Pillars of Eternity 2 and crowdfunding on Kickstarter?

[Sedrefilos]

I only mentioned Paradox because Ark Evensong brought it up. I have nothing against them. After all, Obsidian invited them over. If they need an extra distributor it's fine by me, although they were presented as publishers. 

 

The main price argument/question remains and this is my only concern. It is the only problem I have about the game. Actually not even about the game; about Obsidian's pricing policy.

[Lephys]

I get the sentiment. I mean, look at it this way:

 

If 80 bajillion people buy half-price games on Black Friday, imagine how many people would buy ALL games if they were simply 30$ instead of 60.

 

Look at Subway. They were in trouble, then they came up with the never-before-thought-of-idea (sarcasm) of lowering their prices. Thus, the $5 Footlong was born. Suddenly, everyone's like "Man... a nice, round $5 price for a footlong sandwich?! I'M IN!", and they sell like hotcakes.

 

And with video games, they don't even have the material costs of each individual copy, like they do with sandwiches (sure, there's the cost of discs and packaging, or with digital distribution, there's the general cost of being able to distribute, divided by however many copies you happen to sell, etc.).

 

But, anywho, I don't really understand how the industry, in general, comes up with "this is the best price."

 

*shrug*. Same thing with like... movie theater food. If a drink and a popcorn were $2, I'd get one every single time I go to the movie theater. Instead, it's like $10, so I pretty much never get anything. Sure, they're making $10, and an ambiguous "lot" of people are just hungry and/or thirsty and don't care how much it costs, really, 'cause they just want some food and drink while they're there. But, I just can't imagine what kind of statistics they have that guarantee they're better off selling drinks and popcorn for $5 a piece instead of, say, $3 a piece. Did they ever TRY selling it for cheaper? Or did they just run "marketing simulations" and combine that with poll data, so that the 73 margins of error all overlap into oblivion, and you come up with some ultra-precise "conclusive" data? Seems silly to me.

[illathid]

 

ok, but it was sedrefilos who made the affirmative statement about the thing you say is pointless to discuss. Why come down on me for expressing doubt about this (as you point we can't know for certain without input from Obsidian)?

 

 

Well Sedrefilos asked the party in question for information, there is no issue with that. How else go about the problem?

You can certainly express doubt ( i just said your demand for proof is incorrect, i never said your opinion, or the opinion is wrong from any other user).

 

Please go ahead and try to analyse the problem further, as much as you like , it was not my intention "come down on me" (im not even sure what this way of saying stands for, sorry but as said im not a native speaker)

 

if this means "why did you attack me?" then please udnerstand that this was not my intention. I merely stated that there is no use in this way of discussing things.

 

so, now im really outta here :D

 

I didn't see Sedrefilos ask Obsidian anywhere "Did you spend any of your own money on this?" He just said as fact "Obsidian didn't spend any of their own money on development." By making the statement, he needs to offer proof. That's how the burden of proof works in an argument.

 

Say there's a jar of coins. There can be either an even or odd number of coins in the jar, but we don't know which at the moment. If I said "There's an even number of coins" then I would have the burden of proof. If I made an argument where much of conclusions rely on there being an even number of coins in the jar, it's not a red herring to ask me to prove that in fact there is an even number of coins.

 

"Come down on" doesn't mean attack per se, it more like "cast judgement on."

[Lord of Riva]

im referring to Post #87 and #115

 

at least 87 is before your post about citing Obsidian.

but if we can i would like to give this a rest now

[Zitchiock]

I would support Obsidian for another campaign on Kickstarter if Pillars of Eternity is a lot of fun and lives up to its promises. 

[Ark Evensong]

I don't know if they've decided the 42 price for the extra 3 months; noone knows.

The big titles cost 50-60, yet I found DA:I for 48 in a retail store. In their own store, Origin, it costs 60. This means EA could have sell it much cheaper. I guess this could go for anyone. Anyway.

I didn't back the game for Paradox to get involved. NO PUBLISHERS was one of their major points during kickstarter.

The game costs about 20 if you back the project, yet it costs 42 if you don't. Some people made some points about this, I myself am not sure.

 

Anyway, if Obsidian doesen't want to answer, then fine. But don't pretend you know as well as them by assuming things.

I don't believe the delay had much, if any, influence on the price of the game. I brought it up to say that it did cost them something. Whether that's their own money, or reduced income per game sold, I can only guess.

