|
Drifter posted:Since Fig will be taking a percentage of money the same as kickstarter, why wouldn't companies speak to the larger donators in general and work outside of FIg, so they don't have to lose that other 5% investment, and 5% future payment? What is Fig offering that makes it better than a currently in house accountant and/or cfo and/or producer? Yeah that's not how that works though, you haven't been able to invest directly in a game and only the game, you'd have to invest in a corporation (the game dev studio) in return for equity (stocks). This is not a small thing and involves lawyers and meetings and poo poo, and for a larger company it's not worth bothering with unless you're talking at least 6 figures. What this seems more like is allowing smaller investors to get a publisher's deal on the game. I guess there's technically nothing preventing a game dev from negotiating separate deals with dozens or hundreds of individuals, but that's a nightmare. The way to do it would to have them all unite under the same corporate entity, which is what Fig sounds like, have that corporation be the investor in the game, and then handle the profits back through the same way.
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
Trumpeting consumer investment seems like something that could explode in Fig's face in any number of ways, the least of which is making explicit and correct what so many KS backers implicitly and incorrectly assume, which is ownership stake in a project. Obviously they're going to include fine print that firmly sets limits on operational decision-making, but how long until that butts up against Brian Fargo's up-with-people horseshit? The Codex becomes an investor bloc? Ho-ly poo poo the mess they could make? I suspect that there's going to be some amount of scrambling and / or hedging with regard to message and promise over the next few days. But I could be overreacting. In any case the "everybody gets equity wooo" factor is obvs a big aspect of the Fig PR push but I feel like they should have pulled the trigger on announcing that once they actually knew when and how it will happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:In any case the "everybody gets equity wooo" factor is obvs a big aspect of the Fig PR push but I feel like they should have pulled the trigger on announcing that once they actually knew when and how it will happen. It specifically sounds like not everybody gets equity. Like, you'll have purchasing tiers identical to Kickstarter, where you receive only goods, and then higher up on that tier list you'll be able to 'buy' into shares. But holy poo poo I never even imagined what would happen when the Codex raises a million to buy part ownership of the company/project. You may as well move to whatever state legalized suicide if you work for the dev house that happens to. Since this *is* equity and whatnot, are you able to withdraw your initial purchase if you don't like the direction the process/design is headed? I don't know how the laws work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
I am not a lawyer but I would be terrified of being an early adopter until precedents get set on the quality of communication. A Kickstarter pitch is just that, for better or worse a relatively murky free for all that you can satisfy most legal liability by supplying a token product or refund. A listing on Fig is suddenly a security brief, and vultures can and will take it to court over inconsistencies real or imagined if their return is below what they can sue for interest as damages.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:One of the big disadvantages is losing the establishment of Kickstarter. Look at how much less Indiegogo campaigns get compared to Kickstarter campaigns. Now you want to switch to a site that's totally new? Interplay revived the corpse of Black Isle Studios, went for crowdfunding on "InvestedIn" and raised a massive... Wait for it... $6,630. Phew. http://invested.in/P3507/black-isle-studios Can't wait to play that sweet
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:One of the big disadvantages is losing the establishment of Kickstarter. Look at how much less Indiegogo campaigns get compared to Kickstarter campaigns. Now you want to switch to a site that's totally new? Obsidian is a major developer with a major reputation. I think that it doesn't really matter where they decide to fund a game because they are absolutely not going to have publicity or demand problems with it, and those are the major funding problems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Obsidian would also have to tell us how much money Pillars made - or near enough through their future investment plans to easily figure it out, and all sorts of other interesting information if Fig is truly a type of investment equity vehicle. It'll be neat to see amounts on much companies earn and make and spend.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Khizan posted:Obsidian is a major developer with a major reputation. I think that it doesn't really matter where they decide to fund a game because they are absolutely not going to have publicity or demand problems with it, and those are the major funding problems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Yeah, I can see Fig failing, but at least the first couple of projects by established studios should get enough attention. But I suspect it would get far less money than the same project would get on Kickstarter. It's the Indiegogo issue, there's no install base. Unless there really are whale-ish angel investers just waiting to jump in with their cash, but I just can't see it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Konsek posted:Interplay revived the corpse of Black Isle Studios, went for crowdfunding on "InvestedIn" and raised a massive... To be fair, the site they chose was the least of their problems. It would have failed badly anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:But I suspect it would get far less money than the same project would get on Kickstarter. It's the Indiegogo issue, there's no install base. Unless there really are whale-ish angel investers just waiting to jump in with their cash, but I just can't see it. It seems like an odd move for a company just getting out of financial troubles for sure, even though I don't think it'll fail completely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Wizard Styles posted:Yeah, that's true. Especially since not getting funded on Fig probably wouldn't even be the worst thing, could probably just move to Kickstarter then. But getting sufficient funding but not as much as you'd hoped for on Fig would be really lovely. I only have the one comparative example, but I'd think you end up getting less for sequels, anyway. Shadowrun made less for its kickstarted sequel than the original. Fewer backers, and fewer dollars per backer spent. Is there an example that shows the opposite, with regards to the $500k-$million+ projects?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Drifter posted:I only have the one comparative example, but I'd think you end up getting less for sequels, anyway. Shadowrun made less for its kickstarted sequel than the original. Fewer backers, and fewer dollars per backer spent. Yea, but Dead Man's Switch was a pretty lovely game. I didn't back the second one because of that and only backed HK because Dragonfall, while still not very good, was playable and is really the only SR game we are gonna get.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Dragonfall was great you nerd
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Unless they do some hardcore advertising and offer great deals, this new crowdfunding site is a huge waste of time. Also, lol, why would you make Tim Schafer, the guy whose company has hosed up multiple Kickstarter projects, a lead member of a crowdfunding platform?
