Community Fargo and Co to party like it's 1988 + New 30$ tier

[General Maxson]

C'mon guys don't be such assholes. Every penny you give, or get someone else to give goes straight to make the game better, they will only profit if they sell the game afterwards. Any we haven't had a good rpg for such a long time. I don't like ingame shit for backers too, but that won't stop me to help fund what could be the greatest next thing since Fallout 1 and 2. Look at all the other kickstarter projects and find one that caters to Codex hivemind and that will in the future cater to US like Fargo and MCA do! I dare you! So don't be so retarded, you won't get any game like this for a long time. There may be other good projects and games, but this one is OURS made by OUR Bro's.

 

[Dexter]

A) It's not a big deal. It's completely superfluous.
B) It's how crowdfunding has and always will work. You don't have to like it, but if you want something otherwise unattainable...don't act surprised.

A) It's up to anyone to make up their mind if it's a "big deal" or not, you don't have a monopoly on that.
B) Can you please, reasonably explain how this is how "crowdfunding has and will always work" instead of just saying it is like that?
From the games offered so far, aside from Shadowrun and Wasteland I haven't seen a single one offer "Exclusive Ingame Content", Double Fine didn't do it, Banner Saga, Faster than Light and Larry don't do it etc. That Starlight project changed their stance after backlash: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/732317316/starlight-inceptiontm/posts/203313 and people don't exactly seem to be too happy over Shadowrun doing it...
I also must've dreamt up Wasteland 2 getting up to 2.5 Million before this was even announced, or did everyone just back it because of that "unique and quirky skill"?
It's pretty simple, offer any kind of physical or in-game reward etc. as long as you don't split up your game into different versions for different people (no matter how small or large) everyone will be happy, it's not such an abstract concept is it?

Again, I won't go apeshit over this and do something retarded like cancel my pledge for the Collectors etc., but allow me to be pissed about it plx xD

 

[Burning Bridges]

Why is he different then from any other greedy marketing publisher? Trying to talk to his fans like sheep and milk them as much as he can?
I was under the impresion this guy was an gentlman who wanted to make the game for caring fans. I guess i was wrong then eh.
This move is just showing great disrespect towards his fans at last rational ones.

Brian already said that he does not want money for himself. If you want to believe him is up to you.

Personally, I think what he said was actually, that he does not need money for himself. Brian sounds like a guy who can afford to act as CEO and creative director for free, make Wasteland 2 and similar games until his retirement, as long as the needed capital is giving to him. He also knows the sale of the games may return a nice profit, which he will not need to share with any publisher. I also understand that Chris is payed for his part, but appears to be on fire for this kind of work.

The fact that they want to increase the funding capital should really not be criticized. There are many other, sensible reasons besides personal greed to want as much money as possible for the project. For example to be able to spend more for it in terms of people and resources.

If you are really so concerned about people being just greedy I don't see how you could invest in kickstarters at all. The two ideas of a) giving a person money for implementing a plan you really like, and b) thinking he is just greedy and after your money, are not compatible. Or in other words, give only money to kickstarters if you are 100% certain they are not just after the money.

After weeks of kickstarter discussion I think I can bring this to the point now. With kickstarter you are hiring the person Brian Fargo for making a computer game that you want. If you don't trust him 100%, you should not pledge. Personally I am quite sure this was the right project to invest into, because of the person Brian Fargo. I would be more concerned if this was some unknown poorfag who quit his job.

 

[Burning Bridges]

C'mon guys don't be such assholes. Every penny you give, or get someone else to give goes straight to make the game better, they will only profit if they sell the game afterwards. Any we haven't had a good rpg for such a long time. I don't like ingame shit for backers too, but that won't stop me to help fund what could be the greatest next thing since Fallout 1 and 2. Look at all the other kickstarter projects and find one that caters to Codex hivemind and that will in the future cater to US like Fargo and MCA do! I dare you! So don't be so retarded, you won't get any game like this for a long time. There may be other good projects and games, but this one is OURS made by OUR Bro's.

