• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Double Fine: Broken Age (KS) released in two parts via Steam Early Access Jan/May '14

Minsc

Gold Member
Having watched (almost all of) the latest episode of the documentary, I do have to say the game is looking better than ever. The lighting tech they showed off in the video looks great, and sometimes you forget they also have to build the game for tablets too, so it's funny to hear them talking about going back to PS1 era tricks to get certain effects like reflections to work.

I also feel after finally seeing a significant amount of the boy's locations / back drops in finished state and animated, it feels like it's starting to be a lot more complete. Seeing how large a simple non-main plot conversation with a NPC written out with all it's branching dialog options looks, and then seeing Tim scroll through pages and pages of similar dialog was great too.
 

MrBud360

Member
The game looks beautiful, will be a REAL old school game adventure game, like old times, but with an incredible looks. This game would never been made without the backers. We should be proud. They build a new tech, that could be used in another's adventure games. The only downside is the wait. I'm fine with that, by the way, I'm double fine with that. Tim, we are different from the traditional publisher, we love your games, and gems take time to be made. Thanks for trying to give us what we, adventure gamers, deserve. Thank you!!!
 
It's been a long time since he's done an adventure game. Story is a major component of the game, and the story in Brutal Legend was awful, though the jokes were pretty good. Broken Age sure looks great, but it's going to be a long while still before we have any idea what it plays like.
Interesting, I loved the story of Brutal Legend and the character development. Got a bit teary eyed in a few spots. A sadder ending than I expected too.

They've shown enough gameplay to show Broken Age plays like an any other adventure game and even has that SCUMM cursor.
 

Smash88

Banned
What a joke....

They get 8 times the money to create a game. And they are essentially paying themselves for this. They were asking for 400k originally and got 3.2+ million and it apparently isn't enough.

I'm not buying it.

They need an itemized list where all the money went, because right now this seems like a complete joke. Only way to redeem this sketchy route they took.

This is why I refuse to back anything on Kickstarter.

EDIT: Also paying, let's say their salary, on top of actors and composers, for a POINT AND CLICK ADVENTURE GAME.... to reach 3.2 million? Are we real?
 

krYlon

Member
What a joke....

They get 8 times the money to create a game. And they are essentially paying themselves for this. They were asking for 400k originally and got 3.2+ million and it apparently isn't enough.

I'm not buying it.

They need an itemized list where all the money went, because right now this seems like a complete joke. Only way to redeem this sketchy route they took.

This is why I refuse to back anything on Kickstarter.

EDIT: Also paying, let's say their salary, on top of actors and composers, for a POINT AND CLICK ADVENTURE GAME.... to reach 3.2 million? Are we real?


I would have felt like this too if it wasn't for the documentary. Seriously, the documentary opens your eyes up to how difficult game development is.

Also, why are you talking like point n click adventure games are easy to make? This is going to be a meaty adventure in the vein of Grim Fandango.


As an aside, I just watched the latest episode and the game is looking fantastic. It's really come along. There is a sense of depth to the environments now whereas before it looked a bit flat and cheap.
I can see why it is taking so long to make, they are really putting everything into this.
 

Omikaru

Member
The Kickstarter haters are out in full force today. Quite frankly, we all knew the risks when we bought into DF Adventure, or any other Kickstarter for that fact, so I don't see how there's any "Stockholm syndrome" or any other crap. Even Tim said that they would be documenting the experience so we could either see the development of a successful game from start to finish, or watch the trainwreck from the very beginning. That possibility was always there, and I feel it was communicated appropriately.

As for the matter at hand...

The way I see it, we get a more complete game if this is split in two as DF have proposed. As backers, we're not really getting half a game (DF are just letting some non-backers get in a bit earlier to help finish off the other half, which we're getting as part of the initial $15 we paid), and we knew this would be a long time coming since they had to start from scratch. Comparing this to a game announcement plus copious delays reaching up to two years is intellectually dishonest, since a lot of games are announced when they're well into development. With Broken Age, we watched the process from before a single line of code was written.

