surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Not every developer has the luxury of milking Angry Birds unfortunately. Some developers have to rely on support from fans that want a game untouched by publishers.
Your last thought on the subject hit the nail on the head, Jim. The «is Kickstarter good for gaming» debate will come to fruition over the next few months/years, when the crowdfunded games actually do end up playable and we gamers have a go at them, especially the more high-profile ones. It will only be once we get to actually play the games (and you guys review them) will we be able to see if it was worth it or if it was, all in essence, a pipe dream.
I fully expect a trend of Kickstarter-backer rage in the near future of gamers who donated and ended up feeling cheated because the game didn't live up to their expectations. I mean, think about it: what *if* the DoubleFine game sucks? I wouldn't want to be in Tim Schafer's shoes in that hypothetical, weeding out the angry tweets and hatemail.
I fully expect a trend of Kickstarter-backer rage in the near future of gamers who donated and ended up feeling cheated because the game didn't live up to their expectations. I mean, think about it: what *if* the DoubleFine game sucks? I wouldn't want to be in Tim Schafer's shoes in that hypothetical, weeding out the angry tweets and hatemail.
That's right, game developers! You only debase yourself when you try your best to appeal to the financially limited! But when you do your little dances for executives and stockholders you are completely respectable!
What kind of logic is this?
What kind of logic is this?
I'm sure there's plenty who enjoy it, but Angry Birds has always struck me more as a circus act, then an actual game as well. It's basically the equivalent of a flash-game which for some reason or not has a massive hype train.
Secondly, the dev's are promising rewards to you in return for helping them, I would tend to say that we all hear the horror stories of Publisher Game Development, and we also here all of the fun and glory of being indie.
I mean with the Ouya, sure it may have been a bit of a circus, but those weren't minor rewards, they were massive donations which honestly, made sense. 10,000$ in donations and we'll give you a special party, etc. Personally, this makes sense to me. That would the equivalent of buying 100 Ouya's for yourself.
I would tend to agree about still being wary Jim. It may just be the amount of time game development requires, but I have barely heard any news from what i've seen off kickstarter, even for kickstarters almost 2 years ago.
Secondly, the dev's are promising rewards to you in return for helping them, I would tend to say that we all hear the horror stories of Publisher Game Development, and we also here all of the fun and glory of being indie.
I mean with the Ouya, sure it may have been a bit of a circus, but those weren't minor rewards, they were massive donations which honestly, made sense. 10,000$ in donations and we'll give you a special party, etc. Personally, this makes sense to me. That would the equivalent of buying 100 Ouya's for yourself.
I would tend to agree about still being wary Jim. It may just be the amount of time game development requires, but I have barely heard any news from what i've seen off kickstarter, even for kickstarters almost 2 years ago.
Bad things will happen with Kickstarter because bad things happen to everything and everyone. The same applies with good. That doesn't mean things will always turn out desirable, but it does make criticizing it a bit pointless. Especially at a stage as early as this.
Also, I get the feeling that the guy can only say that because he himself doesn't have to worry about funding.
Also, I get the feeling that the guy can only say that because he himself doesn't have to worry about funding.
There are only a few ways to start up a business:
1. Bootstrap yourself and be beholden to no one.
2. Get investors like Rovio did in 2005 and work for your shareholders.
3. Get crowd funded and work for your customers.
Option 3 sounds like the most noble to me.
1. Bootstrap yourself and be beholden to no one.
2. Get investors like Rovio did in 2005 and work for your shareholders.
3. Get crowd funded and work for your customers.
Option 3 sounds like the most noble to me.
Oskar Burman is a bit of an idiot, kickstarter has many drawbacks but pandering to an audience to get your game made really isn't one of them.
It's a bit rich coming from a guy who's studio is milking their one hit wonder for all it's worth.
It's a bit rich coming from a guy who's studio is milking their one hit wonder for all it's worth.
Rovio, "We've designed two games! well... we've design... we bought the rights to that one game... and stole the concept of another... and.. made pigs... KICKSTARTER IS BAD"
As I recall, this was part of the point of the Penny Arcade kickstarter, lampooning the way some would pander so much to contributors.
But as has already been pointed out, the great thing about kickstarter and a lot of these projects being funded as they are is that it's ultimately about the very audience that consumes their kind of entertainment, and not about stockholders or which middleman acts as intermediary.