Good, that is the short version of what I just said

 

[Haba]

A girl enters the office of a music producer and tells him "I want to become a pop artist".

The producer says "I like your style and I'd love to hear your album. I'll produce you, but you have to suck my dick first".

So the girl sucks his dick.

The girl goes to a record label mogul and says "I have a producer, I want you to record my album".

"I like your style and I'd love to hear your album. We'll do your record, but I'll fuck you up the ass first" replies the mogul.

So the girl lets him fuck her up the ass.

A year later, the girl has become a pop artist and her new album is now on sale. As a special promotion event, the girl herself is signing records at the store.

A codexian walks to the store and starts complaining. "I bought your album for $15 but I didn't get a blowjob and buttfuck! What kind of bullshit is this? I am a paying customer, I demand equal treatment!" he screams, frothing at mouth.

 

[Infinitron]

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

B) Can you please, reasonably explain how this is how "crowdfunding has and will always work" instead of just saying it is like that?

It's been explained through and through by myself and others throughout countless threads all across the great plains of the internet and more specifically here and at inXile. If you don't get it by now it is your problem, not mine. I've wasted enough time explaining it to people too proud to be angry and cynical to react any other way. But Maxson said it pretty succinctly above you: "Every penny you give, or get someone else to give goes straight to make the game better, they will only profit if they sell the game afterwards" and Zeronet, who registered just to point out something so painfully obvious it must have hurt him not to: "InXile is a developer who wants to attract funds for development costs, the more money Wasteland 2 accures for it's development budget. Which let's InXile hire more developers to make a bigger, better game." Kickstarter is not like DLC. It is not like asking for money like publishers do in order to rape your wallet with frivolous nonsense.

We are like investors here. We're pledging money to get this thing rolling. To make this happen. The "rewards" are called "rewards" and not "pre-orders" for a reason. It's like a pre-order in that what you're usually rewarded is tied to what you're helping to fund, but that's just it: If you're not interested in helping fund the creation of something, you shouldn't be participating in the crowdfunding to begin with.

Crowdfunding 101: You want to make something but don't have the cash. You appeal to interested parties. You offer appealing rewards for the investment. You make more elaborate tiers for more generous pledges. You obtain as much money in the time you are allotted so that your final product can be the best it can possibly be. You make the best product you can make. People are satisfied with having helped fund your product. Your reputation is now solid. You are clear and free in the public eye to do this again.

 

[FeelTheRads]

From the games offered so far, aside from Shadowrun and Wasteland I haven't seen a single one offer "Exclusive Ingame Content", Double Fine didn't do it, Banner Saga, Faster than Light and Larry don't do it etc. That Starlight project changed their stance after backlash: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/732317316/starlight-inceptiontm/posts/203313 and people don't exactly seem to be too happy over Shadowrun doing it...
I also must've dreamt up Wasteland 2 getting up to 2.5 Million before this was even announced, or did everyone just back it because of that "unique and quirky skill"?

That's a lie. It just won't work without it. Everybody is suddenly an expert in funding and they know how things are done.

but allow me to be pissed about it plx xD

No, you can't be. Because. That's why.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Crowdfunding 101: You want to make something but don't have the cash. You appeal to interested parties. You offer appealing rewards for the investment. You make more elaborate tiers for more generous pledges. You obtain as much money in the time you are allotted so that your final product can be the best it can possibly be. You make the best product you can make. People are satisfied with having helped fund your product. Your reputation is now solid. You are clear and free in the public eye to do this again.

K, plz new overnight crowdfunding expert. You're still not explaining how you CAN'T do it without exclusive in-game content.
There are plenty of rewards offered which are not in-game content and apparently you can fund it only on that. Giving in-game content most likely brings more, but the question remains if it's worth it.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Overnight? Well, I've successfully used it to fund one of my own projects but if the "snark" helps you feel better about your posts, go for it.

