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

[Howdyphillip]

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".

Money this company is getting would otherwise have to be paid back and profits shared if it were not for kickstarter. The very idea of kickstarter was to get ideas and products out that couldn't otherwise be invested in. A successful model proves that this particular idea can get investments. Going back to kickstarter to get money that doesn't have to be paid back is getting investment for free. 

 

Also, once again, you are not buying a game on kickstarter. You are giving an investment to a company so they can make a game. They may, or may not do this, and you may or may not enjoy it. 

[Rhom]

Decided to play a season character with my brother on D3.

Season started last night. While fooling around this morning, got a message that someone was the first in the Americas to unlock boss mode. :stunned: (which I believe means they started from scratch yesterday and then killed a bunch of bosses on Torment X in less than 24 minutes.)

[Shryke]

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.  

 

But they likely do need the money. And the fact that it's a sequel actually means the risk is much less and it's alot more like a pre-order scheme. And one that allows the developers to cut out the middle-man.

 

Like, I think you fundamentally misunderstand the idea of investment. Investing is a way to increase economic efficiency by turning future income into present income where it is needed more. Usually this is accomplished via finding someone else with excess money to loan that money in return for profit. Kickstarting just cuts out that middle man and directly turns future purchases into present income. And even does it in a dynamic way that better matches the price the customer wants to/is able to pay. There's no need to direct income to investors which actually means it's more efficient.

 

The only downside is a lack of risk protection. And while Kickstarter is upfront about that, it's totally valid to say that the people contributing aren't really getting the distinction. However:

1) the risks are much less on a sequel

2) this isn't even the issue you are complaining about anyway

 

Your use of the word "cyberbegging" more implies some sort of strange moral distaste with the idea. Like you attach moral value to making sure the investor class gets it's cut for no reason.

[Howdyphillip]

 

But they likely do need the money. And the fact that it's a sequel actually means the risk is much less and it's alot more like a pre-order scheme. And one that allows the developers to cut out the middle-man.

I'll buy that they need the mone. I can see how my statement is confusing in that regard. I am saying that they do not need the money from crowd-sourcing because they already have a viable and profitable model to attract investors. Investers that they can share in profits with. 

 

I also can see where you are comparing this to a pre-order scheme, but this really isn't close either. A company is only allowed to sell merchandise once they have that merchandise whether it is on or before the release date of that product. With Kickstarter, the product does not exist at all, may never exist, and may not be up to any standard that is acceptable to the investor.  

[Werthead]

Money this company is getting would otherwise have to be paid back and profits shared if it were not for kickstarter. The very idea of kickstarter was to get ideas and products out that couldn't otherwise be invested in. A successful model proves that this particular idea can get investments. Going back to kickstarter to get money that doesn't have to be paid back is getting investment for free. 

 

Also, once again, you are not buying a game on kickstarter. You are giving an investment to a company so they can make a game. They may, or may not do this, and you may or may not enjoy it. 

 

If the company has already created games via Kickstarter, or is an established company, then the chances of them making the next game increase quite a lot. Not quite to 100%, but they are more likely than some guys you've never heard of before.

 

The issue with Kickstarter and video games is that it has allowed the middle-market to come back into existence. This is the market where a game might cost $5-10 million to make and might make maybe $10 million profit. The big publishers have made it abundantly clear they are not even remotely interested in this tier of games any more when 10-15 years ago they ruled the roost. There was a point in the early 2000s when EA was putting out 70-odd games a year, with a few massively profitable games and whole ton of mid-listers. This year I think they're releasing 12 games total, as they've dumped the mid-listers as not being worth their time. Activision and Ubisoft's attitudes are pretty much the same.

 

So it's not really the case that these games would get made without Kickstarter, even after a modest success story like D:OS. Under the traditional model, Larian would get funding for a sequel provided they signed away the IP rights to the publisher, and they'd be crazy to do that. Hence, returning to the Kickstarter well. The alternative, private investment from individual financiers, is incredibly rare in video games (Deliverance: Kingdom Come is being funded that way and there's a lot of interest in seeing how that works).

