|
Shalinor posted:Whether he is or isn't, he's right that there was a period in the 90's where it was actually possible to get publishing deals for AAA games, even as a new studio. He's also right that that door has long since slammed shut, and even XBLA/PSN slammed shut pretty well about 2-3 years ago. My complaint wasn't the nature of how studios were funded but that he stated he would blow that cash and the publishers would just have to deal with it. This is a guy who wanted our money, seemingly to do the same with. That makes me angry. Given his at best untrustworthy behaviour in regards to the wildman kickstarter, his clear need for more than $1.1m to keep gpg going and his open contempt for anyone who might fund him, it seems a good thing for kickstarter backers that wildman failed. I of course hope former gpg employees find new jobs soon.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 11:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
Shalinor posted:Whether he is or isn't, he's right that there was a period in the 90's where it was actually possible to get publishing deals for AAA games, even as a new studio. He's also right that that door has long since slammed shut, and even XBLA/PSN slammed shut pretty well about 2-3 years ago. Well, Obsidian somehow manages to get "AAA" (or close to it) development deals despite being a fully independent studio. I'm sure it's much more difficult now to do big budget games as an indie, but it's definitely not impossible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 14:03
|
|
|
quote:“There was a heyday in the 1990s where you could burst in the door of a publisher and you could get a contract. You blew your budget anyway, and they dealt with it,” Taylor said. “That has locked itself so tight. Consoles are going to just hit the wall. The guys who wrote these big checks — that’s just gone.” This makes me very glad that Wildman didn't succeed. If that's his viewpoint, he probably would have done the same with the Kickstarter money. When it ran out he likely would have tried a new campaign, which probably would have failed, and all the money from the first run would have been a waste.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
quote:I love how he says this, and doesn't think, "Hmm, I wonder why they don't do that anymore..." It kind of makes me wonder if this is how he lost his last contract to begin with. I actually liked Age of Empires Online and all, and the FTP model it had never seemed very well thought out, but the way Microsoft abruptly pulled the plug and cancelled all in development content makes me think they may have been wildly over budget.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
For people that followed the Kinetic Void Kickstarter, our steam store, coming soon page and community hub is up now! http://store.steampowered.com/app/227160/
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:That said, he seems to have driven the crazy train well past bitter and is currently steaming his way up to the cliff of regrettable-things-to-have-said, so... eh. I think he's always been like that, I remember an interview with him about piracy where he basically shat on PC gamers and said they were going to move towards consoles because you can't pirate stuff on consoles apparently. http://uk.ign.com/articles/2008/02/20/gdc-2008-chris-taylor-on-pc-piracy I'm sure Supreme Commander 2 did really well on the xbox 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
LumberingTroll posted:For people that followed the Kinetic Void Kickstarter, our steam store, coming soon page and community hub is up now! Any better estimate on the alpha getting started (such as "this week" or "next week")?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
LumberingTroll posted:For people that followed the Kinetic Void Kickstarter, our steam store, coming soon page and community hub is up now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
Delver's Drop looks kind of neat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDnpIdX6i1U ... and it's also cross-posted in the Greenlight thread, because it's there too. I kinda dig the looks. A bit worried about the floaty-looking movement physics, but it makes for some unique-looking combats and puzzles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Delver's Drop looks kind of neat: + Competent programmers (engine and tools are built in-house), meaning that unlike other games on kickstarter, this one might actually get finished + Video shows functional gameplay, another rarity for gaming kickstarters + Nice art, the 3d aspect with the walls moving slightly is a nice touch A few things that bother me, not necessarily 'cons', just things I'm personally skeptical about - What's with the trend of having weird lighting? I swear I've seen like 10 upcoming indie games that all use the same lovely super-dark-areas-except-for-the-areas-near-torches lighting effect. It's like a programmer learned how to create light sources and went nuts with them. - Randomly generated puzzles are rarely fun or interesting in this kind of game, IMO. - Too many physics notes that at best people won't care about and at worst will impact the funness of the game. Like you said, the character movement already looks 'floaty' in a bad way. They list 'Acceleration, mass, momentum, grip, destructibility, elasticity, etc affect movement' in their dev log, not sure any of that stuff has ever added anything to any game that wasn't explicitely a physics game. Sounds like a case of a programmer forgetting that they were making a game, not a tech demo. Overall those are fairly minor nitpicks though, and this game looks far more promising than 90% of the other stuff on kickstarter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:squeeeeee Sorry no, its honestly as fast as we can get it done, estimating development time is really loving hard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