What a joke....

1) They get 8 times the money to create a game. And they are essentially paying themselves for this. They were asking for 400k originally and got 3.2+ million and it apparently isn't enough.

2) I'm not buying it.

They need an itemized list where all the money went, because right now this seems like a complete joke. Only way to redeem this sketchy route they took.

3) This is why I refuse to back anything on Kickstarter.

4) EDIT: Also paying, let's say their salary, on top of actors and composers, for a POINT AND CLICK ADVENTURE GAME.... to reach 3.2 million? Are we real?
I've edited numbers into your post to address each of your points.

1) The extra money allowed them to spend more time on the game, thus the scope increased. Tim was too ambitious, and nobody is letting him get a free pass for that (the criticism is justified), but the implication of your post is that they shouldn't be paying themselves a salary to make the game? What? What else would they spend the money on? The whole point of Kickstarter is to afford these people the money to work on the project full time. The more money they get, the more time they can spend on it, thus the bigger the scope of the project.

2) I don't see how you can't fathom what went on here. The scope of the project increased and they needed more money to pay for the development time. It's pretty simple, really. The original DF Adventure was going to take less than a year and be a really low-budget thing. The success of the Kickstarter meant Tim felt he could make a bigger game with higher production values. Obviously they've been overambitious, but the implication that something shady happened, and that they've embezzled the funds or something is pretty gross. Take that shit elsewhere.

3) Then don't back anything on Kickstarter. We all knew the risks going in...

4) Games are expensive.
 

FACE

Banned
What a joke....

They get 8 times the money to create a game. And they are essentially paying themselves for this. They were asking for 400k originally and got 3.2+ million and it apparently isn't enough.

I'm not buying it.

They need an itemized list where all the money went, because right now this seems like a complete joke. Only way to redeem this sketchy route they took.

This is why I refuse to back anything on Kickstarter.

EDIT: Also paying, let's say their salary, on top of actors and composers, for a POINT AND CLICK ADVENTURE GAME.... to reach 3.2 million? Are we real?

They didn't get 3.2 million to make the game because not all pledges on kickstarter go through, kickstarter and amazon have fees, part of the money went to make the physical rewards and there's the documentary. I believe their budget was ~2 million when it was all said and done.

Edit: Not that this excuses mismanaging funds.
 

Smash88

Banned
The Kickstarter haters are out in full force today. Quite frankly, we all knew the risks when we bought into DF Adventure, or any other Kickstarter for that fact, so I don't see how there's any "Stockholm syndrome" or any other crap. Even Tim said that they would be documenting the experience so we could either see the development of a successful game from start to finish, or watch the trainwreck from the very beginning. That possibility was always there, and I feel it was communicated appropriately.

As for the matter at hand...

The way I see it, we get a more complete game if this is split in two as DF have proposed. As backers, we're not really getting half a game (DF are just letting some non-backers get in a bit earlier to help finish off the other half, which we're getting as part of the initial $15 we paid), and we knew this would be a long time coming since they had to start from scratch. Comparing this to a game announcement plus copious delays reaching up to two years is intellectually dishonest, since a lot of games are announced when they're well into development. With Broken Age, we watched the process from before a single line of code was written.


I've edited numbers into your post to address each of your points.

1) The extra money allowed them to spend more time on the game, thus the scope increased. Tim was too ambitious, and nobody is letting him get a free pass for that (the criticism is justified), but the implication of your post is that they shouldn't be paying themselves a salary to make the game? What? What else would they spend the money on? The whole point of Kickstarter is to afford these people the money to work on the project full time. The more money they get, the more time they can spend on it, thus the bigger the scope of the project.

2) I don't see how you can't fathom what went on here. The scope of the project increased and they needed more money to pay for the development time. It's pretty simple, really. The original DF Adventure was going to take less than a year and be a really low-budget thing. The success of the Kickstarter meant Tim felt he could make a bigger game with higher production values. Obviously they've been overambitious, but the implication that something shady happened, and that they've embezzled the funds or something is pretty gross. Take that shit elsewhere.

