FeelTheRads
Arcane
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2008
- Messages
- 13,716
Thanks. I hope revisions means removal. Because last time I checked they said they only said they will make them more responsive.
Aside from all the Paul Trowe drama, which actually next to nothing to do with SpaceVenture
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects...aceventure-by-the-creators-of-space-que/posts
Release & Project Status as of June 6th
We are aware that there are a lot of questions from you, our backers, regarding when SpaceVenture is going to be released as well as made available for sale. There are many opinions and feelings, varying from the extremely harsh to the quite patient, though ultimately all wanting the same thing; the highest quality SpaceVenture possible. Some want it yesterday, and some have advised us to “take the time you need to make the best game you can." We have worked hard to not abuse this encouragement.
We are very sensitive to the entire range of feelings. We ultimately intend to deliver to you the best game possible. We can hurry and release a gaming experience we aren’t as happy with, something we would be afraid and certain would be a let-down to you, or take the extra time to give you something we will feel good about in both our hearts and guts, a game worthy of your backing and patience.
We have avoided giving an official release date due to many major unexpected challenges we have encountered as we’ve progressed through the development process of the first new game by our new company. Everyone who has ever worked on a first project of any kind, and especially a game in a new environment, knows there are ‘growing pains’, especially with that very first one. We don’t want to delve into a laundry list of details. If you would like a taste of the issues mentioned in the past please feel free to read our October 16th update.
Having said all that, we have decided to give a soft estimated release time period of 9 months to a year from now without going into detail on why things have moved slower than each and everyone of us has wanted. That means if everything goes more smoothly than the first third, and we see absolutely no way it won’t, we expect to be done by March of next year. We will not let the game suffer due to being pushed by a hard deadline. Know that first and foremost, we are shooting for an adventure game the type of which we offered and for which our fans asked, an ‘old-school adventure with new tech and design lessons learned’ game you backed through Kickstarter and PayPal.
We know without any doubt this release estimate will frustrate most of you and infuriate others, but because of our passion for this game and adventures in general, we stand fully behind this decision. As we have said in the past, we have one shot at making the game great. That one shot will determine the future of the company.
Here is a breakdown of where things stand currently:
FULL GAME COMPLETION
ARTWORK/ANIMATIONS
- The story is complete.
- Most storyboards and a good deal of concept artwork done for the full game are on Mark’s wall.
- 1/3 of the game is mostly complete with polish. That includes artwork, game play mechanics, music/sfx, and narrative/dialog. (Please note that this has been a our major learning curve, and the achievement of this will definitely speed progress on the rest of the game. SO many lessons learned here!)
AUDIO/MUSIC
- We have very polished artwork for 1/3 of the game and some scene artwork completed for the rest of the game. Although Mark is mostly involved in polishing artwork, he is also overseeing a couple of our artists working on scenes for the rest of the game along with animations and cutscenes.
- Most of the animations needed in the game for Ace and Rooter are completed, something that’s a larger feat than most would think.
- All non-Ace and Rooter animations are added and working in 1/3 of the game.
VOICE RECORDING
- Almost all sound effects and music have been completed for 1/3 of the game.
- The music is as complete as it can be at this point.
PROGRAMMING
- At this time no voice-over has been recorded for the game. Dialogue is fluid and we intentionally wait until as late as we can to book our talent and studio time. We are planning to go to the studio in three different recording sessions. The first recording session is coming up. We’ll post more details on that hopefully soon, As with the art, for each part of the game we will schedule our talent and studio time as late as is possible because, as we learned years ago, the dialogue also evolves for the better.
FUTURE KICKSTARTER UPDATES
- Of all the items listed in this update, programming is the one that has contributed the most in causing the project to move as slowly as it has. As mentioned in the October update, we had to design almost all the tools needed to make SpaceVenture ourselves since Unity has been in the past especially a ‘one size fits all games’ game engine. The good news there though is that we have been able to make very good progress now that the tools we needed are nearly complete.
