on the contrary, before double fine it wasn't a meaningful service because no one used it (for games).
there's no "sticking to the publisher" when space sims, crpg's, and other genres simply aren't made anymore.
-
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.
Rab Florence Piece on Industry Vets Killing Kickstarter
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
on the contrary, before double fine it wasn't a meaningful service because no one used it (for games).
there's no "sticking to the publisher" when space sims, crpg's, and other genres simply aren't made anymore.
I do think Bethesda shouldn't be absolved of this, even if Obsidian could've tried to fight for better terms (though we don't have any idea what happened there). Mainly, I think it's terrible to assign bonuses to Metacritic scores, because that places too much actual value on how these people rate a game, and as evidenced here means a few of them can unwittingly screw over the developers when they didn't mean to, especially bad for 80 scores that are likely from people who liked the game.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
HA!, you almost got me!
CecilRousso
Member
Maybe he should have focused just on bad kickstarter pitches (Elite) rather then trying to disqualify every known developer from using it. They are filling a gap, between the publisher funded games that only greenlit when they are expected to sell well, and the self funded indie games, that while great fun are on a different level.
The difference between the projects from 22 Cans and Double Fine are more or less just the names Schafer and Molyneux. If you´re going to to hate one, hate both.
The project starters will not be able to kill Kickstarter, that´s something the backers will be responsible for if it happens. Everyone who are able to pledge are mature enough to be able to say yes or no.
And when did we start to forget the point about crowdfunding is about avoiding publisher interference, the same interference everyone hates?
The difference between the projects from 22 Cans and Double Fine are more or less just the names Schafer and Molyneux. If you´re going to to hate one, hate both.
The project starters will not be able to kill Kickstarter, that´s something the backers will be responsible for if it happens. Everyone who are able to pledge are mature enough to be able to say yes or no.
And when did we start to forget the point about crowdfunding is about avoiding publisher interference, the same interference everyone hates?
The Friendly Monster
Member
I think Rab is right, and people are being naive about Kickstarter. It's now being used as a moneygrab, a defacto part of making a niche game, and you are being misled. There is an implication that these games wouldn't be made without your help, or that you are contributing to development. That simply isn't going to be true in a lot of cases. You are being told to pay for something because you are a fan of it, and without your money it isn't going to happen. It's blackmail, and fuck anyone who does it.
In a lot of cases it will be a grey area, but the idea that Molyneux doesn't have £450,000 to invest (or will use the communities ideas in a game) is a joke.
I'm not anti-kickstarter, I have friends who are managing to fulfil their dreams with small projects that I know couldn't have been done to the same extent without services like it. This tactical use by rich entities targeting your wallet makes me very uneasy.
In a lot of cases it will be a grey area, but the idea that Molyneux doesn't have £450,000 to invest (or will use the communities ideas in a game) is a joke.
I'm not anti-kickstarter, I have friends who are managing to fulfil their dreams with small projects that I know couldn't have been done to the same extent without services like it. This tactical use by rich entities targeting your wallet makes me very uneasy.
michaelius
Banned
Oh and what if i want to support project with a good established developer which gives higher chance of getting good game instead of another indie garbage that i won't even bother to download when it comes to humble bundle ?
Freezie KO
Banned
Please kill Kickstarter. I'm sick of every fucking person I know becoming a beggar.
DiscoJer
Member
I dunno. So far, thanks to KS, we are getting Wasteland 2, a Shadowrun RPG, an isometric Black Isle style CRPG, a new Tex Murphy, a bunch of space games (one by Chris Roberts, but also that one for the Vita), and new games by several people who used to be at Sierra - the Coles, Jane Jenssen, SpaceQuest dudes, and even a LSL remake.
Sure, all vets, but at the same time, no longer making the stuff they used to make (and apparently want to make).
Personally, the game funding project that bugs me is that Johann Sebastian Joust one, the game with the move controllers.