 

EA pricing their game higher in their own store than in retail, is probably just keeping up good relations with their distributors. (Retail stores, other webshops, etc.) You don't generally want to piss off your distributors by selling directly to customers for a lower price, even if it'd net you more per game sold. Stores will stop selling your stuff, and you'll have less sales in total. Is it a little messed up? Sure, but there are reasons beyond "Muahaha, bleeding our customers dry!".

 

As far as Paradox is involved, from what we can tell, they've been fairly hands-off regarding development, and Obsidian keeps their IP. That's all fine by me.

 

To avoid confusion, for the backer prices we'll stick to USD, okay? $20 for the "Early Backer" tier, and $25 for the regular-backer-but-still-discounted price. Currently priced for $45. Yeah, that's a significant increase. Note, however, that the $20 and $25 price points were set when they expected the game to be rather smaller in scope. (Counting on 1, maybe 2 million instead of 4.) I'll say again that selling for less than $30 or so at launch would be a slap in the face of a lot of Backers.

 

Most of all, though, I simply disagree that their own monetary investment should significantly influence the price at which they're willing to sell the game. I think it's fine to agree to disagree on that point. But to call that immoral or unethical ... I strongly object. This was brought up before, and maybe it's a case of language barrier, but those are pretty strong words, and don't lend themselves very well to hyperbole.

[Elerond]

 

Well the issue is that Illathid demanded proff of Sedrefilos, it was not my argument. You are correct in the statement that this does serve no purpose. Which is exactly what i said btw, so you are actually agreeing with me. Im sorry if that didnt became evident.

 

Well you can gather information up to a point were you think you have conclusive evidence, thats how it works. You do not know if the comclusion you got is correct, but you think that it is. Thats how people understand the world we do not necessarily know but we learn.

I apologize, as I did not mean to suggest that it was your argument. I was carelessly unspecific with my wording.

 

And I see what you're saying. But, the point is, you think something, until you know it. If you don't know it, there's never a reason to conclude anything. My whole point is that, there are two possibilities here:

 

1) That Obsidian spent some of their own money in this project, beyond the Kickstarter funding.

2) That Obsidian did not spend any of their own money in this project.

 

If we know neither, then they're both equally questionable. One isn't any more conclusive than the other, so there's exactly equal "necessity" for proof on both sides. Any parties involved can wager a guess, if they'd like, but, as the saying goes, "Your guess is as good as mine." The "No, YOU are the one who has to prove otherwise" argument is not sound.

 

If I THINK someone committed a crime, but have no proof they did so, it's not on just me to prove they did it, OR just them to prove they didn't. If either side cannot prove anything, then they should just be set free. The two are mutually exclusive, so as long as both are possible, neither is conclusive.

 

So, it isn't that "Hah, I believe they spent some of their own money, and that's a better conclusion than that they didn't." It's that both are arbitrary conclusions until actually proven.

 

 

Will Obsidian give you compensation for your money that has monetary value? If they do then they have put their own money in the game as money that you gave them wasn't a gift. If case is that money that you gave them was gift then your point has some merit.

[illathid]

im referring to Post #87 and #115

 

at least 87 is before your post about citing Obsidian.

but if we can i would like to give this a rest now

 

Yeah, in each of those Sedrefilos asks "Obsidian, Why did you price it this way?" and states as a fact "Obsidian did not contribute any money to the development." No where did he ask "Did you spend any of your own money on this?"

 

I don't care about what Sedredilos' opinion is. What I care about is where he got his information saying "Obsidian did not contribute any money to the development." Because he keeps saying it and is refusing to give support for it.

[BAdler]

@Valmy

 

Do you have some ethics fetish? There is nothing about ethics in this conversation.

 

I don't think I need to explain to anyone else that the price of a product is directly tied to the development cost. So I will not bother to inform one ignorant.

 

Your case of developer pricing the game whatever they feel like is really paper thin. We all know how the games pricing looks like and indie Kickstarter games do not cost more than AAA titles. Obsidian overpriced PoE and that's a fact.

 

I would like to point out that Obsidian has spent a good deal of its own money and resources in developing PoE. I can understand that some people may feel the game is not worth what we are charging, but trust me when I say that this game has a lot of content in it. Lots more than many AAA titles I have worked on.

