It suprises me how many people in this thread are saying they hope it doesnt get funded. If you arent interested in it then dont play it or buy it when it comes out, but how does it getting made affect you in any way?
If people want to fund it then I am happy for them and the developer. It means jobs for the studios and the people supporting will get to play something they are interested in.
I am not pledging to this game, but I wouldn't hope for them to fail. That is just kind of morbid.
While it does not affect me directly, it is an interesting topic.
It is a huge loophole introduced with JOBS ACT and needs to be addressed promptly as it is currently on a borderline of legality.
And you are wrong that it is good for industry. In short term sight, probably. In long term, the prospects are grim.
More people donate, more money will be lost since this type of funding stripped for liability will produce high amount of failed projects and more projects fail, less people will be willing to put their money in.
I do not care how people spend their money, I do care tho if business is kept liable and transparent.
Really, you aren't understanding something pretty obvious if you look at Kickstarter. Startups that don't have anything to show for themselves and devs with experience in the industry don't get funded. Every single well funded Kickstarter had a reason they got funded: they had experienced developers and / or a prototype to get funded. Kickstarter allows indie developers to stay indie without being bogged down by publishers (which can greatly effect the quality of a game, look at any studios EA has bought out for example). Projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of day don't get funded.
Sure, there is a whole liability issue. One of these days a well funded Kickstarter won't deliver and prehaps the whole Kickstarter paradigm will change, but that really hasn't happened yet. Even so, a class action lawsuit still might be possible. Screaming that it's a "Scam" is just as outrageous as saying you should fund any Kickstarter you come across though. There are plenty of positives in Kickstarter and I'm sorry you cannot see them.
Also I love how you bring politics into this. Kickstarter was around way before the JOBS ACT was even introduced.
I don't see why you care if a business is kept liable and transparent if you aren't investing in it or even buying products from said business.
There was a ShadowRun MMO game created by Microsoft once, but it didn't last long, I saw it and went back to the store later to bu
That was not an mmo, it was an online only pvp fps.
As an aside, it's quite possible they supplied the final funding themselves through proxy accounts to ensure they didn't lose the 400k+ legitimate funding. The stakes are high, and they don't NEED the extra money, as they were going to make the game anyways. Truth is, they just wanted more money, and hell, in it's first year, I'd be surprised if their cash shop brings in nearly 500k.
This was a cash grab and promo for a browser game. Hopefully it will be a good game and faithful to the IP at least.
Originally posted by Magnum2103 Projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of day don't get funded.
It is the contrary - projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of the day gets funded.
Apparently you do not understand the difference between donation and investment.
What paradigm to change? The paradigm is ALREADY broken. This kind of funding is highly insecure and fraudulent without any liability.
Someone was posting stats for successful launch of Kicstarter projects that GOT funded and it is well below 50% iirc.
As I said, fail rate of Kickstarter projects will be very high because those are simply failed projects lacking any survivability and donation is the only option.
Projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of day don't get funded.
It is the contrary - projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of the day gets funded.
Actually, chances are these projects would get funded in some way otherwise through actual investors (a publisher in the case of video games); however the project would wind up being an abomination of the developer's vision in the long run due to publisher control and constraints. Most of the well funded projects are from well known developers and/or with a very workable prototype. Chances are they'd find a way to get the backing even without Kickstarter.
Apparently you do not understand the difference between donation and investment.
Actually I fully understand. Maybe you don't? I'm not investing in a product, I'm simply funding it's production. I receive no return from my investment (other that Kickstarter rewards). I willing spend my money to fund a project I really want to see be made reality similar to how fundraisers work for charities and politicians.
What paradigm to change? The paradigm is ALREADY broken. This kind of funding is highly insecure and fraudulent without any liability.
