Pledging/Early Access - The Ultimate Hype Killer

MightyUnclean

I remember when Camelot Unchained was THE game that everyone was drooling over.  Savior of open world PvP, sandbox was just becoming the hot trend, all that.  It was going to be AWESOME!  People (me included) pledged and bought into the game early and hyped it on here to no end and then...crickets.  Years later, there still isn't even a game client to test for those who pledged.  Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.  Early pledging and early access, the ultimate hype killer.  Who knows, maybe it will gain a second wind if and when it ever becomes a testable game, much less an actual release. 

Kyleran

Your post comes across as....petulant.

Ask for a refund, Mark will still give you one.

MightyUnclean

Try "disappointed."  But if you can't counter the argument, attack the person.

ConstantineMerus

I understand your point, and I don't blame you. But there is more to this story. 

First of all, if it was anyone else but @MarkJacobs, we had broken shell of a game on Steam's early-access program for at least a couple of years now. He has my respect for not pursuing the easy path. 

Second, is your take on crowdfunding an MMORPG. What should we get disappointed about when it comes down to kickstarters? Is it really the project or is it us?

Now people have different ideas when it comes down to crowdfunding. Some see it basically as pre-ordering game. They just treat it like when a triple A company teases them with a trailer of their upcoming game and opens the pre-orders shop. Shut up and take my money! Well, kickstarters are definitely not like that. Usually there is no game yet, there has been no development, there isn't even enough people around to be able to create that trailer, even if there were enough people around, there wouldn't be any place for them to sit down. It is like when Michael Angelo was staring at a piece of stone. Potentially, it could turn into statue of David--a masterpiece--and it did, but right now it is just his imagination and a piece of ugly stone. Kickstarters, they usually don't even have the stone. 

People have to realize what they are getting into. A very long waiting game, for which there is no result guaranteed. it's like when a young lad tells you he is going to school to becomes an astronaut. Now you might help him with his tuition a bit. But you have know how many years it would take for him to get there. And you shouldn't give your money just to anybody. 

I don't mean we shouldn't be expecting anything from a crowdfunding campaign. I'd get pissed if that kid used the tuition money on hos and blows instead. Or keeps flunking. Or skips school to chase a rock band. But if he is doing it right, he is doing it right. 

But, despite all this. You are definitely right about the hype part. Because that's where the conflict lies. They hype us, because they need our excitement otherwise why would be making a pledge. Then immediately they ask us to calm down and chill for half a decade. That raises frustration one way or the other. Sometimes I just want to Grrrrrrrrrrr!!! too! Whoever is able to not to get frustrated is on the verge of reaching nirvana. 

I have gotten disappointed about many a project I backed so far. But Camelot Unchained isn't one of them. Because I think they are doing it right. And I believe my current Grrrrrrrrrrr!!! will turn into a Wheeeeeeeeee!!!! one day. 

We're on the same boat. But let's hope we'd be reaching a nice shore one day. Meanwhile, there's no reason to not to talk about our frustrations!

BruceYee

I still have hope that they'll deliver because I think MJ is smarter than Garriott and Smed who just rushed projects out to make a quick buck rather than take their time to perfect a truly good game.

WaR is still one of the best games I've ever played as far as PVP goes + there is something really amazing in a large scale pvp battle taking place right in front of you and not just in a 5vs5 match up that sticks you in a tiny box arena.

On that note though if you're after large'ish scale PVP and can't wait for CU you may want to check out Eternal Crusade when it goes on sale on Steam. I wrote the game off about a year ago(ima founder) then just recently went back to check it out and it has greatly improved. The games are going pretty much non-stop 24 hours a day. You can also play as Ork(Waaagh!) so that's a big plus for me since I luv 40k and really miss my choppa from WaR. It also has a fairly complex advancement system + learning curve compared to other shooters.

P.S. I pledged to CU during the winter holiday to show my support for the game.

Raquis

i crowd funded shroud of the avatar and the game`s combat is so bad i dont want to even play it!
i will never buy early access or crowd fund a game again in my life,its always not what you expect.

Sovrath

MightyUnclean said:

I remember when Camelot Unchained was THE game that everyone was drooling over.  Savior of open world PvP, sandbox was just becoming the hot trend, all that.  It was going to be AWESOME!  People (me included) pledged and bought into the game early and hyped it on here to no end and then...crickets.  Years later, there still isn't even a game client to test for those who pledged.  Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.  Early pledging and early access, the ultimate hype killer.  Who knows, maybe it will gain a second wind if and when it ever becomes a testable game, much less an actual release. 