3) Then don't back anything on Kickstarter. We all knew the risks going in...

4) Games are expensive.

Where did the money go? How are they out of money? How big can a scope get for a point and click adventure get in order for them to run out of money? Come on we have to be realistic here. It feels like they are pocketing a larger portion of the money because the scope increased. You don't get paid for the scope of the game, you get paid for the time you put in - they put in what a year and a half of work and they are bone dry? Are we real? Half-way to the second year and they need more money.

Also how is it gross to question where exactly the money went? They paid themselves for a year, and they are barely into a second year and they have nothing else. How much money was being paid to every employee that 2-3 million was not enough.

I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE. Not me, on the sidelines of it. I think it's MORE GROSS that THE PEOPLE WHO KICKSTARTED aren't asking these questions.

Also to add on to that, you have to imagine you, the kickstarter, as a share holder for a company. You PAID for this project to work. THEY need to answer everything in detail, they need to be accountable for their actions. Right now it doesn't look like that, it looks like they went "oh the scope got so huge so we are splitting this game up, because we are out of money and we need more in order to continue funding this project." I'm sorry, but if share holders don't get detailed reports where this money is going, if they don't they pull out of projects - although kickstarter doesn't allow this - it is still important for the people that kickstarted this project to ask harder questions and to get the answers.
 

duckroll

Member
Where did the money go? How are they out of money? How big can a scope get for a point and click adventure get in order for them to run out of money? Come on we have to be realistic here. It feels like they are pocketing a larger portion of the money because the scope increased. You don't get paid for the scope of the game, you get paid for the time you put in - they put in what a year and a half of work and they are bone dry? Are we real? Half-way to the second year and they need more money.

Also how is it gross to question where exactly the money went? They paid themselves for a year, and they are barely into a second year and they have nothing else. How much money was being paid to every employee that 2-3 million was not enough.

I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE. Not me, on the sidelines of it. I think it's MORE GROSS that THE PEOPLE WHO KICKSTARTED aren't asking these questions.

The people who kickstarted this project have answers to all those questions. There is no need to question it because Double Fine has been providing that information all along. We know why things are the way they are, and where the money has gone to. I don't think there is any need to explain it more in detail to people who are "on the sidelines" just to satisfy your curiosity. If there is some scam going on or suspicion of inappropriate use of funds, that would certainly be expressed.

You're trying to make a fuss out of something you're not even invested in. It's pretty funny. :p
 
I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE. Not me, on the sidelines of it. I think it's MORE GROSS that THE PEOPLE WHO KICKSTARTED aren't asking these questions.

We are not asking the questions, because Double Fine have already told us most, if not all, answers to them. They are open and transparent about it, but you have to listen also.
 

krYlon

Member
I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE. Not me, on the sidelines of it. I think it's MORE GROSS that THE PEOPLE WHO KICKSTARTED aren't asking these questions.

BECAUSE WE ARE WATCHING THE DOCUMENTARY AND FOLLOWING THE PROJECT and you aren't.
And how do you know we haven't been asking questions on THE DOUBLE FINE FORUMS?
 

Smash88

Banned
The people who kickstarted this project have answers to all those questions. There is no need to question it because Double Fine has been providing that information all along. We know why things are the way they are, and where the money has gone to. I don't think there is any need to explain it more in detail to people who are "on the sidelines" just to satisfy your curiosity. If there is some scam going on or suspicion of inappropriate use of funds, that would certainly be expressed.

You're trying to make a fuss out of something you're not even invested in. It's pretty funny. :p

We are not asking the questions, because Double Fine have already told us most, if not all, answers to them. They are open and transparent about it, but you have to listen also.

If we have the answers, where is this itemized list of where all the money went? I am genuinely curious.

Everyone is citing the documentary... Does this documentary cite where all the money is going exactly, dollar for dollar?

