Game News Project Eternity Kickstarter Update #22: Q&A with Tim, Cooking?, and Avellone Trolls You!

[Infinitron]

/patiently/ You said that if PE succeeds, another developer with sufficient credentials might step forward, as if there is an army of them out there, waiting for an opportunity to make an awesome RPG.

That's not the point, VD. You said that the success of Obsidian on Kickstarter only proves anything about Obsidian, and not about the viability of Kickstarted videogames in general. I say that's false. Of course if there are actually no game developers out there BUT Obsidian willing to go on Kickstarter, my point is trivially true.

My point is that BG was a proven success from day one, which nobody denied, yet it didn't result in more games like BG.

What kind of historical revisionism is this? BG resulted in a short-lived renaissance of similar games. Not all of them exactly like BG, but similar enough.

 

[Infinitron]

Infiltron, it is obvious to me that you cannot tell the difference between marketing and actual content. The environment ought to be such that the content is more important because you put your real dollars into something which does not exist.

I don't know what you're talking about.

You say "KICKSTARTER NEEDS OVERSIGHT OR IT WILL FAIL!!" because you think oversight is good and you want to believe that Kickstarted projects need it because it's good.

I'm the realist here, shattering your naive belief that just because something is good, it is therefore a requirement.

 

[Mrowak]

Infiltron, it is obvious to me that you cannot tell the difference between marketing and actual content. The environment ought to be such that the content is more important because you put your real dollars into something which does not exist.

I don't know what you're talking about.

You say "KICKSTARTER NEEDS OVERSIGHT OR IT WILL FAIL!!" because you think oversight is good and you want to believe that Kickstarted projects need it because it's good.

I'm the realist here, shattering your naive belief that just because something is good, it is therefore a requirement.

No bro. It's you who keeps saying that our *faith* in the project without any real evidence or facts to back it up is good enough reason to believe it will succeed. You are incurable optimist who has yet to learn how real projects work, and how they fail.

 

[Mastermind]

Also, there are way too many fucking RandRoid Libertards on Codex, apparently, who have no idea what fucking oversight is. Capitalists are not friendly people who take your money and make you money, they are fucking Bernie Madoff and the producers of Kingdoms of Amalur. Give them free money without oversight, say good bye to your fucking money.

Kingdoms of Amalur was a great game. I should get around to playing it again sometime.

It was a poorly designed action shit, but yeah, you should get around to playing it again sometime.

The RP part was mediocre at best, but as a game it was fantastic. The best way to judge the combat of an RPG is to ask yourself the question: would you still play this shit if you didn't get to pick your own stats and skills? In other words, if the game was an action game or a real time/turn based tactical game, would you still play it?

KoA passes that test for me. KoA is better as an action game than the average rpg of the same type is as an action game. One of if not the best in the subgenre so far. Slap KoA's combat on morrowind and you'd have a complete masterpiece that wouldn't be surpassed for a thousand years.

The same cannot be said about AoD, which, as a turn based strategy game, is utter shit. Slap it on Arcanum's character system and I'd still uninstall it in 10 minutes. Maybe the game is better with a storyfag character, but when a codexer makes a turn based RPG, I expect the combat to deliver more than snores.

 

[Infinitron]

No bro. It's you who keeps saying that our *faith* in the project without any real evidence or facts to back it up is good enough reason to believe it will succeed. You are incurable optimist who has yet to know how real projects work, and how they fail.

You must be confusing me with J_C.

Project Eternity may or may not succeed. If it does succeed, additional Kickstarted projects will appear and they will also grant backers no oversight. If it doesn't succeed, it might kill the "Kickstarter" revolution. In either case, the result will not be oversight for backers. You either will, or will not have Kickstarted games with no oversight.

 

[Vault Dweller]

That's not the point, VD. You said that the success of Obsidian on Kickstarter only proves anything about Obsidian, and not about Kickstarted videogames in general. I say that's false.

Because?

Obsidian has almost two decades of experience and probably the best development team out there. Nobody else comes close. Whom else can you trust to deliver?

