Kickstarter management & hype & Interview...

[Adhin]

That's how anything creative goes really, game development more then anything else. I think one of the biggest problems isn't that developers make a promise, they almost never do. It's usually a 'this is what we're working towards'. Players take it as a 'this is a 100% promised and obviously working feature' and when it doesn't come people get all ragy. I think that has a lot to do with marketting and devs not specifying 'this is what we're working forwards' or this is what we hope its like and all that. But you rarely see them come out and say 'this is exactly how it is and but for some reason we're still 2 hours out from release'.  

[Sedrefilos]

Well as I see it, it is a duche journalist interviewing a duche game developer. I can't say it made me think about kickstarter in general.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Sedrefilos

[talharbash]

Very surprised to see RPS do a "tough" interview. They typically do a lot of kissing up for access and even remove comments that aren't all flowery and nice.

 

Frankly, RPS can do the same for a lot of KS projects. People are still complaining on the Steam forums about crashes with Wasteland 2 but no one is really calling Inxile on it.

[Luckmann]

Very surprised to see RPS do a "tough" interview. They typically do a lot of kissing up for access and even remove comments that aren't all flowery and nice.

 

Frankly, RPS can do the same for a lot of KS projects. People are still complaining on the Steam forums about crashes with Wasteland 2 but no one is really calling Inxile on it.

 

As has been pointed out in the thread, it's not really a "tough" interview at all, RPS is as "kissing up" as always, don't worry.

[dorkboy]

Very surprised to see RPS do a "tough" interview. They typically do a lot of kissing up for access and even remove comments that aren't all flowery and nice.

 

Frankly, RPS can do the same for a lot of KS projects. People are still complaining on the Steam forums about crashes with Wasteland 2 but no one is really calling Inxile on it.

I doubt that would be very constructive. If you actually care about WL2 crashing, then sending, or encouraging others to send/submit, detailed support tickets to inXile's support e-mail or on their forums would possibly prove just as effective - if not more.

Ironically, after the recent patch (which wasn't the balance pass some had hoped for) some people complained (and cited "people on steam being very upset about this!", to paraphrase wildly) about the fact that inXile had prioritized bug fixes over balance..

[Luckmann]

 

Very surprised to see RPS do a "tough" interview. They typically do a lot of kissing up for access and even remove comments that aren't all flowery and nice.

 

Frankly, RPS can do the same for a lot of KS projects. People are still complaining on the Steam forums about crashes with Wasteland 2 but no one is really calling Inxile on it.

I doubt that would be very constructive. If you actually care about WL2 crashing, then sending, or encouraging others to send/submit, detailed support tickets to inXile's support e-mail or on their forums would possibly prove just as effective - if not more.

 

Ironically, after the recent patch (which wasn't the balance pass some had hoped for) some people complained (and cited "people on steam being very upset about this!", to paraphrase wildly) about the fact that inXile had prioritized bug fixes over balance..

 

I'd be more upset if RPS made another easy-target piece and inXile paid them any attention.

[Sakai]

That RPS interview is god awful and the interviewer is clearly just trying to put the screws to Molyneux and being a jerk about it.  He isn't a freaking politician cause embezzling government funds meant for the social security department.  He is a visionary game dev who over promises features and hasn't learned from his mistakes of doing so in the past.

Any random idiot can be a "visionary". Coming up with ideas for cool games is easy. Ideas are dirt cheap. What is not easy is actually making those games a reality. And that's what separates a true visionary from a random idiot. Yes, that interview was harsh. But you can hardly say that it was undeserved. He took peoples money and promised a certain product in return. That's a big, big responsibility that shouldn't be taket lightly at all. So why should RPS or anyone else give him a pass? Especially when he has a history with failed promises. 

[Elerond]

 

That RPS interview is god awful and the interviewer is clearly just trying to put the screws to Molyneux and being a jerk about it.  He isn't a freaking politician cause embezzling government funds meant for the social security department.  He is a visionary game dev who over promises features and hasn't learned from his mistakes of doing so in the past.

Any random idiot can be a "visionary". Coming up with ideas for cool games is easy. Ideas are dirt cheap. What is not easy is actually making those games a reality. And that's what separates a true visionary from a random idiot. Yes, that interview was harsh. But you can hardly say that it was undeserved. He took peoples money and promised a certain product in return. That's a big, big responsibility that shouldn't be taket lightly at all. So why should RPS or anyone else give him a pass? Especially when he has a history with failed promises. 

 

 

He didn't took people's money, he presented his idea for game and prototype of that game and asked if people are interested to give them fund to make that prototype to something like his idea, which was in short create something new in god game genre. 

 

So it is his responsibility to try his best to realize his promises, but it should noted that people who funded his project are responsible for their money and risk that they took when they decided to invest in his project, as people should always remember that there is risk of failure in such projects, and if you didn't take those risk in consideration when you made your decision to fund the game then fault is wholly in your shoulders not anybody else's. 

 

P.S. Visionary and executor of visions rarely are same people, which is why most projects have different people in designer posts and developer posts. 

 

P.P.S. It should remember that Molyneux has not yet failed permanently anything else in Godus project than ability to deliver finished project in promised time, which has been more norm than exception in gaming KS projects.

 

P.P.P.S.  It should also noted that interview was done by magazine that awarded another KS project that had most of same failures than what Molyneux Godus project has had as excellent example of good KS project, which in my eyes make that interview look much more personal attack than anything resembling serious journalism. 

