Would you pledge to a new Obsidian Kickstarter?

[tyrannosaurus rex]

He created an historical setting in a fantasy world. Good. What he needs is a creative sidekick to decorate it.

 

[AwesomeButton]

If you like a console casual RPG over a mediocre computer RPG like pillars of eternity you don't belong here.

Allow me to enlighten you, PoE is a game made for casuals and journos. With the financial backing of numerous IE games veterans who were plainly cheated.

W3 is a "console first" game, but one with an open world, good writing, and characters whose reasoning and outlook of the world are realistic and make sense in the context of this world. This sums up what they call "mature themes", "moral ambiguity", all the stuff that comes down to and can really just be described as "not-epic-fantasy".

Hilariously, this is exactly what PoE attempts and totally fails at achieving.

If you call a game "casual" because of its popamole combat you can't really make a distinction between Witcher 3 and PoE on that criterion alone. Both games have popamole combat. With the slight difference that Witcher 3 doesn't care about it, in fact it's a selling point, whereas PoE's creative lead swindled backers into believing he is making a "tactical RTwP" game in the spirit of the IE games.

Anyway, I don't think it's fair to compare the two games really, because of the difference in their budgets and dev team size at least.
...
So, if anyone thinks PoE is the second coming of Gorgnardy Jesus, this only paints them as an inexperienced newfag. But who cares about such things anyway. It's funny when people start waving join dates at each other.

EDIT, regarding the poem shit:
Yes, I agree on the principle that if you adapt your work according to the wishes of random weirdos on the internet, who have not backed your game with their money, but simply feel "offended", then you are indeed a hack who doesn't care about his work.

Remember that months of forum wars between backers didn't move Sawyers opinion on Engagement by one iota.

Yet all it took for him to change one of the actually good poems was some random crazy moron on twitter complaining.

Make your own conclusions from that.

 

[Zombra]

Hey look! A mod split the stupid piracy discussion into its own garbage thread!

 

[Somberlain]

text

So, a user called AwesomeButton is defending Twitcher 3 here?

 

[AwesomeButton]

text

So, a user called AwesomeButton is defending Twitcher 3 here?

At least I've played the game, (as well as PoE) and know what I'm talking about.

BTW the forum shortens my name to "AwesomeButt..." when viewing the forum on mobile in Portrait mode.


And to get back at you:

"So, a "console popamole company" from Poland outdoes the geniuses in Obsidian?"

Tell you what, my impressions are coming from a very small portion of the game, but Serpent in the Staglands, made by 2 hobbyists who got kickstarted for a laughable sum, also outdoes said geniuses.

As for Underrail, an indie game made by bloodthirsty savages from the Western Balkans, there is no doubt that it outdoes the geniuses.

Man, could it be that these geniuses might actually seem to suck?

EDIT:
tyrannosaurus rex , I seem to recall three recent cRPGs with demos: Age of Decadence, Underrail, and Serpent in the Staglands...
Hmm.
Maybe developers who:

• have small budgets, i.e. not aiming at a huge market in order to make up for a huge budget;
• know they are making a real old-school cRPG, and not a disguised popamole, therefore
• have nothing to hide from their audience;

are more prone to releasing a free demo of their game?

Oh, and P.S. -- It won't be fair if we don't mention that PoE had a demo of sorts -- the Backer Beta. But wait, that was a demo available only to people who had already paid for the game ( ) , and were paying extra with their volunteering to seek bugs and balance issues.

 

[J_C]

Yeah those autistic let's players are better than a hands on impression and I know exactly where to find my soul mates on the internet that experiences things the same things I do. Technical sides, no way I can tell what my computer will run well and what it won't. No way those requirements ever work, and they don't tell me about FPSs or other possible technical difficulties.

No, demo existed for a reason. But now you have enough No lifes with inheritance money on a consuming frenzy that they aren't released anymore as much as they used to. That was something PC gamers used to pride themselves with over consoles were you always had to rent before Buying.

So you say if there were demos, you would play those and check out if a game is good enough to buy? They play the pirated version as a demo, play the first levels, or first hour, and decide if you want to buy it. But noooo, you pirate it, and don't just play the beginning, but play the whole game. That's a pretty weak excuse.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

No, but it's not really a feeling specific to Obsidian.

I've never backed a big-name Kickstarter and I don't ever intend to...it's a total scam from the backer perspective, running headlong into a classic principal-agent problem.