So, the point is, Obsidian's success will prove only one thing - that Obsidian has skills to write and design a good RPG. Which we already know.

What kind of historical revisionism is this? BG resulted in a short-lived renaissance of similar games. Not all of them exactly like BG, but similar enough.

Which ones?

 

[Infinitron]

Because?

Obsidian has almost two decades of experience and probably the best development team out there. Nobody else comes close. Whom else can you trust to deliver?

So, the point is, Obsidian's success will prove only one thing - that Obsidian has skills to write and design a good RPG. Which we already know.

There are other genres in the world besides RPGs. We're talking about the Kickstarter business model for videogames, not for RPGs specifically.

Let me remind you that there would be no Wasteland 2 or Project Eternity if not for Double Fine.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The RP part was mediocre at best, but as a game it was fantastic. The best way to judge the combat of an RPG is to ask yourself the question: would you still play this shit if you didn't get to pick your own stats and skills? In other words, if the game was an action game or a real time/turn based tactical game, would you still play it?

KoA passes that test for me. KoA is better as an action game than the average rpg of the same type is as an action game. One of if not the best in the subgenre so far. Slap KoA's combat on morrowind and you'd have a complete masterpiece that wouldn't be surpassed for a thousand years.

From the other thread:

"Kingdom of Amalur excels at one thing - it makes you appreciate Bethesda games more by showing that design can be infinitely worse.

I'm playing on Hard. Fighter. Long sword. It was challenging for about a level (when I was level 2). Then it's gotten uneventfully easy. Unlike, say, Diablo 2 where I can use different attacks, all I do is left click and sometimes I hold the LMB for that extra attack I unlocked. Since the game is easy, I don't use block. Since the game is easy, I'm not looking forward to level ups, new powers, new items, etc.

Any game where you can just left-click on shit until it dies is a poorly designed game. That's the gospel's truth, sea.

They've tried to make it contextual (same button, different attacks based on how you play - charge, dodge, block, but they've failed because in the end you just left-click through everything, occasionally dodging and hitting R. In comparison, D2 is a lot more engaging and offers a lot more builds/things to do in combat. Even God of War offers a lot more, so unless I'm really playing it wrong, I don't really see why people praise combat that much. You click on things and they die. Yay?

The loot distribution - an important aspect of action RPGs - is shit too. It's everywhere and it's mostly useless, because there is no stats and skills. You can do only so much with "moar damage", especially in a piss-easy game.
...
I don't see a single strong point and I can't think of anything good to say about the game at all. Well, some things aren't awful, but I'm not sure that's enough to call them strong points.

The game tried to be too many things at once and failed:

- It's an action game with God of War -light combat, yet it wants to tell an engaging story. There is a reason why games like God of War and Diablo go easy on the story.

- It wants to tell an engaging story, but it's written for 12 year olds; it's basically a single player MMO where characters where exclamation and question marks over their heads.

- It wants to tell an engaging story but it's generic as fuck. Well, how many people here would consider Salvatore a good writer?

- it wants to be an open world game but it's a corridor game; you can jump only in designated places, for fuck's sakes. If you run up a small hill, you can't just jump down because you'll hit an invisible wall.

- It's an action game but it's easy as fuck.

So, why should anyone play it? To experience a poorly designed, poorly written, poorly put together world? To enjoy a "quick and dynamic" but (in your own words) gets "tedious and repetitive" fast combat?"

The same cannot be said about AoD, which, as a turn based strategy game, is utter shit.

:gasp:

 

[J_C]

Budget for the the minimal funding amount with a timeline. Vision document with concrete features in the basic game. List of used technologies readily available to the developer and to be purchased with the acquired money. Number of employees involved in the basic project and the sum of their salaries spread over time. Additionally for every stretch goal how it will factor in the timeline and how much money it will take.

Ok, some of this is understandable, some of it is not. Let me break it down:

Budget for the the minimal funding amount with a timeline.

Ok, maybe a company can make this availlable for the public. The thing is, companies don't do that. Financial informations are among the biggest secrets of a company. Do you really think that they will make in available for everyone in the world? These are even protected by NDAs, which are signed by the developers. Obsidian won't put it on the internet. If you will be a shareholder of the company, you can take a look at their books, but a KS donator is not a shareholder.