If a well funded project from Kickstarter ($1 mil+) wound up being a "scam" as you put it I'm sure there would be a serious change in how Kickstarter worked. Right now, that isn't the case yet. And yes, Kickstarter has already changed the paradigm in a positive way that upstart indie developers now have means of getting funded outside of potentially draining all of the resources they accumulated in life to try to get the attention of a major publisher or through digital distributors like Steam.
Someone was posting stats for successful launch of Kicstarter projects that GOT funded and it is well below 50% iirc.
Some also aren't asking a heck of a lot and don't have a lot of backers funding it. I'm talking specifically about ones that are asking for a lot of funding for example Double Fine productions or Shadowrun Online (to the tune of $100k+). At least I specifically don't back small projects unless they have a proven track record or at least something to show for it. Some projects still aren't at their scheduled delivery date yet which is probably factored into the statistics. There have been quite a few success stories from Kickstarter already. Kickstarter is still relatively new. Give the projects some time to pan out before posting statistics on it.
As I said, fail rate of Kickstarter projects will be very high because those are simply failed projects lacking any survivability and donation is the only option.
Which is fine. It's funder's right to choose which projects they think are going to take off and want to see as a final product. It's a great feeling when the project you funding takes off and you are an active (sometimes credited) participant in making that happen. Projects that are bad (offer nothing new, have scope issues, don't have a workable prototype, are from people who clearly aren't experienced enough to handle them) aren't going to get funded. I don't see the problem here.
The last 10 years or so of MMO history are littered with games that had great concepts, amazing feature lists and very enthusiastic developers... and failed miserably (Dark & Light, Dawntide, Xsyon, Mortal Online amongst others). All of them spent many years in development without Kickstarter funding, and ALL of them that actually launched did so with only a fraction of their original feature list implemented.
Evidently, building good MMO's is not easy. Even building MMO's that WORK doesn't seem to be easy. But there's an abundant supply of enthusiastic indie developers that believe "they" will be the ones who'll crack it. So far they have given us hope, but that's about all.
I've nothing against the idea of Kickstarter. But anyone that donates money there should know that probably 1 in 10 of those projects will actually produce a playable game. It might even be a game that you would be prepared to play, even it the final product differs quite a bit from the one that you originally "invested" in.
However, as the old saying goes: "Where there's life, there's hope".
Perhaps in the MMO world that should change to: "Where there's money, there's hope"
Tues Aug 14th, 2012. 6003 Backers, $558,863 pledged of $500,000 goal . 58,863 over the 500k they were looking for.
I don't think you seem to fathom just how big a name Shadowrun is amongst the RPG community and old school pen and paper gamers. Many of us have been waiting a very long time for a proper iteration of the game in an online environment and now we have the opportunity to see it finally become a reality.
Just because you consider it to be low quality or not worthwhile, is simply your own individual opinion. Judging by the fact that nearly 130k was pledged in less than 24h I'd say you fall under the category of vocal minority.
Sorry to burst your bubble. I'm glad they did make it.
Originally posted by Magnum2103 Actually I fully understand.
Nope. You may cite their definition or usage but you cannot put it in context or make implications.
It does make a lot of difference who put the money into project. Factor you either keep ignoring or you are just not even aware of.
Originally posted by Magnum2103 If a well funded project from Kickstarter ($1 mil+) wound up being a "scam" as you put it I'm sure there would be a serious change in how Kickstarter worked.
Yeah, that would be a scam but 1 000 projects funded 10k USD each and not delivering is not a scam...
Because indie devs could use Ponzi scheme and it would be positive and all right as long as they can gather their funds...pointless discussion.
Kickstarter does not give a damn, it is not their concern, they are not liable.
Looks great, the Shadowrun IP has a lot of potential to make an awesome game. I also did my bit and I'm glad to see it got funded just in the nick of time!
For those that are actually interested in Shadowrun Online and, maybe, were even amongst those over 6.000 backers that deemed Shadowrun Online worth their support:
Thanks for all the support and hurray! If you are interested in staying up to date, visit shadowrun.com. You'll always find the latest news there and you'll be able to exchange ideas with the devs on the forums there. And there is a a Shadowrun Online Newsletter, twitter feed and facebook site too for those that do not have the time/interest to read up on hundreds of forums posts.
