Do they have a copy of Minecraft ported to that rock you live under?
That's what I wanted to say.I want to see Tim's reaction to the numbers.
Though there's still a wait to see how this actually pans out, if you really think about it projects like this, and Minecraft, send a poignant message about what could be in store for the industry's future. The modern technological conveniences of digital distribution, and now having direct, quick and reliable access to your entire fan base, puts a lot of pressure on the middle men and could pave the way for projects otherwise thought of as impossible.
And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
I want to see Tim's reaction to the numbers. Then I want to see a video of him dancing a jig.
EatChildren said:Though there's still a wait to see how this actually pans out, if you really think about it projects like this, and Minecraft, send a poignant message about what could be in store for the industry's future. The modern technological conveniences of digital distribution, and now having direct, quick and reliable access to your entire fan base, puts a lot of pressure on the middle men and could pave the way for projects otherwise thought of as impossible.
And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
here, here.Though there's still a wait to see how this actually pans out, if you really think about it projects like this, and Minecraft, send a poignant message about what could be in store for the industry's future...
I want to see Tim's reaction to the numbers. Then I want to see a video of him dancing a jig.
T
And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
Though there's still a wait to see how this actually pans out, if you really think about it projects like this, and Minecraft, send a poignant message about what could be in store for the industry's future. The modern technological conveniences of digital distribution, and now having direct, quick and reliable access to your entire fan base, puts a lot of pressure on the middle men and could pave the way for projects otherwise thought of as impossible.
And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
I want to see Tim's reaction to the numbers. Then I want to see a video of him dancing a jig.
Hear, hear. But even looking at it superficially, the fact that the goal has been completely smashed in under a day is just incredible. I'm so thrilled for him and the company. It's really bound to be something special.And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
This is pretty incredible, I love this community.
Looks like Gaben was right.
Wait, so if I give $150,000 of funding to these guys, I don't get a share in the profits? That's not how investment works.
Wait, so if I give $150,000 of funding to these guys, I don't get a share in the profits? That's not how investment works.
Wait, so if I give $150,000 of funding to these guys, I don't get a share in the profits? That's not how investment works.
I actually could see a japanese software house like for example Capcom revive one of his beloved and iconic character through community help and partial funding maybe selling the prototype.The sad thing, to me at least, is that it seems like this whole fan funding thing is something that Japanese devs would never do. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong, but I can't see a company like say...SNK or Cave starting something like this. And that's a damn shame.
Almost 400 posters to sign, someone's hand is going to be tired
Not to take away from the accomplishment so far, but with 10000 people stirring the pot (having inputs), I'm curious how the project will proceed trying to please every person involved. I certainly won't envy whoever they pick to be the community manager.
No, this is how sponsoring works.
This will be the longest credits roll in gaming history.
Does this not irk people somewhat? I mean, great, we can fund our favourite developers to make the games we've always wanted. That's genuinely great. But by the same token, am I the only person who thinks this is essentially charity, and we're giving these people our money to make something, who are then going to potentially rake in the profits whilst all we get in return is a game?
I mean, sure, we get a game that perhaps we really wanted, and if that's worth $x to you and that's what you've donated, fine, you'll be happy about it. But still. This seems a little shady to me.
First of all, no, it's not all you get in return. See the rewards tiers. People like both cool stuff and the warm fuzzy feeling they get when donating.Does this not irk people somewhat? I mean, great, we can fund our favourite developers to make the games we've always wanted. That's genuinely great. But by the same token, am I the only person who thinks this is essentially charity, and we're giving these people our money to make something, who are then going to potentially rake in the profits whilst all we get in return is a game?
I mean, sure, we get a game that perhaps we really wanted, and if that's worth $x to you and that's what you've donated, fine, you'll be happy about it. But still. This seems a little shady to me.
I had the same thing, waiting to hear back from Amazon.
For some reason I get the phrase "this functionality has been disabled for your account" when attempting to fund this. Pretty annoying. Not entirely sure why.
We get in return is a game? But still. This seems a little shady to me.
And I think one of the most important messages here is not that Double Fine's pledging idea actually worked, nor that it worked so quickly, but that it only required ~10,000 people to fund a $400,000 project. Ten thousand people. How many games can you imagine other publishers have canned, and developers have had to can, for expecting ten times that amount of potential buyers and that still not being enough?
Yup. I agree with both.To me this says that games like this from this kind of talent aren't dead; you* have just been pitching it to the wrong people.
*The publishers. Not YOU you. Unless you're a publisher, in which case hissssssssssssssssssssssss
Does this not irk people somewhat? I mean, great, we can fund our favourite developers to make the games we've always wanted. That's genuinely great. But by the same token, am I the only person who thinks this is essentially charity, and we're giving these people our money to make something, who are then going to potentially rake in the profits whilst all we get in return is a game?
I mean, sure, we get a game that perhaps we really wanted, and if that's worth $x to you and that's what you've donated, fine, you'll be happy about it. But still. This seems a little shady to me.
I'm just trying to be devil's advocate here. There seems to be overwhelming positivity about this in this thread, with nobody as far as I can see questioning it from this angle. I mean, am I right in assuming that Schafer and co will keep profits?
Does this not irk people somewhat? I mean, great, we can fund our favourite developers to make the games we've always wanted. That's genuinely great. But by the same token, am I the only person who thinks this is essentially charity, and we're giving these people our money to make something, who are then going to potentially rake in the profits whilst all we get in return is a game?
I mean, sure, we get a game that perhaps we really wanted, and if that's worth $x to you and that's what you've donated, fine, you'll be happy about it. But still. This seems a little shady to me.
I'm just trying to be devil's advocate here. There seems to be overwhelming positivity about this in this thread, with nobody as far as I can see questioning it from this angle.