The guy is talented, but I honestly hope he does get some peeps who know their stuff really well. An artist alone cannot carry a project, if WarDevil thought us anything.
The guy is talented, but I honestly hope he does get some peeps who know their stuff really well. An artist alone cannot carry a project, if WarDevil thought us anything.
Read the dang Kickstarter. Massive Black has and will continue working on it. I'd say they know their stuff really well.
Just found out about this today. It looks quite fancy. I hope they get up to at least the $500k mark. Would be great if they got past 2 Million and the game could reach its full potential.
I was interning at Massive Black when this project was still in the early stages and I can confirm that they really got their shit together on this, all they need is the funding. I really hope this project gets off the ground because they have so many great ideas for gameplay and encounters, it's more than just a cool premise and nice art.
oh I always loved that concept, great that someone is trying some novelty with zombies.
I think Kickstarter might not be all pros but at least it seemed to revive the zombie genre with novel ideas (i.e. The Dead Linger (http://www.thedeadlinger.com/), which was funded already)
I really don't understand why its ok to put games up on kickstarter without gameplay, surely from all the years we've had the mod scene around its dawned on you people just how easy it is to write up a design document with the usual list of buzzwords?
Hell, the modscene will actually put up more fucking work and potentially gameplay footage and is still considered a bit of a joke. Infact, when there are so many people putting out amazing character models or modular levels around these parts in their own time, why the fuck aren't these demands on people who are asking for MONEY. If they aren't at least willing to put out the same amount of work as hobbyists as proof of their faith in the project then I honestly don't see them to be much different from the people who offer to pay with royalties.
A couple of good illustrations does not = fantastic gameplay.
And seeing as they think that its new costumes and other gimmicky shit that = longevity then it makes me feel theyre just playing design by checklist. Reminds me of Dungeon defenders in that it just felt like a cluster fuck of flavour of the month things like pets/levels/cosmetics as the be all and end all of game design.
I mostly disagree with jack, but the fact that the stretch goals include FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF GAME DESIGN is enough to spook me. 100k it's a 2player game with 'leveling', 200k its a team coop game, 500 k it's pvp diablo, 1 million its a hangout game with tons of classes ?????
Was talking with joe over msn and I tried to compare it to the Foo fighters making a game pitch, while I agree that it's nice to see your money be invested in someone thats a bit more secure than a bedroom programmer... I still just feel off about it.
I'm having a hard time getting my thoughts to be concise but i'd say for a first time foray into games design it's almost essential to have a proof of concept, theres a HUGE difference between them and Double fine.
Infact, that somewhat works ... in that all massive black have proved themselves as is an outsourcing studio, theres no evidence that they can make a good game, and i'd say joes point about all the different price brackets changing the focus of the game completely only serves to highlight that point. They dont have a fucking clue.
It seems to me that they have a solid direction they have in mind (you play a kid-based shooter vs kiddie zombies) and the pricing levels just add new multiplayer additions to the basic game. I agree, though, it does kind of suck that there isn't a proof of concept or even any basis that the game won't be a simple shooter wrapped in cute kiddie zombie shell, except for these two sentances:
"Zombie Playground is an online, team based, action arena game with RPG elements. Gameplay will be deep, challenging, and rewarding."
I was excited about the concept of this game but that footage ain't too exciting. That combat doesn't look too "deep, challening, and rewarding". I understand it's pre-alpha but they're showing this to all of the non game devs who aren't going to give a shit. They should have waited until they had something a bit more substantial to show some gameplay footage or even start the kickstarter.
Jesus, if you don't like it you just don't have to help Kickstart it. If people like the idea of the game, why are you angry that they want to play it?
Advertising something that is an actual proof of concept and not bullshit PR speak written up by someone going down a checklist of gameplay mechanics is a dick thing to do?
I dont think anyone should give this kind of pitch the time of day, it's no more than a pseudo moddb page at this point where you can write whatever you want. I'd like it if it was mandatory to have an ACTUAL proof of concept, otherwise ive no indictation of what im funding.
It is not an unreasonable request to ask to see gameplay for a project they expect people to invest in.
It's Pre-Alpha, but it looks like they're going to do what every other game did out there, only that the setting is a school.
A zombie game that is going to allow the creation of traps, killing zombies in silly ways, while still maintaining a sense of horror by horde numbers.