[Sakai]

He didn't took people's money, he presented his idea for game and prototype of that game and asked if people are interested to give them fund to make that prototype to something like his idea, which was in short create something new in god game genre. 

 

So it is his responsibility to try his best to realize his promises, but it should noted that people who funded his project are responsible for their money and risk that they took when they decided to invest in his project, as people should always remember that there is risk of failure in such projects, and if you didn't take those risk in consideration when you made your decision to fund the game then fault is wholly in your shoulders not anybody else's. 

 

 

Just because there are risks doesn't mean developer isn't accountable when he fails. 

 

 

[Snoozer]

The latest Jimquisition sums up my thoughts. Have a look on his website or on youtube.

[Bryy]

Wish he would re do the movies under a different title..Such a underrated game..Still play it today some times love the game..

The Movies was a good idea that very quickly became an advertisement for itself. It shipped with malicious codecs that literally turned off your monitor. You couldn't export properly to an outside editing software. 

 

The game existed simply to sell itself (yeah, okay, I know that sounds weird). It was cyclical. 

Edited February 16, 2015 by Bryy

[Sakai]

The latest Jimquisition sums up my thoughts. Have a look on his website or on youtube.

Yep, sums it up quite nicely. Peter Molyneux got exactly what he deserved. And instead of hating RPS for that interview, we should thank them for it. He needed a good kick in the butt, and maybe now he'll be much less willing to repeat the same thing with his next game. Or at the very least people won't give him their money so easily.

[Elerond]

 

He didn't took people's money, he presented his idea for game and prototype of that game and asked if people are interested to give them fund to make that prototype to something like his idea, which was in short create something new in god game genre. 

 

So it is his responsibility to try his best to realize his promises, but it should noted that people who funded his project are responsible for their money and risk that they took when they decided to invest in his project, as people should always remember that there is risk of failure in such projects, and if you didn't take those risk in consideration when you made your decision to fund the game then fault is wholly in your shoulders not anybody else's. 

 

 

Just because there are risks doesn't mean developer isn't accountable when he fails. 

 

 

 

But when we do that selectively, then it does actually little good and is just picking those who are already down. And singling single individual over companies where he work is not actually holding developer responsible for failure as accountable, but pouring all the fault to single individual that can't in any way be only person responsible for the failure (which in this case is even under question is there such failure that anybody should be held responsible for it)   

 

And I would say that calling somebody pathological liar (and making it a question don't make it any less accusation) is not keeping them accountable to anything it is just statement that you think that they lie constantly. And also when you start interview with such accusation you make your interviewee become defensive and starting to justify and explaining everything, which usually leads that you get them to say non-true statements , as they really don't actually have time to reflect what and when they have done things (this don't mean that Molyneux don't do such things even when he is well prepared, but such cheap yellow press tactics probably will not help, and generally yellow press tactics aren't good journalism ever, or good way to held anybody accountable to anything, which we see even this case as Molyneux comes out more as wronged party than person whose actions were under question). And when editorial board of publication don't remember that they should give fuller picture of things, instead of by editing in only points where interviewee has exaggerate/given false statements, like mentioning fact that found KS project game, from developer with history of over promising and under delivering, which over promised and under delivered as excellent example of good KS project game. 

 

And there is also question who should held Molyneux accountable if he fails to deliver his promises for his investors/funders/backers, is it said backers or press or both? I as projects backer don't like very much how interviewer in said interview tries to represent me as reason why they ask the question that they ask, that is again just bull**** yellow press tactic where interviewer tries to get authority over interviewee by presenting themself as representative of people that haven't anyway gave them such authority.

 

I fully believe that people should be held accountable on their actions, this includes developers, journalists and people that invest/fund/back projects/products/etc. that have risk to fail and that accountably should be delivered equally and not by picking easy targets to get name for themself as though person.

[anameforobsidian]

The latest Jimquisition sums up my thoughts. Have a look on his website or on youtube.

I don't follow a ton of gaming news anymore, but I did always like the Jimquisition.  Posted for those who want to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGo63oAEN20

[BAdler]

Speaking of promised and undelivered features, if there's someone here who worked in real game development, I'd like to ask a question. I can easily imagine the situation when designer writes out a concept for a game (or, say, kickstarter pitch), team starts working on that concept, and later in the production certain feature(s) doesn't feel right (doesn't fit with gameplay, artstyle, generally feels wrong, whatever), so it's better to cut it off rather then redesign the whole system to shove it in. Could that be real case in game development process or am I stupidly theorizing too much?

Well, typically if you are pitching a game (on Kickstarter or to a publisher) you might mention some of the pillars of the game. Specific features would be rare. For example, you might say your game pillars are:

• Cool, complex loot system
• Exploration
• Fluid combat

From there you might identify some of the ways you will achieve those things in the game. Taking the cool, complex loot system, for example, you might mention some stuff like loot that you can upgrade through quests or loot that gains experience and can unlock new abilities. Whatever you think supports that gameplay pillar could work.

When you are actually developing the game, you might go through a bunch of different features that support that gameplay pillar - some you will implement and some you will scrap - but it would be very rare to completely scrap a pillar of your game and try something else instead.

The cool thing about establishing these pillars early is that whenever you want to put something in the game you can see if it would support one of the pillars. If it doesn't, it probably shouldn't be in the game. It is a good way to make sure that the game you are creating fits your initial vision for the product.