|
SpiritOfLenin posted:I read all of that despite not being a Homeworld fan - I do, however, remember reading a lot of opinions from the largest Finnish gaming magazine at the time about how loving good Homeworld games were, and if I'd had a better computer at the time they were new, I would've been all over them. They looked like cool games. If their goal was $1 that just means that they get to keep the money no matter how much is received, yeah. If you don't meet your goal, you don't get any of the money. A $1 minimum is like saying "we're making this game anyway but you can pay us now to somehow nebulously make it a better game" Fig is like buying stock in a game, in other words it's incentivizing making profit-driven games instead of good games Psychonauts 2 and Wasteland 3 are the only notable games that have been funded through Fig Even the Outer Wilds devs were unable to fund a followup game through Fig because it turns out that gamers (who are the target investors of Fig) know that the game they want to play is unlikely to return major profit. That being said Gearbox is publishing HW3 not developing it, the devs of Homeworld 3 (Blackbird) made Hardspace: Shipbreaker (good) and Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak (pretty good), and they did not make Homeworld Remastered, so there's hope. DoK was also published by Gearbox so it's not outside of the realm of possibility that HW3 ends up pretty decent. deep dish peat moss fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Nov 2, 2021 |
# ¿ Nov 2, 2021 16:12 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 08:55 |