Video Games: Excuse me Sir, the machine ate my quarter

[Fez]

These are all crap reasons... As you have said, they have made money on the game and have proven that there is a return on investment. They can very easily go out and get capital from standard means if they absolutely need it. They are not doing so, they are banking on the sentimentality of the fans and are getting money for free. 

 

My response is to tell them loudly that this is not cool, or acceptable in any way, 

 

I completely agree with you.

 

Its one reason why I hope Fig works out. Its crowd-funding, but only for video games. And, unlike Kickstarter, donations of more than a certain amount aren't donations, they're investments entitling you to a percentage of the profits.

 

Its not a perfect model. You need to meet the SEC definition of a certified investor, which requires a certain amount of net wealth or income, as well as be giving at least $1,000, to make an investment instead a donation like Kickstarter. Also, what you are getting is a stake in a LLC that will receive all profits from the sale of the game. You aren't getting a stake in the developer's company, or in the IP itself. So its not the safest investment, and there's still the potential for abuse by developers. Still, its miles better than Kickstarter, and if it works out maybe we'll see more and better such models.

[Liffguard]

These are all crap reasons... As you have said, they have made money on the game and have proven that there is a return on investment. They can very easily go out and get capital from standard means if they absolutely need it. They are not doing so, they are banking on the sentimentality of the fans and are getting money for free. 
 
My response is to tell them loudly that this is not cool, or acceptable in any way, 

Why? Nobody is forced to contribute. So long as the developer is honest and up-front about where the money is going then crowdfunding seems like a perfectly valid source of funds.

[Sci-2]

It's because Larian Studios isn't a big studio by a long shot and, while they did make a lot of money on the game, they cannot spend all of it on a new game because they have other costs they need to pay and going on Kickstarter means they can make a better game with more money and also shameless marketing.

 

I like it because it's an opportunity to get the product for a cheaper price.

 

There are Kickstarters I'm against, where they are offering little in return for your contribution. Here you can get product, and it's essentially a preorder with a bit more risk.

 

I mean if people want to contribute hundreds to thousands of dollars that's fine, personally I just like the discounted product with a few potentially interesting add ons.

[Red Tiger]

Only a few more days

[Werthead]

It's the "Kickstarter as pre-order" argument again, although it's also one that has more weight to it: with game #2, or #3 or whatever, the developer has already proven they can deliver and are far less likely to go bust or not deliver on the product. In that case, some may be able to justify the use of Kickstarter as an elaborate pre-order scheme.

 

It's definitely a more questionable stance, however. Given that the game was fully funded in under 24 hours (with 34 days to go) it's clearly not a huge problem for thousands of people, however.

 

Meanwhile, first Satellite Reign review and second. Both pretty solid. I'll get this tomorrow.

[Mark Antony]

I've been playing the hell out of it. They made all the changes I could've asked for. Execution all the way  :thumbsup:
.

The gnasher is a little wonky at super close range but yeah I've been playing the shit out of it as well

[MerenthaClone]

Anyone play Pillars of Eternity with and without the expansion? Apparently the expansion makes a variety of improvements to the original, including the AI.

 

I've got the [original] PoE but haven't played it, and I'm wonder if I should just get the expansion? If anyone has any input I'd appreciate it -thanks!

Pretty sure all of those improvements are baked into the most recent patch and not the expansion itself.  I've got it, but haven't played it yet.  

[Sci-2]

Pretty sure all of those improvements are baked into the most recent patch and not the expansion itself.  I've got it, but haven't played it yet.  

 

Ah thanks for that. I might still get the expansion but my primary motivation was the improved AI so will double check. Much appreciated.

 

It's the "Kickstarter as pre-order" argument again, although it's also one that has more weight to it: with game #2, or #3 or whatever, the developer has already proven they can deliver and are far less likely to go bust or not deliver on the product. In that case, some may be able to justify the use of Kickstarter as an elaborate pre-order scheme.

 

It's definitely a more questionable stance, however. Given that the game was fully funded in under 24 hours (with 34 days to go) it's clearly not a huge problem for thousands of people, however.

 

Meanwhile, first Satellite Reign review and second. Both pretty solid. I'll get this tomorrow.

 

Well, I said preorder w/ risk. The question is am I willing to pay $20-60 for a potentially non-existent product in order to get a game that might not exist otherwise? And the answer, for me, would be yes in certain cases.

 

In the case of the sequel, yeah I'm fine with them returning to Kickstarter. I get that theoretically I could share in the profits but my contributions are so minimal it's not worth the effort.