How he can't? He already did. He's trying to entice people to give more. Hey, maybe some of these little superfluous things are interesting to you? Maybe you want that bonus item? If so, here's a tier where you can get it. And he went to lengths to ask the fans what they'd prefer for their tiers. FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. Where were you throughout all of that, eh? When your whinging like an arsehole could have actually made some difference? And I don't know about you guys, but if I've got a Kickstarter project I'm going to listen to the people pledging me money, not bitter Codextards too cynical to get involved.

 

[FeelTheRads]

How he can't? He already did.

Jesus, do you even know what you're talking? You keep yapping about how you can't do it without in-game exclusives, then someone points out that it was done without such things and asks you to explain why do you keep saying it can't be done, and your answer is: LOL HE ALREADY DID IT.

 

[Dexter]

Crowdfunding 101: You want to make something but don't have the cash. You appeal to interested parties. You offer appealing rewards for the investment. You make more elaborate tiers for more generous pledges. You obtain as much money in the time you are allotted so that your final product can be the best it can possibly be. You make the best product you can make. People are satisfied with having helped fund your product. Your reputation is now solid. You are clear and free in the public eye to do this again.

So your explanation basically boils down to "he can do anything to get more money", you know I heard "social" games and cover-based third person shooters attract a lot of investors and can get more money than this quickly...

Leaving that aside, if you look at the general reaction the Shadowrun game got over this sort of practice, both on their YouTube video e.g. top rated comments and in general from the backers of the project, who would have no other reason to be against that other than morality/ethics involved with that business practice because they get the content anyway since they're already backing including many people getting outright pissed or even withdrawing their pledge, maybe... just maybe this isn't the best way to increase the funding and "appeal to interested parties" regardless of what you believe and there might be other levels to this you don't seem to be considering?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns/posts/207508

 

[Infinitron]

The real WTF is that the Codex is getting all worked up because of some BMPs in a portraits directory, but nobody except hoopy gave a fuck about an ingame skill.

 

[Brother None]

Leaving that aside, if you look at the general reaction the Shadowrun game got over this sort of practice

Shadowrun proposed including backers-only areas, missions, actual gameplay impacting stuff. WL2 proposed something close to it on a smaller scale, saw the backlash, pulled it (the item and skill) and replaced with a quirky, funny skill, rather than something that would impact balance or the gameplay experience.

I can't equate the two. Gameplay and cosmetic extras are fundamentally different. In fact, when discussing the tier upgrade with Fargo he specifically stressed this is "just another cosmetic", being very wary of making the same mistake Shadowrun did. And he didn't, he upset a few highly principle people (and I admire the absoluteness with which you stick to your principles), but I'm only seeing a handful (albeit very loud) ones. That may sound like I want to dismiss your opinion, but please know that I don't, I just feel it's not a very big deal, and it seems "most" agree.

K, plz new overnight crowdfunding expert.

I would think Twinkie is one of the few people here who has successfully run a crowdfunding drive himself.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Jesus, do you even know what you're talking?

Well, Jesus, yes. Yes I do.

You keep yapping about how you can't do it without in-game exclusives, then someone points out that it was done without such things and asks you to explain why do you keep saying it can't be done, and your answer is: LOL HE ALREADY DID IT.

Oh, cool. You completely missed my point. Where have I said "This can't be done without in-game content"? What I meant by "He already did" was "He already funded the game without advertising any extra in-game content which matters and now he's asking fans what bonuses for higher tiers they'd like to see in order to be swayed into upping their pledge". I don't really give a fucking rat's arse about whether you idiots think in-game content is fair, is appropriate or whether he could or couldn't have done it without it. I'm saying:

1 - It's not a big deal. It's superfluous bullshit.
2 - Crowdfunding does not equal DLC.
3 - He is going to cater first and foremost to the people pledging money. This makes sense.

Those are the only things I've been seriously discussing.

 

[Temaperacl]

I think you are beginning to split hairs.
For me calling this pre-ordering, donation, or investment leads nowhere.

I agree - definately with the "investor" part (Although with a broader definition, I would argue that most of us, especially the people who are putting money in to "support this type of game" are seed investors for this type of game.). However, my response was in reaction to someone claiming that we were not investors and these were not pre-orders so the behaviour was not comparable. My intent was to take the strictest definition of an investor that I know and show that at least a subset of the population was investors based on that definition, even if you look purely at directly calculateable value. In other words, that we could indeed use those as a basis for argument against exclusive content.