- We have a code base foundation that will be used for the entire game and as well as whatever we do in the future. We’ve essentially built our wheel.
In Summary:
- In the past, Chris has tried his best to provide unique updates on the 1st and the 16th of each month. This was a decision made with the best of intentions but in reality is sometimes difficult to execute without becoming annoying to some because, even though there is always some progress, there’s not always something with a high-enough drool-inducement factor worth sharing, and we don’t want to give away too much in the updates. Chris will post updates as achievements warrant, to let you know we have something new and exciting or relatively interesting, or when something’s just too cool to not share. We will do our best to give you a clear view of the status of the project.
There have been many challenges and setbacks that have slowed progress. Yes, there are things we should have anticipated, but also many we couldn't. No matter how many games with which one is involved there will always be hard lessons along the way. These can be humbling. There have been many moments of frustration, even more for us than most of you. We’ve encountered and surmounted many hurdles, but such is the way of game development, as well as life in general. We are (almost all) merely human. With the exception of one team member, we’ve each had family health care issues that have impacted our performance and progress. Nonetheless, we will continue to push forward fueled by your enthusiasm, from those who've backed us from day one to those who've just recently become aware of what we are doing, and by our team's passion for the game and our excitement over what is ahead. Through all of that we absolutely believe we'll be proud of SpaceVenture, and you will enjoy the end result.
Thank you all for your support.
Guys From Andromeda LLC
Scott Murphy, Mark Crowe, and Chris Pope
<Now donning helmets, protective exo-armor, bracing for impact>
This one is really starting to look like an impossible mission
$200k in 9 days...
Anyway, I decided to re-watch (and share it here) this really awesome video on the SQ series and the origins and history of adventure games: http://www.youtubeXXX.com/watch?v=VGh7i2mj5tU
(this guy really comes up with amazing videos, a shame he stopped doing them)
Share it around (together with the http://www.tgakick.com link) by email, twitter, facebook, and maybe it will gather more pledgers.
I think a lot of the adventure game excitement of 2012 had died down... even I'll say that Quest For Infamy took longer to finish than I would have liked, and I will say if we'd had a larger budget, we could have finished it sooner, I reckon. I just get sad thinking that all that enthusiasm that was had two years ago has waned, and has often been replaced with anger, mistrust or malaise. So far, many of the offerings people were excited about have gotten mixed reviews/reactions. I still feel like Scott and Mark are going to make a good, fun and engaging game - but the time thing really does make the excitement wane. It's an interesting position for me, as a developer AND a huge adventure game fan.
Bt
In reply to exoScoriae and others: In general, your comments are completely true. Mark and Scott, despite decades of game-making experience, greatly underestimated the time and money it would take to make a new adventure game. Lori and I are in the same situation, although our specifics are slightly different.
So our "Estimated delivery" dates were ridiculously optimistic. That doesn't mean that the projects are ridiculous or that we won't deliver eventually. I know Mark, Scott, and their team are working very hard on their project; as are Lori, I, and our team on Hero-U: Rogue to Redemption. With 20:20 hindsight, we could have all done better.
But do not assume that big companies are any more competent at getting games out the door. In 1990, Sierra had an established game engine, which cost millions, and all of the projects used it. As a result, we got games out in a year for under $1 million using those tools. By the late 1990's, they had to rework all of the tools for 24-bit graphics, 3D, and modern computers. The system development cost millions for *each* game, and the games themselves took years and millions of dollars to develop. Quest for Glory V shipped two years late and at triple the original budget. Sierra, with all its experience and expert developers, came nowhere close to accurately predicting either costs or schedule.
King's Quest: Mask of Eternity shipped the same year, far behind schedule and with massive cost overruns. They also had a custom game engine which ran into development problems - There was no communication to develop one engine for multiple games as there was in 1990. Let's also not forget that it was ludicrous to ship two major fantasy titles in the same year. Sierra did it because nobody at the company had any idea when either game would be complete. The following year, Sierra closed their in-house development.