 

I also can see where you are comparing this to a pre-order scheme, but this really isn't close either. A company is only allowed to sell merchandise once they have that merchandise whether it is on or before the release date of that product. With Kickstarter, the product does not exist at all, may never exist, and may not be up to any standard that is acceptable to the investor.

 

This is true, and people have gotten burned. But there's also a difference in that private investment you're usually putting a hell of a lot more money than $25 into a project. So whilst the risk is there, the consequence of failure is relatively modest (if you're a $1000 backer, that's a different matter).

 

This is why the situation with Star Citizen is interesting. If it fucks up - and it could - there are a lot of people who invested multiple four figure sums into the game and they'll be clawing that money back any way they can.

[Altherion]

Money this company is getting would otherwise have to be paid back and profits shared if it were not for kickstarter. The very idea of kickstarter was to get ideas and products out that couldn't otherwise be invested in. A successful model proves that this particular idea can get investments. Going back to kickstarter to get money that doesn't have to be paid back is getting investment for free.

 
Kickstarter may have begun as a platform for ideas that would not get traditional investors, but right now it also serves a couple of other purposes. One of them is to serve as seed money to prove to investors that the idea has potentials. That is, a project gathers the Kickstarter funds, then woos traditional investors and then possibly sells the whole thing for a lot of money to a massive corporation (see the Oculus Rift for an example). The other is to do what Larian is doing here: to sell copies of the potential product at a lower price in exchange for having the money now rather than later so that one can avoid investors.
 
It's still not free though: copies sold now mean that they won't be sold at a higher price when the game is released. I will agree with you that it is a much better deal than they would get with most investors who want not only a share of the profits, but also a say on the various properties of the product as well as possibly ownership of the intellectual property. As long as the game is actually made, Kickstarter is much better for both the customer (who gets it at a cheaper price) and the company (which retains full control of the creative process and also of profits).
 

Also, once again, you are not buying a game on kickstarter. You are giving an investment to a company so they can make a game. They may, or may not do this, and you may or may not enjoy it.

Sure, but if they do make the game, then I'm guaranteed to get a copy at no extra cost. I'm not giving them any free money except in the case where they completely fail and produce no game. As to not enjoying a game... this is always a risk in any case. My biggest Kickstarter disappointment so far was an RPG called Lords of Xulima. The game was delivered and in fact it had exactly the properties that were advertised, but it made me realize that I've outgrown that kind of game.

[Fez]

Finished my DA:I replay. I was pretty impressed by how different the final act was compared to my first playthrough, even with the same starting world state. It didn't change my opinion of the game, which is overall pretty positive but recognizing that there's a few pretty big flaws (most of which stem from the decision to be so open world). Interestingly, I finished in 51 hours, which is pretty similar to my first playthrough's 48 hours; its interesting because I did a lot more this time around, like actually going to the Hissing Wastes this time (damn that place is too big). I think its probably because in general the fights went a lot faster this time; archers really are OP.

 

And it seems like I picked the perfect time to finish that replay too. The trailer for the 3rd DLC has leaked and it takes place two years post-ending. Looks really story-heavy, and considering all the different possible end-states, this must've taken a lot of work. Apparently Bioware has said this will be the last DLC for the game too, so I guess this'll tie up the story. I'm curious to see if it sets up the next game though, like Shadow Broker+Arrival did for ME3, or if there's enough of a clean break to make that not necessary. Looking forward to it though.

 

So that's coming Sept. 8. Meantime, I was going to get Shadowrun: Hong Kong, but it sounds like there's still a fair amount of bugs. There's already been multiple patches released, but I figure I'll wait a while longer for them to get things right. So I finally went back to Pillars of Eternity. I couldn't remember a damn thing that was going on, so I just started over again. Guess I'll see how this goes.

