Star Citizen: Will big budget space game satisfy its backers?

mgilbrtsn

Interesting article about Star Citizen. (sorry if it's a duplicate post)

"So, it's no small achievement that Star Citizen's creator says he has raised more than $108m (£75m) to develop the title via online crowdfunding campaigns.

In fact, it makes the sci-fi space simulator the biggest crowdfunded project of all time.

Not bad considering its creator, Chris Roberts, had originally hoped to raise about a tenth of the amount."

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35555086

Adjuvant1

Doesn't ask any difficult questions. I don't think the interviewer knows how. Let me write the questions for one of these.

Erillion

Here is another link to the BBC video that goes with the article

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35582147


Have fun

Dammam

The article never really got around to truly addressing the question posed in its title: will the game ultimately satisfy its backers?

While many like to discuss the development of star citizen itself and whether it will live up to its goals and budget, I'm personally curious about the nature of large crowd funded projects in general and whether it's ever possible to satisfy all the backers of such projects.

So long as a project is funded by a small crowd, it is feasible, I think, to produce something that satisfies. The smaller crowd may be entirely composed of people who want the same specific things as far as the project goals are concerned,  and the total funds may be relatively small, tempering expectations.

On the other hand, when a very large group of people fund a project, both these factors change. With more money comes higher expectations in all aspects of the project, and which aspects or features matter most will vary more within a significantly large group. So not only does everyone scrutinize the various features of the project more, but different people will focus on different areas to nitpick, while having a different standard by which to gauge progress. Ultimately, as the number of backers increases and the funds grow larger, I feel it is almost impossible to fully satisfy the backers. And this is ignoring any management issues on the project side, but simply considering the effects of large groups of people throwing money at an idea as they've understood it.

So it seems to me, the degree of satisfaction comes down to how well the project goals are initially communicated, how clearly and transparently questions are addressed, and how well the final outcome meets the initial goals. There will always be those who spend money without thinking, and then complain if they don't get what they assumed they should. However, those who do buy into a project based on the ideas communicated to them will be reasonably satisfied if those goals are met. But if the project grows as more funds are acquired, shifting some of the initial goals or timeline, how can we be sure all who were sold on the initial idea are also sold on the changing scope? And how do we (backers and those working on the project) measure success/failure when design goals become more fluid?

Watching things play out with Star Citizen, this seems to be the question. Will it be the game each person reading this site wishes for? Not likely, but that shouldn't matter. Will it be the game that was initially promised? That's tough to answer, considering the changes that have resulted from the massive funds. The article says we'll have to wait and see, which is true but not insightful. Personally, I think it should have aimed to meet its initial goals and deadlines, regardless of the surplus in funds, and used the surplus to create extensions, expansions, or whatever after the initial goals were met. That way, no reasonable person would be unsatisfied. But with the shifting timeline and changes in scope? I say high expectations are hard to satisfy, and at this point high expectations are not unreasonable. I guess we do have to wait and see.

Erillion

My personal opinion:

With hundredthousands of backers it is not feasible to satisfy 100 % of the backers 100 % of the time, as some expectations are mutually exclusive.

So I expect that there will always be some that will wail and despair when the game comes out, no matter how good the game will be.

I hope CIG does it like Bioware and follows the "Its done when its done" principle and does not push out the game too early due to pressure from impatient players.


Have fun

SpottyGekko

Dammam said:

The article never really got around to truly addressing the question posed in its title: will the game ultimately satisfy its backers?

...

Nobody can answer that question until the game is released, so until then the question will remain rhetorical.

There's no shortage of opinions on the matter, and as can be seen by the constant activity in these forums alone, it remains a hot topic. SC is generating more sustained discussion volume than any other MMO in history, lol, considering that it's still a year or two away from release...

mgilbrtsn

Adjuvant1 said:

Doesn't ask any difficult questions. I don't think the interviewer knows how. Let me write the questions for one of these.

Don't think it was meant to be a 60 minute in depth hit piece.  Just a light hearted look at a 108 million dollar crowd funded project.  Outside of the MMOverse, I don't think people are as tuned into the controversy that is SC.

mgilbrtsn

Dammam said:

The article never really got around to truly addressing the question posed in its title: will the game ultimately satisfy its backers?

While many like to discuss the development of star citizen itself and whether it will live up to its goals and budget, I'm personally curious about the nature of large crowd funded projects in general and whether it's ever possible to satisfy all the backers of such projects.

So long as a project is funded by a small crowd, it is feasible, I think, to produce something that satisfies. The smaller crowd may be entirely composed of people who want the same specific things as far as the project goals are concerned,  and the total funds may be relatively small, tempering expectations.

On the other hand, when a very large group of people fund a project, both these factors change. With more money comes higher expectations in all aspects of the project, and which aspects or features matter most will vary more within a significantly large group. So not only does everyone scrutinize the various features of the project more, but different people will focus on different areas to nitpick, while having a different standard by which to gauge progress. Ultimately, as the number of backers increases and the funds grow larger, I feel it is almost impossible to fully satisfy the backers. And this is ignoring any management issues on the project side, but simply considering the effects of large groups of people throwing money at an idea as they've understood it.

