|
Megazver posted:Zombies aren't an enemy, they're hostile environment. How is this more true of zombies than of any other enemy? Zombies actively pursue you, can be evaded or killed, have specific weaknesses, and are fought using conventional weapons.
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Fergus Mac Roich posted:How is this more true of zombies than of any other enemy? Zombies actively pursue you, can be evaded or killed, have specific weaknesses, and are fought using conventional weapons. Because the main point about the rare actually good zombie stories is that the zombies don't actually matter — it's the interaction between the people that is important, and the zombies are just a catalyst to trigger those interactions. They could just as well be amazon ants or a blazing inferno or the unstoppable that spreads along the ceiling planels and rots the house… and you have no ladder to go up on the roof and fix the leak. The only real difference with zombies is that it makes for fun make-up in movies. Granted, a swarm of ants and a rotting wall could be considered environment as well, but usually when you see those in media, the focus is usually slightly different in that there is a clear antagonistic relationship between those and the ”heroes”. In a zombie movie, the “heroes” are the antagonists (to each other). Tippis fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
Tippis posted:Because the main point about the rare actually good zombie stories is that the zombies don't actually matter — it's the interaction between the people that is important, and the zombies are just a catalyst to trigger those interactions. They could just as well be amazon ants or a blazing inferno or the unstoppable that spreads along the ceiling planels and rots the house… and you have no ladder to go up on the roof and fix the leak. You're describing zombie movies, not games. I enjoy zombie movies. EDIT: ok, Dead Rising gets a pass. But even then, only barely. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
One of the reasons I'm looking forward to Survarium is that instead of a zombie plague ending the world, it's a PLANT INFESTATION! Unstoppable plants that infest everything, destroy any structure, and infect humans with disease. And this game is being made by the people who made STALKER. That said, I can imagine them going the lazy route and just give us lots of humanoid zombies infested with plants. I hope not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 03:04
|
|
|
I'd play an EDF type game where you have to destroy giant Audrey II type plants before they take over the world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:One of the reasons I'm looking forward to Survarium is that instead of a zombie plague ending the world, it's a PLANT INFESTATION! Unstoppable plants that infest everything, destroy any structure, and infect humans with disease. Also got my soundtrack queued up  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTuJQL8GBqY
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
The latest Matt Chat has an extensive interview with Chris Taylor about Wildman and GPG in general. It's really candid and actually really interesting, mainly because it's 99% Chris Taylor just getting a mountain of stress of his chest. Anyway, it seems like if the game gets funded he can hire 15 people, assuming he goes without pay personally for a while. That's half the people he wanted, and he'd have to work with the community pretty extensively at least as far as playtesting goes. The way he tells it, he expected "orders of magnitude" more money, ending in the $2-3 million range (which would give everyone jobs) and considers the current numbers abysmal. Kicktraq agrees, indicating the project's having a lot of trouble maintaining any momentum it gets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
Pyradox posted:he expected "orders of magnitude" more money Talk about fatal mistakes. All the biggest success stories have been from people expecting to have to fight until the bitter end to reach their target, and then crawl up into a little ball and think about switching to Enterprise work because nobody is ever really going to back them anyway oh god  Firing everyone a few days in won't have helped the trajectory either, would have scared off a lot of potential donors. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Jan 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 09:51
|
|
|
Fergus Mac Roich posted:Personally I refuse to buy zombie games. It's in part because individual games are made worse by their use of zombies but I also just want to discourage people from using the exact same loving enemy that looks and behaves the exact same way in every single game. Seriously, don't do that, but if you ARE going to do that at least choose a more interesting enemy. "Video game soldier guy" with medium armor and a mid-range assault rifle, the second most cliche enemy in games, is ten times more interesting in terms of what kinds of things they could do to a player and requires an equal(zero) amount of creativity to come up with. people don't choose zombies because they're creative/uncreative. They choose them because they're an order of magnitude less difficult to program and implement. Zombies move towards you relentlessly. They do not shoot or take cover or move in any way that is not mindlessly towards you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 10:10
|
|
|
Didn't watch that 1h+ youtube, but going on your summary, I think he's deluded if he thought that pitch was going to set the internet on fire and give him $3 million to go to town with. The kickstarter games that pull in that kind of money have all sold the idea that the people behind have been hindered by external forces to produce the kind of experience that the backers are looking for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 10:22
|
|
|
The other thing is that the million dollar kickstarters have all been niche products in genres without any real big name competition. Double Fine Adventure, Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity are all games with not only no major modern analogues but teams that have their roots among cult classics and critical darlings of the genre. Wild Man is trying to tap two exceptionally popular genres - MOBAs and ARPGs - which are already loaded with popular and upcoming games. DOTA, LOL, HON, Diablo, Torchlight and Path of Exile are all games in Wild man's genres, so the only real new thing it's offering is the tech upgrades, which aren't really a significant mechanical change from the rest of the genre. As sympathetic as I am to the guy after that video, I'm just not confidant he can outclass the competition with half his team and a fraction of the funding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 10:42