Vision document with concrete features in the basic game.

I can agree with this. Do you think that the features mentioned on the obsidian updates are enough, or do you need more? There might be one problem: the basic game sometimes is such a barebone product, that it might scare people off. If somebody sees that Obsidian will make a very simple RPG with a few areas and NPCs for 1.1 million, they might not pledge. "Whoa, I won't pay for such a shitty little RPG, I want a new Baldur's Gate!" They don't think about the possibility that the devs will make a much bigger game, if they get 2-3 million. I'm not saying that everybody is like that, but there are people who are.

List of used technologies readily available to the developer and to be purchased with the acquired money.

Understandable, they could do that. Of course 99% of the people won't even know what are these stuff and why do they need it, but hey, everything for transparency.

Number of employees involved in the basic project and the sum of their salaries spread over time.

Totally unknown quantity even for the Obsidian guys. Fluctuates during the development, as the guys over at Obsidian already told us. Depends of the money made on KS and the work that is needed at a given moment. The best they could do is a rough estimate. Also, salaires are never public at ANY given company.

Additionally for every stretch goal how it will factor in the timeline and how much money it will take

You just CAN'T quantify a strech goal. You can't tell that putting a player house in the game is 45.123 dollars. It will depend on how much money they will get at the end, how many people they could devote to the team. If they have more money, more people will work on the project, and they will make that player house sooner.

There is a lot of stuff in game development, which is not easy to quantify, and even if it is, it is not available for the public. And I don't see why should they release financial data for the public. Which company does that? NOT A SINGLE ONE. A car manufacturer company making its plans available for the investors is not the same as Obsidian telling every fucking people in the world that how much their project exactly cost and how much money do they pay for their employees.

No bro. It's you who keeps saying that our *faith* in the project without any real evidence or facts to back it up is good enough reason to believe it will succeed. You are incurable optimist who has yet to know how real projects work, and how they fail.

You must be confusing me with J_C.

Project Eternity may or may not succeed. If it does succeed, additional Kickstarted projects will appear and they will also grant backers no oversight. If it doesn't succeed, it might kill the "Kickstarter" revolution. In either case, the result will not be oversight for backers. You either will, or will not have Kickstarted games with no oversight.

I'm not saying that our "faith" is enough for it to succeed. I'm not sure if it succeeds. I'm just saying that it is unrealistic to ask exact details, business information from a company, which might be still in pre-production. Also, the data asked is not publicly available.

 

[Mastermind]

I'm playing on Hard. Fighter. Long sword. It was challenging for about a level (when I was level 2). Then it's gotten uneventfully easy. Unlike, say, Diablo 2 where I can use different attacks, all I do is left click and sometimes I hold the LMB for that extra attack I unlocked. Since the game is easy, I don't use block. Since the game is easy, I'm not looking forward to level ups, new powers, new items, etc.

...

They've tried to make it contextual (same button, different attacks based on how you play - charge, dodge, block, but they've failed because in the end you just left-click through everything, occasionally dodging and hitting R. In comparison, D2 is a lot more engaging and offers a lot more builds/things to do in combat. Even God of War offers a lot more, so unless I'm really playing it wrong, I don't really see why people praise combat that much. You click on things and they die. Yay?

"Left clicking through everything" will get you killed so I largely suspect you either barely played the game or are lying your ass off.

The combat is enjoyable because it runs smoothly and killing shit is satisfying, which is the main reason why I play action games (though I could do without the retarded fate button tapping). Doom 2 is fun to play for the same reasons even if it was a pretty easy game. Some D2 builds had more things to do in combat. Others had next to nothing, but they were still fun to play because the gameplay is satisfying. It's very hard in D2 to accidentally click on the wrong thing and run in the middle of combat or stop and attack something you didn't mean to, so even when you don't have a lot of options D2 still holds its own. KoA is good for the same reason. I'm starting to understand why AoD combat is so boring though, you have no clue what makes combat fun to play. Fallout's combat was fun because of the atmosphere created by the game along with its ridiculous death animations. Cracking open a mole was just as fun the 50th time as it was the first time, even if all you were doing was "left clicking through everything".