I would rather say with kickstarter the backers pay for a job performance. That is, we backers give you 2.5 million $, and you make a new Wasteland game by Oct. 2013 (at the earliest). Kickstarter is like giving money to a painter for a portrait. Now matter how it turns out, you must pay for it. You can't get money back if he did not make the mistake of serious misconduct.

Sure - I think this is a fair way to look at it. To be honest, though, I don't care how people look at putting the money in - I still don't view the cutting of content for certain classes of people as a good thing anyhow - I oppose the segregation or tiering of the game regardless of if the exclusive content is a "thank you", an "incentive", or whatever.

I don't oppose attempting to increase the funding. Certainly, I have an instinctive gut reaction against additional efforts specifically to increase the target funding it after passing the initial requirement, but there is fundamentally nothing wrong with that - as people have said, that is just going to make the game better and supporting the type of game I am expecting (and hoping) this will be. I can't speak for anyone else, but what I (personally) am primarily opposing from the exclusive content is the sort of division of the game that I mentioned earlier (The fact that there are now 3 versions of the game for any platform).

 

[Johannes]

Crowdfunding 101: You want to make something but don't have the cash. You appeal to interested parties. You offer appealing rewards for the investment. You make more elaborate tiers for more generous pledges. You obtain as much money in the time you are allotted so that your final product can be the best it can possibly be. You make the best product you can make, except you exclude a few portraits from the majority of your backers. People are satisfied with having helped fund your product. Your reputation is now solid. You are clear and free in the public eye to do this again.

 

[CappenVarra]

Well, this thread at least provides a handy list of people I can taunt with my super-exclusive BMP files. Look upon my pixels, ye whiny, and despair...

 

[Pegultagol]

Brilliant. About how many portraits would the vanilla have, does anyone know? The double the pool of portraits would seem more significant depending on the original number; the higher it is, less the impact it would possibly have. People who have made pledges so as to make Wasteland 2 a reality might envision a game that will be developed to expend every last single cent (barring the 5% of the Kickstarter resolve and of course kickback to kickstarter for hosting) donated to make the best product there can be. In that vein, I understand to some with absolute viewpoint of what ideal development process can be inspired from such model, creating possibly different tiers of the game would negatively influence the pure process of designing such a product when it should be all about the genesis of one single product made possible by all who participated. For me, I could be considered as one of those being thankful that they stopped at mere portraits and didn't go further down the slope. The question still remains what exact version would await those who participated in the Codex drive but were too poor to donate to the Kickstarter equivalent.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

except you exclude a few portraits from the majority of your backers.

Codex Reactions 101: Get butthurt about anything even if it doesn't actually affect you in any real way.

Codex. Codex never changes.

 

[Azalin]

Codex. Codex never changes.

No it doesn't

 

[Nattvardsvin]

The real WTF is that the Codex is getting all worked up because of some BMPs in a portraits directory, but nobody except hoopy gave a fuck about an ingame skill.

I give a fuck about the in-game skill.
It's fucking gay.

 

[Jaesun]

The real WTF is that the Codex is getting all worked up because of some BMPs in a portraits directory, but nobody except hoopy gave a fuck about an ingame skill.

The only person that is upset is some 2011 shitposter (seriously, go to his profile and read his posting activity). One lines, no discussions, just shit post. It's not the codex that is complaning, just shitposters and alts....

THEMOREYOUKNOW.JPG

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Codex is infested with arselickers.

= laughed at.

Little did bioware know all they had to do to get you girls frothing was promise a few portraits. Shitty shadowrun has exclusive missions, next it'll be exclusive characters.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Get 'dem frogs outta 'dem icecubes and you have yourself a real party'swhat I'm sayin, oh lord yes. Edgy comments about Bioware. OoOoOoOo!

 

[Havoc]

Changing the topic. If somebody will be watching the party (for me it's 4AM), record that shit!