The backer pays into a vague idea of a game they want, with imagination and hope often overriding cold rationality. They want a clone or iteration of Game X and logic be damned.

On the other end, the acting agent, the developer, has a very different desire. They want to make a lot of money. And that might very well influence how they design and market the game. Since they already have a bunch of hardcore fans captive via pledges, what's to stop them from cutting corners, or "mainstreaming" the game? Why not try and sell to the widest possible audience once you have a war chest of money from a bunch of saps backers?

There's really nothing stopping them. No regulatory entity exists for Kickstarter (to my knowledge) and any disgruntled backers will likely be replaced by legions of new fans ready to back the next campaign, at least in the eyes of a profit-motivated executive.

And what does the backer receive for their faith shown through cash? The game half-off at release, with bonus day 1 DLC for generous folks, and immortality through backer-created content for the true whales (well, until it is deemed NOT OKAY by the great and good folks at tumblr/Kotaku/RPS/Gawker). One is essentially gambling whether or not a game will be good or not, paying a lower price if you "win" and losing money on a poor decision (made with far less information than a typical purchase).
What a total ripoff. If Kickstarter was some sort of crowdsourced equity market, at least one could hedge their bets; watching a game be turned into popamole might at least be good for your wallet, and losing potential returns on a misunderstood gem that bombs probably wouldn't sting too hard for the gaming enthusiast.

And it isn't as if Kickstarted RPGs have ushered in some new golden age. Most of the crop of games have had mixed receptions, at best, over here at Codexia. We have:

-Good For What It Is 2
-Cyberpunk Squad Tactics for Tablets
-The most brilliant game ever, full of wonderful ideas and superb gameplay (of which most of the proponents cannot, for some reason, finish).
-A puzzle tactics game that quickly turned sour in the hastily thrown together sequel.
-An Infinity Engine clone roughly on par with BG1/IWD1 (but don't worry guys, they'll get it all right in the expansion/sequel!).

Not exactly a tidal wave of incline, especially given that there's no telling whether or not traditional publishers and self-funded indies might have done better in a hypothetical Kickstarter-less world. Big publishers are starting to see the value in nostalgia and (faux) hardcore appeal; just look at Enemy Unknown, Dishonored, and the inevitable DMC5 (suck it Tameem). And there's always some zany folks like good ol' Pierre who will bust out surprise hits on the indie scene (when they aren't occupied by writing goofy libertarian tomes, or whatnot).

I wouldn't mind Kickstarter as a platform if it were mostly involved with tightly defined projects with concrete goals (e.g. CreativeCommons-friendly translations/renditions of great works). But when it comes to projects with a lot of ambiguity, like games, it's a joke.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

So you say if there were demos, you would play those and check out if a game is good enough to buy? They play the pirated version as a demo, play the first levels, or first hour, and decide if you want to buy it. But noooo, you pirate it, and don't just play the beginning, but play the whole game. That's a pretty weak excuse.

Yes I used to play Demos a lot, especially back when my income was limited to pocket money and I had to be very picky.

Can't say that I'm not tempted to just play a pirated single player game to the end if the game is stable in it's pirated form. But don't open the floodgates in the first place if you aren't sure you can close them.
The temptation wouldn't be here if instead of torrenting something from the buccaneers hideout I had downloaded the demo and proceed to buy the game if satisfied with the sample.

 

[tuluse]

On the other end, the acting agent, the developer, has a very different desire. They want to make a lot of money. And that might very well influence how they design and market the game. Since they already have a bunch of hardcore fans captive via pledges, what's to stop them from cutting corners, or "mainstreaming" the game? Why not try and sell to the widest possible audience once you have a war chest of money from a bunch of saps backers?

The next game.

 

[Infinitron]

-A puzzle tactics game that quickly turned sour in the hastily thrown together sequel.

Blackguards was not Kickstarter-funded.

 

[AwesomeButton]

No, but it's not really a feeling specific to Obsidian.

I've never backed a big-name Kickstarter and I don't ever intend to...it's a total scam from the backer perspective, running headlong into a classic principal-agent problem.

The backer pays into a vague idea of a game they want, with imagination and hope often overriding cold rationality. They want a clone or iteration of Game X and logic be damned.

On the other end, the acting agent, the developer, has a very different desire. They want to make a lot of money. And that might very well influence how they design and market the game. Since they already have a bunch of hardcore fans captive via pledges, what's to stop them from cutting corners, or "mainstreaming" the game? Why not try and sell to the widest possible audience once you have a war chest of money from a bunch of saps backers?