What do you mean "crickets"? You get updates regularly.

MightyUnclean

Sovrath said:

MightyUnclean said:

I remember when Camelot Unchained was THE game that everyone was drooling over.  Savior of open world PvP, sandbox was just becoming the hot trend, all that.  It was going to be AWESOME!  People (me included) pledged and bought into the game early and hyped it on here to no end and then...crickets.  Years later, there still isn't even a game client to test for those who pledged.  Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.  Early pledging and early access, the ultimate hype killer.  Who knows, maybe it will gain a second wind if and when it ever becomes a testable game, much less an actual release. 

What do you mean "crickets"? You get updates regularly.

Crickets from the community that used to be so vocal.


I'm just frustrated.  Turns out I don't think I have the attention span to wait 4-6 years from the original hype of these types of games to actual release.  I was much happier when fully developed games just magically appeared on my doorstep and I was blissfully ignorant of the development process.

Dammam

ConstantineMerus said:

...
Second, is your take on crowdfunding an MMORPG. What should we get disappointed about when it comes down to kickstarters? Is it really the project or is it us?

Now people have different ideas when it comes down to crowdfunding. Some see it basically as pre-ordering game. They just treat it like when a triple A company teases them with a trailer of their upcoming game and opens the pre-orders shop. Shut up and take my money! Well, kickstarters are definitely not like that. Usually there is no game yet, there has been no development, there isn't even enough people around to be able to create that trailer, even if there were enough people around, there wouldn't be any place for them to sit down. It is like when Michael Angelo was staring at a piece of stone. Potentially, it could turn into statue of David--a masterpiece--and it did, but right now it is just his imagination and a piece of ugly stone. Kickstarters, they usually don't even have the stone. 

People have to realize what they are getting into. A very long waiting game, for which there is no result guaranteed. it's like when a young lad tells you he is going to school to becomes an astronaut. Now you might help him with his tuition a bit. But you have know how many years it would take for him to get there. And you shouldn't give your money just to anybody. 

I don't mean we shouldn't be expecting anything from a crowdfunding campaign. I'd get pissed if that kid used the tuition money on hos and blows instead. Or keeps flunking. Or skips school to chase a rock band. But if he is doing it right, he is doing it right. 
...

This is where I think the problem lies with Early Access and crowdfunding games. As players (consumers), we get hyped at the prospect of a game we'd like to play. Perhaps it's a game type we've been wishing for, an itch no current game can scratch, and along comes this chance to make it happen, so we pay. But there is another angle to games as well. They are a business product.

A company or individual that makes a game of this scope, regardless of their personal interests, is making a product to sell. We are not talking about kickstarting someone's hobby by helping pay for a nice monitor or drawing pad. These games are large undertakings on the scope of professionally released games and the funding received can rival those as well. Anyone who has ever worked on any type of project of this magnitude, programming related or otherwise, can understand the challenge of finishing on schedule and within a budget. Compromises are made, work days are stretched, and perfection is abandoned in lieu of what's doable by the specified deadline.

How much gets done, by what time, and how well is all driven by the simple notion of wanting to get paid. Get it done reasonably well, on time, and you are likely to turn a profit. That is the incentive, regardless of people's artistic passions and interests in the game. Yes, a good game is a labor of love, but what sees the development through to the finish is the financial need of those involved.

Now consider what happens when the game is sold as Early Access. What reigns in ideas that crop up during development? What forces tough compromises or the acceptance that the game won't be perfect, but it can be great? There may be a timeline or schedule, but what happens if it is delayed? When money comes in long before the product is developed, the development process surely changes. I have no doubt that many (perhaps even all) the developers remain invested in their work and truly want to finish it. I also see the idealistic beauty of not having to compromise game design to meet a financial deadline. Unfortunately, for any large project to finish in a reasonable time and with reasonable polish, some concessions must be made, and I don't see those happening with many Early Access or crowdfunded games. Work can continue, incrementally, indefinitely, without consequence and thus with little results.

I hope CU is one of the successful ones. I'm just skeptical of this new direction in game development.

Distopia

MightyUnclean said:

Sovrath said:

What do you mean "crickets"? You get updates regularly.