I mention Sierra because I was there, but I could give dozens of examples of major game companies falling completely on their faces, missing deadlines by years, and spending millions of dollars over budget. Wildstar, anyone? Its spend was approaching $100 million when I interviewed their several years ago. Carbine started development on it in 2005, I think for a planned 2008 or 2009 release. Wildstar is getting excellent reviews, so they may have placed the right bet. A mediocre game released five years ago would have just wasted all the money put into it.
Then there was the game company - started by major industry figures whose names you would all recognize - that asked Lori and me to propose a game design. We spent weeks at it, on spec, and presented what we still think is a great game idea. They decided they didn't need outside game designers, and instead had the executives and art directors do the design. That game cost millions and sold fewer than 1,000 copies in its first six months. It's beautiful; the game play is... let's just say "bad". Word of mouth got out quickly and the game failed.
Ref major films, William Goldman famously said, "Nobody knows anything." That is even more true in the game industry.
So yeah, if we'd been smart, we probably would have written some adventure game books rather than a computer game. We believed people when they told us how easy it was to develop a game under Unity. We thought Unity would replace most of that multi-million dollar game system development at Sierra. Instead, we found out that it is just a subset of what is needed for a full graphic adventure.
Making games is hard. Making great games is completely unpredictable. Planning a schedule for a large game has so many unknowns that nobody gets it right consistently. Finding great animators and programmers who will work for a fraction of their industry-standard paycheck is very hard. We are all doing the best we can.
How did Jane Jensen do it? She signed a publisher contract to supplement the Kickstarter income. And was still about a year late. How are Lori and I making a game long past the original deadline? We have key team members who are deferring pay while they support themselves with day jobs. We are borrowing money to keep food on the table and to pay other team members and project expenses. We hope we can sell enough copies of the game to pay for all that and hopefully reward our loyal team. But it's impossible to predict.
I'm personally a bit relieved that SpaceVenture is having such a hard road to release. It and Hero-U have had many of the same problems with engine, animation, and team. All it shows me is that we have not taken on easy or predictable tasks. Large-scale creative development is difficult, expensive, time-consuming, and unpredictable. But I trust Mark, Scott, and Chris; they will finish the game and it will be good. It will also have cost far less to develop than any current AAA game from a major studio. I can say this because I know it's true of Hero-U as well.
But we are sorry that we listed an Estimated delivery date that we had no chance of making. In hindsight, even if we had gone with our very simple original plan (essentially an animated board game with a lot of text), we would have missed the deadline by six months. Instead we are making a AA game and missing by two years. It's the best we can do, and few others manage to do better.
Hey everyone! It's time to get caught up on some of the goings-on within the SpaceVenture project! We've had a pretty eventful last couple of months as we have worked out the majority of the bugs we were having with the first third of the game along with moving into newer territory with the rest of the game.
PILOTING ACE HARDWAY'S SHIP
Probably one of the most exciting things I get to share with you all during this update is the fact that we've made some big leaps forward in terms of how the navigation of Ace's ship works. Whether you're a fan of taking matters into your own hands, or your less inclined to anything that remotely resembles an arcade sequence in an adventure game, we're gonna have you taken care of.
Last time you saw this garage, it was empty, but not anymore!
Chris Pope said:Let me also say that all of these videos are still considered early testing of controlling Ace's ship. Things can and probably will change. Let me reiterate to you out there that will be concerned about arcade type sequences in SpaceVenture, there is nothing for you to worry about. We are working on a great balance for the game.
As for the release of the game goes, things are still on track for 2015! I'll give more info on that as I have it in a future update.
Basically instead of working within your limitations - they are taken away...and the game design exponentially gets larger and more complex.
Do large budgets ruin movies?