[Werthead]

Final Fantasy XV will feature a lot of driving. Like, a ton of it. Also, a distinct lack of song variation on the radio.

 

I'm still not sure why Square decided that the next game in their flagship RPG series should be N Sync vs. Monsters (on a Road Trip), but it's certainly an interesting path to take. Not necessarily a very good path, but an interesting one.

 

I was going to get Shadowrun: Hong Kong, but it sounds like there's still a fair amount of bugs

 

Seems okay to me. The only annoying one was a fight next to some elevators which constantly churned out reinforcements, the bad guys could somehow chuck grenades through solid walls. Luckily I had the skill where you can just throw them right back, so it wasn't too much of a problem.

[The Anti-Targ]

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. 

Fig sounds like the way to go, it's specific to video game funding and if you commit above a certain amount you actually have equity in the game and therefore stand to make a return on investment. So at least the risk comes with a potential financial reward.

[The Anti-Targ]

Finished my DA:I replay. I was pretty impressed by how different the final act was compared to my first playthrough, even with the same starting world state. It didn't change my opinion of the game, which is overall pretty positive but recognizing that there's a few pretty big flaws (most of which stem from the decision to be so open world). Interestingly, I finished in 51 hours, which is pretty similar to my first playthrough's 48 hours; its interesting because I did a lot more this time around, like actually going to the Hissing Wastes this time (damn that place is too big). I think its probably because in general the fights went a lot faster this time; archers really are OP.

 

And it seems like I picked the perfect time to finish that replay too. The trailer for the 3rd DLC has leaked and it takes place two years post-ending. Looks really story-heavy, and considering all the different possible end-states, this must've taken a lot of work. Apparently Bioware has said this will be the last DLC for the game too, so I guess this'll tie up the story. I'm curious to see if it sets up the next game though, like Shadow Broker+Arrival did for ME3, or if there's enough of a clean break to make that not necessary. Looking forward to it though.

 

So that's coming Sept. 8. Meantime, I was going to get Shadowrun: Hong Kong, but it sounds like there's still a fair amount of bugs. There's already been multiple patches released, but I figure I'll wait a while longer for them to get things right. So I finally went back to Pillars of Eternity. I couldn't remember a damn thing that was going on, so I just started over again. Guess I'll see how this goes.

I spend far too much time pissing about tweaking armour and weapons. So my 2nd playthrough is at 80hrs already and I only got to skyhold after 70 hrs and haven;t killed a dragon yet. I am playing nightmare difficulty, and so I am using tactical view for fights to micromanage things better and that is a major time sink. I am any future plays will be at Normal difficulty, which should allow for a mucxh fast play through combat and a lot less angsting about getting my armour and weapons exactly right. I just hope the glitch I experienced by selecting nightmare at the start but the game re-setting itself to normal without me realising until about 30 minutes in doesn't prevent triggering the trophy for it. I don;t think I can handle the idea of having to do another nightmare playthrough for the platinum. I want to platinum the game, but I don't think I want to that much.

 

Like the look of the final DLC trailer. So that's an eluvian, is it Morrigan's? Will we see Merrill (please)? That's a desire demon right, and Darkspawn troll? Not Qunari surely. My first playthrough as a Qunari rogue is non-cannonical as I let...someone... die who I will not let die for any other plays through, so I must finish at least one and preferrably 2 more plays through before doing this DLC.

 

Also, yes, with Solas showing up I definitely do have questions.

 

I also need to have a playthrough with different world states from DA:O and DAII. Like No baby for Morrigan, Anorra becomes queen that sort of stuff. Another muck up I did in my first play through was I didn't customise my Hawke's appearance to look close to her appearance in my DAII plays. Don't know whether to swap out for my rogue or mage dude Hawke. Might go mage Hawke when I play as a warrior, and side with the templars for the lulz, though I do prefer the mage choice because of where you go, what you do and what you learn as part of getting the mages on side.