They are out of money because they needed more time to make the game. They have factored this into their budget. That doesn't mean they have blown all their cash already, just that they know they won't have enough to carry development on to meet the game's current trajectory. What part of that do you not understand?

It's pretty obvious that the team has grown in size as well as the time of development increasing. Those are two ways that they could've overbudgeted, and it could easily account for where the money went.

Again, games are expensive. They cost a lot to make. One example of how the scope increased is that they decided to build an in-house engine, rather than use an off the shelf adventure game engine (like AGS, I assume). This allowed them to do a lot of technical things that wouldn't be possible on AGS. Yesterday's documentary showed some of those features off pretty clearly.

Having watched all the documentary episodes -- which, being a non-backer "on the sidelines of it", you wouldn't have -- I'm perfectly satisfied with the explanations given.

If they factored this into the budget, they wouldn't be out of money.

Also since they increased the team, by how many people did they increase it by?

They get paid a salary, per year, if they budgeted that in, how are they out of money?

We are not asking the questions, because Double Fine have already told us most, if not all, answers to them. They are open and transparent about it, but you have to listen also.

Well if they are open and transparent about everything, how many people were originally on the team and how many are on the team now? If they are transparent we would know how the money is spent in detail. For instance how much is Tim Schafer making?

Omikaru said:
No it doesn't give us an itemised list of where the money went, but considering the documentary shows the development process -- from how the team grew in size, to the outsourcing, and so on -- I think we have a pretty good idea of how a game originally planned as a $400,000 project has increased in budget. Do they need to tell us any more? I don't think so. If you disagree, and are curious, then back the game and watch the documentaries for yourself and I'm pretty sure you'll see things our way. If you're not willing to do that, then I don't see why you're moaning. It's not like you've spent any money. If dodgy shit was going down we'd be up in arms. We are not, because we are satisfied with the explanation.

You want me to back a project to see a documentary, where apparently you don't even have the detailed answers to.

For me something doesn't click.

Also just because you don't need anymore explanation, doesn't mean others don't want a fair explanation, backer or not.

Just because they are showing us how the game is made, doesn't show us where the money went.
 

Omikaru

Member
Where did the money go? How are they out of money? How big can a scope get for a point and click adventure get in order for them to run out of money? Come on we have to be realistic here. It feels like they are pocketing a larger portion of the money because the scope increased. You don't get paid for the scope of the game, you get paid for the time you put in - they put in what a year and a half of work and they are bone dry? Are we real? Half-way to the second year and they need more money.

Also how is it gross to question where exactly the money went? They paid themselves for a year, and they are barely into a second year and they have nothing else. How much money was being paid to every employee that 2-3 million was not enough.

I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE. Not me, on the sidelines of it. I think it's MORE GROSS that THE PEOPLE WHO KICKSTARTED aren't asking these questions.

They are out of money because they needed more time to make the game. They have factored this into their budget. That doesn't mean they have blown all their cash already, just that they know they won't have enough to carry development on to meet the game's current trajectory. What part of that do you not understand?

It's pretty obvious that the team has grown in size as well as the time of development increasing. Those are two ways that they could've overbudgeted, and it could easily account for where the money went.

Again, games are expensive. They cost a lot to make. One example of how the scope increased is that they decided to build an in-house engine, rather than use an off the shelf adventure game engine (like AGS, I assume). This allowed them to do a lot of technical things that wouldn't be possible on AGS. Yesterday's documentary showed some of those features off pretty clearly.

Having watched all the documentary episodes -- which, being a non-backer "on the sidelines of it", you wouldn't have -- I'm perfectly satisfied with the explanations given.
 

Supernorn

Chucklefish (Starbound)
You're trying to make a fuss out of something you're not even invested in. It's pretty funny. :p

There's a lot of this going on in the thread. If you are a backer then you know there's nothing to worry about. The game is looking great.
 

duckroll

Member
If we have the answers, where is this itemized list of where all the money went? I am genuinely curious.