Somehow this guy can fly all over the world demoing the game at conferences and shows, but he can't finish it? And somehow Sony is involved? If they think it's so great, why don't they give him money?
The Elite IV one is questionable, but at the same time, he's been screwing around for 20 years, if this gets him to finally make another Elite, so be it.
Sure, all vets, but at the same time, no longer making the stuff they used to make (and apparently want to make).
Personally, the game funding project that bugs me is that Johann Sebastian Joust one, the game with the move controllers.
Somehow this guy can fly all over the world demoing the game at conferences and shows, but he can't finish it? And somehow Sony is involved? If they think it's so great, why don't they give him money?
The Elite IV one is questionable, but at the same time, he's been screwing around for 20 years, if this gets him to finally make another Elite, so be it.
CecilRousso
Member
How do we really know that?
How much do we know about what 22 Cans have costed him yet?
22 Cans is just not Molyneux. It´s a team of 20+ people, why are we expecting Molyneux to carry all of them by himself?
Spend less time reading gaming news. Problem solved.
The Friendly Monster
Member
Because it's his company. This is an extremely wealthy man, having just built a company of over 20 people. £450,000 is not going to be the difference between him shutting down the company or managing to keep going. This was planned! He's taking your money and abusing your fandom. And why the fuck not? It's free money!
Visualante2
Member
Talent leaving studios established studios, starting up their own companies isn't sticking it to publishers? Peter used to work for Microsoft... Braben's company used to contract for Microsoft. I predict employment contracts for top tier talent will exempt them from making Kickstarters in the future. All we need is Cliffy to start a Kickstarter and we're 3 for 3 losses on Microsoft Game Studios. I think many commentators are predicting crowd funding is indicative of the death of games publishing.
Auto_aim1
MeisaMcCaffrey
He really got a lot of press with that RPS interview, and I think the timing couldn't have been a coincidence. You kind of know these people will ruin a good thing eventually though, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. It's easy to say "oh, don't pledge then!", but you really cannot expect people to be knowledgeable about all these things. What Molyneux is trying to do is passing the risk onto consumers, so he's basically playing safe here.
I really wish Kickstarter had a stringent approval process; cut the bullshit at the base level itself, but they won't do that of course.
I really wish Kickstarter had a stringent approval process; cut the bullshit at the base level itself, but they won't do that of course.
CecilRousso
Member
From wikipedia: On 7 March 2012, Molyneux announced that he will be leaving Lionhead and Microsoft after the completion of Fable: The Journey to begin work at a company founded by former Lionhead Studios CTO Tim Rance called 22Cans.
I have no idea about his wealth, I have never seen details about his personal wealth. Have you? I would of course be suprised if he didn´t have much more then you and me, but I still don´t know any details, and I have no details about what 22 Cans might have costed him so far. It´s all just assumptions.
Free money? It´s not. 22 Cans (again, it´s just not him) are expected to deliver a result, work for it.
I completely disagree and I believe Molyneux has had too much overblown criticism for a lifetime. Veterans only help put the kickstarter brand on the market, they help make it believable.
Also, veterans have a lot of trouble doing what they want. I am sure Molyneux for example has already tried to do another Black and White or Populous but Microsoft wanted Fable. ( If i'm not right on this one then that's just sad).
Also, veterans have a lot of trouble doing what they want. I am sure Molyneux for example has already tried to do another Black and White or Populous but Microsoft wanted Fable. ( If i'm not right on this one then that's just sad).
ii Stryker
Banned
Moleyneux has had his run and he's now a cancer in gaming.
He actually buys into his own hyperbole and that's very dangerous as well as idiotic.
He actually buys into his own hyperbole and that's very dangerous as well as idiotic.
I'd rather support a name I know then a bunch of fucking no-names. I know Peter Molyneux and I've liked nearly every game he's been involved in so I'll support him because I'm sure he can make a game I'd like. Same with a Brian Fargo or Tim Schafer. I know those guys and I'll support them every single day over some unknown group who cannot be trusted with my money.
