Interview Vault Dweller interviewed about Kickstarter, calls Shadowrun Returns an "awful fucking iPhone game"

[Grunker]

Pretty much. BG3 was supposed to be 3D, Dragon Age style.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Can't help but wonder what would have happened had Feargus asked for 4 mil. Can't help but wonder why 10 mil isn't enough to make BG3 but 4 mil is more than enough to make PE.

Cuz they wanted to make an AAA BG3 cuz back then they thought a retro RPG wouldn't sell. We've been over this.

By 'we've been over this' you mean that you've offered your interpretation of the events?

They way Feargus tells the story, he was offered to make BG3 but he asked for too much. He said that it can't be 10 mil, it has to be 20-25, which fucking implies - unless you can't read - that a reasonable budget was on the table, but Feargus decided to push it, got ok eventually, but then Atari had the buyer's remorse and reconsidered. Now, I'm not saying that a 10mil Atari-sponsored BG3 would have been better than a 4 mil PE. I'm just wondering about them numbers and what's enough and what isn't.

And yes, we all understand why he wanted 20-25 mil, but let's not look at what he wanted but at what Atari was comfortable with.

 

[Infinitron]

that a reasonable budget was on the table

"Reasonable" for what? Was it a reasonable budget for the type of game Atari wanted to make? Was Feargus a greedy bastard, or did he avoid the trap of being stuck with a too-low budget for the game he was trying to make and having yet another substandard product staining his company's reputation?

And yes, we all understand why he wanted 20-25 mil, but let's not look at what he wanted but at what Atari was comfortable with.

Again, "what Atari was comfortable with" isn't just a matter of budget but also game genre. Go look up what Dragon Age's budget was because after that game was released in late 2009 that was the type of game Obsidian would be expected to make.

 

[Brother None]

It's not just being 3D, it's large amounts of pre-rendered cutscenes and full voice acting. I don't think Atari would have been interested in funding a major-title RPG at that time that didn't have those kind of AAA production values, which means a budget below $20 million would not have worked. It's just a production values thing, nothing complex, it's a different budget because it's not the same kind of game.

PS: it's also pretty normal for a publisher to propose a budget that is way too low for what kind of product they envision, and going back and forth on that. Feargus knows what he's doing there.

 

[Grunker]

It's not just being 3D, it's large amounts of pre-rendered cutscenes and full voice acting.

Hence "Dragon Age style"

 

[Brother None]

It's not just being 3D, it's large amounts of pre-rendered cutscenes and full voice acting.

Hence "Dragon Age style"

Fair nuff, just clarifying. I dunno if everyone realizes how significant a chunk of the modern videogaming budget comes from VA and cutscenes. Our full budget wouldn't cover one Blizzard cutscene.

 

[Vault Dweller]

that a reasonable budget was on the table

"Reasonable" for what? Was it a reasonable budget for the type of game Atari wanted to make? Was Feargus a greedy bastard, or did he avoid the trap of being stuck with a too-low budget for the game he was trying to make and having yet another substandard product staining his company's reputation?

We don't know. Maybe Atari low-balled him, maybe they offered enough but he saw an opportunity to go for a bigger budget and went for it (perfectly understandable). Your guess is as good as mine....

Again, "what Atari was comfortable with" isn't just a matter of budget but also game genre. Go look up what Dragon Age's budget was because after that game was released in late 2009 that was the type of game Obsidian would be expected to make.

... yet you pass your guess for facts. My point is, they offered him to make BG3. Surely, they had a number in mind. Maybe the number was reasonable, maybe it wasn't. Maybe he could have taken 10 mil, if that's what they offered, and then explained what he can do with this budget and let Atari decide. It seems like instead he went for double the money and lost.

 

[Volourn]

"PS: it's also pretty normal for a publisher to propose a budget that is way too low for what kind of product they envision, and going back and forth on that. Feargus knows what he's doing there."