So it seems to me, the degree of satisfaction comes down to how well the project goals are initially communicated, how clearly and transparently questions are addressed, and how well the final outcome meets the initial goals. There will always be those who spend money without thinking, and then complain if they don't get what they assumed they should. However, those who do buy into a project based on the ideas communicated to them will be reasonably satisfied if those goals are met. But if the project grows as more funds are acquired, shifting some of the initial goals or timeline, how can we be sure all who were sold on the initial idea are also sold on the changing scope? And how do we (backers and those working on the project) measure success/failure when design goals become more fluid?

Watching things play out with Star Citizen, this seems to be the question. Will it be the game each person reading this site wishes for? Not likely, but that shouldn't matter. Will it be the game that was initially promised? That's tough to answer, considering the changes that have resulted from the massive funds. The article says we'll have to wait and see, which is true but not insightful. Personally, I think it should have aimed to meet its initial goals and deadlines, regardless of the surplus in funds, and used the surplus to create extensions, expansions, or whatever after the initial goals were met. That way, no reasonable person would be unsatisfied. But with the shifting timeline and changes in scope? I say high expectations are hard to satisfy, and at this point high expectations are not unreasonable. I guess we do have to wait and see.

The more people you have participating in a project the harder it is to get consensus.  This is particularly true for a group that is as polarized and opinionated as the MMO community.  This community has a definite group that thinks 'my way or the highway,' which doesn't help.

SEANMCAD

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

mgilbrtsn

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

SEANMCAD

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

'I dont know which is why i was asking the question'

mgilbrtsn

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

'I dont know which is why i was asking the question'

Ah, kk.  I'm so used to people being sarcastic and cynical on here, I sometimes read into things.  

SEANMCAD

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

'I dont know which is why i was asking the question'

Ah, kk.  I'm so used to people being sarcastic and cynical on here, I sometimes read into things.  

So I ask again though.

If Star Citizen is considered a large budget then what are the likes of GTA 5? are such games just totally mismanaged budget wise or are we getting a better game for the dollar?

for the record I dont know if we are getting a better SC game but I do know generally speaking we are not getting a better game (speaking for GTA 5 specifically) 

simsalabim77

When has an MMORPG ever lived up to over-inflated expectation? What makes SC any different? Well the difference is that the community has footed the bill which will make the shit show 100x worse. I can't wait. I ordered a year's supply of popcorn.... although, bit afraid it may be bad by the time SC launches. 

Dammam

mgilbrtsn said:

Dammam said:

...

The more people you have participating in a project the harder it is to get consensus.  This is particularly true for a group that is as polarized and opinionated as the MMO community.  This community has a definite group that thinks 'my way or the highway,' which doesn't help.

The keyword here is "participating". It's already clear, as you mention, that reaching a consensus within a group becomes more difficult with size, and a group that has vastly diverse opinions adds to that challenge. This issue exists for any developer vying for a slice of the market, since it really isn't possible to please everyone. Yet crowd funded projects have this unique notion of backers "participating" in development.

If some company makes a game that doesn't appeal to me, I won't play. It's not a big deal. So long as it appeals to its intended audience, the game is fine. But if I "participated" in the game's development, only to find the finished product unappealing, I may not feel as indifferent. So there is this added challenge, I think, for crowd funded game development and I'm interested to see how it all turns out, especially on a project this big.

mgilbrtsn

Dammam said:

mgilbrtsn said:

Dammam said:

...

The more people you have participating in a project the harder it is to get consensus.  This is particularly true for a group that is as polarized and opinionated as the MMO community.  This community has a definite group that thinks 'my way or the highway,' which doesn't help.

The keyword here is "participating". It's already clear, as you mention, that reaching a consensus within a group becomes more difficult with size, and a group that has vastly diverse opinions adds to that challenge. This issue exists for any developer vying for a slice of the market, since it really isn't possible to please everyone. Yet crowd funded projects have this unique notion of backers "participating" in development.

If some company makes a game that doesn't appeal to me, I won't play. It's not a big deal. So long as it appeals to its intended audience, the game is fine. But if I "participated" in the game's development, only to find the finished product unappealing, I may not feel as indifferent. So there is this added challenge, I think, for crowd funded game development and I'm interested to see how it all turns out, especially on a project this big.

This almost falls in the vain of some people who have the mentality when talking about various professions 'I pay their salary, they should cater to me.'  For good or ill, people have donated money to the project, and that's the only participation they are guaranteed to.  Anything else is largesse by the company.

SEANMCAD

I think GTA 5 budget is obscene and the return on investment is terrible

Dammam

@mgilbrtsn
Oh, I'm not saying people should feel one way or the other, or that their expectations are justified. I'm simply saying that people will have expectations, and a business, ultimately, needs to satisfy enough people to turn a profit. The problem is that people's expectations increase for things they invest in, whether it's time or money.