For those that are actually interested in Shadowrun Online and, maybe, were even amongst those over 6.000 backers that deemed Shadowrun Online worth their support:
Thanks for all the support and hurray! If you are interested in staying up to date, visit shadowrun.com. You'll always find the latest news there and you'll be able to exchange ideas with the devs on the forums there. And there is a a Shadowrun Online Newsletter, twitter feed and facebook site too for those that do not have the time/interest to read up on hundreds of forums posts.
I like the design approach you guys took: It stands out as something different and with room to grow.
Tues Aug 14th, 2012. 6003 Backers, $558,863 pledged of $500,000 goal . 58,863 over the 500k they were looking for.
I don't think you seem to fathom just how big a name Shadowrun is amongst the RPG community and old school pen and paper gamers. Many of us have been waiting a very long time for a proper iteration of the game in an online environment and now we have the opportunity to see it finally become a reality.
Just because you consider it to be low quality or not worthwhile, is simply your own individual opinion. Judging by the fact that nearly 130k was pledged in less than 24h I'd say you fall under the category of vocal minority.
Sorry to burst your bubble. I'm glad they did make it.
I am glad there are gullible people on the net that will fund almost anything. If they actually make it a game, great, i will take a look and see if it is fun. If they don't, i won't be one who loses money and get angry.
Originally posted by nariusseldon I am glad there are gullible people on the net that will fund almost anything. If they actually make it a game, great, i will take a look and see if it is fun. If they don't, i won't be one who loses money and get angry.
It only shows how people little care about "quality", despite they cry so much about it.
They do not mind to pay for games in beta, now they do not even mind to throw money on a game that is still on paper...
I am glad there are gullible people on the net that will fund almost anything. If they actually make it a game, great, i will take a look and see if it is fun. If they don't, i won't be one who loses money and get angry.
It only shows how people little care about "quality", despite they cry so much about it.
They do not mind to pay for games in beta, now they do not even mind to throw money on a game that is still on paper...
What's next?
Oh i do think they care about quality. When .. i mean IF .. the game comes out, and it is not polished, those backers will cry bloddy murder.
However, somehow they are willing to pay for hope. I am sure, in their mind, this will turn out to be the greatest, most polished with all the bells & whistles ... Shadowrun game of all time. That is what i call "wishing thinking".
Comments
Really, you aren't understanding something pretty obvious if you look at Kickstarter. Startups that don't have anything to show for themselves and devs with experience in the industry don't get funded. Every single well funded Kickstarter had a reason they got funded: they had experienced developers and / or a prototype to get funded. Kickstarter allows indie developers to stay indie without being bogged down by publishers (which can greatly effect the quality of a game, look at any studios EA has bought out for example). Projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of day don't get funded.
Sure, there is a whole liability issue. One of these days a well funded Kickstarter won't deliver and prehaps the whole Kickstarter paradigm will change, but that really hasn't happened yet. Even so, a class action lawsuit still might be possible. Screaming that it's a "Scam" is just as outrageous as saying you should fund any Kickstarter you come across though. There are plenty of positives in Kickstarter and I'm sorry you cannot see them.
Also I love how you bring politics into this. Kickstarter was around way before the JOBS ACT was even introduced.
I don't see why you care if a business is kept liable and transparent if you aren't investing in it or even buying products from said business.
I don't. In fact, the only thing i care about is whether a game is released, and if the game is fun.
That was not an mmo, it was an online only pvp fps.
As an aside, it's quite possible they supplied the final funding themselves through proxy accounts to ensure they didn't lose the 400k+ legitimate funding. The stakes are high, and they don't NEED the extra money, as they were going to make the game anyways. Truth is, they just wanted more money, and hell, in it's first year, I'd be surprised if their cash shop brings in nearly 500k.