Any game where you can just left-click on shit until it dies is a poorly designed game. That's the gospel's truth, sea.

Jedi Outcast/Academy combat largely revolved around left clicking (since blocking was automatic) and the combat was great and even tactical at points.

Give a knife to a master and he'll carve you a masterpiece. Give the same knife to Vault Dweller and you get teleported in the middle of a wood mill and gang raped by lumberjacks.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"Left clicking through everything" will get you killed so I largely suspect you either barely played the game or are lying your ass off.

The number #1 complaint about the game was that the game was too easy, even on Hard. Even developers admitted that they erred on the side of, uh, caution, yet for you, Mastermind, the game was hard and challenging. Why am I not surprised?

 

[Mastermind]

"Left clicking through everything" will get you killed so I largely suspect you either barely played the game or are lying your ass off.

The number #1 complaint about the game was that the game was too easy, even on Hard. Even developers admitted that they erred on the side of, uh, caution, yet for you, Mastermind, the game was hard and challenging. Why am I not surprised?

I never said it was "hard and challenging". The game is broken. Not Morrowind or M&M7 brokeon, more like Fallout broken but broken nevertheless. I disputed that you can "left click through everything". I can understand why you can't really see the difference though. You also thought teleporting ranged characters into melee range was a good idea, so your grasp on reality isn't exactly solid.

 

[Mrowak]

Budget for the the minimal funding amount with a timeline. Vision document with concrete features in the basic game. List of used technologies readily available to the developer and to be purchased with the acquired money. Number of employees involved in the basic project and the sum of their salaries spread over time. Additionally for every stretch goal how it will factor in the timeline and how much money it will take.

Ok, some of this is understandable, some of it is not. Let me break it down:

Budget for the the minimal funding amount with a timeline.

Ok, maybe a company can make this availlable for the public. The thing is, companies don't do that. Financial informations are among the biggest secrets of a company. Do you really think that they will make in available for everyone in the world? These are even protected by NDAs, which are signed by the developers. Obsidian won't put it on the internet. If you will be a shareholder of the company, you can take a look at their books, but a KS donator is not a shareholder.

I do not demand the breakdown of Obsidian's *own* finances, their stocks or information about the pay for each and every of their worker. What I want to know is the *estimates* for *the project* *I* am about to support. This will prove me that they think ahead of the time, and do not come to the table empty-handed. It will also save a lot of work for them, later on.

Vision document with concrete features in the basic game.

I can agree with this. Do you think that the features mentioned on the obsidian updates are enough, or do you need more? There might be one problem: the basic game sometimes is such a barebone product, that it might scare people off. If somebody sees that Obsidian will make a very simple RPG with a few areas and NPCs for 1.1 million, they might not pledge. "Whoa, I won't pay for such a shitty little RPG, I want a new Baldur's Gate!" They don't think about the possibility that the devs will make a much bigger game, if they get 2-3 million. I'm not saying that everybody is like that, but there are people who are.

I need to see the actual vision document. The thing they usually present for their investors - even if only to see that they actually have a complete vision of what they are trying to get. Some random features taken out of context for marketing reasons do not satisfy me. I do not say they shouldn't launch a marketing campaign simulatneaously. I am saying that it would be awesome that the marketing could be grounded in facts, and not random namedropping and dreaming. Ok, sp you are telling me this is going to be second BG2. Now show exactly the core values and tenets from BG2 that are going to be implemented in your game. It's that simple.

If they fail to produce a document like that... I don't know - it shows that they did not care? Were lazy? Do not really know what made BG2 an iconic title?

And I don't accept the argument *people don't care*. They will start to care when it turns out the game does not match their expectations.

List of used technologies readily available to the developer and to be purchased with the acquired money.

Understandable, they could do that. Of course 99% of the people won't even know what are these stuff and why do they need it, but hey, everything for transparency.

Gled we see eye to eye.

