing the game which can only be measured in man hours.  

 

If I can speak frankly:  I was just hoping someone would point to a link where Obsidian told us about some kick ass new **** they were throwing in the game because of the additional backing.  That's all...no conspiracy or accusations of lieing and certainly not trying to audit them.  

[Lephys]

You can never defeat the "what if" argument and I do not say that in a rude or condescending tone.  You just cannot defeat it.  I can say "what if this" and someone can counter "what if that".  I did not start the thread trying to insinuate some conspiracy because, again, it is the "what if" argument.

I understand that. My intention isn't to "defeat" the "what if" argument. I simply encourage people to apply it both ways.

 

The "what if" argument is perfectly valid, but it should not be considered in isolation, or used to reach some arbitrary conclusion regarding the probability of the stretch goal being bogus or something. I'm not trying to accuse any particular person or call them out on this. A lot of the sentiments expressed in this thread just seem heavily saturated with the idea of that conclusion. So, my intent is simply a "don't forget to consider all there is to consider first" approach.

 

It's human nature to notice "what if"s, but the impulse to think past them isn't always very strong in our minds, even if it's almost always useful. I also just don't like to see unbased assumptions sort of assault people's reputations, intentionally or not (i.e. "Obsidian just wanted more money, clearly!").

 

So, while the "what if" you raise is quite a valid line of analysis on the matter, and I realize you're not jumping to any conclusions with it, I simply point out to the people who might be doing so that such conclusions aren't really well-founded, and are really kind of unfair to Obsidian.

 

Being skeptical is one thing. That's just caution in the face of the unknown. But, deciding the stretch goal is crap, just because it could be, is something I feel the need to actively discourage and point out the folly of, in case some people were doing this, as they seemed to be (but I could obviously be mistaken).

 

For what it's worth.

 

Sorry if I seemed to be counter-attacking you.

 

If I can speak frankly:  I was just hoping someone would point to a link where Obsidian told us about some kick ass new **** they were throwing in the game because of the additional backing.  That's all...no conspiracy or accusations of lieing and certainly not trying to audit them.

I'm with you on that. Details would definitely be nice, even if it's just "we had Steve the Artist spend a whole 'nother week going back and touching up all the models, where, previously, he wouldn't have spent that week doing that."

Edited April 11, 2014 by Lephys

[Ffordesoon]

@Lephys:

 

But you can say that about any Kickstarter.  "Help me make this thing that should exist but doesn't" is the pitch, but we're still talking about paying for a thing that doesn't exist.  I'm not diminishing the reassuring nature of more specific promises, but I could go to Kickstarter right now, start a campaign, and make up some highly specific promises I have no intention of living up to.  Kickstarter is based on trust, as I've said before.  If you don't trust inXile with your money, don't back their game.  Simple as that.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Ffordesoon

[Lephys]

@Lephys:

 

But you can say that about any Kickstarter.  "Help me make this thing that should exist but doesn't" is the pitch, but we're still talking about paying for a thing that doesn't exist.  I'm not diminishing the reassuring nature of more specific promises, but I could go to Kickstarter right now, start a campaign, and make up some highly specific promises I have no intention of living up to.  Kickstarter is based on trust, as I've said before.  If you don't trust inXile with your money, don't back their game.  Simple as that.

Exactly.

 

That's what I'm trying to say. A vaguer stretch goal has no higher probability of deception than a more specific stretch goal. Or any other claim, for that matter.