I've been seeing the same thing happen more and more the last few years now, in the music industry: More and more bands and musicians who are going direct to the fans instead of still trying to succeed through a label, because those very bands and musicians exist because of the fans, not because of the label that publishes their work.
But as has already been pointed out, the great thing about kickstarter and a lot of these projects being funded as they are is that it's ultimately about the very audience that consumes their kind of entertainment, and not about stockholders or which middleman acts as intermediary.
I've been seeing the same thing happen more and more the last few years now, in the music industry: More and more bands and musicians who are going direct to the fans instead of still trying to succeed through a label, because those very bands and musicians exist because of the fans, not because of the label that publishes their work.
Well, if there's one game developer that knows about whoring the shit out of itself and its IP, it would be Rovio.
Kickstarter is a great thing, and at this point I honestly can't see anything changing that in my eyes, especially not Rovio.
The way I see it, yes, there is a chance the games will be bad. And yes, there will inevitably be an uproar if they do turn out that way. But there is a much higher chance of them being good in the hands of the devs rather than the publishers, and if people are too stupid to realise that there is a certain risk involved in funding a Kickstarter project, they deserve to have their money taken from them anyway. There will always be space for small projects on KS at least, and I think the new culture of funding a pound or two on a project that seems cool is better than buying an app on the Apple store and never using it.
The way I see it, yes, there is a chance the games will be bad. And yes, there will inevitably be an uproar if they do turn out that way. But there is a much higher chance of them being good in the hands of the devs rather than the publishers, and if people are too stupid to realise that there is a certain risk involved in funding a Kickstarter project, they deserve to have their money taken from them anyway. There will always be space for small projects on KS at least, and I think the new culture of funding a pound or two on a project that seems cool is better than buying an app on the Apple store and never using it.
What a tool. An i-dev makes money then criticizes others who want to make far more ambitious titles but lack the funds. Jerk.
Kickstarter is the Ebay (without buy it now) of game development, not the Best Buy corporate-picked inventory selection. Not everything will be good, but you're going to find some fantastically unique ideas that publishers like Capcom think are niche and too unimportant to fund. You put in your bid, and wait for the auction to end, hoping that it's what you imagined when you paid for it.
I don't see how this direct developer-gamer connection can bottom out, even if the first wave of games released are all trash. People have direct input on what's getting made for the first time, and any dev that wants to continue receiving funds does best to listen to his/her audience. I think it's awesome that devs are THANKFUL enough to offer a personal meeting to those who fund substantial portions of their work.
Jeez, that guy's a prick.
Kickstarter is the Ebay (without buy it now) of game development, not the Best Buy corporate-picked inventory selection. Not everything will be good, but you're going to find some fantastically unique ideas that publishers like Capcom think are niche and too unimportant to fund. You put in your bid, and wait for the auction to end, hoping that it's what you imagined when you paid for it.
I don't see how this direct developer-gamer connection can bottom out, even if the first wave of games released are all trash. People have direct input on what's getting made for the first time, and any dev that wants to continue receiving funds does best to listen to his/her audience. I think it's awesome that devs are THANKFUL enough to offer a personal meeting to those who fund substantial portions of their work.
Jeez, that guy's a prick.
Yeah I'm sure all the backers will feel really pleased when the game they funded sells millions, makes the devs and whichever publisher eventually distributes the game a metric tonne of cash and they get some bonus DLC.
Far in the future, I will be propped in my wheel chair parked in the corner of a rundown nursing home "suite", and "I Love the 2010's" will flash across my virtual reality headset...and I will remember, for the first time in decades, that Rovio (and Angry Birds) once existed...and then I will shit myself.
What does Rovio actually know about game publishing and developer-gamer relationships? They made a simplistic physics puzzler and pushed it to the App Store.
Why the hate for Angry Birds? I mean, they are fun and addicting, the fact that they are "simple" don't have to detract them. It's true that they milked the Birds for all they worth but they have made Bad Piggies which is awesome.
It really bugs me when people criticize games like that just because they are not "deep" or "mature"... they a re perfect for that times when you want to just have fun and not want to shed tears playing Crisis Core or rage with that one fight in Devil Survivor in the middle of a Bus.