LumberingTroll posted:Sorry no, its honestly as fast as we can get it done, estimating development time is really loving hard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:Still the faction algorithms giving you trouble? Not really trouble, just time consuming, a lot of things to get playing nice with each other, its almost done (today or tomorrow) and then we gotta tighten up some other stuff, new UI things and some itemization.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Two entries from the "neat project, shame they probably won't make it" category. I mean if you like those and want to spread the word, go ahead, they certainly look cool. But eh. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bumblebee/days-of-dawn-discover-the-magic Days of Dawn: 11 days to go, $30k needed. This is their second try after failing once with a 100k goal, interestingly with a greater sum pledged than what they're asking for now. Sadly, the devs failed to acknowledge this anywhere on their project page (not even in the Risks and Challenges section). They also seem awfully intent on sidestepping any criticism in their comment section, preferring to bask in their fans' admiration...... Looks like their gamble backfired though - I wonder what would have happened if they'd been honest and transparent about how the game is suddenly going to cost half of what they originally stated. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/229423802/death-inc?ref=category Death Inc.: 21 days to go, $~390k needed. It goes without saying that the art is gorgeous, and the devs seem to have some pedigree at least. The goal was probably exorbitant for what they wanted, they should just start something smaller. And seconding that lighting criticism in Delver, really awful. Single-handedly ruined the cool visuals for me. miguelito fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Feb 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
Orzo posted:- Too many physics notes that at best people won't care about and at worst will impact the funness of the game. Like you said, the character movement already looks 'floaty' in a bad way. They list 'Acceleration, mass, momentum, grip, destructibility, elasticity, etc affect movement' in their dev log, not sure any of that stuff has ever added anything to any game that wasn't explicitely a physics game. Sounds like a case of a programmer forgetting that they were making a game, not a tech demo. Could be something that's less for the player and more for the developer. Physics stuff like that can make it easier to put together a more flexible puzzle, or a puzzle that includes systems interacting in a way that you haven't specifically programmed into the game already... just, like you say, the gameplay ends up being a little less exacting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
About 2 days left on an indiegogo fundraiser for a Lovecrafty looking thing called Tainted Fate. Help a poor Croatian guy buy a computer capable of running his own game, also maybe food. Seems to already have one game under his belt already. Playable alpha tech demo also available for download linked on the page. Note: using flexible funding (stated up front in the introduction) so pledges get contributed even if the goal isn't met.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
New At the Gates kickstarter update: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jonshafer/jon-shafers-at-the-gates/posts/404789 Jon Shafer posted a huge essay critiquing his design decisions for Civ V and how he's going to apply the lessons learned to AtG. It's a pretty interesting read, even if you're only doing it for a postmortem on Civ V.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 00:51
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Delver's Drop looks kind of neat: I dig this. I understand the lighting criticisms, but I think it looks pretty.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:New At the Gates kickstarter update: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jonshafer/jon-shafers-at-the-gates/posts/404789 That was a really good read, thanks for linking. Addresses my trepidations with Civ 5's diplomacy and AI model somewhat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
LumberingTroll posted:then we gotta tighten up some other stuff Like the graphics on level 3? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:That was a really good read, thanks for linking. Addresses my trepidations with Civ 5's diplomacy and AI model somewhat. Yeah, he seems to address almost every single misgiving I had with Civ V. I've always been one of the vocal ones saying that Civ V wasn't as good as IV, but it seems like Shafer is ready to admit all of its serious flaws and proposes compelling new systems that are sounding really appealing to me. I particularly like the changes he talks about to combat. Making the combat more of a strategic-level battle rather than a tactical-level one. The return to stacks, combined with a supply system that can control their impact. It seems like a really neat idea for a 4X game. The one system I'm not 100% sold on is the diplomacy. I'm all for more transparent diplomacy, especially after Civ V's trainwreck of a diplomacy system, but maybe it seems like it's going too far in the other direction? I don't know. We still know so little about the game, it's likely I'm worrying about nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 02:11