Crickets from the community that used to be so vocal.


I'm just frustrated.  Turns out I don't think I have the attention span to wait 4-6 years from the original hype of these types of games to actual release.  I was much happier when fully developed games just magically appeared on my doorstep and I was blissfully ignorant of the development process.

People are quiet because there's not much to say other than comment on any recent updates. It's better than the revolving door of topics about Pantheon or SC TBH. As all they usually turn into is an argument full of sensationalizing or conjecture. The hype hasn't even really started for these games IMO, that will come much closer to release.

Dammam

DMKano said:

Dammam said:

I hope CU is one of the successful ones. I'm just skeptical of this new direction in game development.

Look at it from game dev perspective -

1. Spend 100+ million on a game over 4-6 years, reveal it to public and realize that very few like what you made

OR

2. Develop a Minimally viable product/demo for less than 1 million, see what the traction is, get players to donate from early on and help fund development.


No wonder why so many have switched to #2

Yeah, that's what I am saying. All business is about supplying a minimally viable product, that is a product with a sizeable market to sustain it and turn a profit. Something is a viable product the moment it can sell for an acceptable return on investment.

So before, as you say, large investments had to be made at the beginning and risks had to be taken since a significant amount of work was required to produce this minimally viable product, which was a more or less complete game.

Now, people will pay upfront for something much less, so essentially the bar is lowered. Of course, the number of people buying into something this early is less than those willing to buy a final product, so there is some incentive to build on the initial idea and finish development. I'm simply suggesting that the development process is also not linear. That is to say, finishing a product isn't simply a matter of time, but a shifting of gears and resources over the development period to build up to the final push.

Starting something is the easy part, as anyone with a hobby can attest. So a lot less people may buy into an Early Access game than a final game, but it takes significantly less work to produce an Early Access game than a final, polished one.

Naturally, a developer would want to convince as many people to buy into the Early Access / crowdfunding strategy, hence all the hype. But, the more people you get buying into Early Access, the less people remain to buy the final product. Are there enough left to truly justify the significant investment needed to turn an Early Access game into a finished, polished product? Sure, Early Access helps fund a game's development, but it also cannibalizes the target market for the finished product. As you say, the risk is less for the developer so this is the route they take, but the incentive to achieve the level of completion and polish of earlier games is also diminished. I just hope there's enough of an incentive to reach the finish line.

nurso

Raquis said:

i will never buy early access or crowd fund a game again in my life,its always not what you expect.

Welcome in the world of the responsible customers, where we all follow the rule: "Think twice, even trice before opening your wallet!"

MightyUnclean said:

Crickets from the community that used to be so vocal.

That's insulting!

MightyUnclean said:

Turns out I don't think I have the attention span to wait 4-6 years from the original hype of these types of games to actual release. I was much happier when fully developed games just magically appeared on my doorstep and I was blissfully ignorant of the development process.

Good job for learning something about yourself -- but that's doesn't make it okay to rant in a forum and being rude towards the devs and community. The devs haven't done anything wrong, it's just that a game of the scope of CU needs ~5+ years to develop. If you can't handle this, it's your problem.

Warlyx

DMKano said:

Dammam said:

I hope CU is one of the successful ones. I'm just skeptical of this new direction in game development.

Look at it from game dev perspective -

1. Spend 100+ million on a game over 4-6 years, reveal it to public and realize that very few like what you made

OR

2. Develop a Minimally viable product/demo for less than 1 million, see what the traction is, get players to donate from early on and help fund development.


No wonder why so many have switched to #2

yep and thats good because we as players now have way more "control" over how the games are developed changing something when a game is 90'-100% done is a big no-no.

changing something when the game is still in development....is way more easy.

the problem is the wait , in 1 example u are hyped , see some gameplay and what not , but thats it until open beta u cant play.

with 2 example, u play wayyyy before is even "playable" or even enjoyable , could look good or could look bad...no1 forces u to play nor to pay to get early acess , but u can get a really bad impression playing an alpha.

Abuz0r

I understand what the OP's point is.  There's an entire genre now of test games.  When I search for a game to play on Steam, 75% of the games seem to be 'early access' promising to be more than they currently are.  After I play one of these early access games and get frustrated, the liklihood of me ever returning is VERY slim.  There eventually needs to be some laws put in place about selling online content and services to keep companies from making 35 early access games and selling them all for full box price and going on vacation.