[Fez]

I spend far too much time pissing about tweaking armour and weapons. So my 2nd playthrough is at 80hrs already and I only got to skyhold after 70 hrs and haven;t killed a dragon yet. I am playing nightmare difficulty, and so I am using tactical view for fights to micromanage things better and that is a major time sink. I am any future plays will be at Normal difficulty, which should allow for a mucxh fast play through combat and a lot less angsting about getting my armour and weapons exactly right. I just hope the glitch I experienced by selecting nightmare at the start but the game re-setting itself to normal without me realising until about 30 minutes in doesn't prevent triggering the trophy for it. I don;t think I can handle the idea of having to do another nightmare playthrough for the platinum. I want to platinum the game, but I don't think I want to that much.

 

Like the look of the final DLC trailer. So that's an eluvian, is it Morrigan's? Will we see Merrill (please)? That's a desire demon right, and Darkspawn troll? Not Qunari surely. My first playthrough as a Qunari rogue is non-cannonical as I let...someone... die who I will not let die for any other plays through, so I must finish at least one and preferrably 2 more plays through before doing this DLC.

 

Also, yes, with Solas showing up I definitely do have questions.

 

I also need to have a playthrough with different world states from DA:O and DAII. Like No baby for Morrigan, Anorra becomes queen that sort of stuff. Another muck up I did in my first play through was I didn't customise my Hawke's appearance to look close to her appearance in my DAII plays. Don't know whether to swap out for my rogue or mage dude Hawke. Might go mage Hawke when I play as a warrior, and side with the templars for the lulz, though I do prefer the mage choice because of where you go, what you do and what you learn as part of getting the mages on side.

 

Looks like there's a lot of eluvians, not sure where the Qunari might have gotten them. There's a rumor going around that Sten will show up; apparently he's one of the three current Arishoks (guess Bioware wrote off anyone who killed him in DA:O looking for the urn), so he could be leading the Qunari invasion. It sounds from the trailer like the Inquisitor is in a much darker place than s/he was for all of DA:I; I sure hope the DA team isn't pulling from the ME team too much and decided a 'dark' ending where they die is 'important storytelling.' I am fine with there be multiple endings, and in one of them they die. Although that would complicate DA4, unless its like the end of ME2 and the dark ending is blatantly non-canonical. Or I suppose if DA4 really does end up set somewhere in the north, far removed from Orlais or Fereldan, it would just involve changing a couple throw-away lines of dialog.

 

There's an interview with Mike Laidlaw that goes into more detail about the DLC. I'm liking what I'm hearing...

 

In terms of structure, is it like the Jaws of Hakkon DLC, which gives you another large area to explore freely? Or is it more focused? 

It’s much more narrative in the way it flows. There’s clear goals, clear next steps to take, and it’s much higher in cinematic presentation than Hakkon was. We look at the feedback, and that’s something people have been looking for – something dealing more directly with the followers. We’ve had this cooking for quite a while; it was coming, and we knew this was there. Hakkon was a chance to refine some of what we learned about exploration, and The Descent was an opportunity for us to work more closely with the Austin team to make more of a dungeon crawl. This one is the more narrative heavy of the three.

 

 

A strong narrative focus is always what I want from Bioware, its by far what they're best at.

[Werthead]

On the subject of crowdfunding, a lot of backers are now angry with Star Citizen and the $87 million (!!!) they've donated to it and Polygon has a long discussion with Chris Roberts here about it.

[KiDisaster]

So glad I didn't back that game. The feature creep is legendary. 

