I had to, psychonauts was one of the first games I played all the way through, and enjoyed thouroughly. The story and characters and gameplay were all very compelling, and even though I'm normally not much for a click-adventure game, seeing the whole process of development should be interesting!
I am, however only a poor student so I kept it to 15$.
EDIT: oh and I totally forgot about Grim Fandango, for which I had to look up some clues but still finished playing (even though it was more of a to-do list now) simply because of the awesome setting and story.
I think it's against Kickstarter's rules to use the money for anything other than what's stated in the original pitch, right?
So, this will all have to go towards the dev of thier next point and click adventure game, and the documentary about it's making.
I think.
If that's the case, how exactly is Kickstarter gonna monitor that? All this money is just essentially gonna pay the salaries of dudes sitting at computers and manning the cameras. What those dudes do while sitting at computers is another matter entirely. Unless Kickstarter has some sort of thought police.
If that's the case, how exactly is Kickstarter gonna monitor that? All this money is just essentially gonna pay the salaries of dudes sitting at computers and manning the cameras. What those dudes do while sitting at computers is another matter entirely. Unless Kickstarter has some sort of thought police.
They don't monitor it. If you wanted to pay yourself a 1 million dollar salary and do the whole thing yourself, then you can. But yes, you're supposed to use all the money on the project.
I've gotta admit I have mixed feelings about this. I love everyone helping to fund a project that they're interested in, but I feel like if you're contributing a decent amount of money, then there should be some sort of return on your investment. I don't know why it bothers me that people are just giving away their money to this company, but it kinda does. No big deal though. Their choice.
I've gotta admit I have mixed feelings about this. I love everyone helping to fund a project that they're interested in, but I feel like if you're contributing a decent amount of money, then there should be some sort of return on your investment. I don't know why it bothers me that people are just giving away their money to this company, but it kinda does. No big deal though. Their choice.
What do you mean a return on the investment. Anyone who donates gets the game, the dev documentaries and access to the exclusive forum. Then there are tons of other rewards like limited edition posters, tours of the studio, etc... I'm sure you read most of the rewards. Are you saying they should get a percentage of the sales from the game?
I've gotta admit I have mixed feelings about this. I love everyone helping to fund a project that they're interested in, but I feel like if you're contributing a decent amount of money, then there should be some sort of return on your investment. I don't know why it bothers me that people are just giving away their money to this company, but it kinda does. No big deal though. Their choice.
I can understand this. I think Kickstarter's meant for startups, and people making their first splash into whatever industry it is they're aiming for.
For an established company to use it, who have worked on some rather big games, headed by a guy that's made some of the most-loved titles ever, doesn't sit right with me, either. I guess it's within the Kickstarter rules, so I guess it's all above board.
But, this initial strangeness aside, I am really glad for them, and am looking forward to a new point and click game. I'm curious if other studios might go this route and bypass publishers completely. I wonder if it might work so well for smaller, or lesser-known teams. I also wonder how many publishers are shitting their pants that this experiment has yielded such an impressive response.
This is pretty awesome and I'm really all for it. But much like others here it's also tripping my "the world is a changing" sense really bad.
The only negative I can feel is that consumers working with this system imply that their money is for the services rendered and not for the product. That may not sound so bad from behind our desks as it is a frequent issue in debates about piracy et. al. but I'm very used to looking at a completed product, considering its worth and price, and then deciding to purchase based on that. If it was made by a company I like and I get to feel good supporting them then that's a bonus.
I dunno this radical new finance model sound like it could perpetuate the current trend of "lol we can do what we want because it's business, and you paid us so you like that right?"
It's very interesting stuff, but also a bit puzzling as some mentioned it above.
I pledged because I do believe in supporting an innovative company, and I am also in favor of cutting the middleman (publisher) in a time when physical media is becoming obsolete and big marketing campaigns are more and more pointless. I am super interested in the beta releases of the game too, very cool stuff. (I don't care much for the videos and user forums tho.)
It's kinda odd that Kickstarter would let an established company use its platform that way - but in a way, I can understand why : DF would certainly have a very hard time finding a "regular" investor/publisher to finance and or distribute something as niche as a classic adventure game ; in a way, DF indeed does seem to comply with the Kickstarter indie philosophy.
The KS requirements state :
To be eligible to start a Kickstarter project, you need to satisfy the requirements of Amazon Payments:
Be a permanent US resident and at least 18 years of age with a Social Security Number (or EIN), a US bank account, US address, US state-issued ID (drivers license), and major US credit or debit card.
So, since in the US corporations are legally people, I suppose it works just fine for DF ? But can a company really have a "US state-issued ID" ?
Anyways - I think what I like the most about this idea is that it is all based on trust. If you trust the guy and the DF team because you enjoyed their games before, then it's a total no brainer!
Very curious to see how this develops, and what will happen next with other small studios using the same kind of crowd funding systems.
I can understand this. I think Kickstarter's meant for startups, and people making their first splash into whatever industry it is they're aiming for.
For an established company to use it, who have worked on some rather big games, headed by a guy that's made some of the most-loved titles ever, doesn't sit right with me, either. I guess it's within the Kickstarter rules, so I guess it's all above board.
But, this initial strangeness aside, I am really glad for them, and am looking forward to a new point and click game. I'm curious if other studios might go this route and bypass publishers completely. I wonder if it might work so well for smaller, or lesser-known teams. I also wonder how many publishers are shitting their pants that this experiment has yielded such an impressive response.