Copperfield

i think cu will be sucessfull.. only because it already has a very steady and loyal amount of players who are backing this back..

most people who backed this game up are from DOAC.. which still runs now

ConstantineMerus

Dammam said:

ConstantineMerus said:

...

I hope CU is one of the successful ones. I'm just skeptical of this new direction in game development.

I agree with everything you said. I think making MMORPGs and crowdfunding doesn't mix well, because it takes way too long create one. On the other hand, it seems no one wants to properly fund the games the niche market demands. That has left many people whom miss having a freaking community in a virtual world not choice but to gamble on these projects. Only advice I can give is don't gamble if you can't afford to lose, either financially or emotionally. Because there is no other way to make a safe bet on any of these projects. 

There are several reasons I think CU would do better than most. Besides the man behind it and the team, I think they are handling their project very well. Most projects tend to get to the early-access phase quickly to make pledges more appealing. They need monies, they need it fast, and they need lots of it. Which can be either caused by greed, or financial mismanagement or not having a solid long-term plan. CU hasn't done that. That is a very good sign in my opinion. 

Second, they don't generate (false) hype. They needed their initial funding and they are moving forward with that. You don't see articles here about what dreams may come anymore. You see progress reports and updates. Meanwhile, other campaigns still are talking about concepts and ideas. Well, that's not a bad thing--but if its purpose is only to generate hype hence getting more funds--then we're back to point one. 

Third, @MarkJacobs hits these forums. Not to defend his honor! or as a marketing strategy. But to answer the questions and respond to fans, and he does that sincerely. 

Fourth, they never added exciting and unrealistic features to their game, only to hype-up the current fans to pledge more, or bring in a new crowd. You see this in many other campaigns. Their never-ending expanding shops and pledge tiers. Or they they start as a niche game then trying to expand to other type of players by adding those features as milestones. 

I think they are managing their campaign fairly well. 

nurso

Abuz0r said:

There's an entire genre now of test games. When I search for a game to play on Steam, 75% of the games seem to be 'early access' promising to be more than they currently are. [...] There eventually needs to be some laws put in place

In a first approach it would be helpful to not tar all funding models with the same brush; there is a difference between KS-projects and EarlyAccess.

EA also known as paid-alpha is exactly what it means: the buyer pays less than a full-price game for a product in alpha-state. If the buyer is lucky, the game gets finished and he or she has strike a bargain (e.g. Minecraft for 5 bucks when it was in alpha). If not, i.e. the game remains at it is, he or she was unlucky, but not cheated, because the bought product -- a game in alpha-state -- was delivered. [Ofc this doesn't hold iff the EA-page on steam promises a full, fledged-out game]

KS-projects are a completely different funding model, based on a pre-internet method of raising cash for an idea. And that's what it is: raising money for an idea, not an existing product. So, if one funds a KS-project he or she basically gifts the money. There is no money-product exchange included, although most KS-projects promises some sort of reward and / or a copy of the finished product.

So, I don't see why there have to be special laws put in place, except maybe a 'law' which calls in the obligation of the buyer to inform him- or herself before opening the wallet.

meddyck

MightyUnclean said:

I remember when Camelot Unchained was THE game that everyone was drooling over.  Savior of open world PvP, sandbox was just becoming the hot trend, all that.  It was going to be AWESOME!  People (me included) pledged and bought into the game early and hyped it on here to no end and then...crickets.  Years later, there still isn't even a game client to test for those who pledged.  Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.  Early pledging and early access, the ultimate hype killer.  Who knows, maybe it will gain a second wind if and when it ever becomes a testable game, much less an actual release. 

Backers who purchased tiers with IT, Alpha, Beta 1, and even Beta 2 (CUBE only) have access to the game client for scheduled tests and CUBE.

CSE sends out updates every week, a newsletter every month, and livestreams multiple times a week. That's not crickets.

This... is not the official forum. If you are truly a backer, go here

https://forums.camelotunchained.com/

and login and you will see the actual official forum is extremely active including dev participation by Mark and Ben.

Kyleran

MightyUnclean said:

Try "disappointed."  But if you can't counter the argument, attack the person.

You basically retitled your June 2016 thread on the same subject "Will CU ever effin release?" and shared your thoughts and feelings again on it.