 

I would also like to point out that the price of a game is not always tied to development cost. As an example, Star Wars: The Old Republic cost $200 million dollars to develop, but when I purchased it, it was the same price as any other AAA PC game at the time. I am not sure how much the latest Dragon Age cost to develop, but it was probably significantly less. They are selling the game for $60... even more than I paid for SW:TOR. I realize that SW:TOR was likely relying on monthly payments to recoup cost, but it also has massive ongoing costs of a live team and many servers to upkeep. The case I just mentioned shows that sometimes it doesn't matter how much it cost to develop something, companies will only charge what they think people will pay for their game.

[Kal Adan]

Pillars of Eternity is not that kind of a product that can get to many people for a price of 1$ in number enough to let Obisidian stand on their own two feet. I will go as far as to say that Kickstarter could be an option - in my opinion - if they won't raise enough capital through selling Pillars of Eternity for their another project. Selling Pillars of Eternity in a lot of copies for a reasonable price (not 1$)  is ultimately beneficial to all involved.

[Osvir]

I am not sure how much the latest Dragon Age cost to develop, but it was probably significantly less. They are selling the game for $60... 

I've seen a couple of these statements made by forum members here and it got me curious because I was doing some comparing with PoE pricing with some AAA titles.

 

The price for Dragon Age: Inquisition on Origin is $71 where I live (converted SEK to Dollar). SEK = Svensk krona (Swedish crown). Which means Dragon Age: Inquisition is priced differently depending on where you live, no? (A lot of new AAA titles on Origin goes for $60-$70 where I live by the way)

 

Pillars of Eternity on Steam is €42 where I live, which converts to $46.

 

I'm just trying to provide some perspective, and also finding interesting contradiction in the comments saying "Pillars should be cheaper than AAA titles!!". Well.... it is   by quite a lot too.

 

Also, more perspective for those of you without badges:

 

Bronze = $5-$99 (Only $20 and above = Digital Copy though, which was limited to "25,000 backers", notice that it says "All Gone") 

Silver = $100-$499

Gold = $500+

 

$20 being the price for the Digital Copy (During Kickstarter, limited amount). $29 being the price for Slacker Backer (After Kickstarter). Then $25 for an Extra Digital Copy (During Pledge Site). I don't remember what the price was for a single Digital Copy (without any "Deluxe" deals) during the Pledge Site time, but I think it was in the $25-$30 range.

[Sedrefilos]

Nice to see Brandon answering.

 

To those who ask where do we know Obsidian spent 0 money; well, the kickstarter campaign. "Give us 1 million to make the game - we won't go to a publisher". No prototype or alpha stage to show (like many others have done), just the idea of a game. And those who want additional money from kikcster, they say it beforehand "hey, we've made it thus far, we want your help to finish it. Give us money". Pretty straightforward. Obsidian never said anything like that.

Content comes from budget also. A budget Obsidian got through crowdfunding.

Of course I have no reason not to belive Brandon. If he says Obsidian poured much of their resources in, then I raise my hands.

 

Brandon also says something I noted when I mentioned the DA:I example; companies price their games whatever they like, despite the cost because people are used to spend that money without question. Yeah, yeah I know, it's a luxury.

 

We come from different worlds I guess.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Sedrefilos

[Rafkos]

 

 

From what I saw however I will be careful in trusting your claims about content and check reviews and opinions after launch. 

Yeah, that's what lots of people do, they wait for reviews and other opinions and then decide to buy it or not. I hope PoE will be a game of the year, if so, you guys should expect a very high income after week/two after the release.

I've read all of the posts here and now I think that they really should use KS in their another game, not because of the money but because of the quality of a final product. I like how PoE is being made, wish the same for PoE2. I've already preordered it on Steam but now I know that it's going to be sold in shops for a lot less price with all the books and stuff, shame on me hehe, I guess I'll have to buy this game again in a year or two as a gold collection with all of the expansions/sequels in it.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Rafkos

[Lord of Riva]

ahh that solves the issue then, @the more critical viewpoints

 

well you could Still not believe Mr.BAdler but no that would be kinda a stretch.

I mean as long as they dont actually show you the original Bank details you could feed your doubts.

 

Brandon also says something I noted when I mentioned the DA:I example; companies price their games whatever they like, despite the cost because people are used to spend that money without question. Yeah, yeah I know, it's a luxury.

 

 

They are not only used, but willing to buy at this price. I agree that we may be able to boycot this if nobody buys any game for more then 30$. But im pretty sure this would lead to a lot less games and lower quality games overall.