I guess the Walking Dead game really did spoil me, I was hoping they would take the game in a more 'trudge' ridden place, with dead teachers and parents, etc.
Pre-Alpha, but it honestly feel like it's going towards the old idea again.
Heres an idea, keep the theme the same and perhaps put more emphasis on making traps.
Now take some of l4d's exploration and make it a requirement... youre looking for tools and things you can turn into traps (making exploring forced and with risk reward payoff). Even silly little concepts taken to a violent level with chalk duster on top of the door/trip wire/acids. Think Home alone on smack.
Perhaps combine it with a tower defence timed element, so you "x" amount of time to explore the school safely and hopefully find a place to hole up and items to make traps with on route... if youre struggling to find things to use and the time is running out youre forced to think about making do with what youve got vs finding something better in the science dept.
It's so fucking easy to write this down, i can ramble with stupid gameplay ideas no end but i'm not putting this shit up on kickstarter asking for money.
It's so fucking easy to write this down, i can ramble with stupid gameplay ideas no end but i'm not putting this shit up on kickstarter asking for money.
That's what the video was, showing that the Kickstarter isn't just them rambling about game ideas.. Making sure people realize it's literally being made in front of their eyes.
People eat that shit up, Indie devs have proven this time and time again, if you throw ideas out there, start showing proper involvement and progress, people will line up and support it.
You're upset about them starting from the beginning and showing pre-alpha work, but they're using it to their advantage.
In the case of Kickstaters, that is kinda a valid point.
I mean it's not reviewing a game, where a gamer/reviewer/dev all have the same bias in them pending on background, we're talking about cash and time here in a grand scale of things.
But Jack, why are you fevered against this game? I can see it in your posts how annoyed you are at this, is there a personal reason? I mean the project just got recently funded, and this is Pre-Alpha, it doesn't look good, and they're going to very likely take the game in a very generic path, but your outlash to it seems out of the park for some reason...
That cash milestone crap is so offputting. Still I like that kickstarter works this way, your audience can decide what is worth the investment and what isn't. Minimal filtering, if your project doesn't look like it has potential it won't meet funding...
And it doesn't look like they're gonna meet their goal and if they do, it's gonna be seriously close. I suspect when they come back for round 2 of funding they'll have a better documented design. That or they'll just increase the price of the standard copy of the game by 25% to make up for the difference heh...
Awesome that they got Aesop Rock involved though
Massive Black has no track record? What rock do you live under?
Massive Black is not a game developer, they're an art outscouring studio. Art assets are a small part of a game, not even the most important part...
It's not the game its the reaction to it and the general fawning over new projects without any care to think critically at all around here.
Pent up frustration over a lack of discussion about games and their design in general, all the while studios continually get fucked up the arse and we have the same people that have once praised good art in a bad game appear again to say their condolences.
Consider it venting as im always bitching and moaning about this subject as games are my main passion, so to not really discuss things and mindlessly accept things as the status quo frustrates me no end.
@Deadly - Making ART for games is NOT making games. Do you think they can write a book? (Seriously, why should I have to type that out on a forum like this? Ace-Angel, this is part of what annoys me...)
Valve have been making short films for 5~ years now... Please help me out here man. And incase you want to be pedantic, short films are the sort of things animation students will put out from places like gobelins so by extension id consider that an acceptable means of experimenting with the craft of movie making.
Find me a gameplay prototype to the level of; http://konjak.org/ - by Massive black... infact thats unfair as konjak is amazing.
I could be wrong, perhaps they have made games in their own time but id take the bet on them having made none.
It's not the game its the reaction to it and the general fawning over new projects without any care to think critically at all around here.
I'm stating the obvious here but most people have very superficial tastes in entertainment... If enough people want to buy a game for no other reason than it has pretty graphics then why not let em?
Experience isn't a prerequisite to making a game, it's a pre-requisite to making a kickstarter with no game design information and it getting funded millions of dollars.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was more of a practice-run-attempt at getting a game to a market. BlackCocks have been working on the mothhead project for quite sometime now.
Experience isn't a prerequisite to making a game, it's a pre-requisite to making a kickstarter with no game design information and it getting funded millions of dollars.
Yet they have a kickstarter, so either they know something you don't or they don't care.
Either way your complaint is with kickstarter not these guys for making a game.
You're correct, and i'll quote myself at the top of the page when i say;
"I'd like it if it was mandatory to have an ACTUAL proof of concept, otherwise ive no indictation of what im funding."