Most everything posted here mirrors those you received previously. So none of this is news to you.

This game needs no hype, though Mark recently did say here on these forums he wished followers would talk the game up more, especially with regards to milestones achieved.

As I told him once he's ready to let me play a more or less feature complete version I'll start paying the game more attention and be willing to discuss.

More than anything this title needs a polished, feature complete launch to succeed.  MMORPGs are a sum of their parts which is why I disagree wirh the MVP approach so many are taking these days.

When I pledged in the KS i had my doubts, still do and I still remain skeptical a fully featured MMORPG can be made for so little money.

But then I recall they are really only building one side of DAOC, the RVR piece with some crafting so it is within the realm of possibility.

So no, my original reply didn't address the "problem" you again raised.

I find it sort of pointless to "shout at the devil"

The game will come when it will, no telling the day at this poont.

cheyane

If you do not have the patience don't pledge.

aliven

DMKano said:

Dammam said:

I hope CU is one of the successful ones. I'm just skeptical of this new direction in game development.

Look at it from game dev perspective -

1. Spend 100+ million on a game over 4-6 years, reveal it to public and realize that very few like what you made

OR

2. Develop a Minimally viable product/demo for less than 1 million, see what the traction is, get players to donate from early on and help fund development.


No wonder why so many have switched to #2

It switched because morons keep buying cat in the bag and say THIS IS THE FUTURE OF GAMING. 

nurso

aliven said:

It switched because morons keep buying cat in the bag and say THIS IS THE FUTURE OF GAMING.

Is someone wants to buy a cat in the bag, he or she isn't a moron, because it was a conscious and informed decision … it's just that not many 'early-adopters' know what Kickstarter or Early Access means.

francis_baud

MightyUnclean said:

[...] an indication of how much interest there is these days.

The interest is still high, it's just that we're hibernating until Beta 1 launches.  =p

CrazKanuk

MightyUnclean said:

I remember when Camelot Unchained was THE game that everyone was drooling over.  Savior of open world PvP, sandbox was just becoming the hot trend, all that.  It was going to be AWESOME!  People (me included) pledged and bought into the game early and hyped it on here to no end and then...crickets.  Years later, there still isn't even a game client to test for those who pledged.  Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.  Early pledging and early access, the ultimate hype killer.  Who knows, maybe it will gain a second wind if and when it ever becomes a testable game, much less an actual release. 

I think this actually summarizes the "problem" perfectly. You're not wrong, but it isn't the process, it's the people. There is such thing as a hype curve and it looks something like this:


So, usually, consumers won't get a product in their hands until after the peak of inflated expectations. The Plateau of Productivity is where you'll generally see consumer level products. HOWEVER!!! Crowdfunding sells you the product during the Peak of Inflated Expectations, so you're NEVER actually going to have your expectations met. Also, because you're exposed to all of this very early on, this peak happens quickly, and falls off, but then the Trough is actually much longer on the general timeline because development timelines are long. This is why game publishers don't tell you about game projects they JUST started working on. You want to use that hype to sell games, but you can't do that if you announce it 5 or 10 years before it's released because the interest has simply fallen off by then. 


So, yes, crowdfunding is a hype killer, but it's only that way because of how we've been programmed to accept hype. We want things NOW!!! Many companies won't announce a product unless it will ship in the next 6-12 months. However, crowdfunding is a double-edged sword in this regard because if you don't have a good hype video then you won't make your targets, but if you have a great hype video then the expectations will skyrocket, but you know you'll ultimately let people down. Honestly, I have no problem with losing interest in a project because I will back something and walk away, don't really follow it other than news articles that might pop up. Don't participate in beta or alpha unless I'm ACTUALLY testing. Essentially, I reset all of my expectations for the product until it's approaching release. Otherwise, how can you be anything BUT disappointed? 

YashaX

It seems like just yesterday you were asking for a way to support the game and get immediate access to play it : http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/443336/immediate-access#latest

I was quite hyped up about it at that time as well, but I thought the game was still at least a year or two away from being ready (still seems a long way from release imo). 

JamesGoblin

MightyUnclean said:

<snip>
 Look at the forum activity on here if you want an indication of how much interest there is these days.
<snippety>

Yes, we are rather silent but it will change in beta. Part of that is due to CU being in good hands = not desperate for attention.

Also, we are talking about a MMORPG in full development for bit more than three years.