CecilRousso
Member
It started with Braben, he really exploded on twitter over that. I can understand that one. After years of teasing Elite IV, Braben delivers a kickstarter withing nothing to show for these years, and says he´s using Kickstarter to test the interest in the game. Such behaviour should criticized.
michaelius
Banned
Nobody is being forced under penalty of death to pledge to projects. You do it because you are interested in the pitch, want to see another game in the genre and/or are a fan of the developer, and you can afford to throw some money in.
Most projects get quite a bit more funding than they had originally asked for. Even once it's past its original pledge amount, many people still put money in, even though the game is already happening regardless. That should be your first clue that people quite simply want to support these games and aren't exactly being coerced into it.
If you want to direct your ire someplace, it would be better-served at Microsoft for its monstrous Xbox Live Gold charge, and publishers for their egregious milking of consumers. These have actually damaged the industry beyond repair, with absurd online pass/DLC/pre-order practices and online gaming charges now widely accepted as a norm that we will never be able to revert. Developers who dare to remove the publishers' leashes from their necks? I don't think they're hurting anything.
The Friendly Monster
Member
The company is new and has managed to hire over 20 people, if they suddenly are finding themselves in need of £450,000 or they're going down that is an epic failure of management. Concede that Kickstarters could be used simply as a money grab and it becomes quite clear.
Exactly! Work for the money, don't just make a game you were going to make anyway and grab the money. People are not being held accountable here.
The Friendly Monster
Member
That man has had an insane amount of creative freedom. Milo ring any bells?
But it's totally misleading, this Godus game would've been made anyway.
What about stretch goals are now being planned out in some kind of sick levelling-up meta game?
And I fight that with my wallet, I've never pre-ordered for a bonus or bought a Gold subscription in my life. It's all part of the same thing though, you are being milked.
CecilRousso
Member
What we should do, is demand more from industry veterans then of indies. Considering what kind of prototypes Double Fine seems to be able to do in two weeks time, maybe we should demand every known developer to have something like that when the kickstarter starts? Or at least a design document available?
So while the critique of them actually using kickstarter is a bit much, critique against their pitches isn´t.
Yes, if the kickstarter is the difference between them closing down or not, that would be the case. But what I posted there was about Molyneux personal wealth, how big it might be and asking why so many assume that he can/should keep the company going with whatever money he might have.
They already said that if the kickstarter fails, they will have to go down the publisher route, with whatever that compromises might lead to. That´s what everyone should say yes or no to. If you don´t like it, don´t pledge, but I really don´t see any problem with 22 Cans asking this question.
They are by gambling their company on this. The assumption that this is about Peter Molyneux himself grabbing money to run away with it is ridiculous.
So while the critique of them actually using kickstarter is a bit much, critique against their pitches isn´t.
Yes, if the kickstarter is the difference between them closing down or not, that would be the case. But what I posted there was about Molyneux personal wealth, how big it might be and asking why so many assume that he can/should keep the company going with whatever money he might have.
They already said that if the kickstarter fails, they will have to go down the publisher route, with whatever that compromises might lead to. That´s what everyone should say yes or no to. If you don´t like it, don´t pledge, but I really don´t see any problem with 22 Cans asking this question.
They are by gambling their company on this. The assumption that this is about Peter Molyneux himself grabbing money to run away with it is ridiculous.
You're right, they should've walked away and kept the company alive using the money they got from...uh...oh.
Freezie KO
Banned
No no. Not gaming. I'm talking about my Facebook feed. Everyone I know has a film or an art show or a music demo or...
And I get this shit all the time. Kickstarter has ruined several pleasant social acquaintances I once had.
Keep in mind that I live in Los Angeles, where art-minded people go to die. So this may color my view.