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Yeah, he seems to address almost every single misgiving I had with Civ V. I've always been one of the vocal ones saying that Civ V wasn't as good as IV, but it seems like Shafer is ready to admit all of its serious flaws and proposes compelling new systems that are sounding really appealing to me. I particularly like the changes he talks about to combat. Making the combat more of a strategic-level battle rather than a tactical-level one. The return to stacks, combined with a supply system that can control their impact. It seems like a really neat idea for a 4X game. The one system I'm not 100% sold on is the diplomacy. I'm all for more transparent diplomacy, especially after Civ V's trainwreck of a diplomacy system, but maybe it seems like it's going too far in the other direction? I don't know. We still know so little about the game, it's likely I'm worrying about nothing. I had the complete opposite reaction. After reading that, I'm about to pull my pledge, because it's manifestly clear the game isn't For Me and I am unlikely to enjoy playing it. There are people, like me, who are not Good At Games (tm) just in general, and in fact barely and only with much struggle and less-fun-than-exasperating grinding manage to beat something like Civ 5 on the default difficulty. When I read an update where it seems like 3 or 4 times the developer goes out of his way to assure people that this will be a super-hard game, way harder than Civ 5, I am not sure what I am supposed to think other than 'casuals not welcome'. I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion here or anywhere else, but Kickstarter's model is geared towards the hardcore and as such games funded on it are probably going to cater more to hardcore players than people who don't want to invest 60 hours to get 'kinda okay' to the point where they can actually play the game without getting curbstomped. It kinda is what it is, and why I usually only back games that are 'big' and have huge support like P:E, because I have a reasonable hope that there will be some way for people like me to enjoy them. I was hoping AtG was gonna be one of them, but the developer is pretty bluntly saying I was wrong, and the Kickstarter won't fail for lack of my 25$ I guess. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 02:41
|
|
|
There are probably going to be difficulty settings, and he does open up the post about how he wants the interface to ease in new players, just like it did for Civ V. Civ V was easy because it was broken and flawed. The AI constantly did ridiculously stupid things, for example. Making the AI less bad isn't a bad thing for casuals as long as they also compensate by giving good difficulty settings and having a solid, friendly interface. It doesn't sound like they're making the game systems too complicated or hard to understand. On the contrary, everything still seems really simple and intuitive. The challenge will be in the strategy, not in the learning curve. I guess I don't understand how you can be a strategy gamer and think that's a bad thing. I always thought that Civ V was more accepted by a larger range of gamers because of its accessibility, which it seems like is a thing they want to maintain for At the Gates.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
Mukaikubo posted:I had the complete opposite reaction. After reading that, I'm about to pull my pledge, because it's manifestly clear the game isn't For Me and I am unlikely to enjoy playing it. There are people, like me, who are not Good At Games (tm) just in general, and in fact barely and only with much struggle and less-fun-than-exasperating grinding manage to beat something like Civ 5 on the default difficulty. When I read an update where it seems like 3 or 4 times the developer goes out of his way to assure people that this will be a super-hard game, way harder than Civ 5, I am not sure what I am supposed to think other than 'casuals not welcome'. I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion here or anywhere else, but Kickstarter's model is geared towards the hardcore and as such games funded on it are probably going to cater more to hardcore players than people who don't want to invest 60 hours to get 'kinda okay' to the point where they can actually play the game without getting curbstomped. It kinda is what it is, and why I usually only back games that are 'big' and have huge support like P:E, because I have a reasonable hope that there will be some way for people like me to enjoy them. I was hoping AtG was gonna be one of them, but the developer is pretty bluntly saying I was wrong, and the Kickstarter won't fail for lack of my 25$ I guess. I'm with you, huge stacks of units, a bunch of sliders, resources you have to stockpile to make a purchase, are all things I really dislike in a strategy game because it makes it so fiddly and bogs everything down.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 04:09
|
|
|
Uncle Jam posted:I'm with you, huge stacks of units, a bunch of sliders, resources you have to stockpile to make a purchase, are all things I really dislike in a strategy game because it makes it so fiddly and bogs everything down. The stacks wont be huge because the supply system will limit how many units any given tile can support, and he made no mention of sliders being included. The sliders were supposed to be an example of allowing adaptable play. I guess AtG's version of adaptable play will be through the romanization perks system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