It really bugs me when people criticize games like that just because they are not "deep" or "mature"... they a re perfect for that times when you want to just have fun and not want to shed tears playing Crisis Core or rage with that one fight in Devil Survivor in the middle of a Bus.
Even if Kickstarter proves to be completely dysfunctional and a only quarter of the games promised actually comes to fruition, it will still have been more important to the industry than Rovio.
By the way, selling half a buck shitty repetitive games is what whoring oneself actually is. Make it free and caring, like the games from Newgrounds you shamelessly copied.
By the way, selling half a buck shitty repetitive games is what whoring oneself actually is. Make it free and caring, like the games from Newgrounds you shamelessly copied.
I'll be curious in a few years to see what happens with all these Kickstarter projects. If the games are successful then it could be the beginning of a new type of game development. If not, well, it will make for a good bullet point on the "Decade in Gaming" articles that will show up in 2020.
I'm with you, @SCORPIONSERKEN. I especially like Angry Birds Space which really had a decent amount of complexity to it with the gravity physics. And Bad Piggies? Really smart game design. Respectable amount of depth.
@SCORPIONSERKEN
I don't hate Angry Birds. But Rovio's portfolio and M.O. are not those of a studio with the experience and authority to comment on how "traditional" game development and publishing works.
I don't hate Angry Birds. But Rovio's portfolio and M.O. are not those of a studio with the experience and authority to comment on how "traditional" game development and publishing works.
I don't know why everyone is so excited about kickstarter, it hasn't produced a single great game yet, however people are proclaiming publishers are dead and not needed anymore.
As far as I'm aware the only good thing to come from Kickstarter so far is FTL (Faster Than Light) which while amazing only used Kickstarter after most of the work was already done and they just needed a modest sum of cash to get the thing right and out the door.
We haven't had one great game that was entirely funded by kickstarter.
As far as I'm aware the only good thing to come from Kickstarter so far is FTL (Faster Than Light) which while amazing only used Kickstarter after most of the work was already done and they just needed a modest sum of cash to get the thing right and out the door.
We haven't had one great game that was entirely funded by kickstarter.
... what portemanteu said. We still have yet to see if Kickstarter works for video games, and what the final products end up being. It will definitely be an interesting ride!
I believe that the actual circus animals are the developers who sell their souls to major publishers; they're the ones jumping through flaming hoops and are instructed to roll over and fetch and by the execs. Meanwhile, developers using Kickstarter feel more like a musician performing requests for the audience who bought tickets to their concert. Also, that's big talk from the company that never made anything other than mobile games and got lucky with Angry Birds which they milked dry. As far as I'm concerned, Rovio haven't earned the right to call out devs like Obsidian for turning to fans rather than grovel to big publishers.
Interesting how a studio which makes games starring animals releases a statement where 'escorts' and 'circus animals' are mentioned in the same breath.
Are they PAYING to fuck birds and pigs over at Rovio? No wonder they need so much money.
Are they PAYING to fuck birds and pigs over at Rovio? No wonder they need so much money.
I'd go as far as saying I'd be more willing to degrade myself by LITERALLY do a little dance for kickstarter supporters over going to a publisher. Why? Because at the end of it all I would have funded my game AND still own the IP, so if it takes off, I control it in the future, not activision or EA. become a "circus animal" for fans, and keep my property? Yes, yes I will.
Hmm, kickstarter has turned into a joke and is one of the worst things to happen to gaming. Rovio is a joke and is one of the worst things to happen to gaming. Tough to side with either party here...
Oh fuck you Burman.
Rovio has made two fun, little games. This doesn't warrant this extremely cocky attitude, as if he and Rovio are the greatest game developer to have ever lived.
Kojima, Inafume and Miyamoto have all accomplished much more and we never hear them get this cocky.
I also believe that Kickstarter is much better than heading to some publisher. Backers should of understood the risk they're facing once they have their paychecks to these developers and if these games fail then this will be just another sad chapter in the history of video games.
Rovio has made two fun, little games. This doesn't warrant this extremely cocky attitude, as if he and Rovio are the greatest game developer to have ever lived.
Kojima, Inafume and Miyamoto have all accomplished much more and we never hear them get this cocky.
I also believe that Kickstarter is much better than heading to some publisher. Backers should of understood the risk they're facing once they have their paychecks to these developers and if these games fail then this will be just another sad chapter in the history of video games.