I think that's been a misunderstanding with people all the time, kickstarter has never been just for the startup or small guy, it's been for whomever has an idea that needs funding, and for the people ready to pay up front for that idea.
This is hardly the first time a known developer or person has used kickstarter for a project, but it is the first time it has reached this kind of a budget.
Which is the big reason this is so special, no one knew kickstarter could gather this amount of money, even doublefine aimed very low with their project.
Publishers will only start shitting their pants when kickstarter-projects can reach multimillion budgets, until then they probably don't care much.
People are often mistaking this as people giving away money for nothing, resulting in some "oh but people should give money to those that TRULY need it", when people are in fact most often giving some money and getting something in return, in this being the actual game and documentary for $15 and other bonuses if they paid more.
... let an established company use its platform that way - but in a way, I can understand why : DF would certainly have a very hard time finding a "regular" investor/publisher to finance and or distribute something as niche as a classic adventure game ; in a way, DF indeed does seem to comply with the Kickstarter indie philosophy.
As a side-effect most projects that end up on kickstarter will be indie-projects, since without a publisher in the picture, this game will be developed solely by double fine in an indie-spirit.
Anyways - I think what I like the most about this idea is that it is all based on trust. If you trust the guy and the DF team because you enjoyed their games before, then it's a total no brainer!
.
Yep, I guess this is why doublefine have had such a success, with a ton of people having no doubt at all that they'll get the product they pay for, which is the big hurdle in crowdfunding:
"Will I get the project I pay up front for, or maybe it is better to wait until it is finished and pay then?"
Jesus christ, HBoy. Can you miss the mark more with that image? I don't think so. Ignoring the absolutely piss-poor grammar and typos, I'll bite:
-Reiterating a dead genre of games with a new shitty game nobody wants to play
Uhm. No-one, apart from the people who've put up one and a half million dollars, already. And the new game'll be shitty, why? Because the company making it was built by two venerable founding fathers of point and click adventure games? Utter shit.
-Being produced by steriotypical white males with no regard for cultural sensitivity
How do you know that the entire staff of Double Fine has no regard for cultural sensitivity? I checked out the tumblr for the Arkh project. They're only interested in having "people of color", preferably "queer", work on their game. That sounds entirely culturally sensitive, "representing all creeds, colors and orientations", eh?
-Targetting an audience which is now in its late 30s and shouldnt be playing video games anymore
Seriously, fuck whoever made this image. I take insult that these people are trying to limit an age bracket to playing games. Apparently it's fine to keep it open to all colours, races, genders and lifestyles. But age? Oh no! Let's limit those old people, whatever persuasion they might be.
Senseless, blind, jealous, hypocritical hating, HBoy, and you ought to know better.
glynnsmith, I got curious and read up on that other project, seems to be quite some drama surrounding it.
So I'm pretty sure that image was created to have some sort of rage-marketing effect where people will post it around and talk about it to create awareness for that other project in a tasteless way.
wow.. really?.. that trolled? the blind fanboy levels are strong with this one
I don't really care either way about that picture, but why not just chuckle and move along?
also, it's not that Hboybowen made that picture.. but hey, let's kill the messanger while we're at it eh? can't let people post just whatever they want about our lord and savior, no mather how much of a troll or joke it might be!
also, Shafer's team getting more money doesn't mean that the development time will be extended and in turn result in a better product. he has allready set a deadline has he not? I think it was 6 months from now or so? meh, guess more money would mean 50 people rather than 10.. more cooks is better, I hear
glynnsmith, I got curious and read up on that other project, seems to be quite some drama surrounding it.
So I'm pretty sure that image was created to have some sort of rage-marketing effect where people will post it around and talk about it to create awareness for that other project in a tasteless way.
On that note, pledged! I'm extremely excited to get a new (and in all likelihood great) adventure game.
I don't think that this could become a standard way of paying for games though. This company is just unique enough to make it happen, considering most of the pledgers have an emotional attachment to the developers by growing up with their games. Added to that it's a company with tons of goodwill.
wow.. really?.. that trolled? the blind fanboy levels are strong with this one
Everyone knows that Tim S. is the supreme leader of the KKK and all of his games have hidden agendas of racism, it's not like his games had a variety of charters which represented other cultures without referencing skin color, and besides, he clearly makes old people games.
Really? Do you realize that whoever made that picture is essentially calling Tim S. a racist smucktard bigot who is acting like a grown up baby man just because he is white and more people donated to this cause, right?
Trolling or not, that is in poor taste, what's next? Calling a white person racist because he married a white woman? Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I'm white, more people supported my project, I have a penis and I married a white person, therefore my games and my entire staff is composed of racist assholes.
And Arkh is also a failed project, why you ask? An average team of developers, in California or Chicago, based upon a one year contract with minimum wage would need about 150-200K to complete the year, while still being able to get food and clothes.
So explain to me how on Earth a 'large' team of 'colored, tran, and queer' people who will make a 'colored, tran and queer' game will able to survive on 100K exactly?
Also, since when is getting rid of the 'white' people a solution? Isn't that racist in itself? Why is that being overlooked and OK with the community?
I guess, we're old and smelly, muahaha!
I don't really care either way about that picture, but why not just chuckle and move along?
Not caring about what your racist uncle says is one thing, not caring about what racist friends says is also one thing, but when an entire Developer team is being ridiculed and being called it racist is another.