 

Edit: Yup, you were right, Patch 2.0 is all that's necessary. Thanks for the heads up!

[l2 0 5 5]

The gnasher is a little wonky at super close range but yeah I've been playing the shit out of it as well

Yeah I've had some issues with that as well. I noticed that enemy players are somewhat laminated at long range. Not a fan of that.

[Werthead]

40 minutes of Sword Coast Legends. Looking good so far.

[Altherion]

I just noticed this, and frankly it is a little offensive. Divinity: Original Sin was into a heavy profit days after its release and has made this company a lot of money. Why are they online asking for a startup for a sequel? 

To be perfectly frank, as most of you know, I am against kickstarter to begin with. I don't feel it is fair to ask people for investment money without sharing profits if that investment is successful. We have had that argument here before, and I don't really care to revisit it. 

I just don't see any justification at all to finance a second game this way when the first one is obviously a money maker. 

I don't think they are doing this for the money. The $500K that they asked for is not enough to make a game of this caliber (i.e. they're certainly using the profits from the previous game to make this one) and since buying on Kickstarter is cheaper than the retail version, they're probably not making much of a total profit. There are a couple of reasons why they would do this. First, it's free publicity -- we wouldn't be talking about it here yet if it was quietly being developed. Second, it gives them a dedicated audience to participate in the alpha and beta and provide feedback. Also, keep in mind that a lot of people actually asked them to do a Kickstarter -- not only does one get the game at a discount, but the Kickstarter process is a form of entertainment in and of itself.

 

Incidentally, I'm currently playing Shadowrun: Hong Kong which is another sequel that got a partial contribution from Kickstarter (they asked for $100K and got $1.2M). It's very good; I think they keep getting better with every installment. It's a rare RPG where the combat is almost (though not quite) optional and there is a bunch of ways to accomplish any given task.

[Howdyphillip]

I don't think they are doing this for the money. The $500K that they asked for is not enough to make a game of this caliber (i.e. they're certainly using the profits from the previous game to make this one) and since buying on Kickstarter is cheaper than the retail version, they're probably not making much of a total profit. There are a couple of reasons why they would do this. First, it's free publicity -- we wouldn't be talking about it here yet if it was quietly being developed. Second, it gives them a dedicated audience to participate in the alpha and beta and provide feedback. Also, keep in mind that a lot of people actually asked them to do a Kickstarter -- not only does one get the game at a discount, but the Kickstarter process is a form of entertainment in and of itself.

 

Incidentally, I'm currently playing Shadowrun: Hong Kong which is another sequel that got a partial contribution from Kickstarter (they asked for $100K and got $1.2M). It's very good; I think they keep getting better with every installment. It's a rare RPG where the combat is almost (though not quite) optional and there is a bunch of ways to accomplish any given task.

I do not care what the reasons are that they are cyberbegging for money that they do not need. The fact that they are getting free money for an established money making product is over the top ridiculous to me. Again, I am not a fan of crowdfunding to begin with, but the strongest argument for it is that products that would otherwise be unavailable can become so. I personally don't believe this. Anything that will get crowdfunding can gain money by investments, but there is a solid argument against my reasoning. There is nothing rational about funding a financially successful business.  

[Altherion]

I do not care what the reasons are that they are cyberbegging for money that they do not need. The fact that they are getting free money for an established money making product is over the top ridiculous to me. Again, I am not a fan of crowdfunding to begin with, but the strongest argument for it is that products that would otherwise be unavailable can become so. I personally don't believe this. Anything that will get crowdfunding can gain money by investments, but there is a solid argument against my reasoning. There is nothing rational about funding a financially successful business.  

I don't understand why you are thinking of what they do as "cyberbegging" or what they get as "free money" -- that's not how Kickstarter works. Kickstarter backers don't get a share of the profits, but they do get one or more copies of the game and whatever other stuff is included in their order. Basically, they are selling a game that will cost around $40 when released for only about $25 with the catch that you have to but it more than a year before its release. Given that anybody who is willing to pre-order the game so early in the development process would almost certainly have bought it anyway later on, they are not making a significant profit on this transaction.

[Howdyphillip]

I don't understand why you are thinking of what they do as "cyberbegging" or what they get as "free money" -- that's not how Kickstarter works. Kickstarter backers don't get a share of the profits, but they do get one or more copies of the game and whatever other stuff is included in their order. Basically, they are selling a game that will cost around $40 when released for only about $25 with the catch that you have to but it more than a year before its release. Given that anybody who is willing to pre-order the game so early in the development process would almost certainly have bought it anyway later on, they are not making a significant profit on this transaction.