I really hope Throw Trucks With Your Mind makes it. It's the first EEG headset game I've seen that doesn't look to suck out loud. ... It probably will, too. 25% funded already.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 06:31
|
|
|
Throw Trucks With Your Mind looks super cool, but I'm wary of how long the game's community is going to last. PC gaming relies heavily on digital distribution but with a game like this you can't just buy it on Steam and play it immediately. I think people will be turned off by the fact that they'll have to order a special headset and there will be very few people playing. It'll end up like The Ship, except this time you'll be left with a pricey EEG headset with very few things to use it on. A multiplayer focused route is not a good idea for this game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
miguelito posted:http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/229423802/death-inc?ref=category So sorry to see this getting so little support, it really seems like an interesting idea and depending on execution i can see it have some degree of financial success as well. Out of curiosity, has anyone seen a resurrection project for an old-school city builder like Caesar/Pharaoh/Zeus? Haven't seen one yet and it is something i would be interested in (as would a few others i think).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Al! posted:I feel like Taylor should count his lucky stars that he and GPG were given as many chances as they were, despite producing so many bad and or failed games. It's also ridiculous that he's bemoaning the thing since Wildman managed to get $600,000 in pledges anyway. That's huge in Kickstarter terms. They just put the goal way too high, thinking they'd be able to raise Obsidian-levels of money for some reason (and even Obsidian had a conservative original target). They might well have gotten close to 1.1M if they'd kept it going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:22
|
|
|
Mr.48 posted:Like the graphics on level 3? And his mum said he'd never get anywhere with these games!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:26
|
|
|
Antti posted:It's also ridiculous that he's bemoaning the thing since Wildman managed to get $600,000 in pledges anyway. That's huge in Kickstarter terms. They just put the goal way too high, thinking they'd be able to raise Obsidian-levels of money for some reason (and even Obsidian had a conservative original target). Plus I suspect if they'd paid attention to the factors that made Kickstarters successful and actually targeted the thing properly, come out with some apparent engine footage and less vague proposals, they'd have done far better. I really feel like he plain just didn't get it from the start. And if you're asking for a million and hoping for more, you should at least try to understand Kickstarter properly, which is what makes his statements now so dumb. He blew it himself, to a decent degree.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 09:55
|
|
|
uaciaut posted:Out of curiosity, has anyone seen a resurrection project for an old-school city builder like Caesar/Pharaoh/Zeus? Haven't seen one yet and it is something i would be interested in (as would a few others i think). Not on Kickstarter but there is a game being made exactly like that called Medieval Mayor by Tilted Mill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 10:28
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Plus I suspect if they'd paid attention to the factors that made Kickstarters successful and actually targeted the thing properly, come out with some apparent engine footage and less vague proposals, they'd have done far better. It's kinda funny that the Kickstarter for Planetary Annihilation which described itself as "Total Annihilation-inspired gameplay on a planetary scale" raised 2.2 million, but somehow Chris Taylor who was the actual designer for the original Total Annihilation couldn't figure out how to copy this success.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 10:59
|
|
|
quote:“Gas Powered Games’ heritage and development pedigree shows us just how valuable an addition Chris and his company will make to the Wargaming family,” said Victor Kislyi, CEO of Wargaming. “Gas Powered Games has a long track record of providing incredibly engaging AAA gaming experiences and we can’t wait to start working with them.” http://www.vg247.com/2013/02/14/wargaming-acquires-gas-powered-games/
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
I didn't see that coming. GPG are known for their RTS games so I imagine that's what they bought them for, does that mean we might get some sort of online focused strategy game with the economy similar to World of Tanks? After Age of Empires Online I'm surprised they'd try something like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:14
|
|
|
GPG is basically just Chris at this point so what did they really acquire?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
Al! posted:GPG is basically just Chris at this point so what did they really acquire? The management skills of Chris Taylor don't come cheap, man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Al! posted:GPG is basically just Chris at this point so what did they really acquire? PR and goodwill. Chris Taylor's big games are rather popular in their main market (Europe, Eastern Europe PC players).
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
He must still have ownership over some IPs. Space Siege anyone?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
He has some experience in making MOBAs and I could certainly see Wargaming.net wanting to make one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2013 16:18
|
|