Consider this, not only is a member of Arkh being racist, but they run a Thumblr account called 'dumbthingswhitepplsay' and put a comment along the lines of 'how to shut up a white woman'.
How is any of that OK, when the current dev's themselves of Arkh don't even live by the message they're trying to send out? Seriously, this is hypocritical at best and sickeningly pathetic at worst.
Plus, their design is horrible, seriously? Perfect white Asian male, kissing a woman that looks like she has been dipped in tea, who is sporting really stupid clothing? More skin = More armor right? Last people I would have expected to fall for this trope would have been the same people who are trying to break the mold.
Oh but I know, we'll say that we have a black/indian/asian/latino girl on our team who made the design for the character and everyone will back off, isn't that OK?
also, it's not that Hboybowen made that picture.. but hey, let's kill the messanger while we're at it eh? can't let people post just whatever they want about our lord and savior, no mather how much of a troll or joke it might be!
Actually, not to take out your point, but what says he didn't. So far no one has posted up their name on that image, nor put up a naming convention. It's a flying image with no association.
It could also very well originate from 4C if it's the case, or maybe someone from Thumblr or who knows where else, but HBoy posted it without any information or wording, and considering he was pissed off at DF getting too much cash, what else is one supposed to assume other than that he created it?
Absent minded? Maybe? But wouldn't help in anyone's case.
also, Shafer's team getting more money doesn't mean that the development time will be extended and in turn result in a better product. he has allready set a deadline has he not? I think it was 6 months from now or so? meh, guess more money would mean 50 people rather than 10.. more cooks is better, I hear
In game dev? Last I heard, yes, what happens if one of your sculptors fall ill during crunch time? Oh, I know, bring in the next guy or outsource it quickly. Maybe need a port to PC? Have the spare cash. What happens if the game goes through a rough patch before picking up in sales? You don't have to close the company and fire everyone.
Plus, you also have audio, programming, testing, etc. Art isn't all that there is, nor is animation.
Frankly, the gist of what I'm saying is NO, I will not get over-my-self, how about you get over-your-self and realize non of this is OK and should not accepted. Apathy is a terrible thing to live by.
I'm suspecting Mr Bowen might work on the Arkh project and is upset that this big name studio has swept in a grabbed a bunch of money while the little indis languish. Which is not entirely unreasonable though he'd do better to be up front about it.
I pulled up the Arkh page. First thought is that the web design could use a lot of work. Beyond that, I can make some hypothesis on why the project hasn't taken off yet.
The Arkh project doesn't have much in the way of funding because it's simply put, a poor sell. While they have some interesting ideas and their hearts are more or less in the right place (though some of their ideas seem slightly misguided), their website doesn't give any indication that they have any idea what they're doing. There's only a very vague description of gameplay along with some nice concept art and written descriptions.
It smells like another well-meaning indi project that's doomed to fail, unfortunate though that might be. Maybe that won't turn out to the case, but they need to allay those fears before people start tossing money into their proverbial hat.
Looking at the scope and budget it's pretty obvious it's doomed to fail, is being poorly run from a production side of things, and I'm sure when it inevitably fails the blame will be shifted to the white, straight cismale keeping them down.
But the Arkh Project as it is outlined is a terrible fucking idea. If you want to throw money at issues with white privilege and male gaze, there are other options. Hell, your $5k that they're spending on a handful of concepts would fund the entirety of Anna Anthropy's book tour: http://www.indiegogo.com/Anna-Anthropy-World-Tour-2012
Which is both much more reasonably budgeted, scoped, and involves an (soon to be) existing piece of media.
I'd love to support the Arkh Project but reading their plan it's painfully obvious that it's going to flame out and fail, and it's only a matter of whether that happens before or after they get out of the whimsical fantasy land of making concept art.
Honestly at this point I think the Arkh Project is going to do more harm than good by running off with their $5k (they have not been seeing new donations lately and have largely stagnated) and some concept art and making the folks who initially supported it wary of supporting a project like that in the future.
you have to realize most people are not actually donating money, the average donation is in the $30 range which means they are pre-ordering the game and the documentary.
Because I thought it was a interesting image about a strange project. Though I am still wondering myself why people donated to Double Fine so much out of all the projects that have been on kickstarter.
You mean, why on earth would people pre-purchase (not donate), a game from a company with long experience in making them, a proven trackrecord, some key people behind the adventure genre and games that a vast amount of people cherished and grew up with?
And should they instead purchase a project from some people with no experience, no solid game idea to show off, and a project lead that seems to be weirdly racist and unstable, and not only that, their target fund won't be enough to go around, so they'll eventually run out before the game is finished.
Why are people putting money into one and not the other?
Because I thought it was a interesting image about a strange project. Though I am still wondering myself why people donated to Double Fine so much out of all the projects that have been on kickstarter.
Because they want a new Tim Schafer Adventure Game?
Tim Schafer rose to fame and Sith-like power on the back of that genre and is well-loved by folks in gaming and tech industries, who traditionally have a lot of disposable income. Growing up in that era, if you were a serious computer-user, you had at least one of his games and you wax nostaglic for them.
So when you have the opportunity to pre-order a new Tim Schafer (and Ron Gilbert) Adventure Game, and potentially get some pretty sweet stuff in there (the larger donations were all pretty awesome), you go for it.