[Sedrefilos]

Well I don't intend of starting a movement for boycotting video games with high prices. The majority of those who are into video game culture are not of that mentality anyway, else they would 've done it long ago. Nor do I believe if the prices were lower the quality of the games would be meh. Again, the DA:I expample prooves it otherwise.

 

I'm just dissapointed that the crowndfunding movement cares only about them not having publishers over their head and exploit the geekiness and wealth of people in video games to easy fund their games then act as publishers would do pricewise.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Sedrefilos

[ruzen]

200M $  wow It just blew my mind. Its very much for that years. Even GTA5 (which took 5 years to develop) cost estimated 265M $ (with the marketing) in 2014. No wonder television guys are frightened by the progress of the computer game industry. Insane numbers are begining to come up. Dota2 price money and all that... Its really crazy

[PrimeJunta]

I'm just dissapointed that the crowndfunding movement cares only about them not having publishers over their head and exploit the geekiness and wealth of people in video games to easy fund their games then act as publishers would do pricewise.

 

I actually don't give a toot about the publishers. I have nothing against publishers. They provide a useful service. Publishing a game requires a whole different set of activities, skills, contacts, and what have you than developing one. 

 

I do of course have a whole range of beefs against specific publishers, but that's neither here nor there.

 

I like Kickstarter because it lets developers throw things at the wall and see if they stick. A publisher has to take a best guess about whether something will sell enough to be worth publishing since it'll eat the loss if it doesn't. This means that pitching something new is going to be an uphill battle since it's inherently riskier.

 

With Kickstarter, either the idea flies or it doesn't. We -- the people who will actually play the damn things -- get to decide, directly. I.e., the publisher can throw any damn-fool idea at us, and either we'll like it or we won't.

 

This also makes for a much healthier power relationship. Instead of the developer being beholden to the publisher's best guesses about what sells and what doesn't, they, again, talk directly to us, their public. If a publisher is involved, there's going to be much less uncertainty about how well the product will do in the market, which means the developer is in a better negotiating position too. Less risk, better deal. And even the publisher likes it better, because, hey, less risk.

 

If the dev chooses to bring a publisher on board at some point -- for marketing, distribution, and what have you -- I say by all means. I wouldn't even object if the publisher is in from the start. Some publishers are pretty damn cool actually, Paradox for example. If they were involved in a KS, I would not count that as a minus.

[Karkarov]

Personally what worries me is your launch date.  Pillars is coming out two days after a much better known, much more anticipated and advertised action RPG in general called Bloodbourne.  Pillar's one advantage is that Bloodbourne happens to be a PS4 exclusive.

[Luckmann]

Personally what worries me is your launch date.  Pillars is coming out two days after a much better known, much more anticipated and advertised action RPG in general called Bloodbourne.  Pillar's one advantage is that Bloodbourne happens to be a PS4 exclusive.

 

Haven't even heard of it. I doubt there'll be much overlap, considering that PoE is as far from console peasantry as possible. The peasantry will get Bloodbourne and the rest will get Pillars of Eternity.

[Sedrefilos]

 

I'm just dissapointed that the crowndfunding movement cares only about them not having publishers over their head and exploit the geekiness and wealth of people in video games to easy fund their games then act as publishers would do pricewise.

 

I actually don't give a toot about the publishers. I have nothing against publishers. They provide a useful service. Publishing a game requires a whole different set of activities, skills, contacts, and what have you than developing one. 

 

I do of course have a whole range of beefs against specific publishers, but that's neither here nor there.

 

I like Kickstarter because it lets developers throw things at the wall and see if they stick. A publisher has to take a best guess about whether something will sell enough to be worth publishing since it'll eat the loss if it doesn't. This means that pitching something new is going to be an uphill battle since it's inherently riskier.

 

With Kickstarter, either the idea flies or it doesn't. We -- the people who will actually play the damn things -- get to decide, directly. I.e., the publisher can throw any damn-fool idea at us, and either we'll like it or we won't.

 

This also makes for a much healthier power relationship. Instead of the developer being beholden to the publisher's best guesses about what sells and what doesn't, they, again, talk directly to us, their public. If a publisher is involved, there's going to be much less uncertainty about how well the product will do in the market, which means the developer is in a better negotiating position too. Less risk, better deal. And even the publisher likes it better, because, hey, less risk.

 

If the dev chooses to bring a publisher on board at some point -- for marketing, distribution, and what have you -- I say by all means. I wouldn't even object if the publisher is in from the start. Some publishers are pretty damn cool actually, Paradox for example. If they were involved in a KS, I would not count that as a minus.