This was a cash grab and promo for a browser game. Hopefully it will be a good game and faithful to the IP at least.
It is the contrary - projects that have almost no chance of seeing the light of the day gets funded.
Apparently you do not understand the difference between donation and investment.
What paradigm to change? The paradigm is ALREADY broken. This kind of funding is highly insecure and fraudulent without any liability.
Someone was posting stats for successful launch of Kicstarter projects that GOT funded and it is well below 50% iirc.
As I said, fail rate of Kickstarter projects will be very high because those are simply failed projects lacking any survivability and donation is the only option.
Funding completed 15 mins ago with $58K to spare.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1964352341/shadowrun-online
The last 10 years or so of MMO history are littered with games that had great concepts, amazing feature lists and very enthusiastic developers... and failed miserably (Dark & Light, Dawntide, Xsyon, Mortal Online amongst others). All of them spent many years in development without Kickstarter funding, and ALL of them that actually launched did so with only a fraction of their original feature list implemented.
Evidently, building good MMO's is not easy. Even building MMO's that WORK doesn't seem to be easy. But there's an abundant supply of enthusiastic indie developers that believe "they" will be the ones who'll crack it. So far they have given us hope, but that's about all.
I've nothing against the idea of Kickstarter. But anyone that donates money there should know that probably 1 in 10 of those projects will actually produce a playable game. It might even be a game that you would be prepared to play, even it the final product differs quite a bit from the one that you originally "invested" in.
However, as the old saying goes: "Where there's life, there's hope".
Perhaps in the MMO world that should change to: "Where there's money, there's hope"
They did make it, you judged prematurely.
Tues Aug 14th, 2012. 6003 Backers, $558,863 pledged of $500,000 goal . 58,863 over the 500k they were looking for.
I don't think you seem to fathom just how big a name Shadowrun is amongst the RPG community and old school pen and paper gamers. Many of us have been waiting a very long time for a proper iteration of the game in an online environment and now we have the opportunity to see it finally become a reality.
Just because you consider it to be low quality or not worthwhile, is simply your own individual opinion. Judging by the fact that nearly 130k was pledged in less than 24h I'd say you fall under the category of vocal minority.
Sorry to burst your bubble. I'm glad they did make it.
Nope. You may cite their definition or usage but you cannot put it in context or make implications.
It does make a lot of difference who put the money into project. Factor you either keep ignoring or you are just not even aware of.
Yeah, that would be a scam but 1 000 projects funded 10k USD each and not delivering is not a scam...
Because indie devs could use Ponzi scheme and it would be positive and all right as long as they can gather their funds...pointless discussion.
Kickstarter does not give a damn, it is not their concern, they are not liable.
Great tip for Kickstarter project:
http://screen.yahoo.com/nickstarter
For those that are actually interested in Shadowrun Online and, maybe, were even amongst those over 6.000 backers that deemed Shadowrun Online worth their support:
Thanks for all the support and hurray!
If you are interested in staying up to date, visit shadowrun.com. You'll always find the latest news there and you'll be able to exchange ideas with the devs on the forums there. And there is a a Shadowrun Online Newsletter, twitter feed and facebook site too for those that do not have the time/interest to read up on hundreds of forums posts.
I like the design approach you guys took: It stands out as something different and with room to grow.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
I am glad there are gullible people on the net that will fund almost anything. If they actually make it a game, great, i will take a look and see if it is fun. If they don't, i won't be one who loses money and get angry.
It only shows how people little care about "quality", despite they cry so much about it.
They do not mind to pay for games in beta, now they do not even mind to throw money on a game that is still on paper...
What's next?
Oh i do think they care about quality. When .. i mean IF .. the game comes out, and it is not polished, those backers will cry bloddy murder.
However, somehow they are willing to pay for hope. I am sure, in their mind, this will turn out to be the greatest, most polished with all the bells & whistles ... Shadowrun game of all time. That is what i call "wishing thinking".