Nothing else on Kickstarter has "eat lunch with a childhood/teenage hero and tour his videogame office" at the $10k mark. No one else on Kickstarter has "$15 documentary about that same hero and how he is making a game like the ones you grew up on."
It's a combination of nerd-attraction, nostalgia, and wish fulfillment.
I doubt any other Kickstarter projects are going to come close for a good long time.
I have zero problem with people donating and getting excited, its just it seems like its a lot of hype and buzz when there are probably some great projects that get nowhere near the same level of exposure.
Hell, go on tigsource and have a gander at some of the devlog's on there, theres some great game ideas floating around and some may never see the light of day... it just seems a bit redudent past a certain point to keep showing your support for an entity that is seemingly self sustained?
But all in all, its a good thing, i understand why its a bit frustrating to see so much money poured blindly (more like tunnel vision fanboy) into one project.
Not that im trying to take some kind of douchebag moral highground, DONATE TO CANCER stance, just trying to show another point of view.
I have zero problem with people donating and getting excited, its just it seems like its a lot of hype and buzz when there are probably some great projects that get nowhere near the same level of exposure.
If you noticed though, it's no charity.
Creative projects only
Kickstarter cannot be used to fund for charity projects or causes. While there are countless causes worthy of support, we believe that creativity deserves its own space
People get access to the game AND the documentary if they pay the minimum of $15, soundtrack and HD documentary at $30.
This is where most of the "donations" are, they're paying because they want to have the game when it's done, and they want to see the diary like documentary as they're making it, and they want the soundtrack.
It's like pre-ordering a game.
It's all about funding and much like with a publisher you have to sell your idea in a very good way, and you'll have to have the promise of something when it's all done.
As already mentioned, few kickstarter projects will give you the finished game AND the documentary for just $15, the arkh project as an example will give you access to the beta only if you pay $500.
A example of kickstarter where it got funded but ended badly was the Orion:Prelude project where it was revealed here on Polycount that he ripped off his team by firing them and not giving them any compensation.
Which even further proves that people are more likely to fund a known studio.
Is making profit-sharing/royalties one of the tier'd prizes a possibility through kickstarter? Would be an interesting way for people to feel like they really invested in a project if that is something they can buy into. I imagine it would potentially get people to buy a higher tier than they might have otherwise. Of course, I'm sure there would be issues.
I'm not really arguing specifics more ideals, perhaps this sudden influx of people who have now used kickstarter may now be more aware of what it is and look for new projects.
You're probably more in the know than i am, eld, on all the prototype/dead project videos that sit around on youtube. Look at that midway game Necissary force, for example... they had a last ditch attempt to pitch that prior to shutting down. Perhaps they should have put that up on kickstarter?
I digress though, i know what kickstarter is and it just seems strange (albeit nice in this case) to have a big name use it in such a way.
@SHEP, yeah i can see that... if it means that companies could branch out and gauge interest like that it'd be fucking fantastic.
As a bit of a tangent, and as strange as it sounds im not hugely fond of marketing or that idea that because something is marketed well it can be an inferior product and sell more. I think the quality of the "thing" should always be what matters.... but hey, naive idealist talk in a world where branding is key.
Is making profit-sharing/royalties one of the tier'd prizes a possibility through kickstarter? Would be an interesting way for people to feel like they really invested in a project if that is something they can buy into. I imagine it would potentially get people to buy a higher tier than they might have otherwise. Of course, I'm sure there would be issues.
I'm pretty sure it's in the rules that the compensation for funding a Kickstarter project has to be a non-monetary gift. So money as recompense isn't allowed Hence why you sometimes get whacky "Dinner with...", or "Ride in a car with..." gifts which, honestly, makes the whole thing a nicer, lighthearted experience - It'd probably suck if the place was filled with sharks, making shrewd investments based on a bottom line.
I'm sure there are crowdfunding sites that offer that kind of thing, though. Kickstarter, only being available in the US, isn't the only crowdfunding site out there.
I have to agree that it seems kinda sketchy that a big mainstream company with 6 released console games is asking people on the internet for money... They should be able to fund their own projects at that point, not to mention there is another company about 20 miles away from them that has been making successful modern adventure games for years.
The original budget of $300,000 is very unrealistic (on the small side) when they have to pay the salary of every person working on the game for over a year. The amount they have raised now is a much more realistic budget for an actual team developed game but $1.6 million is insane for having absolutely nothing to show or even tell in terms of what the game will actually be.
I simply don't understand the negativity in this thread. There is pretty much unlimited funding available through kickstarter. It's not like Double Fine is stealing it from some poor Indie's bank account.
It's simply absurd to think that if Double Fine's kickstarter project didn't exist that other projects such as Arkh would have gotten a significant share of what Double Fine has raised. Most people aren't randomly browsing kickstarter going "hmm... I've got this money burning a hole in my pocket, what project should I back today?". They hear about a cool project that interests them and then go and back it.
Seriously, if you're developing a game what better way is there to gauge interest, secure funding, and avoid publisher BS all at the same time?.
Why begrudge Double Fine for doing what most game studios dream of doing? Why say that they should take an apparently unnecessary financial risk when they don't have to?
I don't think you realize how fine a line small studios like double fine walk. They are not a large "mainstream" studio or publisher and do not have a bottomless pit of money to draw from.
They should be able to fund their own projects at that point, not to mention there is another company about 20 miles away from them that has been making successful modern adventure games for years.
What company is this?