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
RIP pillars of eternity
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
So it's essentially like signing up for a whaling ship. You get a cut of the profits on a return trip, but sometimes the ship sinks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
I thought the idea was to make several kickstarter projects, reinvest the profits into bigger and better titles, and slowly build up to financial independence and the ability to make more ambitious titles. quote:Being directly funded by gamers was great... but we really miss being financially indebted to rich jerks who don't have our best interests at heart. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I thought the idea was to make several kickstarter projects, reinvest the profits into bigger and better titles, and slowly build up to financial independence and the ability to make more ambitious titles. That's never ever ever going to work. What you want is to use several kickstarter projects to prove to the big publishers that you've got the talent to work with a budget and a concept and be left alone to get things done and will produce a commercial success at the end.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Also, lol, why would you make Tim Schafer, the guy whose company has hosed up multiple Kickstarter projects, a lead member of a crowdfunding platform?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:That's never ever ever going to work. What you want is to use several kickstarter projects to prove to the big publishers that you've got the talent to work with a budget and a concept and be left alone to get things done and will produce a commercial success at the end. I thought focusing on long term growth and growing gradually was a fairly successful and oft used strategy regardless of what business you were in. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:I thought focusing on long term growth and growing gradually was a fairly successful and oft used strategy regardless of what business you were in. In video games you aren't realistically going to make so much money that one dud release won't wipe you out. You are spending a year or two to produce one product that will make most of it's revenue in the first couple of months after release. It's incredibly risky. There's a reason that developers who can deliver good AAA games consistently stay with big publishers and it's the likes of Obsidian and Schafer are crowdfunding - regardless of their ability to produce the odd niche gem they aren't consistent at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:In video games you aren't realistically going to make so much money that one dud release won't wipe you out. You are spending a year or two to produce one product that will make most of it's revenue in the first couple of months after release. It's incredibly risky. Looking at SteamSpy, it looks like PE probably sold somewhere around 400,000 copies after factoring out backers. At $40 a pop, that's around 16 mil. Steam takes 30%, and they're were other expenses like whatever they paid Paradox or invested themselves, but it seems like they're probably still looking at 8 to 10 million in profit? Before anything they make of expansions. Repeat that with PE2: Souls of Justice, PE3: Dyrwood reckoning, and maybe another kickstarted franchise (inXile has three now) and if you're building your warchest it seems like you'd be building up enough money to make your own New Vegas or lower end "AAA" title. Companies like Paradox have built up from pretty much nothing to dominating their niche without massive outside investment. I thought the whole idea of kickstarter for a company like Obsidian was as a stepping stone to building real independence, not trying to make themselves look more appealing to publishers and venture capitalists. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:Companies like Paradox have built up from pretty much nothing to dominating their niche without massive outside investment. I thought the whole idea of kickstarter for a company like Obsidian was as a stepping stone to building real independence, not trying to make themselves look more appealing to publishers and venture capitalists. Paradox have had an incredibly rocky time and are only in the position they are in now through a combination of talent, being willing to explore new ways of selling content, and sheer luck (Cities Skylines wasn't a predictable runaway hit). As for your numbers... gross profit is not net profit. e: I mean really it's impossible to overstate how innovative Paradox have been in making money. They've monetised Strategy games almost on an MMO model and their 'current' games E4 and CK2 get more users with every expansion they release. They're a fantastic success story but they've done a bunch of really unique things to make it happen that the other developers we are talking about haven't come close to doing. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Will we have a separate thread for White March or will this just be the thread? Also, where can I pre-order White March? I don't see it on Steam yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Paradox have had an incredibly rocky time and are only in the position they are in now through a combination of talent, being willing to explore new ways of selling content, and sheer luck (Cities Skylines wasn't a predictable runaway hit).