Amazon takes 5% for all payments via Kickstarter, after that Kickstarter takes 5% for the hosting fee. $473k is set aside for physical rewards, which includes shipping. The budget for the documentary is $393k. They were left with about $2.2 million for the game budget, which allows for a staff of 11 to work on the game for a whole year. That was the development estimate for the game - a full year of production. This was mapped out and budgeted last year in April.

We're here one year later, and the game isn't done because the game was more ambitious than expected, and they are unable to finish it within the year they budgeted. No, it is not ideal, and yes, it shows that the management is not perfect. But we know where the money went, how many people were working on it, and what they've been working on every month for the past year.

There are regular updates on the various development pipelines - programming, art, writing, etc. It's not just in the documentary, the staff interact with fans daily on the Backer Forums. No one is kept in the dark.
 

Smash88

Banned
Amazon takes 5% for all payments via Kickstarter, after that Kickstarter takes 5% for the hosting fee. $473k is set aside for physical rewards, which includes shipping. The budget for the documentary is $393k. They were left with about $2.2 million for the game budget, which allows for a staff of 11 to work on the game for a whole year. That was the development estimate for the game - a full year of production. This was mapped out and budgeted last year in April.

We're here one year later, and the game isn't done because the game was more ambitious than expected, and they are unable to finish it within the year they budgeted. No, it is not ideal, and yes, it shows that the management is not perfect. But we know where the money went, how many people were working on it, and what they've been working on every month for the past year.

There are regular updates on the various development pipelines - programming, art, writing, etc. It's not just in the documentary, the staff interact with fans daily on the Backer Forums. No one is kept in the dark.

So each person paid themselves $200,000 a year?

I would love a extremely detailed itemized list.

It just seems weird that $400,000 was fine at first, where they would originally be taking in $36,000 (barring any fees) a year. So by that calculation, just because they got more money they should receive a higher paycheck?

They paid themselves 7 fold, because they got pledged so much more money...?

I gotta go to bed, I'll reply to any more comments later today.

Wow, that's an average annual salary of 200k. ObamaNotBad.jpg I know devs who make a lot less.

Exactly this, I know people in the gaming industry, and this is not even close to what they make. NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE. Did they all become CEOs?
 

Dakota47

Member
Amazon takes 5% for all payments via Kickstarter, after that Kickstarter takes 5% for the hosting fee. $473k is set aside for physical rewards, which includes shipping. The budget for the documentary is $393k. They were left with about $2.2 million for the game budget, which allows for a staff of 11 to work on the game for a whole year. That was the development estimate for the game - a full year of production. This was mapped out and budgeted last year in April.

We're here one year later, and the game isn't done because the game was more ambitious than expected, and they are unable to finish it within the year they budgeted. No, it is not ideal, and yes, it shows that the management is not perfect. But we know where the money went, how many people were working on it, and what they've been working on every month for the past year.

There are regular updates on the various development pipelines - programming, art, writing, etc. It's not just in the documentary, the staff interact with fans daily on the Backer Forums. No one is kept in the dark.

Wow, that's an average annual salary of 200k. ObamaNotBad.jpg I know devs who make a lot less.
 

Omikaru

Member
Amazon takes 5% for all payments via Kickstarter, after that Kickstarter takes 5% for the hosting fee. $473k is set aside for physical rewards, which includes shipping. The budget for the documentary is $393k. They were left with about $2.2 million for the game budget, which allows for a staff of 11 to work on the game for a whole year. That was the development estimate for the game - a full year of production. This was mapped out and budgeted last year in April.

We're here one year later, and the game isn't done because the game was more ambitious than expected, and they are unable to finish it within the year they budgeted. No, it is not ideal, and yes, it shows that the management is not perfect. But we know where the money went, how many people were working on it, and what they've been working on every month for the past year.

There are regular updates on the various development pipelines - programming, art, writing, etc. It's not just in the documentary, the staff interact with fans daily on the Backer Forums. No one is kept in the dark.