I really love that Double Fine was able to secure funding for their game through voluntary means and send a message to other developers that they can do the same. Anyone that hates this can go pound sand.
I have to agree that it seems kinda sketchy that a big mainstream company with 6 released console games is asking people on the internet for money... They should be able to fund their own projects at that point, not to mention there is another company about 20 miles away from them that has been making successful modern adventure games for years.
The original budget of $300,000 is very unrealistic (on the small side) when they have to pay the salary of every person working on the game for over a year. The amount they have raised now is a much more realistic budget for an actual team developed game but $1.6 million is insane for having absolutely nothing to show or even tell in terms of what the game will actually be.
Be able to fund their own games at that point? You seriously think most studios can just fund their own games after releasing a few games? We'd have a lot more AAA indie studios if that were the case.
No, the money earned is eaten up at pretty much the same pace you get it. If you don't get a publisher interested in funding the game for you the project is pretty much dead.
As for absolutely nothing to show? No, that's true. But this is a promise made by some of the MOST BRILLIANT MINDS to ever develop adventure games. It takes a good bit of faith to kickstart a project, but these people that definitely have the skills to deliver.
I have to agree that it seems kinda sketchy that a big mainstream company with 6 released console games is asking people on the internet for money... They should be able to fund their own projects at that point, not to mention there is another company about 20 miles away from them that has been making successful modern adventure games for years.
As people said, a vast majority of bigger games companies don't have the luxury to fund their own projects, now you'll realize why publishers have been so important to the world of games, And once again, they're not asking for money, they're essentially just turning the makegame->makemoney thing around, it's the very foundation of crowd funding.
Instead of the middleman of the publisher that would get back the money through purchasing customers, you go to the purchasing customers directly and have them buy the game before it is finished and gather the funding in that way.
The original budget of $300,000 is very unrealistic (on the small side) when they have to pay the salary of every person working on the game for over a year. The amount they have raised now is a much more realistic budget for an actual team developed game
The original budget was for a classic adventure game made by a smaller part of doublefine, it was realistically small as no one believed it was actually conceivable to reach any higher amount.
but $1.6 million is insane for having absolutely nothing to show or even tell in terms of what the game will actually be.
Much like every other project on kickstarter, except doublefine is a solid company, and they know how to work under the pressure of a budget, whatever the game comes to they'll release it, and they'll document the whole process meanwhile for people who paid to see.
They shouldnt be in a place where they are reliant on publisher funding to make a game. The idea of a publisher to most people these days is laughable. Telltale has proven that the genre is not dead or even slightly unsuccessful.
They shouldnt be in a place where they are reliant on publisher funding to make a game. The idea of a publisher to most people these days is laughable. Telltale has proven that the genre is not dead or even slightly unsuccessful.
Isn't pretty much any big studio now a days reliant on having a publisher to found a game? Thoose $300 million dollars project doesn't come fromm the studio's own pocket. Usually all the money lies with the publishers because of the deals they strike with the studios, much like how it's done in the music industry. "We'll give you all the money you need to pull of this project, in return we most likely take control over the IP and take a large cut of every game sold in order to return our investment".
I think using crowd sourcing is a brilliant idea, it will also allow Tim and Ron to have full control over how they want to develop this IP without having a publisher breathing down their necks in order to make sure the game can generate as much money as possible(read: dumbing down controls for consoles, bad ports etc.)
I can't see why this would piss anyone off. Just because they are a larger company with a well established background doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to find new ways found their games.
Replies
So, this will all have to go towards the dev of thier next point and click adventure game, and the documentary about it's making.
I think.
I am, however only a poor student so I kept it to 15$.
EDIT: oh and I totally forgot about Grim Fandango, for which I had to look up some clues but still finished playing (even though it was more of a to-do list now) simply because of the awesome setting and story.
If that's the case, how exactly is Kickstarter gonna monitor that? All this money is just essentially gonna pay the salaries of dudes sitting at computers and manning the cameras. What those dudes do while sitting at computers is another matter entirely. Unless Kickstarter has some sort of thought police.
They don't monitor it. If you wanted to pay yourself a 1 million dollar salary and do the whole thing yourself, then you can. But yes, you're supposed to use all the money on the project.
I've gotta admit I have mixed feelings about this. I love everyone helping to fund a project that they're interested in, but I feel like if you're contributing a decent amount of money, then there should be some sort of return on your investment. I don't know why it bothers me that people are just giving away their money to this company, but it kinda does. No big deal though. Their choice.
What do you mean a return on the investment. Anyone who donates gets the game, the dev documentaries and access to the exclusive forum. Then there are tons of other rewards like limited edition posters, tours of the studio, etc... I'm sure you read most of the rewards. Are you saying they should get a percentage of the sales from the game?
I can understand this. I think Kickstarter's meant for startups, and people making their first splash into whatever industry it is they're aiming for.
For an established company to use it, who have worked on some rather big games, headed by a guy that's made some of the most-loved titles ever, doesn't sit right with me, either. I guess it's within the Kickstarter rules, so I guess it's all above board.
But, this initial strangeness aside, I am really glad for them, and am looking forward to a new point and click game. I'm curious if other studios might go this route and bypass publishers completely. I wonder if it might work so well for smaller, or lesser-known teams. I also wonder how many publishers are shitting their pants that this experiment has yielded such an impressive response.