- People can do whatever they please with their money, what i have a problem with is the driving thought process behind it. The same way people will try to rationalise spending money with microtransactions... granted, these are different kinds of thoughts but thats what I find fault with.
I've said my piece in this and the Republique thread, which is that i'd like for genuinne proof of concepts to be forced because hoping for people to make more informed decisions is asking too much. If people here don't understand that a pretty picture doesn't mean a game will be good then... yeah.
Yet they have a kickstarter, so either they know something you don't or they don't care.
Either way your complaint is with kickstarter not these guys for making a game.
I'm getting the impression you either think me and jack are the same person or that we have the same opinion so just to clarify: I have no problems with kickstarter, I have no problem with Massive Black, I have a problem with your post...
You're passing off game dev experience as if it doesn't count for much, or that Massive Black has proven themselves as a game developer because they can make art for games... There's a reason why doublefine met their funding goals in 24 hours and closed at 400%, while Massive Black is en route to barely miss their goal asking for 1/4 the amount of money.
If you're going to make a kickstarter project and not post details about it, you better have experience to lean on or you're going to have a damn hard time meeting your funding goal.
Ah, I can see the issue here, and I kinda have to agree, on page 1, I mentioned on how Jason Chan is one of the well known 'artists' that even your average gamer will know, and that they better bring their A game if they want to make this awesome (because last I checked, Massive Black wasn't steaming with programmers or people who are 'inside' the industry vs. those that worked full fledged on it.)
Hell, the only reason this project even made it is because sites like Kotaku picked up the name Jason Chan (Game Artist) + Kickstart + Zombies / Write up = News. If it wasn't for them, I'm sure thing project would have died long ago.
Also, about the argument of the Kick-starters, I kinda have to say, them being an indication to a person or team being 'good' or having a solid 'background' doesn't work, since you can have any number of people vouch for this randomly. I think currently we had about 12 different game related projects that 'passed' based upon the promise for a couple of them that the game will be about gay and non-white characters in a game which is going to be awesome...
Hell, some games even had the promise of tentacle porn and rape in them in a very lewd fashion, talk about out there.
Honestly, I'm kinda tired about all these peeps taking advantage of the system, Kickstarter needs to change stuff around. Maybe make a 'peer reviewed' phase? Where you submit an idea, and senior members of the site/industry can see if the objective are achievable or properly laid out? Then a checkup phase where is something happens, you don't simply drop of the face of the world, and THEN you go to pick up your backers?
Overall, I don't care either way, once a few bad apples get piled up, maybe people will stop throwing money left and right on projects which include some artists name, under a company and zombies.
A majority of all kickstarter projects are made by people with little or no professional experience in in the area in question, yet many of them seem to be turning out fine.
It's time to stop worrying and kickstart some more, in worst case players can give feedback on what needs to be fixed once playable alphas get going.
i can ramble with stupid gameplay ideas no end but i'm not putting this shit up on kickstarter asking for money.
It's so fucking easy to write this down, i can ramble with stupid gameplay ideas no end but i'm not putting this shit up on kickstarter asking for money.
Why are you having a problem with someone giving their favourite artists the benefit of the doubt. Isn't it their choice? 1st amendment and all that. Its hardly affecting you if they wanna fund a game.
Difference between someone with a track record and none at all.
HUGE difference.
They have a massive track record (hoho). They have a huge talent base, and know what's good judging by their work. They've worked on the biggest games out there as artists. There are engines out there so artist friendly they'll never need to code a single line, just use some scripts. And you think they are going to try and come up with some completely new game type? No; they are of course going to use established design from established successful games, as is evident from the pre-alpha. They are just looking to bring that painting to life.
You are not venting out of frustration, because there is nothing to be frustrated about. You are simply ranting needlesly.
The rest of you - it's up to you what you want to invest in, just understand you're investing in concept art alone. That alpha gameplay footage is not close to being alpha-level gameplay. Massive Black has never released a game (although they've talked about making one for years and years).
All of the other kickstarters that have blown up are either:
- A proven team that has released games (games, not game art, but games)
- A project that is fully playable, fun, looks good in its current form and wants funding for the final mile.
The idea for this kickstarter is nothing more than: "wouldn't it be cool if we made a game out of that concept piece Jason did a while back?"