Number of employees involved in the basic project and the sum of their salaries spread over time.

Totally unknown quantity even for the Obsidian guys.

No, I don't believe it. So you start a project without even knowing what teams you are going to need any how many people for each one? So how the fuck did you calculate that $1.1 milion will be enough money to make IE-like game in 18 months? Are you amateurs?

Fluctuates during the development, as the guys over at Obsidian already told us. Depends of the money made on KS and the work that is needed at a given moment. The best they could do is a rough estimate.

For every stage of development they should have an exact number of employees involved in doing the given process with maybe space for +/- 2 posts in case of crisis. And if they employ people purely on need basis, because "hey, we thought we needed 2 people, but it turns out we need 6" then I think I know where the problems with their games stem from (bad human resource management).

Also, salaires are never public at ANY given company.

But the crowdfunding has not been used for large commercial projects before so maybe they *should* make the data public. Again I am not talking about salaris for concrete people but for particular teams. They even don't have to be called salaries but expenditure (which encompases pay, cost of used technologies, cost of meterials and tools etc.)

Additionally for every stretch goal how it will factor in the timeline and how much money it will take

You just CAN'T quantify a strech goal. You can't tell that putting a player house in the game is 45.123 dollars. It will depend on how much money they will get at the end, how many people they could devote to the team. If they have more money, more people will work on the project, and they will make that player house sooner. There is a lot of stuff in game development, which is not easy to quantify, and even if it is, it is not available for the public.

But you can. After all they did quantify that having the stronghold will cost $3 millions, another city $3.5 million and having Zeist in the team $2.8 million (as nonsensic as it sounds)... What? Are you saying that's just marketing? Well, if so then how do they know making 2 big quality cities, a stronghold, 11 classes, tactical combat, all graphical and sound assets and so on will cost them $3.5 millions when they cannot quantify that? Don't you see any lapse of logic here? They can quantify whole project but they cannot quantify its segments? Hmm... someone didn't do his homework then, I guess (didn't prepare of Kickstarter).

And I don't see why should they release financial data for the public. Which company does that? NOT A SINGLE ONE.

Not true. Organisations which turn for the public for founding do provide their financial data openly. Obsidian asked people for money. So the people should have right to at least see how it is going to be spent. What worked before when they were funded as publishers cannot work now.

A car manufacturer company making its plans available for the investors is not the same as Obsidian telling every fucking people in the world that how much their project exactly cost and how much money do they pay for their employees.

But a car manufacturer who asks people for money will (or at least ought to - US is the country of total paradoxes for me).

 

[Dhralei]

Isn't all of this demanding of financial information taking things a bit too far? So you donated? Cool. However what makes you think you're entitled to more than a thank you, the rewards that you get for your tier and a forum post down the line detailing how much of the budget they're spending on what parts of the game like DFA did?

All in all I consider kickstarter to be like donating to charity. I don't go and demand WWF or Unicef give me details on how exactly they're spending the money I gave them so why should I treat Obsidian any differently? Worst case scenario they blow the money and don't deliver anything or deliver something badly done, that's the risk you take by donating. If you don't want to take on that risk, don't donate.

 

[J_C]

But you can. After all they did quantify that having the stronghold will cost $3 millions, another city $3.5 million and having Zeist in the team $2.8 million (as nonsensic as it sounds)... What? Are you saying that's just marketing? Well, if so then how do they know making 2 big quality cities, a stronghold, 11 classes, tactical combat, all graphical and sound assets and so on will cost them $3.5 millions when they cannot quantify that? Don't you see any lapse of logic here? They can quantify whole project but they cannot quantify its segments? Hmm... someone didn't do his homework then, I guess (didn't prepare of Kickstarter).

Nonono. I'm 100% sure that Josh said that these numbers don't represent the actual money needed for these extra stuff. These are only there for marketing purposes, to present a goal to the people. I think when you make the budget of a game, you don't break it down to features (at least not this detailed). You don't say that 10 quests costs 50K and 1 stronghold costs 200K. They will know that for 3,5 million they can have about a dozen people on the project for 1,5 years, and they promise that they will make 2 cities. And this promise drives the donators to pledge more money.