The only negative I can feel is that consumers working with this system imply that their money is for the services rendered and not for the product. That may not sound so bad from behind our desks as it is a frequent issue in debates about piracy et. al. but I'm very used to looking at a completed product, considering its worth and price, and then deciding to purchase based on that. If it was made by a company I like and I get to feel good supporting them then that's a bonus.
I dunno this radical new finance model sound like it could perpetuate the current trend of "lol we can do what we want because it's business, and you paid us so you like that right?"
I pledged because I do believe in supporting an innovative company, and I am also in favor of cutting the middleman (publisher) in a time when physical media is becoming obsolete and big marketing campaigns are more and more pointless. I am super interested in the beta releases of the game too, very cool stuff. (I don't care much for the videos and user forums tho.)
It's kinda odd that Kickstarter would let an established company use its platform that way - but in a way, I can understand why : DF would certainly have a very hard time finding a "regular" investor/publisher to finance and or distribute something as niche as a classic adventure game ; in a way, DF indeed does seem to comply with the Kickstarter indie philosophy.
The KS requirements state :
So, since in the US corporations are legally people, I suppose it works just fine for DF ? But can a company really have a "US state-issued ID" ?
Anyways - I think what I like the most about this idea is that it is all based on trust. If you trust the guy and the DF team because you enjoyed their games before, then it's a total no brainer!
Very curious to see how this develops, and what will happen next with other small studios using the same kind of crowd funding systems.
I think that's been a misunderstanding with people all the time, kickstarter has never been just for the startup or small guy, it's been for whomever has an idea that needs funding, and for the people ready to pay up front for that idea.
This is hardly the first time a known developer or person has used kickstarter for a project, but it is the first time it has reached this kind of a budget.
Which is the big reason this is so special, no one knew kickstarter could gather this amount of money, even doublefine aimed very low with their project.
Publishers will only start shitting their pants when kickstarter-projects can reach multimillion budgets, until then they probably don't care much.
People are often mistaking this as people giving away money for nothing, resulting in some "oh but people should give money to those that TRULY need it", when people are in fact most often giving some money and getting something in return, in this being the actual game and documentary for $15 and other bonuses if they paid more.
As a side-effect most projects that end up on kickstarter will be indie-projects, since without a publisher in the picture, this game will be developed solely by double fine in an indie-spirit.
That's just some special rules on individuals using kickstarter, companies can do just as much.
Yep, I guess this is why doublefine have had such a success, with a ton of people having no doubt at all that they'll get the product they pay for, which is the big hurdle in crowdfunding:
"Will I get the project I pay up front for, or maybe it is better to wait until it is finished and pay then?"
Uhm. No-one, apart from the people who've put up one and a half million dollars, already. And the new game'll be shitty, why? Because the company making it was built by two venerable founding fathers of point and click adventure games? Utter shit.
How do you know that the entire staff of Double Fine has no regard for cultural sensitivity? I checked out the tumblr for the Arkh project. They're only interested in having "people of color", preferably "queer", work on their game. That sounds entirely culturally sensitive, "representing all creeds, colors and orientations", eh?
Seriously, fuck whoever made this image. I take insult that these people are trying to limit an age bracket to playing games. Apparently it's fine to keep it open to all colours, races, genders and lifestyles. But age? Oh no! Let's limit those old people, whatever persuasion they might be.
Senseless, blind, jealous, hypocritical hating, HBoy, and you ought to know better.
No justice, indeed.
So I'm pretty sure that image was created to have some sort of rage-marketing effect where people will post it around and talk about it to create awareness for that other project in a tasteless way.
I don't really care either way about that picture, but why not just chuckle and move along?
also, it's not that Hboybowen made that picture.. but hey, let's kill the messanger while we're at it eh? can't let people post just whatever they want about our lord and savior, no mather how much of a troll or joke it might be!
also, Shafer's team getting more money doesn't mean that the development time will be extended and in turn result in a better product. he has allready set a deadline has he not? I think it was 6 months from now or so? meh, guess more money would mean 50 people rather than 10.. more cooks is better, I hear
Probably explains why they've only made 5k, eh?
You sound like a bot, that looks like a troll. Chuckle!
On that note, pledged! I'm extremely excited to get a new (and in all likelihood great) adventure game.
I don't think that this could become a standard way of paying for games though. This company is just unique enough to make it happen, considering most of the pledgers have an emotional attachment to the developers by growing up with their games. Added to that it's a company with tons of goodwill.
Everyone knows that Tim S. is the supreme leader of the KKK and all of his games have hidden agendas of racism, it's not like his games had a variety of charters which represented other cultures without referencing skin color, and besides, he clearly makes old people games.
Really? Do you realize that whoever made that picture is essentially calling Tim S. a racist smucktard bigot who is acting like a grown up baby man just because he is white and more people donated to this cause, right?
Trolling or not, that is in poor taste, what's next? Calling a white person racist because he married a white woman? Oh, I'm sorry, I guess I'm white, more people supported my project, I have a penis and I married a white person, therefore my games and my entire staff is composed of racist assholes.
And Arkh is also a failed project, why you ask? An average team of developers, in California or Chicago, based upon a one year contract with minimum wage would need about 150-200K to complete the year, while still being able to get food and clothes.
So explain to me how on Earth a 'large' team of 'colored, tran, and queer' people who will make a 'colored, tran and queer' game will able to survive on 100K exactly?
Also, since when is getting rid of the 'white' people a solution? Isn't that racist in itself? Why is that being overlooked and OK with the community?