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:people don't choose zombies because they're creative/uncreative. They choose them because they're an order of magnitude less difficult to program and implement. Zombies move towards you relentlessly. They do not shoot or take cover or move in any way that is not mindlessly towards you. At least Left 4 Dead tried to play with the formula and actually had a pretty complex AI simulation, just a shame it sparked a bunch of really cheap copies who tried to ride the zombie wave immensely cheaply.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 10:49
|
|
|
Pyradox posted:It's really candid and actually really interesting, mainly because it's 99% Chris Taylor just getting a mountain of stress of his chest. Anyway, it seems like if the game gets funded he can hire 15 people, assuming he goes without pay personally for a while. That's half the people he wanted, and he'd have to work with the community pretty extensively at least as far as playtesting goes. The way he tells it, he expected "orders of magnitude" more money, ending in the $2-3 million range (which would give everyone jobs) and considers the current numbers abysmal. Kicktraq agrees, indicating the project's having a lot of trouble maintaining any momentum it gets. Two orders of magnitude more than 1.1M isn't 3M, it's 110M. I would decimate my pledge to his KS, if I was a backer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
Pyradox posted:The other thing is that the million dollar kickstarters have all been niche products in genres without any real big name competition. Double Fine Adventure, Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity are all games with not only no major modern analogues but teams that have their roots among cult classics and critical darlings of the genre. Wild Man is trying to tap two exceptionally popular genres - MOBAs and ARPGs - which are already loaded with popular and upcoming games. DOTA, LOL, HON, Diablo, Torchlight and Path of Exile are all games in Wild man's genres, so the only real new thing it's offering is the tech upgrades, which aren't really a significant mechanical change from the rest of the genre. You just can't get a lot of these genres that have been successfully Kickstarted. Look at the insane success that was Star Citizen. There isn't any game like that, and even in the genre it is an evolution of, the only space sims that had been getting made for the past 10+ years are low-budget releases from unknown Eastern European studios. (while sometimes fun in their own right, they are usually really buggy and have terrible translations). Now we've got it, Kinetic Void, Elite: Dangerous, and a few others, which are all wildly different evolutionary paths of the space sim genre (and it's about goddamn time!)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Let's just hope other devs take the hint and consider at least variations of those genres.Mordaedil posted:At least Left 4 Dead tried to play with the formula and actually had a pretty complex AI simulation, just a shame it sparked a bunch of really cheap copies who tried to ride the zombie wave immensely cheaply. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
GNERDL might be kind of cool, if it funds. The goal is to create a platform-agnostic gamer network, whilst avoiding the bullshit typically associated with such things. So kind of like Raptr, but not designed to appeal to frat boys or to sell you things. (the person making this is in my town; it bubbled up in a local gamedev list)
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
The Mimic posted:
I made it to 5:20, because my friend who watched the whole awful video made it to 5:20 and told me to at least watch to that point. And...boy, was it...something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:GNERDL might be kind of cool, if it funds. The goal is to create a platform-agnostic gamer network, whilst avoiding the bullshit typically associated with such things. That does sound pretty cool but I'm wary of pledging. I've never used Indie Gogo before and don't they still get the money even if it's not successful? I'm sure I remember hearing that somewhere 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Chuck Bartowski posted:I've never used Indie Gogo before and don't they still get the money even if it's not successful? I'm sure I remember hearing that somewhere
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
helopticor posted:The little bit that says "Flexible Funding campaign" means that GNERDL will work that way. There are many projects that are on indiegogo that say "Fixed Funding campaign" which means it works like Kickstarter. Also sometimes Flexible Funding campaigns will be set up in such a way that it's reasonable to say "you still get the goodies even if we don't hit the goal", and then it's up to you as to whether or not you trust them. Ah right. That clears it up perfectly. Thank you
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:GNERDL might be kind of cool, if it funds. The goal is to create a platform-agnostic gamer network, whilst avoiding the bullshit typically associated with such things. Sweet flexible funding on indiegogo! Looks like they've already made $625. Did they offer a reason behind using indiegogo as opposed to kickstarter? They're obviously US based if they're from your hometown.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Sweet flexible funding on indiegogo! Looks like they've already made $625.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:None whatsoever. I'm intending to point that out to her. Her funding model combined with the high-for-that-site goal basically guarantees it won't fund, no matter how cool it may look. Which is a shame. Using flexible funding guarantees that they will get at least a free $625, so I'm sure they're feeling alright. Kickstarter doesn't offer flexible funding so I imagine that's why they choose Indiegogo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
Can you withdraw from flexible funding pledges before the end of the funding drive or are you locked in as soon as you pledge?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Can you withdraw from flexible funding pledges before the end of the funding drive or are you locked in as soon as you pledge? Pledging deducts money immediately; you're locked in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
Jeez that is shady.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Jeez that is shady. ... and it's that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