What an arrogant asshole !
Coming from the guys that gave you...Angry Birds...a cheap copy of a free flash game and Super Mario Galaxy ehhhh... Angry Birds Space and Amazing something, that incredible machine thingy and Bad Pigs: Nuts and Bolts...
These guys have literally done nothing for the Game industry as a hole and now compare this to:
-Double Fine (Tim Schäfer/Ron Gilbert: Creators of some of the best point and click Adventures in history)
-Obsidian (Most of the former Black Isle employees work there:Fallout 1 and 2, Planscape Tourment, Icewind Dale)
Yeah...the next Mario...alright....idiot !
Coming from the guys that gave you...Angry Birds...a cheap copy of a free flash game and Super Mario Galaxy ehhhh... Angry Birds Space and Amazing something, that incredible machine thingy and Bad Pigs: Nuts and Bolts...
These guys have literally done nothing for the Game industry as a hole and now compare this to:
-Double Fine (Tim Schäfer/Ron Gilbert: Creators of some of the best point and click Adventures in history)
-Obsidian (Most of the former Black Isle employees work there:Fallout 1 and 2, Planscape Tourment, Icewind Dale)
Yeah...the next Mario...alright....idiot !
I too was wary of Kickstarter when I first learned of it, but then as I thought about it, it just makes sense. The people donating hopefully believe in the project they donate to so even if nothing comes of it and these people lose their money, sure they will be pissed but it was an investment that didn't pan out, a risk of all investments really. Plus it's a quick lesson to learn and you don't have to donate ever again.
It'll take time to see if this works out, but I can say as someone who has given money to Kickstarters that I am 100% prepared to not enjoy some of the gave I've given money to. There are so many great game ideas out there that publishers won't touch because they fear failure. I'm happy to give money to help devs make those awesome sounding games a reality.
I'm not sure what the Rovio dude's criticism here is, really. It's pretty common for all money raising ventures to promise something to your donators. I've worked for nonprofs that offer bags, t-shirts, posters, fancy parties, their names on buildings, etc. for varying levels of donations. Pretty standard, really. I can't blame devs who would rather do things like that for their audience while getting to keep their IP rather than chain themselves to a publisher.
I'm not sure what the Rovio dude's criticism here is, really. It's pretty common for all money raising ventures to promise something to your donators. I've worked for nonprofs that offer bags, t-shirts, posters, fancy parties, their names on buildings, etc. for varying levels of donations. Pretty standard, really. I can't blame devs who would rather do things like that for their audience while getting to keep their IP rather than chain themselves to a publisher.
That's pretty funny, actually. Perfectly highlights the contempt that a lot of game developers and publishers have towards gamers now. Like the notion of treating your customer as special or to be catered to, or that you're obliged to give them something worthwhile for their money, is something crazy out of left field.
Man, despite being a one trick pony, the folks at Rovio sure do like to sling the shit. Some of those circus animals have worked on some of the finest titles video games have to offer, so I don't think the Angry birds twerps are in a place to cast dispersions on cutting out publishers and going strait to the consumer. In fact, Rovio would do well to remember that there was a time when Guitar Hero was one of the biggest games in the industry, and another time when kids carried around virtual pets. Their fad will pass as well.
Dear lord, Since when publishers are the new evil that is killing gaming, Some publishers are great (Atlus) but when i read some comments it's like they hate gaming and all gamers in general.
Maybe Kickstarter can make a difference but i see that model turn into something like "Make a game that even if not sell like a big title will gain a small but dedicated fanbase that will give you money to make another one"...
Maybe Kickstarter can make a difference but i see that model turn into something like "Make a game that even if not sell like a big title will gain a small but dedicated fanbase that will give you money to make another one"...
@MosSnake Yeah, I think that's a great attitude. Anyone who invests in Kickstarter programs expecting every single game to kick ass is delusional. Besides, it's not like buying the $200 Special Edition of some AAA game is any guarantee you'll get any satisfaction, either. Plenty of games are duds across the spectrum.
I can see their point, but not every dev has the startup money and Kickstarter is just a means to an end. Rovio spent 100,000 Euros on the development of Angry Birds, and given that advantage, I'd say they have no room to criticize those who work with much less.
