Monty
Arcane
Perhaps the 'publishing shit' is the publishers saying 'we want multiplayer implemented by launch to increase the size of the target market'.
-
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.
Codex Preview RPG Codex Report: Expeditions: Conquistador, Logic Artists and Kickstarter
- Thread starter Grunker
- Start date
It's funny...
(assuming that the game is good) Had they released the SP campaign for all Kickstarter backers two weeks ago, nobody could reasonably complain about anything else they did - because they would've delivered exactly what they promised, and on time (quite an achievement)!
After that, if one week later they released a patch that (among other things) also added a multiplayer mode - great! I mean, not everybody will care about multiplayer (I certainly don't), but the overwhelming reaction would've been something like "Wow, not only have they delivered what they promised on Kickstarter, but they're able to deliver bonus stuff on top of that in such a short time - they must be super-productive, perhaps we should send them to help out Cleve". And the average opinion of them would've only increased...
And if two weeks afterwards (i.e. today) they announced that they have secured a publisher deal that'll enable them to bring the game to even more people who haven't backed, people could only be happy for them - they did good things, and now they're closer to success in making it an actual running business etc. Good for them.
So if they spent a month or two getting their game ready for Steam or whatever after fulfilling Kickstarter pledges, it would've been a heart-warming story of indie success.
Instead... Well, I don't get it. What does their publisher deal have to do with Kickstarter backers? We're getting a copy of the game anyway, what do we care how they sell it to non-backers? (Well, I'm assuming the backer copy will be DRM-free, that could be the issue...) But still, I don't get it. Does the publisher deal require the game to be Publisher X exclusive? That doesn't make sense, because that kind of info should've been known much earlier, and would cause quite a different kind of backlash. And the only situation in which releasing the game to Kickstarter backers would negatively impact later sales is if the majority of backers finds the game shitty and spreads the word about it. And I believe the game is good and can expect a good reaction... So, to repeat: I don't get it.
Why exactly do Kickstarter backers have to wait for them to make publisher-mandated changes? I only know that it projects a "Well, you gave us money already so it doesn't matter if you have to wait for no reason or benefit to you whatsoever, we now only care about selling the game to other people" vibe. I'm not saying that's necessarily the case, nor am I saying they should not think about selling the game and turning it into a healthy business - of course they should. After fulfilling the damn Kickstarter pledges.
(assuming that the game is good) Had they released the SP campaign for all Kickstarter backers two weeks ago, nobody could reasonably complain about anything else they did - because they would've delivered exactly what they promised, and on time (quite an achievement)!
After that, if one week later they released a patch that (among other things) also added a multiplayer mode - great! I mean, not everybody will care about multiplayer (I certainly don't), but the overwhelming reaction would've been something like "Wow, not only have they delivered what they promised on Kickstarter, but they're able to deliver bonus stuff on top of that in such a short time - they must be super-productive, perhaps we should send them to help out Cleve". And the average opinion of them would've only increased...
And if two weeks afterwards (i.e. today) they announced that they have secured a publisher deal that'll enable them to bring the game to even more people who haven't backed, people could only be happy for them - they did good things, and now they're closer to success in making it an actual running business etc. Good for them.
So if they spent a month or two getting their game ready for Steam or whatever after fulfilling Kickstarter pledges, it would've been a heart-warming story of indie success.
Instead... Well, I don't get it. What does their publisher deal have to do with Kickstarter backers? We're getting a copy of the game anyway, what do we care how they sell it to non-backers? (Well, I'm assuming the backer copy will be DRM-free, that could be the issue...) But still, I don't get it. Does the publisher deal require the game to be Publisher X exclusive? That doesn't make sense, because that kind of info should've been known much earlier, and would cause quite a different kind of backlash. And the only situation in which releasing the game to Kickstarter backers would negatively impact later sales is if the majority of backers finds the game shitty and spreads the word about it. And I believe the game is good and can expect a good reaction... So, to repeat: I don't get it.
Why exactly do Kickstarter backers have to wait for them to make publisher-mandated changes? I only know that it projects a "Well, you gave us money already so it doesn't matter if you have to wait for no reason or benefit to you whatsoever, we now only care about selling the game to other people" vibe. I'm not saying that's necessarily the case, nor am I saying they should not think about selling the game and turning it into a healthy business - of course they should. After fulfilling the damn Kickstarter pledges.
I asked exactly this on their forums but they didn't answer. Everything that they did this month and the previous was pretty suspicious and ridiculously mishandled. But it seems that questioning Kickstarter projects from indie studios that shit all over their Kickstarter backers, is verboten here.Instead... Well, I don't get it. What does their publisher deal have to do with Kickstarter backers? We're getting a copy of the game anyway, what do we care how they sell it to non-backers? (Well, I'm assuming the backer copy will be DRM-free, that could be the issue...) But still, I don't get it. Does the publisher deal require the game to be Publisher X exclusive? That doesn't make sense, because that kind of info should've been known much earlier, and would cause quite a different kind of backlash. And the only situation in which releasing the game to Kickstarter backers would negatively impact later sales is if the majority of backers finds the game shitty and spreads the word about it. And I believe the game is good and can expect a good reaction... So, to repeat: I don't get it.