Arnold of Soissons posted:Two orders of magnitude more than 1.1M isn't 3M, it's 110M. I would decimate my pledge to his KS, if I was a backer. I should clarify he meant in terms of the amount of money the kickstarter was making per day, so where he got about $75,000 on the first day he was hoping for something more like Project Eternity where it got a full million in the first day, or at least looked like it was unambiguously going to get there soon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
ReV VAdAUL posted:Jeez that is shady. Doesn't seem any worse than having a "Donate!" Paypal button on your website. Better, even.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:Doesn't seem any worse than having a "Donate!" Paypal button on your website. Better, even. It's less credible to me because it's wrapped up in the format of rewards and the idea of there being a certain amount of volume to make something happen. Most projects, before asking for donations, get together a fair bit to show for their efforts. They don't ask for donations cause they have an idea, whereas crowdfunding campaigns are often about marketing an 'idea', and the premise that you are capable of delivering that idea. Not to say that's all of them, some very much have a lot of work to show before they put it out there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Zereth posted:There's a reason people get extremely suspicious of indiegogo flex funding campaigns. I don't really see why people are suspicious of it to be honest. It's a pretty blatant thing to do. Incidentally flexible funding campaigns on indiegogo have to pay a higher fee on funds received before they reach the goal amount, although they'll get a refund for those fees if they reach their goal. Indiegogo takes a 9% fee on all funds contributed before the goal is reached on flexible funding, and switches to 4% once you're over the funding goal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
Original_Z posted:Either way, I decided to download their other game and the installer is full of trojans which hijacked my browser and wanted to put in a bunch of adware BS on my computer. Looking online on how to fix it just gave me a bunch of shady websites which barely gave any help and wanted you to download some poo poo to fix things, which makes me wonder if it's all just a big scam. Took me awhile to finally get all of that crap off, needless to say it kind of killed any goodwill I had toward the project. What other game is this, if I may ask?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 01:39
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:Most projects, before asking for donations, get together a fair bit to show for their efforts. They don't ask for donations cause they have an idea, whereas crowdfunding campaigns are often about marketing an 'idea', and the premise that you are capable of delivering that idea. I suppose I can see where you are coming from. I was thinking that someone could just as well make a website with a Paypal button as they could put up an IGG flex funding campaign. But that's not quite right. While they could put up their own website, a service like IGG certainly makes it easier. Yeah, if someone wanted to run a low-effort scam, IGG would probably be on the list of possible avenues. From that perspective, I think I can agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:people don't choose zombies because they're creative/uncreative. They choose them because they're an order of magnitude less difficult to program and implement. Zombies move towards you relentlessly. They do not shoot or take cover or move in any way that is not mindlessly towards you. Well, I sympathize with that, then, but as I'm sure you know, it doesn't make me any more interested in buying zombie games. And I still think that if they found some way to make similar games but with different settings or enemies(or no "enemies" per se) they would have something more marketable and more interesting. I don't take the huge glut of extremely low budget games featuring zombies to be indicative of the fact that someone is actually buying them, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:What other game is this, if I may ask? Their other Vacant Sky game or whatever, it's available on their main website. Sure hope the pennies they get by selling out their installer to spyware is worth it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
A new project looking nice, Garry's Incident : http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/exatogames/day-one-garrys-incident-0?ref=email also only asking for 50k which seem correct https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjPnlMLHd-s
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 14:58
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:Doesn't seem any worse than having a "Donate!" Paypal button on your website. Better, even. The problem for me is that Indiegogo is likely to be seen through the lense of the much more popular Kickstarter where your pledges are not taken until a project is funded, they should make it much clearer what "flexible funding" means. Of course one should do due diligence and find this out but still, that you have to do some research to realise something is shady doesn't stop it from being so. The comparison with having a donate button on your website is not one I buy into for a couple of reasons. First, crowdfunding of this time is done under considerable time pressure, encouraging people to donate now to encourage others to do so, donate buttons on websites have no such pressures. Second, these projects often promise stuff to donors that can only be fulfilled if the project is successful whereas donate buttons usually don't make any such promises. Even in Alpha or Beta funding style fundraising efforts you get your key and whatever public build they've released as soon as you pay them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
Le0 posted:A new project looking nice, Garry's Incident : http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/exatogames/day-one-garrys-incident-0?ref=email also only asking for 50k which seem correct This looks like it could be interesting. I wish it looked a little better graphics wise, but if everything else comes together well then I won't really care. quote:We will deliver a rich plot, twists to the story and most important of all, constant expansions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
I agree that graphically it needs some work, I sent a question to the person asking if they had planned to rework graphics because there is no mention anywhere about that
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Oh hey Valdis Story sent out a demo to their backers. Gonna give this thing a shot now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 15:42
|
|