CecilRousso
Member
thehypocrite
Member
I don't kickstart things for a very simple principle.
Kicstarter has become a hotbed to secure interest free loans, however what capital gains am I getting from that money? 0.
Until kickstarter allows backers to make money, it's meningless to me, It isn't as if enough stuff is already being made to take my money from me, now they want me to give my money for promises and nonexistan stuff that I have 0 safety that It will get made, 0 prospects of making money off it, all the risk and none of the benefits with my money.
It's cute that people kickstart things that they want to see existing, I'm also not trying to change any mindsets here, just sharing my thoughts.
Kicstarter has become a hotbed to secure interest free loans, however what capital gains am I getting from that money? 0.
Until kickstarter allows backers to make money, it's meningless to me, It isn't as if enough stuff is already being made to take my money from me, now they want me to give my money for promises and nonexistan stuff that I have 0 safety that It will get made, 0 prospects of making money off it, all the risk and none of the benefits with my money.
It's cute that people kickstart things that they want to see existing, I'm also not trying to change any mindsets here, just sharing my thoughts.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Kickstarter is at the peak of it's hype cycle so saying anything negative about it can be easily taken as pissing in the cornflakes. It seems that Total Biscuit is on the kickstarter hype train for one.
But Rab is right on the money when he says that the cynical way that UK game industry vets are using it is disturbing. These are people who have taken any shilling they can get to make whatever tepid games they can make all the while trading on the memory of things they did in the 80s and early 90s. Things that were often largely creditable to people who left the industry. But when that "shaker" project came up it didn't get funded. And companies like Double Fine and Obsidian always at least try in some way to make games with heart even if they don't deliver in every way.
But Rab is right on the money when he says that the cynical way that UK game industry vets are using it is disturbing. These are people who have taken any shilling they can get to make whatever tepid games they can make all the while trading on the memory of things they did in the 80s and early 90s. Things that were often largely creditable to people who left the industry. But when that "shaker" project came up it didn't get funded. And companies like Double Fine and Obsidian always at least try in some way to make games with heart even if they don't deliver in every way.
Haunted
Member
As long as the project is within the Kickstarter guidelines, I don't have a problem with it.
If the 22Cans project brings a couple more people to Kickstarter (and by extension, other projects) because of the Molyneux name and the attention he's getting, I'm all for that. It's been shown by the numbers before that these projects don't take money away from the smaller ones that really need it - on Kickstarter, a rising tide lifts all boats.
That said, I personally haven't and won't pledge to it. Aside from being real interested in playing the final result, other projects have a higher priority to me (in particular those I feel would or could not exist without KS). With all the attention Kickstarter has been getting, it was obvious that it would be treated as a risk-free alternative to traditional publishing sooner rather than later - and it's important that the option continues to exist. Whenever's money involved -and KS can produce some big money as we've seen - you're going to get people trying to exploit the system. Noble idealism that's at the core of KS aside, that's what capitalism is. You can call it amoral, or cynical - it's reality.
It's up to the backers to not let it turn into that kind of thing exclusively, to keep the kind of projects KS was originally intended to help create, alive. In that sense, articles like the OP's are good as they raise awareness of possible issues arising in the future.
If the 22Cans project brings a couple more people to Kickstarter (and by extension, other projects) because of the Molyneux name and the attention he's getting, I'm all for that. It's been shown by the numbers before that these projects don't take money away from the smaller ones that really need it - on Kickstarter, a rising tide lifts all boats.
That said, I personally haven't and won't pledge to it. Aside from being real interested in playing the final result, other projects have a higher priority to me (in particular those I feel would or could not exist without KS). With all the attention Kickstarter has been getting, it was obvious that it would be treated as a risk-free alternative to traditional publishing sooner rather than later - and it's important that the option continues to exist. Whenever's money involved -and KS can produce some big money as we've seen - you're going to get people trying to exploit the system. Noble idealism that's at the core of KS aside, that's what capitalism is. You can call it amoral, or cynical - it's reality.