Well, yes, it would be cool. Just have balanced expectations about how likely it is to get finished and be fun to play.
there's something I'm a bit confused about here. MB has the desire to get out of just art outsourcing and become a game developer. They want to have ownership and control over their projects rather than being forced down roads certain publishers or parent companies might make them go down. Kickstarter and sites like it give them this ability to fund their project, use those funds to create new jobs to give game designers, artists, and programmers work. Why is any of this a bad thing. Have they made a game before? No, but their trying to start. This is their beginning.
If you honestly find issue with the game, or the way they have set up the kickstarter tiers, have you tried going to their forum site and posting there? So far they have been extremely connected to the community and their reactions to criticisms and questions have been immediate and pretty well managed. I'm pretty sure they will be more than happy to hear from you and take any constructive criticism you have to offer.
People complained about the rewards not being as accessible, so they accommodated. They were asked for gameplay footage and more info on the game in general, and they supplied it. They hosted one of those reddit q&a's to give people whatever info they wanted. As a studio they have shown so far to be very accommodating and professional.
Some of the points raised so far seem valid about their track record for game development, and the lack of programmers and designers employed by the studio. But what do you think the Kickstarter money is for? I'd venture just to guess that its to hire some game designers and engineers to help build the game past what a bunch of artists have managed to put together. They have managed to design, art, and program a game prototype already in their limited free time. I don't care who you are, that shows a professional level of focus and commitment to seeing their project come to life. And just because a studio is made up of a lot of guys making nice art, doesn't mean that's all the artists are capable of doing.
Point is there is nothing stopping them if funded to fill in the gaps to build a larger, more rounded team. I would think that if anything, the community would be very open to encouraging this kind of funding process, purely out of the beneficial opportunities it gives to people trying to find jobs in the industry.
I think a lot of the detractors so far have been bringing up some valid criticisms here and there, and I encourage you guys to post them up on their forums. I'm serious, Jason Chan and Chris Hatala have been hitting those things hard and instead of just having your words sit here, they could actually be aiding to solve the problems(in gameplay design or kickstarter management or whatever) that you all are pointing out.
Replies
Oh, wow.
The names.
Read the dang Kickstarter. Massive Black has and will continue working on it. I'd say they know their stuff really well.
Just found out about this today. It looks quite fancy. I hope they get up to at least the $500k mark. Would be great if they got past 2 Million and the game could reach its full potential.
YUSSS!
I think Kickstarter might not be all pros but at least it seemed to revive the zombie genre with novel ideas (i.e. The Dead Linger (http://www.thedeadlinger.com/), which was funded already)
Hell, the modscene will actually put up more fucking work and potentially gameplay footage and is still considered a bit of a joke. Infact, when there are so many people putting out amazing character models or modular levels around these parts in their own time, why the fuck aren't these demands on people who are asking for MONEY. If they aren't at least willing to put out the same amount of work as hobbyists as proof of their faith in the project then I honestly don't see them to be much different from the people who offer to pay with royalties.
A couple of good illustrations does not = fantastic gameplay.
And seeing as they think that its new costumes and other gimmicky shit that = longevity then it makes me feel theyre just playing design by checklist. Reminds me of Dungeon defenders in that it just felt like a cluster fuck of flavour of the month things like pets/levels/cosmetics as the be all and end all of game design.
What kind of game are they TRYING to make?
I'm having a hard time getting my thoughts to be concise but i'd say for a first time foray into games design it's almost essential to have a proof of concept, theres a HUGE difference between them and Double fine.
Infact, that somewhat works ... in that all massive black have proved themselves as is an outsourcing studio, theres no evidence that they can make a good game, and i'd say joes point about all the different price brackets changing the focus of the game completely only serves to highlight that point. They dont have a fucking clue.
"Zombie Playground is an online, team based, action arena game with RPG elements. Gameplay will be deep, challenging, and rewarding."
:poly141:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=znRX2vsQQIg
[ame="
[ame="
Throw money at that instead.
Because getting upset at a pre-alpha proof of concept and advertising another game isn't a dick thing to do.
I dont think anyone should give this kind of pitch the time of day, it's no more than a pseudo moddb page at this point where you can write whatever you want. I'd like it if it was mandatory to have an ACTUAL proof of concept, otherwise ive no indictation of what im funding.
It is not an unreasonable request to ask to see gameplay for a project they expect people to invest in.