Rovio can talk...
They've achieved success entirely on the back of copying the bazooka weapon from Worms. They have milked the Angry Birds franchise to the point of ridiculousness (it's basically a flash game yet has T-shirts), and think they are hot shit because they made a cheap iOS app.
They are in no position to really talk about what is healthy for gaming...
I don't think it matters what incentives the developers offer for bigger handouts, as long as the handouts don't affect the game. Almost the same exact thing happens with the 'Special Editions' that publishers offer now.
That said personally I think Kickstarter is overrated, eventually people are gonna see projects going sour and the ones who pay for it will be the donaters. Kickstarter still seems to be in a honeymoon phase.
They've achieved success entirely on the back of copying the bazooka weapon from Worms. They have milked the Angry Birds franchise to the point of ridiculousness (it's basically a flash game yet has T-shirts), and think they are hot shit because they made a cheap iOS app.
They are in no position to really talk about what is healthy for gaming...
I don't think it matters what incentives the developers offer for bigger handouts, as long as the handouts don't affect the game. Almost the same exact thing happens with the 'Special Editions' that publishers offer now.
That said personally I think Kickstarter is overrated, eventually people are gonna see projects going sour and the ones who pay for it will be the donaters. Kickstarter still seems to be in a honeymoon phase.
I agree with the Rovio exec's comment, but i agree more with that other response. Developers don't have to 'whore out' with their higher KS pledges in order to be successful, there are ways of keeping things balanced, and I think the OUYA KS did a lot in that respect by keeping to the product itself rather than shirts or other such excess that almost detracted from the product itself, much like publisher marketing and intervention ^_^.
@Gabriel Silverwolf -> Well there is Take-Two (Remember, the guys who decided to publish L.A. Noire even when the developer was problematic), Nintendo (Who decided to publish Bayonetta and bring Dragon Quest IX), CD Project (The Witcher), Square-Enix (They published Deus Ex: HR and the new Tomb Raider), VALVE (helping indie developers with Steam), Xseed Games (Bringing some japanese goodness to this side of the sea)...
Just saying, there are good developers. Don't let that the EA-Activision hate blind us...
Just saying, there are good developers. Don't let that the EA-Activision hate blind us...
While publishers and developer business has been rocky, I think in recent memory the relationship is starting to hurt the industry. I can't say yet, but Kickstarter could prove to help the industry more than it could hurt it.
Rovio is fucking hypocritical, saying developers can't give you shirts and rewards for spending your money, but you can buy Angry Birds shirts and plushies everywhere. It's no different funding a game and a shirt for spending a little more than buying angry birds and then the OFFICIAL Angry birds shirt.
I still like Angry Birds though, it's pretty fun.
Rovio is fucking hypocritical, saying developers can't give you shirts and rewards for spending your money, but you can buy Angry Birds shirts and plushies everywhere. It's no different funding a game and a shirt for spending a little more than buying angry birds and then the OFFICIAL Angry birds shirt.
I still like Angry Birds though, it's pretty fun.
@SCORPIONSERKEN I thought CD Project are a dev who self-publish, but that's not important. I must admit, you make a good point: Valve is largely responsible for the PC renaissance we're seeing now, Square-Enix are doing great as a publisher of other devs' work, and Take-Two made a bold decision on LA Noire. It's just that that bad publishers tend to make or champion certain trends that have detrimental effects on the industry. I'm looking at you, Ubisoft.
It must be easy to say that when the little flash game you made was arbitrarily picked by the internet/pop culture hive mind as the latest world shattering success, and you're now financially set for life with absolutely no real need to ever make anything new.
I don't know if any of these kickstarters are ever going to come out, but since it seems to be one of the only places in the entire industry where anyone is trying trying to make anything interesting rather than the usual business of driving the entire medium off the side of a cliff, I'm going to root for them.
I don't know if any of these kickstarters are ever going to come out, but since it seems to be one of the only places in the entire industry where anyone is trying trying to make anything interesting rather than the usual business of driving the entire medium off the side of a cliff, I'm going to root for them.
I see it as paying a low cost ($15-$20) to pre-order a game. It just so happens that you help fund the game in the process and cut the middleman out of the equation. New isometric RPGs from Obsidian and inXile for cheap? Sure, why not? I like Kickstarter.
follow