And I don't see why should they release financial data for the public. Which company does that? NOT A SINGLE ONE.

Not true. Organisations which turn for the public for founding do provide their financial data openly. Obsidian asked people for money. So the people should have right to at least see how it is going to be spent. What worked before when they were funded as publishers cannot work now.

Oh, OK, I didn't know that.

 

[l3loodAngel]

All of this kind of shit is just white noise that distracts from the actual important issues related to kickstarter and the development of the game. Fuck.

Instead of worrying about how well a project manager can/cannot play Icewind Dale 2, why aren't we questioning what Obsidian will do if they reach 3.25 million but not 3.5 million? Will there be a medium tier city added in place of the 3.5 million stretch goal?

I doubt that, because the stretch goals gave nothing to do with any plan. They are set at certain positions for marketing reasons only. That's why I have a sneaking suspicion that $3.5 million goal for a motherfucking huge city was set so high to boost the campaign, without actually a chance of achieving it (The quality of the cities is also a problem, because, e.g. Neverwinter from NWN2 is rather poorly done).

But that's an unfair statement, because all Bio cities were poor past BG2. Main city DAO or some cities in Kotor anyone?

Anyways if they would do something even remotely close to Underdark in BG2 I would be happy.

 

[l3loodAngel]

1. Obsidian and nXile have a responsibility to their backers (ie. us) not only to produce a final product which meets the expectations they created, 2. but to stick as closely to that vision as possible.

1. You are going to be disappointed. Nothing lives up to the expectations of people, because people are not rational, they do not calculate the budget, the creation time, the size of the team and etc. Give my BG2 for $3 million NOW!

2. I don't give a shit if they will have to change something for a good reason.

 

[Mrowak]

All of this kind of shit is just white noise that distracts from the actual important issues related to kickstarter and the development of the game. Fuck.

Instead of worrying about how well a project manager can/cannot play Icewind Dale 2, why aren't we questioning what Obsidian will do if they reach 3.25 million but not 3.5 million? Will there be a medium tier city added in place of the 3.5 million stretch goal?

I doubt that, because the stretch goals gave nothing to do with any plan. They are set at certain positions for marketing reasons only. That's why I have a sneaking suspicion that $3.5 million goal for a motherfucking huge city was set so high to boost the campaign, without actually a chance of achieving it (The quality of the cities is also a problem, because, e.g. Neverwinter from NWN2 is rather poorly done).

But that's an unfair statement, because all Bio cities were poor past BG2. Main city DAO or some cities in Kotor anyone?

Anyways if they would do something even remotely close to Underdark in BG2 I would be happy.

Neither I, nor thousands of others care. The vague goal was to make the game large in scope like BG2, Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale rolled into one. Athkatla and Sigil are the very minimum player's are going to expect. Them being vague will work against them. We really don't even know if they realise what makes those huge cities so memorable.

1. Obsidian and nXile have a responsibility to their backers (ie. us) not only to produce a final product which meets the expectations they created, 2. but to stick as closely to that vision as possible.

1. You are going to be disappointed. Nothing lives up to the expectations of people, because people are not rational, they do not calculate the budget, the creation time, the size of the team and etc. Give my BG2 for $3 million NOW!

Than how about being transparent so that people can know what to expect?

2. I don't give a shit if they will have to change something for a good reason.

And what if the good reason is: "Oh shit! We miscalculated and we don't have enough money to work on combat system for 4 extra months. Guess we'd better release a broken mess." That does sound like a good reason to me... but good for whom?

 

[l3loodAngel]

Neither I, nor thousands of others care. The vague goal was to make the game large in scope like BG2, Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale rolled into one. Athkatla and Sigil are the very minimum player's are going to expect. Them being vague will work against them. We really don't even know if they realise what makes those huge cities so memorable.

Those are 3 IE games, but they differ from each other significantly. Athkatla was much bigger in scope than Sigil, but you really can't compare them due to the quality and writing. Can they produce the city size of Sigil, but with content from Athkatla. Most likely.