There's really nothing stopping them. No regulatory entity exists for Kickstarter (to my knowledge) and any disgruntled backers will likely be replaced by legions of new fans ready to back the next campaign, at least in the eyes of a profit-motivated executive.

And what does the backer receive for their faith shown through cash? The game half-off at release, with bonus day 1 DLC for generous folks, and immortality through backer-created content for the true whales (well, until it is deemed NOT OKAY by the great and good folks at tumblr/Kotaku/RPS/Gawker). One is essentially gambling whether or not a game will be good or not, paying a lower price if you "win" and losing money on a poor decision (made with far less information than a typical purchase).
What a total ripoff. If Kickstarter was some sort of crowdsourced equity market, at least one could hedge their bets; watching a game be turned into popamole might at least be good for your wallet, and losing potential returns on a misunderstood gem that bombs probably wouldn't sting too hard for the gaming enthusiast.

And it isn't as if Kickstarted RPGs have ushered in some new golden age. Most of the crop of games have had mixed receptions, at best, over here at Codexia. We have:

-Good For What It Is 2
-Cyberpunk Squad Tactics for Tablets
-The most brilliant game ever, full of wonderful ideas and superb gameplay (of which most of the proponents cannot, for some reason, finish).
-A puzzle tactics game that quickly turned sour in the hastily thrown together sequel.
-An Infinity Engine clone roughly on par with BG1/IWD1 (but don't worry guys, they'll get it all right in the expansion/sequel!).

Not exactly a tidal wave of incline, especially given that there's no telling whether or not traditional publishers and self-funded indies might have done better in a hypothetical Kickstarter-less world. Big publishers are starting to see the value in nostalgia and (faux) hardcore appeal; just look at Enemy Unknown, Dishonored, and the inevitable DMC5 (suck it Tameem). And there's always some zany folks like good ol' Pierre who will bust out surprise hits on the indie scene (when they aren't occupied by writing goofy libertarian tomes, or whatnot).

I wouldn't mind Kickstarter as a platform if it were mostly involved with tightly defined projects with concrete goals (e.g. CreativeCommons-friendly translations/renditions of great works). But when it comes to projects with a lot of ambiguity, like games, it's a joke.

Yes. Read this again because this is a good post.

 

[Kz3r0]

For the first time NO has surpassed the unconditional YES, more people finishing act 2 of PoE or the weekend brought more readers?

 

[Roguey]

Yeah, Sawyer prefers classless systems which I forgot to mention. That still doesn't change the fact that PoE is his baby.

There wouldn't be ability scores either, or a lot of the extra features that were added in stretch goals.

 

[Apexeon]

No.
POE once is enough.

Kickstarter might soon end up looking like a "pre-ordering" system for the "teams that deserve a shot to make mass market games".

Kickstarter (pre-order more of the same) POE 2
Kickstarter (pre-order more of the same) POE 3
Kickstarter (pre-order more of the same) POE 4

 

[Weirdstuffinspace]

It's just waiting till they go under and have to beg bio and beth for janitor work.

 

[Whiran]

I voted that no I would not support another kickstarter by Obsidian.

My reasoning is this: kickstarter is there to assist in the development of an idea to get off the ground and get going. It isn't there to act as a glorified pre-ordering system.

Obsidian got their money to get Path of Exile up and running. Any subsequent games from Obsidian should come from their own funding based on the success (or failure) of their kickstarted project. If they were unable to bank money from the success of Path of Exile then that is on them.

If they want to do pre-orders then, by all means, do so and have at it but to use kickstarter to kickstart something when they should have the base funding in place already seems.... like it goes against the spirit of kickstarter. I realize that is me being idealistic about what I perceive kickstarter should be about but that's what I think.

The use of kickstarter as a sales channel / marketing hype system as opposed to a funding site has, in my view, severely degraded the value of kickstarter as a way to get cool projects going. Combine that with ridiculous funding goals (not necessarily Obsidian here but overall) that are in no way, shape, or form realistic has eroded confidence in funding gaming projects. When a company claims that they need 250k to complete a project when it is clear that they would need well over 5 million there is a problem with the system. If a game's development would cost 5 million then they should ask for 5 million. If it'd cost 250 million then ask for 250 million.