A zombie game that is going to allow the creation of traps, killing zombies in silly ways, while still maintaining a sense of horror by horde numbers.
I guess the Walking Dead game really did spoil me, I was hoping they would take the game in a more 'trudge' ridden place, with dead teachers and parents, etc.
Pre-Alpha, but it honestly feel like it's going towards the old idea again.
Now take some of l4d's exploration and make it a requirement... youre looking for tools and things you can turn into traps (making exploring forced and with risk reward payoff). Even silly little concepts taken to a violent level with chalk duster on top of the door/trip wire/acids. Think Home alone on smack.
Perhaps combine it with a tower defence timed element, so you "x" amount of time to explore the school safely and hopefully find a place to hole up and items to make traps with on route... if youre struggling to find things to use and the time is running out youre forced to think about making do with what youve got vs finding something better in the science dept.
It's so fucking easy to write this down, i can ramble with stupid gameplay ideas no end but i'm not putting this shit up on kickstarter asking for money.
That's what the video was, showing that the Kickstarter isn't just them rambling about game ideas.. Making sure people realize it's literally being made in front of their eyes.
People eat that shit up, Indie devs have proven this time and time again, if you throw ideas out there, start showing proper involvement and progress, people will line up and support it.
You're upset about them starting from the beginning and showing pre-alpha work, but they're using it to their advantage.
How many millions did Double Fine get again?
HUGE difference.
I mean it's not reviewing a game, where a gamer/reviewer/dev all have the same bias in them pending on background, we're talking about cash and time here in a grand scale of things.
But Jack, why are you fevered against this game? I can see it in your posts how annoyed you are at this, is there a personal reason? I mean the project just got recently funded, and this is Pre-Alpha, it doesn't look good, and they're going to very likely take the game in a very generic path, but your outlash to it seems out of the park for some reason...
Massive Black has no track record? What rock do you live under?
And it doesn't look like they're gonna meet their goal and if they do, it's gonna be seriously close. I suspect when they come back for round 2 of funding they'll have a better documented design. That or they'll just increase the price of the standard copy of the game by 25% to make up for the difference heh...
Awesome that they got Aesop Rock involved though
Massive Black is not a game developer, they're an art outscouring studio. Art assets are a small part of a game, not even the most important part...
Pent up frustration over a lack of discussion about games and their design in general, all the while studios continually get fucked up the arse and we have the same people that have once praised good art in a bad game appear again to say their condolences.
Consider it venting as im always bitching and moaning about this subject as games are my main passion, so to not really discuss things and mindlessly accept things as the status quo frustrates me no end.
(I said the same thing in the Republique thread; http://www.polycount.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1580766&postcount=14)
@Deadly - Making ART for games is NOT making games. Do you think they can write a book? (Seriously, why should I have to type that out on a forum like this? Ace-Angel, this is part of what annoys me...)
At a certain point if you have a big enough pool of talent, barriers don't exist.
Find me a gameplay prototype to the level of; http://konjak.org/ - by Massive black... infact thats unfair as konjak is amazing.
I could be wrong, perhaps they have made games in their own time but id take the bet on them having made none.
Look at how many awesome mods that get made from people just trying to make something they enjoy.
I don't understand what your gripe is here?
Yet they have a kickstarter, so either they know something you don't or they don't care.
Either way your complaint is with kickstarter not these guys for making a game.
"I'd like it if it was mandatory to have an ACTUAL proof of concept, otherwise ive no indictation of what im funding."
- People can do whatever they please with their money, what i have a problem with is the driving thought process behind it. The same way people will try to rationalise spending money with microtransactions... granted, these are different kinds of thoughts but thats what I find fault with.
I've said my piece in this and the Republique thread, which is that i'd like for genuinne proof of concepts to be forced because hoping for people to make more informed decisions is asking too much. If people here don't understand that a pretty picture doesn't mean a game will be good then... yeah.
I'm an opinionated cynical cunt, i know.
You're passing off game dev experience as if it doesn't count for much, or that Massive Black has proven themselves as a game developer because they can make art for games... There's a reason why doublefine met their funding goals in 24 hours and closed at 400%, while Massive Black is en route to barely miss their goal asking for 1/4 the amount of money.
If you're going to make a kickstarter project and not post details about it, you better have experience to lean on or you're going to have a damn hard time meeting your funding goal.