1. Obsidian and nXile have a responsibility to their backers (ie. us) not only to produce a final product which meets the expectations they created, 2. but to stick as closely to that vision as possible.

1. You are going to be disappointed. Nothing lives up to the expectations of people, because people are not rational, they do not calculate the budget, the creation time, the size of the team and etc. Give my BG2 for $3 million NOW!

Than how about being transparent so that people can know what to expect?

You know if they would have told to me from beginning that they want to make steampunk RPG with elves and dwarfs I would have probably said fuck you. Now I have donated $ 70 bucks for the project and they have expanded it, to suit my tastes better.

2. I don't give a shit if they will have to change something for a good reason.

And what if the good reason is: "Oh shit! We miscalculated and we don't have enough money to work on combat system for 4 extra months. Guess we'd better release a broken mess." That does sound like a good reason to me... but good for whom?

If you don't have any control over the project don't even bother knowing. What you want is that they would give information in the form of the news, that you can only obeserve but not interact with. Well the plane cashed and all the passengers died. Happy now?

 

[Mrowak]

But you can. After all they did quantify that having the stronghold will cost $3 millions, another city $3.5 million and having Zeist in the team $2.8 million (as nonsensic as it sounds)... What? Are you saying that's just marketing? Well, if so then how do they know making 2 big quality cities, a stronghold, 11 classes, tactical combat, all graphical and sound assets and so on will cost them $3.5 millions when they cannot quantify that? Don't you see any lapse of logic here? They can quantify whole project but they cannot quantify its segments? Hmm... someone didn't do his homework then, I guess (didn't prepare of Kickstarter).

Nonono. I'm 100% sure that Josh said that these numbers don't represent the actual money needed for these extra stuff. These are only there for marketing purposes, to present a goal to the people. I think when you make the budget of a game, you don't break it down to features (at least not this detailed). You don't say that 10 quests costs 50K and 1 stronghold costs 200K. They will know that for 3,5 million they can have about a dozen people on the project for 1,5 years, and they promise that they will make 2 cities. And this promise drives the donators to pledge more money.

So you repeated my words: it's just marketing. I do know what they are presenting me with. The thing is I shouldn't be presented with just these.

J_C, just think about it for a moment. When you start a campaign of this magnitude it's going to pay to know exactly the scope of the work you are getting into. To estimate that the team responsible for quests has like 1 month for area A and 3 weeks for area B - the amount doesn't have to matter. They will have to do it either way, so it's better it's done sooner than later. Why is it so important? Because you have finite amount of resources available to your *and there won't be more*. And yes you do break down features of any project - because otherwise you can't plan and can't track what your people are doing.

Also a nice treat for you. This is one of things I think we should have gotten from the start:

http://www.rpgwatch.com/files/Files/00-0208/Torment_Vision_Statement_1997.pdf

 

[Mrowak]

Neither I, nor thousands of others care. The vague goal was to make the game large in scope like BG2, Planescape: Torment and Icewind Dale rolled into one. Athkatla and Sigil are the very minimum player's are going to expect. Them being vague will work against them. We really don't even know if they realise what makes those huge cities so memorable.

Those are 3 IE games, but they differ from each other significantly. Athkatla was much bigger in scope than Sigil, but you really can't compare them due to the quality and writing. Can they produce the city size of Sigil, but with content from Athkatla. Most likely.

I do not care. They were not clear. It's their fault if they make the cities worse than in original games.

You know if they would have told to me from beginning that they want to make steampunk RPG with elves and dwarfs I would have probably said fuck you. Now I have donated $ 70 bucks for the project and they have expanded it, to suit my tastes better.

So you are basically saying that if they provided you with the full info from the start you'd pledge the money on it at the beginnig, instead of the middle of the campaign. Fantastic!

I do not rule out marketing in the campaign. But I'd prefer facts instead of wishful thinking.

2. I don't give a shit if they will have to change something for a good reason.

And what if the good reason is: "Oh shit! We miscalculated and we don't have enough money to work on combat system for 4 extra months. Guess we'd better release a broken mess." That does sound like a good reason to me... but good for whom?