You really do not understand Kickstarter... You are not guaranteed a copy of the game. You are guaranteed a copy of the game if it goes to market which means that you are taking a financial risk. Whether the risk is small or large makes no difference. People who place their money in risks generally get a share of profit. 

[MerenthaClone]

You really do not understand Kickstarter... You are not guaranteed a copy of the game. You are guaranteed a copy of the game if it goes to market which means that you are taking a financial risk. Whether the risk is small or large makes no difference. People who place their money in risks generally get a share of profit.

In this case, a product for often less than it retails for.  Most backer rewards include a copy of the game, usually available if you back at a tier that costs less than retail cost.  At those tiers, kickstarter is effectively no different from early-access games.  

 

e:  Also, "people who place their money in risks generally ..."  is ridiculously vague.  "Generally".  Okay, sure, they generally do.  They don't in this case.  Yay!  Nothing you said requires them to get a share!  Because that's how words work.  

 

 

I do not care what the reasons are that they are cyberbegging for money that they do not need. The fact that they are getting free money for an established money making product is over the top ridiculous to me. Again, I am not a fan of crowdfunding to begin with, but the strongest argument for it is that products that would otherwise be unavailable can become so. I personally don't believe this. Anything that will get crowdfunding can gain money by investments, but there is a solid argument against my reasoning. There is nothing rational about funding a financially successful business.  

SR;HK was explicit in the goals of their kickstarter.  They said they would produce HK, but if their kickstarter was backed, they'd have the time and money to do various things.  In essence, their entire kickstarter was for improvements to HK that they didn't think they would be able to do without that extra money.  They made money from Dragonfall, yes, enough to keep working on HK, but not enough to do what they wanted with it.  Hence, the kickstarter.  

[Relic]

You really do not understand Kickstarter... 

 

Irony =P

 

Look, you don't like kickstarter. Thankfully, plenty of people do, and we've been able to get games like FTL, Shadowrun, Wasteland, and so on. Some of the better games ive played in a long time. I personally love the concept of kickstarter and am, quite frankly, tired of this topic getting rehashed every two months. Please start a kickstarter thread and take these conversations there. Everytime you feel like ranting about KS, just go there. PLEASE. 

[Howdyphillip]

In this case, a product for often less than it retails for.  Most backer rewards include a copy of the game, usually available if you back at a tier that costs less than retail cost.  At those tiers, kickstarter is effectively no different from early-access games.  

 

e:  Also, "people who place their money in risks generally ..."  is ridiculously vague.  "Generally".  Okay, sure, they generally do.  They don't in this case.  Yay!  Nothing you said requires them to get a share!  Because that's how words work.  

 

 

But you aren't getting the game at less than cost. This is a fallacy. You are not guaranteed a game at all, because at the time of your investment, no game exists. 

 

If you don't mind investing in something without a return, then fine, but don't come here and try to tell me that you are buying something, because words actually do mean something...

[Howdyphillip]

 

Irony =P

 

Look, you don't like kickstarter. Thankfully, plenty of people do, and we've been able to get games like FTL, Shadowrun, Wasteland, and so on. Some of the better games ive played in a long time. I personally love the concept of kickstarter and am, quite frankly, tired of this topic getting rehashed every two months. Please start a kickstarter thread and take these conversations there. Everytime you feel like ranting about KS, just go there. PLEASE. 

Look, While I don't like kickstarter to begin with, this is a subject that I haven't brought up at all and I think is worthy of discussion. The new Divinity game is being crowd-sourced when there is already a financially successful model establishing it. This is another level of the conversation.

 

[Relic]

Look, While I don't like kickstarter to begin with, this is a subject that I haven't brought up at all and I think is worthy of discussion. The new Divinity game is being crowd-sourced when there is already a financially successful model establishing it. This is another level of the conversation.

 

 

 

Is that a "no"? Cuz, no offense, but you aren't saying anything new.

[Altherion]

You really do not understand Kickstarter... You are not guaranteed a copy of the game. You are guaranteed a copy of the game if it goes to market which means that you are taking a financial risk. Whether the risk is small or large makes no difference. People who place their money in risks generally get a share of profit. 

No, I understand that I'm taking a risk. There are various returns on risk -- sometimes you get a share of the profit, sometimes (as in gambling) you get a fixed amount that is greater than what you put in. In this case, if I lose, I lose my $25, but if I win, I get something I would have paid $40 for so I've effectively won $15. Since the probability of Larian Studios finishing the game is almost certainly greater than 5/8, it's a pretty reasonable bet.

 

By the way, none of that addresses the question of why you think what they get is "free money".