Hell, the only reason this project even made it is because sites like Kotaku picked up the name Jason Chan (Game Artist) + Kickstart + Zombies / Write up = News. If it wasn't for them, I'm sure thing project would have died long ago.
Also, about the argument of the Kick-starters, I kinda have to say, them being an indication to a person or team being 'good' or having a solid 'background' doesn't work, since you can have any number of people vouch for this randomly. I think currently we had about 12 different game related projects that 'passed' based upon the promise for a couple of them that the game will be about gay and non-white characters in a game which is going to be awesome...
Hell, some games even had the promise of tentacle porn and rape in them in a very lewd fashion, talk about out there.
Honestly, I'm kinda tired about all these peeps taking advantage of the system, Kickstarter needs to change stuff around. Maybe make a 'peer reviewed' phase? Where you submit an idea, and senior members of the site/industry can see if the objective are achievable or properly laid out? Then a checkup phase where is something happens, you don't simply drop of the face of the world, and THEN you go to pick up your backers?
Overall, I don't care either way, once a few bad apples get piled up, maybe people will stop throwing money left and right on projects which include some artists name, under a company and zombies.
A majority of all kickstarter projects are made by people with little or no professional experience in in the area in question, yet many of them seem to be turning out fine.
It's time to stop worrying and kickstart some more, in worst case players can give feedback on what needs to be fixed once playable alphas get going.
Why are you having a problem with someone giving their favourite artists the benefit of the doubt. Isn't it their choice? 1st amendment and all that. Its hardly affecting you if they wanna fund a game.
All i'm reading is:
They have a massive track record (hoho). They have a huge talent base, and know what's good judging by their work. They've worked on the biggest games out there as artists. There are engines out there so artist friendly they'll never need to code a single line, just use some scripts. And you think they are going to try and come up with some completely new game type? No; they are of course going to use established design from established successful games, as is evident from the pre-alpha. They are just looking to bring that painting to life.
You are not venting out of frustration, because there is nothing to be frustrated about. You are simply ranting needlesly.
[ame="
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/massiveblack/zombie-playground-zpg-3d-action-online-battle-rpg/posts/244908
The rest of you - it's up to you what you want to invest in, just understand you're investing in concept art alone. That alpha gameplay footage is not close to being alpha-level gameplay. Massive Black has never released a game (although they've talked about making one for years and years).
All of the other kickstarters that have blown up are either:
- A proven team that has released games (games, not game art, but games)
- A project that is fully playable, fun, looks good in its current form and wants funding for the final mile.
The idea for this kickstarter is nothing more than: "wouldn't it be cool if we made a game out of that concept piece Jason did a while back?"
Well, yes, it would be cool. Just have balanced expectations about how likely it is to get finished and be fun to play.
I'll wait 13 days before making my decision though, best of luck MB.
If you honestly find issue with the game, or the way they have set up the kickstarter tiers, have you tried going to their forum site and posting there? So far they have been extremely connected to the community and their reactions to criticisms and questions have been immediate and pretty well managed. I'm pretty sure they will be more than happy to hear from you and take any constructive criticism you have to offer.
People complained about the rewards not being as accessible, so they accommodated. They were asked for gameplay footage and more info on the game in general, and they supplied it. They hosted one of those reddit q&a's to give people whatever info they wanted. As a studio they have shown so far to be very accommodating and professional.
Some of the points raised so far seem valid about their track record for game development, and the lack of programmers and designers employed by the studio. But what do you think the Kickstarter money is for? I'd venture just to guess that its to hire some game designers and engineers to help build the game past what a bunch of artists have managed to put together. They have managed to design, art, and program a game prototype already in their limited free time. I don't care who you are, that shows a professional level of focus and commitment to seeing their project come to life. And just because a studio is made up of a lot of guys making nice art, doesn't mean that's all the artists are capable of doing.
Point is there is nothing stopping them if funded to fill in the gaps to build a larger, more rounded team. I would think that if anything, the community would be very open to encouraging this kind of funding process, purely out of the beneficial opportunities it gives to people trying to find jobs in the industry.
I think a lot of the detractors so far have been bringing up some valid criticisms here and there, and I encourage you guys to post them up on their forums. I'm serious, Jason Chan and Chris Hatala have been hitting those things hard and instead of just having your words sit here, they could actually be aiding to solve the problems(in gameplay design or kickstarter management or whatever) that you all are pointing out.