I guess, we're old and smelly, muahaha!
Not caring about what your racist uncle says is one thing, not caring about what racist friends says is also one thing, but when an entire Developer team is being ridiculed and being called it racist is another.
Consider this, not only is a member of Arkh being racist, but they run a Thumblr account called 'dumbthingswhitepplsay' and put a comment along the lines of 'how to shut up a white woman'.
How is any of that OK, when the current dev's themselves of Arkh don't even live by the message they're trying to send out? Seriously, this is hypocritical at best and sickeningly pathetic at worst.
Plus, their design is horrible, seriously? Perfect white Asian male, kissing a woman that looks like she has been dipped in tea, who is sporting really stupid clothing? More skin = More armor right? Last people I would have expected to fall for this trope would have been the same people who are trying to break the mold.
Oh but I know, we'll say that we have a black/indian/asian/latino girl on our team who made the design for the character and everyone will back off, isn't that OK?
Actually, not to take out your point, but what says he didn't. So far no one has posted up their name on that image, nor put up a naming convention. It's a flying image with no association.
It could also very well originate from 4C if it's the case, or maybe someone from Thumblr or who knows where else, but HBoy posted it without any information or wording, and considering he was pissed off at DF getting too much cash, what else is one supposed to assume other than that he created it?
Absent minded? Maybe? But wouldn't help in anyone's case.
In game dev? Last I heard, yes, what happens if one of your sculptors fall ill during crunch time? Oh, I know, bring in the next guy or outsource it quickly. Maybe need a port to PC? Have the spare cash. What happens if the game goes through a rough patch before picking up in sales? You don't have to close the company and fire everyone.
Plus, you also have audio, programming, testing, etc. Art isn't all that there is, nor is animation.
Frankly, the gist of what I'm saying is NO, I will not get over-my-self, how about you get over-your-self and realize non of this is OK and should not accepted. Apathy is a terrible thing to live by.
"being produced by stereotypical white males with no regard for cultural sensitivity"
HUh?!
I pulled up the Arkh page. First thought is that the web design could use a lot of work. Beyond that, I can make some hypothesis on why the project hasn't taken off yet.
The Arkh project doesn't have much in the way of funding because it's simply put, a poor sell. While they have some interesting ideas and their hearts are more or less in the right place (though some of their ideas seem slightly misguided), their website doesn't give any indication that they have any idea what they're doing. There's only a very vague description of gameplay along with some nice concept art and written descriptions.
It smells like another well-meaning indi project that's doomed to fail, unfortunate though that might be. Maybe that won't turn out to the case, but they need to allay those fears before people start tossing money into their proverbial hat.
Right. Nobody. Nobody spent one and a half million dollars of their own money to help fund it.
"targetting an audience which is now in its late 30s and shouldnt be playing games anymore"
Who do you think makes all those games on the shelves at the store? Teenagers?
this is opportunity to introduce fun adventure game back to market.
unless they can have several decent 2d artist
3d is way to go.
just in case ...
Likewise.
What was the point of you posting that image?, which if you had checked the history of that other project just makes it so much weirder.
The Arkh Project is a noble idea poorly planned and budgeted, helmed by a rather angry and hateful person:
http://dumbthingswhitepplsay.tumblr.com/post/16877108113/there-has-to-be-some-way-to-tell-white-women-to-shut-up
Looking at the scope and budget it's pretty obvious it's doomed to fail, is being poorly run from a production side of things, and I'm sure when it inevitably fails the blame will be shifted to the white, straight cismale keeping them down.
But the Arkh Project as it is outlined is a terrible fucking idea. If you want to throw money at issues with white privilege and male gaze, there are other options. Hell, your $5k that they're spending on a handful of concepts would fund the entirety of Anna Anthropy's book tour:
http://www.indiegogo.com/Anna-Anthropy-World-Tour-2012
Which is both much more reasonably budgeted, scoped, and involves an (soon to be) existing piece of media.
I'd love to support the Arkh Project but reading their plan it's painfully obvious that it's going to flame out and fail, and it's only a matter of whether that happens before or after they get out of the whimsical fantasy land of making concept art.
Honestly at this point I think the Arkh Project is going to do more harm than good by running off with their $5k (they have not been seeing new donations lately and have largely stagnated) and some concept art and making the folks who initially supported it wary of supporting a project like that in the future.
you have to realize most people are not actually donating money, the average donation is in the $30 range which means they are pre-ordering the game and the documentary.
You mean, why on earth would people pre-purchase (not donate), a game from a company with long experience in making them, a proven trackrecord, some key people behind the adventure genre and games that a vast amount of people cherished and grew up with?
And should they instead purchase a project from some people with no experience, no solid game idea to show off, and a project lead that seems to be weirdly racist and unstable, and not only that, their target fund won't be enough to go around, so they'll eventually run out before the game is finished.
Why are people putting money into one and not the other?
Because they want a new Tim Schafer Adventure Game?
Tim Schafer rose to fame and Sith-like power on the back of that genre and is well-loved by folks in gaming and tech industries, who traditionally have a lot of disposable income. Growing up in that era, if you were a serious computer-user, you had at least one of his games and you wax nostaglic for them.
So when you have the opportunity to pre-order a new Tim Schafer (and Ron Gilbert) Adventure Game, and potentially get some pretty sweet stuff in there (the larger donations were all pretty awesome), you go for it.