There are many really small development teams that could do a game for 250k but to try and kickstart a project for a fraction of what the development cost will be is disingenuous at best and hurts all future kickstarter projects that could really do it.

Obsidian should build on their successes and move forward on their own two feet. I understood the value of kickstarter to get themselves financially stable to be able to self fund but at this point they should be able to walk alone and move forward. Going back to Kickstarter and treating it like a pre-order sales channel is good for no one in the long term.

 

[naossano]

Whiran >
The cost would be different if the project is from America/Norway/Croatia/Somalia/etc...

 

[Whiran]

Whiran >
The cost would be different if the project is from America/Norway/Croatia/Somalia/etc...

Yes, and?

I think most people understand that development costs change based on a variety of factors. However that doesn't change the fact that many kickstarter projects purposefully ask for a fraction of the total development costs for whatever reasons they have.

If a project would cost 2 million USD to make then ask for 2 million. If it'd cost 1 million to make because it is in Somalia then ask for 1 million. Geographical region does not magically absolve a project from asking for the total amount of funding.

 

[Morality Games]

Going back to Kickstarter and treating it like a pre-order sales channel is good for no one in the long term.

It lets them keep like 90% of the money instead of having to endure a Steam/Publisher split.

 

[Telengard]

On the other end, the acting agent, the developer, has a very different desire. They want to make a lot of money. And that might very well influence how they design and market the game. Since they already have a bunch of hardcore fans captive via pledges, what's to stop them from cutting corners, or "mainstreaming" the game? Why not try and sell to the widest possible audience once you have a war chest of money from a bunch of saps backers?

The next game.

If you please the widest possible audience, then you will naturally have the largest well of saps wallets to dig into for money for the next game. Really, if your goal is money, immediately write off the Codex and any place remotely like it, because they're all so much in the minority, their anger will barely be a blip on the radar if you can please the bulk of your audience. With the additional benefit that it takes way less time to program for the main group, since they actively don't want complex things, so thus your programming costs also go down.

It's win win for your bank account.

 

[tuluse]

If you please the widest possible audience, then you will naturally have the largest well of saps wallets to dig into for money for the next game. Really, if your goal is money, immediately write off the Codex and any place remotely like it, because they're all so much in the minority, their anger will barely be a blip on the radar if you can please the bulk of your audience. With the additional benefit that it takes way less time to program for the main group, since they actively don't want complex things, so thus your programming costs also go down.

It's win win for your bank account.

In a very shallow view of business yes. Appealing the largest possible audience and still making something resembling an RPG means going to head-to-head with AAA juggernauts Bethesda and Bioware.

Making more niche products means being able to cut really expensive things the target audience of the above companies expects (full 3d environments, full voice acting, etc), and appealing to things the niche wants.

It's like Fargo said, he wants to be the HBO/Showtime of video games, not the CBS. Obsidian kind wants to be both. Regardless, the best business sense is not to always go for the largest audience.

 

[Athelas]

It's an interesting thought, but I don't think the flaws of any of the Kickstarter RPG's were caused because of trying to appeal to a wider audience. It would be nonsensical anyway, they don't have the budget to reach that wider audience, even if they wanted to - that's the entire point. And obviously it would poison the well for any future Kickstarters.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

It's an interesting thought, but I don't think the flaws of any of the Kickstarter RPG's were caused because of trying to appeal to a wider audience. It would be nonsensical anyway, they don't have the budget to reach that wider audience, even if they wanted to.

How do you call Sawyer appealing to SA morons that found Mulahey hard?

 

[Athelas]

It's an interesting thought, but I don't think the flaws of any of the Kickstarter RPG's were caused because of trying to appeal to a wider audience. It would be nonsensical anyway, they don't have the budget to reach that wider audience, even if they wanted to.

How do you call Sawyer appealing to SA morons that found Mulahey hard?

The audience of fans who liked the IE RPG's is wider than the Codex. It may include the goons of Something Awful. These games are niche, but they're not niche to the extent of being commercially non-viable.

Incidentally, their Infinity Engine megathread is bigger than ours: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3586742

(And no, I didn't actually pay for access, it's free to view at the moment.)

And at any rate, Sawyer is the guy who actually went ahead and implemented attacks of opportunity in a real-time game. Something tells me this hypothetical popamole audience wasn't exactly clamoring for that.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

IIRC one of the idiots there asked Sawyer for a sticky fighter ability so that enemies don't ran past him and off his mages or something,