It's up to the backers to not let it turn into that kind of thing exclusively, to keep the kind of projects KS was originally intended to help create, alive. In that sense, articles like the OP's are good as they raise awareness of possible issues arising in the future.
I agree, I don't like the importance metacritic seems have have in this industry. But the whole notion of poor Obsidian getting screwed over by 'the man' Bethesda is such horseshit. Three options:
1) Negotiate for better terms if you find them objectionable
2) Back out
3) Make sure you have a great game that will hit 85%
Obsidian didn't go with any of those. So they don't get their bonus, the stipulation they agreed to abide by. They went into it with their eyes wide open knowing exactly what the penalty was. Of course there could be more to this, we're only going off what we were told. But from the information we have, it's pretty black and white.
ThaddeusMcGee
Member
Ehhhhh, it's still a pretty stupid internet rant. The message is kind of competent, it's been garbled by its deliverer though. Getting this angry hurts a jouranlist's credibility.
As for kickstarter, have any of these even delivered? I did the doublefine one but haven't heard anything about any others. What's to stop any kickstarter from suddenly going underground and starting Jurassic Park in Costa Rica with the money?
The Friendly Monster
Member
I just don't believe it. If you're that desperate to avoid publisher intervention...maybe just hire 15 people instead of 20 with all this capital you clearly have. Strategically having a kickstarter and abusing your fans to burden the risk of your game is morally questionable in my eyes.
I'm not saying that Molyneux is literally putting the cash in his bank account.
I think Rab's point here isn't that Fargo or Obsidian have done anything wrong with their kickstarters, just that what Molyneux is doing in particular takes that first big step across the line.
Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity were never going to get the go ahead from contemporary publishers in any capacity. The only way old school CRPGs get out now is through alternative funding methods. Those games wouldn't exist without Kickstarter.
Godus however is the kind of game that Molyneux could have had picked up by damn near any publishers half way through the conversation. Hell, the only stipulation the publisher would have over giving the 450K would be that Molyneux instead takes 600K and make the game multiplatform, so they could roll it out on XBLA, PSN, Steam, iOS, and Android day one.
There was no thread of never seeing the light of day hanging over Godus. From Dust got published and did pretty well. Eric Chahi doesn't have anything near the industry connections and name recognition that Molyneux does.
The claim of "openness" in development rings hollow when devs working within the established industry have provided very open looks into their development process, and it's not like Molyneux won't run all their "open" videos and comments through a marketing filter. He could just as easily made that part of the pitch to said 3rd party, that he wanted to use social networks to promote Godus pre-release a la Kickstarter games. Any 3rd party would have lapped that up.
So what it really boils down to is Kickstarter paying for 22 Cans to create a new IP that they gets to keep complete control over instead of arguing with a 3rd party publisher about who gets those rights. That's the only real "gain" here for 22 Cans and is cynical as hell.
Haunted
Member
After reading the text on the Kickstarter page again, I can totally understand how people could take offence, actually. It's a really "impassionate" pitch that uses buzzwords and recycles language used in previously successful Kickstarters so much that it comes across as cold and calculated again. It's the kind of pitch that looks to be written by design on company orders instead of actual passion. It reads like the kind of pitch I would write when prompted to make one that "hits all the right notes with the usual Kickstarter crowd" by my boss.
I can see how someone of Rab's intelligence could take offence to that, because he sees the possibility of people being deceived.
I can see how someone of Rab's intelligence could take offence to that, because he sees the possibility of people being deceived.
polyh3dron
Banned
Crowdfunding games that I've backed:
Star Citizen
Project Eternity
Twilight Zone Pinball Game
Shadowrun Returns
Republique
Double Fine Adventure
And I would've supported Wasteland 2 had I not been a lazy ass and waited too long.