Welp, there it is. I forgot that they gave us a detailed breakdown like that.

@Smash88: I think the vast majority of backers find the situation acceptable. Going over budget is a bad thing, and I think we can fairly criticise Schafer for that, but I think it's awful to imply they've somehow scammed their backers, and you acting all outraged when you don't even have money invested into this is really rather strange. Do you just not like Kickstarters, and are looking for a way to bash it?

In general, I knew that daggers would be drawn the second a Kickstarter ran into problems, because so many people are so vehemently opposed to it for some reason, almost to the point that it's somehow a threat to them. I'm still bemused by some of the reactions from non-backers, however. They are the exact opposite of the people who did back the project, who seem infinitely more contented about the situation.

Wow, that's an average annual salary of 200k. ObamaNotBad.jpg I know devs who make a lot less.
That doesn't factor in software and middleware (are they using any?) licenses, the fact that the team increased at some point in the year, and that they also hired outside help for some parts of the game (like hiring Bagel to do the art direction).
 

mclem

Member
Wow, that's an average annual salary of 200k. ObamaNotBad.jpg I know devs who make a lot less.

General ballpark figure is that you should double a person's salary to get the actual cost of employing that person; if it costs a company $200k to employ a person, they'd be earning a salary in the region of $100k. That said, I'm not sure the 2.2M goes entirely to the core team (Is Stapley included as one of the 11? Are the voice actors?)
 

Purple_Tentacle

Neo Member
I think if anything, people that kickstarted this project should be questioning EVERY MOVE.

I pledged 30; I didn't sign up to be an accountant. I knew the risks and I didn't support Massive Chalice because this project is behind my expectations.

It arrives when it arrives. I was more disappointed by The Cave them I am on this news, and that game was publisher backed and "on time."
 

Dakota47

Member
General ballpark figure is that you should double a person's salary to get the actual cost of employing that person. Also, I think the figures quoted aren't including outsourced content (Is Stapley included as one of the 11? Are the voice actors?)

That's still 100k, which in my world is a helluvalot of money.
 
So each person paid themselves $200,000 a year?

I would love a extremely detailed itemized list.

It just seems weird that $400,000 was fine at first, where they would originally be taking in $36,000 (barring any fees) a year. So by that calculation, just because they got more money they should receive a higher paycheck?

They paid themselves 7 fold, because they got pledged so much more money...?

I gotta go to bed, I'll reply to any more comments later today.



Exactly this, I know people in the gaming industry, and this is not even close to what they make. NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE. Did they all become CEOs?

We await your knowledge and insight with baited breath. I think if you know a better way to develop a game Double Fine would probably hire you although don't expect that $200,000 a year.
 

Smash88

Banned
We await your knowledge and insight with baited breath. I think if you know a better way to develop a game Double Fine would probably hire you although don't expect that $200,000 a year.

Well I don't claim to know the answers, but I would do a better budgeting job. And if they did hire me I might as well be making $200,000 since that is what everyone is making.

It's not just wages, I'm sure overhead costs are being allocated to the project like they would to any other. After rent, utilities, equipment, etc., it brings down the per-person wages even further.

Alright, let's knock $20,000 off every persons salary. That leaves us with $220,000, you honestly believe overhead costs need that much? Come on let's be realistic here.

And even if rent costs $100,000 for 1 year, and utilities cost $10,000 - just for shits and giggles. And they all bought themselves computers, and they spent $4,000 on a laptop and desktop, that $44,000 (that's overkill for a desktop). That's $154,000, that still leaves $66,000 left over. What other overhead do you need? NOT TO MENTION THEY STILL GET PAID $180,000 a year.
 
That's still 100k, which in my world is a helluvalot of money.

It's not just wages, I'm sure overhead costs are being allocated to the project like they would to any other. After rent, utilities, equipment, etc., it brings down the per-person wages even further.
 

mclem

Member
That's still 100k, which in my world is a helluvalot of money.