Not there, apparently, since he didn't get any money to make BG3. And, obviously, he can make a BG type game since that's exactly what NWN2 was (quality aside), and I doubt it cost 20mil+ to make.


R00fles!

 

[Infinitron]

... yet you pass your guess for facts. My point is, they offered him to make BG3. Surely, they had a number in mind. Maybe the number was reasonable, maybe it wasn't. Maybe he could have taken 10 mil, if that's what they offered, and then explained what he can do with this budget and let Atari decide. It seems like instead he went for double the money and lost.

Sounds to me like we're both passing our guesses for facts.

In that case, which of the two guesses sounds more reasonable to you? The guess that is charitable to the heirs of fucking Black Isle, or the guess that's charitable to a crappy bankrupt European publisher that didn't do anything good with the D&D license since 2008?

 

[Brother None]

Not there, apparently, since he didn't get any money to make BG3.

*shrug* Getting money is not always the best option. Sure you can take the money, but what's the point of that if it isn't enough to deliver the outlined product, what happens when you start missing payments for milestones or even incurring milestone penalties? You're working off an assumption that getting a contract is always a win, and missing a contract is always a loss. That's just not how it works. Sometimes no contract is better than a bad contract.

 

[Infinitron]

Not there, apparently, since he didn't get any money to make BG3.

*shrug* Getting money is not always the best option. Sure you can take the money, but what's the point of that if it isn't enough to deliver the outlined product, what happens when you start missing payments for milestones or even incurring milestone penalties? You're working off an assumption that getting a contract is always a win, and missing a contract is always a loss. That's just not how it works.

This is something that somebody who's in hand-to-mouth indie mode might have trouble wrapping his head around. "Refuse money? WHAT???? Why not just take it and see what happens?" (famous last words)

 

[Volourn]

If they offwered him 10mil+, and he didn't take it, he's an idiot. Then again, as much as I like Feargus and the games he'd led on, he's not known for time and money management. His best move post Interplay was sucking BIO docs dicks so they would help him get NWN2 and KOTOR2 contracts. L0LZ

 

[tuluse]

I doubt anyone could take in so much money, without Kickstarter's "patented" psychological manipulation. Stretch goals are about creating artificial crises, to ensure every last dollar is extracted from donors. Without manipulation, Kickstarter just wouldn't work. And the system uses greed against the developers as well. You will never see a developer say, We can stop making promises we have enough money.

For Torment 2 the final stretch goal was just "we'll make the game better". They actually did away with a lot of the things VD criticized kickstarter for, then he criticized them for not using them to get the maximum money possible.

For one inflation is 50% from the 90' to nowadays ,so 4 mil back then are 6-7 today.Second the art costs are way bigger part of the budget now.But you may be right I'm talking out of pure speculation on my part ,but having dived in some business planning in the end cost are four to five times than expected.

Fargo says art costs are cheaper these days, and that the unity store has saved InXile around a million dollars.

 

[Grunker]

If they offwered him 10mil+, and he didn't take it, he's an idiot.

Not if they demanded a game from him that would cost 20.

 

[Vault Dweller]

... the heirs of fucking Black Isle...

TORN rings a bell?

 

[Vault Dweller]

For Torment 2 the final stretch goal was just "we'll make the game better". They actually did away with a lot of the things VD criticized kickstarter for, then he criticized them for not using them to get the maximum money possible.

I criticized them for not showing the art sooner (and more of it), not for not making enough stretch goals and loot bags.

 

[Grunker]

I don't think that's me you're quoting there.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Fixed. My apologies.

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Fargo says art costs are cheaper these days, and that the unity store has saved InXile around a million dollars.

And it shows.Hunted looked like crap.

 

[M0RBUS]

I just want to join in and say that Shadowrun left me pretty disappointed since it has no play at all. I just click a bunch of stuff, and for that I have Plants vs. Zombies, which is challenging, at least.

... the heirs of fucking Black Isle...