Why exactly do Kickstarter backers have to wait for them to make publisher-mandated changes? I only know that it projects a "Well, you gave us money already so it doesn't matter if you have to wait for no reason or benefit to you whatsoever, we now only care about selling the game to other people" vibe. I'm not saying that's necessarily the case, nor am I saying they should not think about selling the game and turning it into a healthy business - of course they should. After fulfilling the damn Kickstarter pledges.
And then when Grunker makes the interview, the liars assured that the game was ready to be delivered, then four days latter, after the MP and the shady publisher debacle, they post that the game isn't ready and needs more polishing.
Go to the forums and read the devs posts. The clowns are still working on the MP. It's like they don't give a fuck anymore about this.
almondblight
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2004
- Messages
- 2,625
You do realize it would have been a month late by February, right? I don't really care much about a delay of a couple of months, but I wonder why people seem to think one month delay = on time, two month delay = late.
Other than that, I agree with your post.
Yeah, I don't understand this. They could have just released that version to all backers, called it the game, and then told them they were going to release an updated version with multiplayer when they decided to start selling the game. They have everything they need to do that, it would make the backers happy ("Oh, released on time! And I can play it before everybody else! And they're releasing a free multiplayer update too!"), fulfill their pledges, and maybe generate some prerelease buzz. Odd.
Mortmal
Arcane
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2009
- Messages
- 9,496
It could also be they are not allowed to distribute their game to early backers, before its on sale on steam, legal agreement and stuf. Even if they could its a bad idea to give it one month earlier, as the game would be on torrents one month before the sale.
Yeah, pretty much this. The problem is that we were never told about this agreement either during the KS campaign, or in the subsequent months. They just came on day practically saying: "LoL, we won't release teh gaem". And then it was quietly removed from Greenlight.
They just got shafted by Kalypso, and in turn they shafted the backers.
I have access to beta but still prefer to play finished game not to mention I have no interest to do unpaved work for them.
and If they will try to screw me will demo their snowfag asses.
and If they will try to screw me will demo their snowfag asses.
Tigranes
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,350
Not willing to write them off as dishonest yet. When you think everything is set, then someone comes in with a new and grand offer to break your previous expectations, and you have to make an on the spot decision, it's easy for things to become a bit messed up and out of hand. I'd like to judge them by the state of their game, and whether in the end this kerfuffle fucked with the quality of their game... and, of course, just how this publisher stuff pans out in the end. E.g. if they end up delaying to May or longer that's clearly bad, and I'm also curious to know what the final shape of this publisher-'boosted' release will be.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 6,704
RTWP!
Overboard
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 719
Luckily I only lost 15 bucks on this. Scandinavian fucks.
shitComposer as the publisher? Expeditions : Conquistadors: Back in Action is cumming!
shitComposer as the publisher? Expeditions : Conquistadors: Back in Action is cumming!
I still can't believe that there are fucks, even here, that are still defending these pubic lice! From the moment they did their "hey one of the guys played multi with me and it was great so we decided to stop working on the SP game in order to implement this!" anyone sane would realise that something was going on. That they couldn't tell the truth then spoke volumes. Not even an apology that they garnered 77,000 on false pretenses with their "SP all the way" snake oil.
DeepOcean
Arcane
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2012
- Messages
- 7,404
The whole point of Kickstarter wasn't that developers wanted freedom from publishers and needed funding from potential fans? And, now they are taking orders from a publisher that wouldn't give two shits for them before the kickstarter. If the delay was for a good reason, okay, but multiplayer isn't a good reason. I don't remember they saying on the kickstarter that they desperately wanted to add multiplayer to the point of delaying the game. If they come with funny things like: "We thought alot and totally for our own decision and having nothing to do with the publisher that forced us to make a multiplayer mode, decided to make the game RTwP, this mode works best with our systems" someone should hire a bald eastern european assassin to kill them, with explicit orders to cause maximum pain. I know that developing games can be hard from a financial point of view, but those guys have the trust of thousands of people and betray that for money is something that the worst kind of the scum is capable. I could be overreacting and the game could be awesome in the end and this MP adding don't affect the game, but I don't trust humanity and JA Back in Action still causes me rage.
What irked me and made me regret pledging the few pesos I gave them, was when they downplayed the Kickstarter money and people, cynically saying that "well, we couldn't have made the game with that money". And when you go to the forums and the comments section on the KS, these brainless morons parrot the same shit about how the game is going to be awesome because the delay.
Is not about the fucking game retarts!, is LogicArts acting like assholes and outright lying left and right. The worst apologist was this fucker that spams both the LA forums and the KS updates. A Darklord moron with an avatar of those dogs that look like Sandra Oh.
Is not about the fucking game retarts!, is LogicArts acting like assholes and outright lying left and right. The worst apologist was this fucker that spams both the LA forums and the KS updates. A Darklord moron with an avatar of those dogs that look like Sandra Oh.
Modron
Arcane
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 11,099
I am thinking that is mm/dd/yy, would at least expect a press release/news post/retarded thread where people post how much they lament pledging by now.
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.