As I said, that's assuming the entirety of the 2.2M goes directly to the salaries of the core team, which I suspect is incorrect. There's going to be a bunch of content outsourced on top of that.
 

megalowho

Member
It seems pretty clear who has been following development as a backer and who is just jumping in due to this news. The backer forums, along with the documentary episodes and bonus clips, have lots of the information that is being speculated upon along with other interesting nitty gritty aspects of design and budget. We're watching the sausage get made, as it's been said, and transparency is not something I think they have been stingy on since the project began.
 

FoxSpirit

Junior Member
Even though we received much more money from our Kickstarter than we, or anybody anticipated, that didn’t stop me from getting excited and designing a game so big that it would need even more money.

I think I just have an idea in my head about how big an adventure game should be, so it’s hard for me to design one that’s much smaller than Grim Fandango or Full Throttle. There’s just a certain amount of scope needed to create a complex puzzle space and to develop a real story. At least with my brain, there is.
3.3 million dollars and you can NOT make a proper adventure game?? Look at Project Eternity or Torment, they got 4 million but are absolutely huge games.
You can only make "Grim Fandango", so a "Day of the Tentacle" or "Sam&Max" is completely out of the question I guess.
Sorry, but I am getting really strong Molyneux vibes from Tim here.
 
Maybe my expectations need some (double) fine tuning, but I didn't envision Kickstarter as a place you go to earn a six figure salary, but more of a starving artist please help us accomplish our dreams styled thing.

That's the same disconnect that caused the Penny Arcade Kickstarter to be, uh, not well received.
 

PaulloDEC

Member
If we have the answers, where is this itemized list of where all the money went? I am genuinely curious.

Everyone is citing the documentary... Does this documentary cite where all the money is going exactly, dollar for dollar?

That sounds awesome. With that kind of information a whole bunch of back-seat game developers could sit around telling Double Fine how bad they are at game development.

Oh wait, that's already happening.

Speaking only for myself, I don't really give a crap what Double Fine does with my money because A) I only gave them around $20, which is generally as much as I ever drop on any Kickstarter, and B) because I trust them to deliver a great game, regardless of hurdles along the way.

Here's the bottom line for me: only give your money to people you trust, and if there's a risk involved, don't give a lot. I'm not worried about DFA in the slightest, partly because the most I stand to lose is $20, but mostly because I trust them.
 

krYlon

Member
As I said, that's assuming the entirety of the 2.2M goes directly to the salaries of the core team, which I suspect is incorrect. There's going to be a bunch of content outsourced on top of that.

Yeah, loads of stuff has been outsourced. They even had Peter Chan do concept art didn't they?

And then there's the soundtrack, the voice acting, the different languages, the touch screen versions, the marketing/promotion.

Also the salaries aren't for just one year. Greg on the backer forums said they haven't run out of money as yet, they are just tracking to see if they have the money for the entirety of the project (so until next year?)
 
I know episodic is standard protocol for adventure games, but I really believe that splitting this in half is self mutilating and lowering the ceiling for what the two halves can be.

Lotta stuff I didn't like about the wording and framing in their new mission statement, and I'm really kind of tired of these guys after seeing them sell 24 hr prototypes on a venue where indie devs sell full games, get less $ overall and have to split it 5-8 ways... same for the UnHumbleBundle with the average being skewed by a preoder that's not pay-what-you-want... and now a guilt-laden "take it or leave it" way to fly safely under the pressure of delivering a fully finished product that can be property criticized... whatever. I'm an old fan, and my perspective is negative.
 

Smash88

Banned
That sounds awesome. With that kind of information a whole bunch of back-seat game developers could sit around telling Double Fine how bad they are at game development.

Oh wait, that's already happening.

Speaking only for myself, I don't really give a crap what Double Fine does with my money because A) I only gave them around $20, which is generally as much as I ever drop on any Kickstarter, and B) because I trust them to deliver a great game, regardless of hurdles along the way.