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
While I'd support them in their new games development, I'm not sure going to a direct investment method is what is best for this type of project unless it was done in tandem with a kickstarter type system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
While I'm plenty skeptical of the implementation it seems pretty apparent that this wouldn't be happening if the big indies involved believed that Kickstarter was truly going to be a sustainable source of funding for the future. This is their big push to move laterally into a model that doesn't involve publisher investment but is still more solid than KS is or will be once it hits its real decline. They're taking a big risk, but they're already taking big risks, and pretty much all of them have faced down closure and escaped it. Why not go into business for themselves? Worst case scenario, the Sword of Damocles drops as it probably would have, sooner or later. Best case scenario, they make out better than they would have in any other circumstance. Basic Chunnel fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:While I'm plenty skeptical of the implementation it seems pretty apparent that this wouldn't be happening if the big indies involved believed that Kickstarter was truly going to be a sustainable source of funding for the future. This is their big push to move laterally into a model that doesn't involve publisher investment but is still more solid than KS is or will be once it hits its real decline. Well, if feargus and Schaefer and Fargo are on the control committee, they're probably partners in the business itself, no? So they're making money through this even without running a Figstarter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
Right, it's like Tidal but for games. When Tidal was announced you had all these famous musicians onstage talking about how it was a better and more artist-friendly way of consuming music. And maybe it is / was, but it's never friendlier than to the artists onstage - they actually had stake in the company. Most artists featured on Tidal don't and never will. That said, Fig is definitely more earnest than Tidal was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:There's a reason that developers who can deliver good AAA games consistently stay with big publishers and it's the likes of Obsidian and Schafer are crowdfunding - regardless of their ability to produce the odd niche gem they aren't consistent at all. Isn't it because those dev companies are usually bought by the said big publishers? Obsidian is one of the few medium-sized dev company that is actually independent. All the others have been bought by Activision-Blizard/Ubisoft/EA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
Furism posted:Isn't it because those dev companies are usually bought by the said big publishers? Obsidian is one of the few medium-sized dev company that is actually independent. All the others have been bought by Activision-Blizard/Ubisoft/EA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 10:10
|
|
|
Raygereio posted:I always had the impression that for those dev companies that are bought up, it's either that or go under / let most of their staff go.. Yes, mostly because they are being hosed over by the publishers (see Obsidian's FNV metacritic fiasco). Or just because the owners get a big pile of money, which I can understand to some extent. It's a bit like what the mob does when they want to buy a restaurant, you know?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
Furism posted:Yes, mostly because they are being hosed over by the publishers (see Obsidian's FNV metacritic fiasco). Or just because the owners get a big pile of money, which I can understand to some extent. That wasn't a fiasco, that was a risk-based bonus, and contractually the publisher was 100% in the right not to award them. It was set very clear the expectation and the reward for meeting it. It was a stupid agreement, given the mercurial nature of what Metacritic is - and should have been tiered rather than have a hard cut-off -, but it wasn't a fiasco in the slightest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
The fiasco was to put it in the contract in the first place, is that I meant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
rope kid posted:There should be a trade-off between the different types of resting locations/mechanics. Camping in the wild requires supplies and doesn't grant bonuses but it has the benefit of convenience and immediacy. Between resting at the stronghold and resting in an inn, there should be some sort of relative trade-off or eventually one becomes irrelevant and the player doesn't consider it at all. With +3 Attribute bonuses and +2 Skill bonuses, the stronghold grants the highest bonuses relative to any inn (The Noble's Rest is getting knocked down from +4 Int to +2 with an additional benefit). The inns grant multiple bonuses and bonuses that are not covered elsewhere. It's been a while since this was posted, but I just caught up with the thread. I think you miss the point on several accounts; first of all, giving different rest bonuses different durations is absolutely counter-intuitive and needlessly opaque. And design-wise, it's not an improvement. An inferior resting bonus doesn't become more desirable just because it lasts longer. At best, it's a minor convenience. Second, the main issue with the stronghold bonuses is that there's so many of them. There's no point of having Really, the most sensible option for the stronghold, barring the apparent technical problems with implementing it, would be to have the bonuses you get from upgrading consolidated into a single one. I absolutely understand if it's not feasible to do that for the individual bonuses, but is it really too hard to have one final upgrade that replaces the previous ones, once you have all For inns, it's much more straightforward to have the better rest bonuses be more expensive. If you really want a money sink, unreasonably expensive 'Archduc's Suites', are a perfectly fine way to do that. Hannibal Rex fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
Furism posted:The fiasco was to put it in the contract in the first place, is that I meant. It was pretty sensible and by all accounts standard. Metacritic results are a good metric of sales/future revenue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Hannibal Rex posted:first of all, giving different rest bonuses different durations is absolutely counter-intuitive and needlessly opaque.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
More Fig articles popping up with more details. Apparently the model is you buy shares in a shell company (a new one created for every game) whose business purpose is to share the profits of each game. Presumably the listings will include ~*Not a Pyramid Scheme*~ to make it sound more on the up and up. That's a lot of moving parts per game and I wish them all the luck in not getting sued for non representative listings the first time a vulture doesn't make their money back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
Alchenar posted:It was pretty sensible and by all accounts standard. Metacritic results are a good metric of sales/future revenue. Just because a lovely practice is standard doesn't make it right. Hollywood accounting is standard and it's still bullshit. You don't need Metacritic to get a good metric of sales; you can just look at, you know, your sales revenues/sales volume. Anyway, I just always felt that Obsidian really deserved the bonus for FNV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:11
|
|