Nothing else on Kickstarter has "eat lunch with a childhood/teenage hero and tour his videogame office" at the $10k mark. No one else on Kickstarter has "$15 documentary about that same hero and how he is making a game like the ones you grew up on."
It's a combination of nerd-attraction, nostalgia, and wish fulfillment.
I doubt any other Kickstarter projects are going to come close for a good long time.
Hell, go on tigsource and have a gander at some of the devlog's on there, theres some great game ideas floating around and some may never see the light of day... it just seems a bit redudent past a certain point to keep showing your support for an entity that is seemingly self sustained?
But all in all, its a good thing, i understand why its a bit frustrating to see so much money poured blindly (more like tunnel vision fanboy) into one project.
Not that im trying to take some kind of douchebag moral highground, DONATE TO CANCER stance, just trying to show another point of view.
If you noticed though, it's no charity.
People get access to the game AND the documentary if they pay the minimum of $15, soundtrack and HD documentary at $30.
This is where most of the "donations" are, they're paying because they want to have the game when it's done, and they want to see the diary like documentary as they're making it, and they want the soundtrack.
It's like pre-ordering a game.
It's all about funding and much like with a publisher you have to sell your idea in a very good way, and you'll have to have the promise of something when it's all done.
As already mentioned, few kickstarter projects will give you the finished game AND the documentary for just $15, the arkh project as an example will give you access to the beta only if you pay $500.
Which even further proves that people are more likely to fund a known studio.
You're probably more in the know than i am, eld, on all the prototype/dead project videos that sit around on youtube. Look at that midway game Necissary force, for example... they had a last ditch attempt to pitch that prior to shutting down. Perhaps they should have put that up on kickstarter?
I digress though, i know what kickstarter is and it just seems strange (albeit nice in this case) to have a big name use it in such a way.
@SHEP, yeah i can see that... if it means that companies could branch out and gauge interest like that it'd be fucking fantastic.
As a bit of a tangent, and as strange as it sounds im not hugely fond of marketing or that idea that because something is marketed well it can be an inferior product and sell more. I think the quality of the "thing" should always be what matters.... but hey, naive idealist talk in a world where branding is key.
HAHAHA
kotaku is just retarded.
I'm pretty sure it's in the rules that the compensation for funding a Kickstarter project has to be a non-monetary gift. So money as recompense isn't allowed
I'm sure there are crowdfunding sites that offer that kind of thing, though. Kickstarter, only being available in the US, isn't the only crowdfunding site out there.
The original budget of $300,000 is very unrealistic (on the small side) when they have to pay the salary of every person working on the game for over a year. The amount they have raised now is a much more realistic budget for an actual team developed game but $1.6 million is insane for having absolutely nothing to show or even tell in terms of what the game will actually be.
It's simply absurd to think that if Double Fine's kickstarter project didn't exist that other projects such as Arkh would have gotten a significant share of what Double Fine has raised. Most people aren't randomly browsing kickstarter going "hmm... I've got this money burning a hole in my pocket, what project should I back today?". They hear about a cool project that interests them and then go and back it.
Seriously, if you're developing a game what better way is there to gauge interest, secure funding, and avoid publisher BS all at the same time?.
Why begrudge Double Fine for doing what most game studios dream of doing? Why say that they should take an apparently unnecessary financial risk when they don't have to?
What company is this?
I really love that Double Fine was able to secure funding for their game through voluntary means and send a message to other developers that they can do the same. Anyone that hates this can go pound sand.
Be able to fund their own games at that point? You seriously think most studios can just fund their own games after releasing a few games? We'd have a lot more AAA indie studios if that were the case.
No, the money earned is eaten up at pretty much the same pace you get it. If you don't get a publisher interested in funding the game for you the project is pretty much dead.
As for absolutely nothing to show? No, that's true. But this is a promise made by some of the MOST BRILLIANT MINDS to ever develop adventure games. It takes a good bit of faith to kickstart a project, but these people that definitely have the skills to deliver.
As people said, a vast majority of bigger games companies don't have the luxury to fund their own projects, now you'll realize why publishers have been so important to the world of games, And once again, they're not asking for money, they're essentially just turning the makegame->makemoney thing around, it's the very foundation of crowd funding.
Instead of the middleman of the publisher that would get back the money through purchasing customers, you go to the purchasing customers directly and have them buy the game before it is finished and gather the funding in that way.
What other company were you referring to?
The original budget was for a classic adventure game made by a smaller part of doublefine, it was realistically small as no one believed it was actually conceivable to reach any higher amount.
Much like every other project on kickstarter, except doublefine is a solid company, and they know how to work under the pressure of a budget, whatever the game comes to they'll release it, and they'll document the whole process meanwhile for people who paid to see.
Isn't pretty much any big studio now a days reliant on having a publisher to found a game? Thoose $300 million dollars project doesn't come fromm the studio's own pocket. Usually all the money lies with the publishers because of the deals they strike with the studios, much like how it's done in the music industry. "We'll give you all the money you need to pull of this project, in return we most likely take control over the IP and take a large cut of every game sold in order to return our investment".
I think using crowd sourcing is a brilliant idea, it will also allow Tim and Ron to have full control over how they want to develop this IP without having a publisher breathing down their necks in order to make sure the game can generate as much money as possible(read: dumbing down controls for consoles, bad ports etc.)
I can't see why this would piss anyone off. Just because they are a larger company with a well established background doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to find new ways found their games.