I'm confident that all those games will be made and that I will be satisfied with them. Now, given Molyneux's track record, I would never in a million years back one of his projects with this method and I doubt anyone else who is as familiar with him as I am would do the same, especially after his latest fiasco. This doesn't mean that crowdfunding is dead, Molyneux is just a fuckwit.
Star Citizen
Project Eternity
Twilight Zone Pinball Game
Shadowrun Returns
Republique
Double Fine Adventure
And I would've supported Wasteland 2 had I not been a lazy ass and waited too long.
I'm confident that all those games will be made and that I will be satisfied with them. Now, given Molyneux's track record, I would never in a million years back one of his projects with this method and I doubt anyone else who is as familiar with him as I am would do the same, especially after his latest fiasco. This doesn't mean that crowdfunding is dead, Molyneux is just a fuckwit.
So either Bethesda gave them a chance when nobody else was interested, or they could have went elsewhere. Either way, I'm not seeing grounds for complaint here.
I've always thought Kickstarter is tolerable because it removes most of the risk for people who simply can't afford for it to not break even. If the game could exist without Kickstarter, then on my principles it's not worth Kickstarting.
I assume most people have a similar line of thinking, but I could be wrong.
Either way, Molyneux doesn't qualify and I agree with blog entry in the OP. It's pretty infuriating and arrogant that someone like Molyneux thinks the world so needs his game that it'd fall over and fist to finance it, when he's fully capable of financing it himself (or finding a willing publisher).
I assume most people have a similar line of thinking, but I could be wrong.
Either way, Molyneux doesn't qualify and I agree with blog entry in the OP. It's pretty infuriating and arrogant that someone like Molyneux thinks the world so needs his game that it'd fall over and fist to finance it, when he's fully capable of financing it himself (or finding a willing publisher).
Delusibeta
Banned
What, you expect Molyenux or a publisher to fund a god game? The odds of that ever happening are zero.
The Friendly Monster
Member
You must be joking. Molyneux is the one who wants to make the game in the first place....From Dust was publisher funded and did well only recently.
And even that is based on the idea that Godus couldn't be internally or VC funded, which to me is very dubious.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I do agree. It is easy to just say "use your own money" until you actually do it and see no source of income and your bank account declining day after day. It is very stressful to you and your family as well. Sure, kudos to those people who manage to do it this way without destroying themselves or their families' life, but I think that labeling people that either find a publisher or ask funding directly to the users, who might be their target audience, greedy is an exaggeration at best.
I would want people to use Kickstarter because they have no other way of creating what they have in mind. I don’t care if it’s made by a popular team or some unknown person, I want to know why they use Kickstarter. I hate people who ask for support when they don’t need it.
This so reminds me of a rich classmate who hides his fortune to grab a couple of hundred Euros a month from the government as support.
This so reminds me of a rich classmate who hides his fortune to grab a couple of hundred Euros a month from the government as support.
The Friendly Monster
Member
But those criteria clearly don't apply to Molyneux or Braben, the topic of the piece. Rab isn't attacking everyone who uses Kickstarter.
...oops sorry didn't notice the post you were replying to.
reptilescorpio
Member
I agree with Florence. Braben bad, Molyneux bad, Double Fine good, Obsidian good.
Frontier have been pumping out projects lately without known issue.
Molyneux could get a project running at plenty of publishers with his past history.
Double Fine & Obsidian were looking at laying off people from their staff if their respective Kickstarters failed.
Frontier have been pumping out projects lately without known issue.
Molyneux could get a project running at plenty of publishers with his past history.
Double Fine & Obsidian were looking at laying off people from their staff if their respective Kickstarters failed.
I realize that more established developers can use Kickstarter to fund games that they could have funded themselves, and by using Kickstarter take away the risk of the game to flop. I have no real problem with this, as long as the game is more of a niche thing and not the next Call of Duty. No one wants to make an experimental game and then lose money on it. The huge plus with Kickstarter is that developers gets full creative control, and as a fan I get to interact with the developer directly.