 

Who said I have anything with any publisher at all? They're saying that, that's why they're going kickstarter. But this has to lower the price. They didn't do it so, I guess the no publisher blah blah was to hook more people into it. Shame

This goes to several other companies out there, not only Obsidian, btw.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Sedrefilos

[Lord of Riva]

well they are cheaper as the normal AAA title

[PrimeJunta]

 

 

I'm just dissapointed that the crowndfunding movement cares only about them not having publishers over their head and exploit the geekiness and wealth of people in video games to easy fund their games then act as publishers would do pricewise.

 

I actually don't give a toot about the publishers. I have nothing against publishers. They provide a useful service. Publishing a game requires a whole different set of activities, skills, contacts, and what have you than developing one. 

 

I do of course have a whole range of beefs against specific publishers, but that's neither here nor there.

 

I like Kickstarter because it lets developers throw things at the wall and see if they stick. A publisher has to take a best guess about whether something will sell enough to be worth publishing since it'll eat the loss if it doesn't. This means that pitching something new is going to be an uphill battle since it's inherently riskier.

 

With Kickstarter, either the idea flies or it doesn't. We -- the people who will actually play the damn things -- get to decide, directly. I.e., the publisher can throw any damn-fool idea at us, and either we'll like it or we won't.

 

This also makes for a much healthier power relationship. Instead of the developer being beholden to the publisher's best guesses about what sells and what doesn't, they, again, talk directly to us, their public. If a publisher is involved, there's going to be much less uncertainty about how well the product will do in the market, which means the developer is in a better negotiating position too. Less risk, better deal. And even the publisher likes it better, because, hey, less risk.

 

If the dev chooses to bring a publisher on board at some point -- for marketing, distribution, and what have you -- I say by all means. I wouldn't even object if the publisher is in from the start. Some publishers are pretty damn cool actually, Paradox for example. If they were involved in a KS, I would not count that as a minus.

 

Who said I have anything with any publisher at all? They're saying that, that's why they're going kickstarter. But this has to lower the price. They didn't do it so, I guess the no publisher blah blah was to hook more people into it. Shame

This goes to several other companies out there, not only Obsidian, btw.

 

 

Uh, Sedrefilos, you brought up publishers in the very post I'm quoting.

 

As to the pricing argument, we've already gone over that several times, and I don't think there's much progress to be made there.

[Quantics]

Personally what worries me is your launch date.  Pillars is coming out two days after a much better known, much more anticipated and advertised action RPG in general called Bloodbourne.  Pillar's one advantage is that Bloodbourne happens to be a PS4 exclusive.

 

Don't take this personally Karkarov but I find these kind of comments really comical. 

 

How many times have we read on these forums that the release date was a terrible choice?

 

Even before the delay got announced, many a Cassandra out there were complaining that the release was dangerously close to X, Y, or Z. First it was Dragon Age: Inquisition, then the Witcher (before it got delayed), now you're citing Bloodbourne??

 

If Obsidian were listening to you they would never release the darn game.  

 

Besides, we all know that it's Sony that ought to be afraid or releasing Bloodbourne too close to March 26

 

And btw, how the hell is a PS4-exclusive, action-oriented game a direct competitor to PoE? I for one have never even considered playing that game... 

Edited March 6, 2015 by Quantics

[NegativeEdge]

ITT people defending a finance model where all the risk is public and all the profit is private. KickStarter is such a model it just has great PR. It's presented as somehow more democratic for the public to take financial risks and reap none of the profit. It even bandies about the same concepts like "Intellectual Property" which came from the banking and financial services industry in their continued efforts to ensure they have absolute control and monopoly, it's a protectionist idea, preventing them from ever having to face the real forces of a genuinely free market or anything resembling actual capitalism.

 

KickStarter model is exactly the same as the high tech industry where all the difficult and expensive work is funded by the tax payer at places like MIT and other research and development institutes and when the hard work is done, handed over to MicroSoft and Apple for private profit (the internet and cell phone tech are just 2 examples) except at least with KS you have a choice whether you want to fund something in this manner (you shouldn't).

[Sedrefilos]

I wasn't expecting any progress, PrimeJunta. I said I'm considering not helping in a next kickstarter because of the price, then people started to jump in and talking on behalf of Obsidian. The conversation spread, so I asked if Obsidian coulod explain that. Brandon Adler wrote a post pretty much saying "because" and that's it. Fans are ok with that, other people are not. Life continues.