If you don't have any control over the project don't even bother knowing. What you want is that they would give information in the form of the news, that you can only obeserve but not interact with. Well the plane cashed and all the passengers died. Happy now?

No. The point I am trying to make is that there should have been measures there that would prove to us this won't happen. Budget outline would be nice to have, for one thing.

 

[J_C]

But you can. After all they did quantify that having the stronghold will cost $3 millions, another city $3.5 million and having Zeist in the team $2.8 million (as nonsensic as it sounds)... What? Are you saying that's just marketing? Well, if so then how do they know making 2 big quality cities, a stronghold, 11 classes, tactical combat, all graphical and sound assets and so on will cost them $3.5 millions when they cannot quantify that? Don't you see any lapse of logic here? They can quantify whole project but they cannot quantify its segments? Hmm... someone didn't do his homework then, I guess (didn't prepare of Kickstarter).

Nonono. I'm 100% sure that Josh said that these numbers don't represent the actual money needed for these extra stuff. These are only there for marketing purposes, to present a goal to the people. I think when you make the budget of a game, you don't break it down to features (at least not this detailed). You don't say that 10 quests costs 50K and 1 stronghold costs 200K. They will know that for 3,5 million they can have about a dozen people on the project for 1,5 years, and they promise that they will make 2 cities. And this promise drives the donators to pledge more money.

So you repeated my words: it's just marketing. I do know what they are presenting me with. The thing is I shouldn't be presented with just these.

J_C, just think about it for a moment. When you start a campaign of this magnitude it's going to pay to know exactly the scope of the work you are getting into. To estimate that the team responsible for quests has like 1 month for area A and 3 weeks for area B - the amount doesn't have to matter. They will have to do it either way, so it's better it's done sooner than later. Why is it so important? Because you have finite amount of resources available to your *and there won't be more*. And yes you do break down features of any project - because otherwise you can't plan and can't track what your people are doing.

Also a nice treat for you. This is one of things I think we should have gotten from the start:

http://www.rpgwatch.com/files/Files/00-0208/Torment_Vision_Statement_1997.pdf

I'm not saying that what you ask is wrong. Actually it would be nice to see those infos about the project. I say that it is not easily done, these numbers, features are all subject to change even during the Kickstarter phase. Also it would be impossible to confirm if the devs are telling the truth. What if they give you a nice vision statement, the number of employees, their salaries etc, then they change it a few weeks later? Of course you won't know about this because they won't tell you. We can't just go there and look into their books.

 

[Mrowak]

I'm not saying that what you ask is wrong. Actually it would be nice to see those infos about the project. I say that it is not easily done, these numbers, features are all subject to change even during the Kickstarter phase. Also it would be impossible to confirm if the devs are telling the truth. What if they give you a nice vision statement, the number of employees, their salaries etc, then they change it a few weeks later? Of course you won't know about this because they won't tell you. We can't just go there and look into their books.

Bro, this is something they *have to* present to a publisher. You'd think that with such risky campaigns as Kickstarter they would treat their audience with greater respect, and provide even more info, considering how they hate the publishers.

The vibe I am getting here is: "let's turn to people for funding because they won't ask inconvenient questions (like 'what exactly are you going to do with my bloody money')?"

 

[ironyuri]

Fucking quote pyramids mang.

 

[J_C]

Bro, this is something they *have to* present to a publisher. You'd think that with such risky campaigns as Kickstarter they would treat their audience with greater respect, and provide even more info, considering how they hate the publishers.

That's not entirely similar. When they go to a publisher, they say "i want to make a game with x-y-z features, give me money". While at KS, they say "we have a base concept, give us money to make it. if you give x ammount we do feature a, if you give y ammount, we do a+b, if you give z ammount, we do a+b+c+"

The vibe I am getting here is: "let's turn to people for funding because they won't ask inconvenient questions (like 'what exactly are you going to do with my bloody money')?"

I don't know why do you think that devs are "evil". I may be a little optimistic, but I think they ask money because they can make a niche game with it. Which they couldn't do without KS.