I agree that greed have taken over in some extent. Double Fine was really generous with what they offered. Getting the game, documentary and beta testing for just $15, while others have $100 for beta testing, those early bird things which feels more like the normal price instead of a discount you can get early, exclusive content for premium, weird stretch goals (money begging)
Can things get out of hand? Possibly. As I see it now things are still looking good. The big games that gotten funded have all been aiming for something of a niche market, with games that couldn't have made it without Kickstarter.
Why more established developers can make successful Kickstarters while indie developers can't isn't for me only because I know they can deliver what they promised. It's also because the games they make are much more interesting. Haven't really come across many indie games on Kickstarter that I really want.
I agree that greed have taken over in some extent. Double Fine was really generous with what they offered. Getting the game, documentary and beta testing for just $15, while others have $100 for beta testing, those early bird things which feels more like the normal price instead of a discount you can get early, exclusive content for premium, weird stretch goals (money begging)
Can things get out of hand? Possibly. As I see it now things are still looking good. The big games that gotten funded have all been aiming for something of a niche market, with games that couldn't have made it without Kickstarter.
Why more established developers can make successful Kickstarters while indie developers can't isn't for me only because I know they can deliver what they promised. It's also because the games they make are much more interesting. Haven't really come across many indie games on Kickstarter that I really want.
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
Kickstarter has accomplished what retail has been trying to perfect for years, discriminatory pricing.
It allows the seller to extract the maximum amount of revenue from each potential customer for their product or service. All without any accountability or guarantees about quality.
With such patchy records of product quality for the likes of Braben and Molyneux this couldn't be any better. Hype up the new product on your past glories and then have no worries about delivering on what you promised.
This couldn't be any further removed from the traditional publisher model which has delivery and quality requirements. The other alternative is self funding to completion but that means having to deliver on your promises with a product that people want at the end.
There's no wonder developers that have problems delivering on their visions are lapping up this new funding model. It fits perfectly with their hype/fail/apologise cycle that they love so much with no impact to their businesses.
Kickstarter basically gives anyone with a good story easy access to a hand picked pool of monied idiots that you can fleece as you wish. You can't blame people and businesses for exploiting this opportunity.
It's unlikely Kickstarter will implement any safeguards to guarantee quality or delivery as it will negatively impact their business too much.
There's no point getting upset about any this, just accept it for what it is.
It allows the seller to extract the maximum amount of revenue from each potential customer for their product or service. All without any accountability or guarantees about quality.
With such patchy records of product quality for the likes of Braben and Molyneux this couldn't be any better. Hype up the new product on your past glories and then have no worries about delivering on what you promised.
This couldn't be any further removed from the traditional publisher model which has delivery and quality requirements. The other alternative is self funding to completion but that means having to deliver on your promises with a product that people want at the end.
There's no wonder developers that have problems delivering on their visions are lapping up this new funding model. It fits perfectly with their hype/fail/apologise cycle that they love so much with no impact to their businesses.
Kickstarter basically gives anyone with a good story easy access to a hand picked pool of monied idiots that you can fleece as you wish. You can't blame people and businesses for exploiting this opportunity.
It's unlikely Kickstarter will implement any safeguards to guarantee quality or delivery as it will negatively impact their business too much.
There's no point getting upset about any this, just accept it for what it is.
Yup, publishers abusing devs by forcing contracts on them that you only agree to because you are in dire need. Dictate rules, get a game that sells millions from dev but doesn't hit metacritic clause. Laugh as you carry money to bank in front of still starving dev.
There should be a clause "if we sell over a million" but even in the past pubs have tried to duck out of that kinda bonus. Wasn't it for a multi-million CoD just a year ago?
The Friendly Monster
Member
This. There's nothing wrong with Rab pointing out the moral problems with it though. I don't know if Kickstarter will be killed, but it'll be very much soured.