Just look at what happens when a hyped game gets a large following early in development. Undoubtedly, as development matures and design choices are modified, those following the process may feel let down. That's not saying they should, but it happens. How significant this will be to crowd funded games of this magnitude is interesting to me.

Dammam

simsalabim77 said:

When has an MMORPG ever lived up to over-inflated expectation? What makes SC any different? Well the difference is that the community has footed the bill which will make the shit show 100x worse. I can't wait. I ordered a year's supply of popcorn.... although, bit afraid it may be bad by the time SC launches. 

Oh, you don't need to wait for launch, people will happily provide you with a shit show on discussion boards, based purely on speculation. You can start enjoying that popcorn today!

Adjuvant1

Erillion said:

So I expect that there will always be some that will wail and despair when the game comes out, no matter how good the game will be.

Nice to know your fervency even knocks other backers at this point.

mgilbrtsn said:

Don't think it was meant to be a 60 minute in depth hit piece.  Just a light hearted look at a 108 million dollar crowd funded project. 

This game doesn't need more "light-hearted looks", which only amount to free advertisement. They pay people in-house to make advertisement, and merchandising, and smoke and mirrors... It's time to take them to task.

mgilbrtsn said:

The more people you have participating in a project the harder it is to get consensus. 

The more CIG doesn't lay down details what they're doing, the harder it is to get consensus.

Right now, they're still pandering. Questions get very few "no" answers, rather when someone has a potential complaint, the answer is, "oh, we don't want that either!". There are extensive diatribes on pvp vs pve (some incredibly avid in the anti-pvp corner), private servers (already stated to be non-priority for the mmo aspect, so I don't know why they bother), people choosing space "roles or jobs" (none of the infrastructure for which is anything but empty words yet), the grand size of the universe (anything outside "crusader" is still .txt files and concept art)...

Two guys, claiming to be law enforcement/ military professionals, have written an entire treatise on "how captains should deal with piracy". There are organizations (guilds) numbering 4 thousand or more participants. Some people are up in arms about "what their spaceship will actually look like in game", ships with 15-25 crew, yet instances hold only 16 people total.

It's all very convenient to blame "naysayers" as "goons", but goons aren't writing the code, nor do they have any influence in the game studio. This whole "bogeyman" thing is a conveniently villified element, similar to how 7-year olds badmouth scolding parents.

It's all just so ridiculous, I'm sometimes at a loss for words. This game isn't going to be "oh so technologically advanced" because they have hard caps and brick walls, realistically, at hardware performance. Yet people continue to believe, believe, believe, continue to throw money at it. It's preposterous, no less asinine.

edit: "CGI" typo to "CIG"

Anthur

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

'I dont know which is why i was asking the question'

Ah, kk.  I'm so used to people being sarcastic and cynical on here, I sometimes read into things.  

So I ask again though.

If Star Citizen is considered a large budget then what are the likes of GTA 5? are such games just totally mismanaged budget wise or are we getting a better game for the dollar?

for the record I dont know if we are getting a better SC game but I do know generally speaking we are not getting a better game (speaking for GTA 5 specifically) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

If you are in the top ten regarding cost for video games I consider that as big budget. SC doesn't have the biggest budget yet, but who knows, counter is still running.

Arglebargle

Top ten is too moveable atarget to define big budget.  Certainly other entertainment forms, say movies, do not follow that pattern.

Kefo

Anthur said:

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

mgilbrtsn said:

SEANMCAD said:

wait...

SC is big budget? 

If so what 'budget' is GTA 5?

You don't think 108 mil is a big budget?

'I dont know which is why i was asking the question'

Ah, kk.  I'm so used to people being sarcastic and cynical on here, I sometimes read into things.  

So I ask again though.

If Star Citizen is considered a large budget then what are the likes of GTA 5? are such games just totally mismanaged budget wise or are we getting a better game for the dollar?

for the record I dont know if we are getting a better SC game but I do know generally speaking we are not getting a better game (speaking for GTA 5 specifically) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop

If you are in the top ten regarding cost for video games I consider that as big budget. SC doesn't have the biggest budget yet, but who knows, counter is still running.

According to that chart they should be 4th since we don't care about marketing.

Or if you subscribe to the Roberts way of thinking then SC is currently sitting at number 1 because crowdfunded money is worth 3-4x more than a publisher dollar

Erillion

Adjuvant1 said:

Erillion said:

--> So I expect that there will always be some that will wail and despair when the game comes out, no matter how good the game will be.

Nice to know your fervency even knocks other backers at this point.

--> That is just experience from 13 years of playing MMO's and knowing computer gamers for 33 years. Experience that predates Star Citizen by decades.

 I'm sometimes at a loss for words.

--> Your posting history in the SC subforum contradicts that claim ;-)


--> Have fun

Adjuvant1

Ffs, if the company is self-publishing, then Robers is the publisher. Come on.

Arglebargle

I am in the 'Roberts is not very competant camp', so I think it will be impossible to please everyone.  And that the cranky camp will continue to grow, as delays and excuses multiply.

it will be a long and bumpy road, so make sure to buckle your seat belts.  And temper your expectations about the golden destinations ahead.