TORN rings a bell?

:cries:

 

[cherry blossom]

Pretty much. BG3 was supposed to be 3D, Dragon Age style.

And thank whatever you believe in that it didn't happen. We already got NWN2 and one sucky game with 3D torture camera is enough.

 

[Roguey]

I noticed the post Anthony Davis brofisted.

I don't think VD even has the capacity to write such juvenile crap as Dave writes.

Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck

Not to mention "and run he did".

That's prose. Haven't read any of VD's prose.

 

[Anthony Davis]

There is a lot of interesting discussion going on here in this thread - and for the most part the discussion is diplomatic and constructive.

As for Atari, Feargus, and BG3, the situation is a LOT more complicated. I'm not saying that what people have said is wrong, some of it is common sense (no contract is better than a bad contract, for example). For example, Atari has not had a lot of money for a looooonnnnng time. They squandered their big money in titles like Mark Eko's Getting Up, and some of the failed Matrix games. If my memory serves me correctly, I remember at E3 2003 during the keynote speech given to developers (this is several days before the floor opens during the class sessions) that one of the main individuals involved in the development of Enter the Matrix console game (it was the one starring Jada Pinket Smith and Ghost) cost an astronomical figure to make. They were PROUD of this figure, saying things like, "the new standard in AAA games." I remember thinking how insane this was. I can't remember with certainty what the actual figure was, but I think it was 200 million - which included franchise rights and marketing.

The point I'm getting at, is that while Atari is actually a good publisher to work with, RPGs are not where they were investing their money, however they still wanted these RPGs to be triple A quality.

I've seen the BG3 prototype from Black Isle. The visual target for that game was to look like BG2's painted backgrounds, but to be fully 3D with a fully rotating camera. The prototype looked pretty amazing to me.

Now I do not think *THAT* version of BG3 is the one that Feargus was talking about in the quotes mentioned previously. I think that version went away when the license got bounced around.

The latest time BG3 came up was at Obsidian when Obsidian was asked to pitch BG3, but Atari wanted a game that was of the same caliber (on all production levels) as a Mass Effect or a Dragon Age. Games that cost tens of millions in development costs, not counting advertising. Feargus I think asked for a very fair amount of money to make an RPG in that same ballpark production wise. Atari at that point balked because they quite simply didn't have that kind of money - which we all know now seeing how Atari has been doing financially (filing for protection under chapter 11 bankruptcy in Jan 2013). Personally, I hope Atari makes it and comes back around to publishing DnD games again. I would love to pitch them a Dark Sun game for example.


Regarding KS, my hesitation with KS actually has nothing to do with KS itself or the KS psychology, but more with the developers and companies themselves that use KS. So far, I have invested 250$ into three projects; P:E, WL2, and Double Fine's adventure game. Out all of them, the only one I regret is Double Fine - where I feel I got suckered.

KS itself and as a model seems to work just fine as long as the companies making the promises control scope and deliver. The failure of the companies to do this is not a reflection on KS because this happens all the time with real companies that invest money, the only difference is that now the consumer is shouldering some of the risk instead of some publisher or investment company. In that regard, the SRR kickstarter did what it promised to do.

Regarding SRR, I invested nothing in the KS, but I bought the game and beat it. I easily got my $20 worth on entertainment out of it. I can also see where people were disappointed in the shallow decision trees and the shallow RPG system. To me SRR is a game that looked at it's budget after backer rewards and KS's cut - and then created the best game they could the way they knew how to do, and I think they succeeded in hitting that target. No, it isn't as deep and complex as AoD promises to be, but it had nice art, nice ambiance, nice music, enjoyable combat, and a decent amount of content. Most importantly, it delivered and it maintained scope. Hopefully they made a profit too, which they can the turn around and invest in future modules and expansions.

 

[Infinitron]

 

[tuluse]

Hey Anthony, aren't you breaking Obsidian's no-codex policy