As budgets for franchise movies increase, the quality of the movie decreases. This effect is especially evident in the 'big' trilogys of the past few years, such as Pirates, The Matrix, or Spiderman. The initial movies in all three of these instalations has been groundbreaking, but as the stories have continued, and the budgets increased, the movies just went downhill (Spiderman 2 is a slight exception...although personally I preferred the first movie).
I think its a case of directors and screen writers not feeling the need to be clever with their scripts. Instead of having a clever plot point to get from A to B, its easier to have a 2 million dollar effect sequence.
Imagine if the first Matrix has a budget of $150 000 000...instead of the few signature sequences that made the movie as incredible as it was (Perhaps 4 bullet time shots...those amazing hovership sequences....that feeling of seeing 4 squidies hunting the ship, that INCREDIBLE helicopter crash), we would have been bombarded with 400 squidies, a full CG chase sequence of the ship, and 40 bullet time shots that would in no way have had a 10'th of the impact as the first time you saw Neo dodge a bullet.
Now I think that the brothers has the basic plot idea of all 3 movies when they made the first, but honestly believe that the movies would have been MUCH tighter with half the budget.
Pirates' first script was amazing. Funny, clever, witty, and a perfect 'star vehicle' for Johnny Depp. When they needed to get a ship, the had a plan, and hijacked one of the royal navies, with perhaps one of the most recognisable camera dollys I have ever seen (when Jack turns at the camera, and smiles..pistol slung over his shoulder)...
In the other movies, when we needed to get somewhere, it became a mishmash of montages and writing who's soul purpose seemed to get to the next 'cool' location.
I can tell you the entire story of POTC - COTBP, but honestly couldn't even try to explain half of what went on in the other movies.
Then you get the other end of the spectrum....movies with tiny budgets, that have either INCREDIBLY smart, funny, tight scripts, or amazing concepts and ideas-because they dont have the budgets to build a new set, or have a 20 minute battle.
I recently saw Juno...incredible movie, and by far one of the best movies I have seen all year. Saw (yes..that one!) gained cult status on a budget of just $1.2 million. Now Saw isnt exactly a Coppola like masterpiece, but as far as horror movies go, it was by far a cut above your average slasher fare, and the script and concept was borne out of the fact that they needed a movie they could shoot in 1 room.
There was a movie called Primer about two guys who develop a time machine in their basement, that uses its small budget to amazing effect. No flashy effects...just excellent dialog, and and extremely clever story.
Hard Candy had some moments in it where my palms were literally sweating...more than I can say for any of the big budget hollywood-fare action, horror, or suspence films of late.
The trend of increased budgets and ruined movies is a worrying one. What is going to happen to Ironman 2 with a bigger budget? Are they going to forego a clever script, and just use effects to fill in the blanks?
I think it goes along the lines of, a bigger budget means more studio involvement, which means the director gets less control. Spiderman 3 is a classic example of this. Venom should NOT have been in that movie-and the movie would have been better without him. But the studio's wanted him, and they were footing the $250 000 000 budget.
Will the trend of having these tent-pole movies with their massive budgets kill the blockbuster, as the studios start to not get the returns equivalent to the budgets?
Should directors start 'demanding' lower budgets to lessen studio involvement?
What are your guys opinions?
Case in point, the 'piloting the ship' aspect of SpaceVenture....is it cool? Yes. Is it necessary for a spiritual successor to Space Quest? I don't think so - especially if they are designing it to be something that CAN be skippable.
I'm also not sure why the current generation of adventure games are so focused on mobile. Mobile development is shit for adventure games. The casual market does NOT want adventure games - and your game will be buried underneath mountains of other 'quick release' games that are more suited to the that market.
I'm not saying don't publish on mobile platforms (Stasis will be on iPad at some point), but creating the game with that being the driving force? I dunno...it just seems like the PC Market is where they should be focused. The market of people who want to sit down for 2 hours after a long day, put on some headphones, and play a cool game.
Richard Garriott... Peter Molyneux... Tim Schafer, are all garbagemen now.