Here's the bottom line for me: only give your money to people you trust, and if there's a risk involved, don't give a lot. I'm not worried about DFA in the slightest, partly because the most I stand to lose is $20, but mostly because I trust them.

No one said anything about their development skills. Just the way in which they are handling their money.

You can speak for yourself, there are people out there that value their money, even if it's just $20.
 

PaulloDEC

Member
You can speak for yourself, there are people out there that value their money, even if it's just $20.

Kickstarters are risky by their nature. You don't hit the button to "buy" a product, you're pledging money for development. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't make sense to pledge any amount of money you'd be concerned about losing unless it's a sure thing.
 

krYlon

Member
No one said anything about their development skills. Just the way in which they are handling their money.

You can speak for yourself, there are people out there that value their money, even if it's just $20.

So who are you speaking for exactly? The people who have backed the project seem to be satisfied with where their money has gone.
It's people like you, who haven't put any money it, that are complaining.
 

mclem

Member
I know episodic is standard protocol for adventure games, but I really believe that splitting this in half is self mutilating and lowering the ceiling for what the two halves can be.

The only Lucasarts adventures I can think of without a clear delineation between acts are the two Maniac Mansion titles (and then arguably DOTT has a three-act structure, albeit with an extremely short Act 1 and 3). I'm not sure it'd be *that* limiting.
 
3.3 million dollars and you can NOT make a proper adventure game?? Look at Project Eternity or Torment, they got 4 million but are absolutely huge games.
You can only make "Grim Fandango", so a "Day of the Tentacle" or "Sam&Max" is completely out of the question I guess.
Sorry, but I am getting really strong Molyneux vibes from Tim here.

You don't think Eternity or Torment can run into these problems?
 

Futureman

Member
I assume there's no way to get the making of documentaries at this point, correct?

shoulda pledged. I'm really interested in character design and videogame creation more generally.
 

Minsc

Gold Member
The only Lucasarts adventures I can think of without a clear delineation between acts are the two Maniac Mansion titles (and then arguably DOTT has a three-act structure, albeit with an extremely short Act 1 and 3). I'm not sure it'd be *that* limiting.

Yeah, considering older adventure games like Curse of Monkey Island were split in to acts (and as you mention most others as well), and that this was already being split in to acts prior to the update, I don't see how that side of things limits the scope at all.
 
The only Lucasarts adventures I can think of without a clear delineation between acts are the two Maniac Mansion titles (and then arguably DOTT has a three-act structure, albeit with an extremely short Act 1 and 3). I'm not sure it'd be *that* limiting.

Partitioning a whole is different than throwing out a piece of an uncooked meal, only to be locked into what's been laid out and what can't be done as a consequence.

This is somehing you do when you want to see what sticks and what incentive there is to go all in... not when you've got a grand vision that needs to coalesce together and be more than the sum of it's parts.

No matter what genre, the lower the foundation the lower the ceiling imo. Whatever they deliver in the end, it's going to be a cobbled together patchwork. Perhaps the best one ever, but telling nonetheless.
 

StarEye

The Amiga Brotherhood
The only thing I fear from dividing the game into two chapters is that perhaps you were supposed to be able to switch between the two characters in the game at any given time, and that now the game will be more linear and less free. Perhaps the first part only gives us the the girls or the boys story, and the second chapter gives us the other.
 
I'm ok with this. They found a decent solution to the problem. The only downside to backers it seems, is the game's getting delayed further. But in return the game's bigger and better.

It is disappointing and disconcerting that they were unable to properly scale the project to the budget. But I'm taking it as a learning process. It's interesting to kind of see things from the perspective of a publisher and what issues may arise with game development.
 

mclem

Member
Partitioning a whole is different than throwing out a piece of an uncooked meal, only to be locked into what's been laid out and what can't be done as a consequence.

But it's *not* a whole. As I understand it, prior to this decision, the game was already split into acts.
 
Top Bottom