-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
KickStarter Mechajammer (formerly Copper Dreams) - cyberpunk RPG from Whalenought Studios
- Thread starter Infinitron
- Start date
Completely independent of whether the art style looks okay or not I still find it shocking that they would massively change it out of the blue to something that is completely opposite of what was originally pitched. You can tell me what you want but thats simply not alright.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2012
- Messages
- 29,864
It's not a massive overhaul in terms of work load, apparently.
I don't think the move to more granular hexes is all good. Sure you get some benefits, but you run into the problem where you're hovering over each of those tiny hexes to figure out the maximum range you can move for the least amount of ticks, which can really slow down the pace of gameplay, at least it does for me. If you wanna go this route, i'd strongly suggest visualizing on those hexes which ones require 1 tick to move to, 2 ticks, etc. to mitigate it.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 20,660
Game is experimental enough for graphics style that looks like it took some acid
gaussgunner
Arcane
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2012
- Messages
- 9,389
gaussgunner
Arcane
I agree completely. Not only are these late design changes unfair to backers, they're simply irresponsible.
When Joe and Hannah went to kickstarter they should have been fully committed to their design. They should have had a playable demo (even if they didn't release it), an outline of all content & feature development remaining to be done, and a business plan to finish it using the $40,000 they asked for, by March 2017 as promised.
They could have been forgiven for going a few months over and cutting a few features due to unforseen technical problems, illness, burnout, etc. It happens. But they're over a year late and they're still fucking around. They're getting into No Man's Sky territory.
grimace
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2015
- Messages
- 2,085
Are you a backer? Let's take this discussion to the backer forums.
Mustawd
Guest
Mustawd
Guest
Tell that to all the retards in the Hero U thread. Apparently the Coles get a pass cuz they're old and broke or something. People need to make up their minds and stick with it. Are big design changes ok in Kickstarters or are they not? To think that a game won't change by small or large amounts is ridiculous. IMO that's part of the risk you take when you become a backer. Of course, you're more than welcome to bitch if you don't like the changes. Just don't pretend like this was never a possibility.
Change is okay and expected, fundamental change that is completely different from what was pitched is not okay and unexpected. I didn't really follow Hero-U development that much and didn't back the game. I backed this on grounds of the pitch, now I get something that has little to to with the pitch in one of the core regards.
I won't go as far as to ask for my money back but I probably won't back another project by them either. If you ask people for money before the fact there needs to be some level of trust that what you give the money for is reasonably close to what will be delivered.
I won't go as far as to ask for my money back but I probably won't back another project by them either. If you ask people for money before the fact there needs to be some level of trust that what you give the money for is reasonably close to what will be delivered.
ArchAngel
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2015
- Messages
- 21,309
How is art style a fundamental thing? It is not like they changed from 3d to tokens on gameboard like what KotC2 uses. It is still same game in same engine that will play the same but it will only look a bit different.
buffalo bill
Arcane
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 1,054
As far as I know, developers of games that have been kickstarted have no legal responsibility to deliver what they have promised. But I take it that posters here feel the devs have some sort of moral responsibility to deliver the sort of game that they promised on kickstarter. That general attitude seems right to me, but it's very murky in the details.
Surely everyone would agree that the devs should have a large degree of creative freedom to change their game as they see fit in the development process, so long as promises to backers are not grossly violated. Something like changing a game from PC to console, or transforming a turn-based tactical party-based game into a single-character aRPG, would count as gross violations of backer trust. However, I'm not sure even radical changes to graphical style falls into the category, especially when the devs were very upfront at the beginning (as I believe J & H were) that the graphics would undergo many changes throughout development.
Maybe I'm biased, because the new graphics have made me actually interested in the game, whereas before this I pretty much wrote the game off (though planned on purchasing/playing eventually nonetheless). But in my eyes, even if you don't like the new graphical direction, it's an overstatement to say that this change is immoral conduct on the part of the devs.
Surely everyone would agree that the devs should have a large degree of creative freedom to change their game as they see fit in the development process, so long as promises to backers are not grossly violated. Something like changing a game from PC to console, or transforming a turn-based tactical party-based game into a single-character aRPG, would count as gross violations of backer trust. However, I'm not sure even radical changes to graphical style falls into the category, especially when the devs were very upfront at the beginning (as I believe J & H were) that the graphics would undergo many changes throughout development.
Maybe I'm biased, because the new graphics have made me actually interested in the game, whereas before this I pretty much wrote the game off (though planned on purchasing/playing eventually nonetheless). But in my eyes, even if you don't like the new graphical direction, it's an overstatement to say that this change is immoral conduct on the part of the devs.
Its not just 'muh graphics' in this case, the game had a clear concept of artistic vision that was pitched and that backers had in mind when they gave them their money. It was a shoddy decrepit low-fi cyberpunk art style. In that sense this
is a pretty crass understatement. It now looks like a box of exploded jelly beans.
I concede its debatable whether a graphical change can be considered a 'big change' or whatever but in this case the graphics were an integral part of the atmosphere and part of the reason why I backed.
I'd also like to add that I might've taken change in better spirits had they communicated it appropriately instead of just changing it like it was nothing.
To clarify how I feel about this, imagine an artist that you really like offers you to paint a really amazing painting if you give him some money and he promises you it will look something like this:
and then after a few years he shows up and hands you this:
When you get pissed, your bros tell you that "its just a minor change" and "it still is the same basic image, only the colors changed a bit" and "you can not expect the artist to uphold his original vision". Well, okay then.
Last edited:
hello friend
Arcane
I actually kind of liked one of the dungeon sieges, although ultimately it was forgettable enough I can't remember which one. Unique atmosphere, let down by same-y gameplay. Fun for a while, but there's not enough going on there to keep you going.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2018
- Messages
- 4,241
The visuals of a game is just a relatively small part of the package, unlike a painting where it's, you know, everything. What a shit analogy.
You seem to have missed the part of my post in which I say that I consider it an integral part of the atmosphere and setting as it was originally presented.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2018
- Messages
- 4,241
It's still a shit analogy. Not everyone feels the same way about the importance of the visual style, while I doubt you'd find many who'd be satisfied with art deco Mona Lisa as long as the frame is solid. Did you really back it for the visuals only?
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.