 

---

 

I cannot stop playing Diablo. Gearing up my Crusader and powering through Torment 6 rifts now, almost up to level 30 greater rifts. Seem to have hit a bit of a plateau though, I was gearing up really quickly for a while but now I can't find anymore of the drops I really want. Guess that's how it works though. Have 5/6 Roland's set pieces plus a cubed Ring of Royal Grandeur for the full set bonus. I really underestimated how important the attack speed stacks from the 6-piece bonus would be. It's insane. Only problem is how quickly I run out of wrath when I'm fighting a boss or a single elite mob. What I really need to push higher is a level 70 version of that shield I found in my 40s that increases Sweep attack damage based on how many enemies you hit with the previous one. I've upgraded so many rare shields and spent so many blood shards and just can't get it. It's annoying that shield passives count as weapon abilities in the Cube when they're classified as armor pieces by vendors and for crafting. Can't use Flense and that shield in the cube at the same time >.>  I need more Death's Breaths. The Cube demands them. 

 

Really want the Seekers set though so I can go back to spamming hammers.

[Fez]

On the subject of crowdfunding, a lot of backers are now angry with Star Citizen and the $87 million (!!!) they've donated to it and Polygon has a long discussion with Chris Roberts here about it.

So glad I didn't back that game. The feature creep is legendary. 

 

Yeah, seriously. Seems like Roberts should've just cut-off the funding at a certain point; telling everyone "Thanks, but we've got enough money to do what we set out to do. We'll begin accepting pre-orders shortly, but no more development funding will be accepted."

[Howdyphillip]

Certainly if you can collect $87 million through crowdfunding, you can get traditional investments. Reading the article Wert linked almost made me feel bad for Chris Roberts for having to work so hard, but then I realized that he collected $87 million dollars for free.

[Werthead]

$87 million is AAA money without the marketing costs. Probably only Destiny, The Old Republic and GTAV have cost more, maybe the last couple of CoDs. Skyrim cost slightly less, Mass Effect 3 was like half that and The Witcher 3 was about a quarter of that (and I think TW3 figure of $20 million includes marketing and every single penny that went into the game).

 

The concern here is that something like this was always going to happen. Chris Roberts did it on Freelancer even after 18-odd years continuously in the games business, to the point where he had to be prised away from the game and have it released massive late (well over two years past its original release schedule) somewhat lacking in his promises for the game. And that was with Microsoft leaning over his shoulder. A project like this, of a massively larger scope, after a decade away from the gaming business, without any kind of oversight is asking for trouble. I'm also not clear on why they are trying to deliver an iffy FPS section to the game. Unless it's going to be as good as Halo or even something like Crysis, it seems completely pointless and sapping attention away from the core game, which is flying around in spacecraft shooting stuff. They certainly look like they've taken their eye off the ball.

 

I am more hopeful for Squadron 42 than I am for SC itself at this stage, as Erin Roberts seems to be much better at delivering a focused, tight gaming experience. Starlancer was excellent, a much stronger game than Freelancer with a good (if cheesy) storyline. I'm really sorry they never got a chance to make the second and third games in the trilogy.

[Azzanadra]

So Metal Gear Solid V is coming out tomorrow. 

 

As Reggie would say, my body is ready. 

 

I went back a couple pages, I am surprised by a lack of MGSV talk considering it is easily one of the biggest releases this year. 

 

Also I finished The Witcher 3 a month back. As a big fan of the series, I thought it was amazing. My gripes were mainly with the main story, which felt rushed in the second and third act. Not to mention the underdeveloped characters, like the main villain for example had like 15 lines of dialogue, and they were all generic one liners like "You shan't escape me this time".... Also, TW3 does not seem to acknowledge my Iorveth playthrough of TW2. I ditched Roche for Iorveth, yet the latter does not appear in game, while the former talks to me like we are best friends...

[Jace, Extat]

They ignored your Iorveth choice because they decided that nobody wanted to be a tree-hugging hippy. :P

[GameofThronesFTW]

Guys I just started playing Duelyst and it's extremely good. Watch my stream here but I'm still learning. Make sure to follow as I'm not on at the moment.

 

www.twitch.tv/primsterzero

[MerenthaClone]

They ignored your Iorveth choice because they decided that nobody wanted to be a tree-hugging hippy. :P

There's also hints Iorveth and Saskia will be around in the first paid DLC.