However e.g. NCSoft with Carbine / Wildstar show that "big company" investment may not be the right fit either.
At least Wildstar launched...How many kickstarter MMOs have even reached that point?
Albion launched. Shroud of the Avatar is advertising a launch date in 2 months.
I think you lack perspective. Carbine started developing Wildstar's engine back in 2005 before they went with NCSoft for funding in 2007. It did not launch until 2014.
The posterchild for crowdfunding time to release complaints, Star Citizen, started in 2012. CU started the same year but the others are all more recent.
UO came out in 1997 starting the VC model MMO track record. That is over 20 years ago. WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
If crowdfunding is dead then publishers have decomposed completely.
Albion launched, and is soulless shit. SotA will probably launch soon, and is soulless shit. Is that the best the Kickstarter MMOs have to offer so far?
However e.g. NCSoft with Carbine / Wildstar show that "big company" investment may not be the right fit either.
At least Wildstar launched...How many kickstarter MMOs have even reached that point?
Albion launched. Shroud of the Avatar is advertising a launch date in 2 months.
I think you lack perspective. Carbine started developing Wildstar's engine back in 2005 before they went with NCSoft for funding in 2007. It did not launch until 2014.
The posterchild for crowdfunding time to release complaints, Star Citizen, started in 2012. CU started the same year but the others are all more recent.
UO came out in 1997 starting the VC model MMO track record. That is over 20 years ago. WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
If crowdfunding is dead then publishers have decomposed completely.
Albion launched, and is soulless shit. SotA will probably launch soon, and is soulless shit. Is that the best the Kickstarter MMOs have to offer so far?
Exactly, This is what you get when you scrape a pile of shit off the bottom. That's all you get to build with. You use shit to build shit with shit.......what do you think you end up with?
Yeah there are likely lots of fail mmorpgs on there, but Ashes OF Creation & Crow Fall were both there?
My argument is against the model on how to fund development of games and the success based on the current model relies on outside investors funding the project long after the game was supposed to be released. That means the model is a poor fit for this kind of game development.
Ashes of creation, let's ask for $750k to make a game on a $30M budget, trust me I'm going to make this game happen because I'm rich. Crowfall, let's ask for $800k, we will conjure up the rest of the $10M elsewhere, just to reach out to do more crowdfunding when you originally were supposed to deliver the game and after 3.5 years in development they finally get the last funds to make the game, hopefully.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Yeah there are likely lots of fail mmorpgs on there, but Ashes OF Creation & Crow Fall were both there?
My argument is against the model on how to fund development of games and the success based on the current model relies on outside investors funding the project long after the game was supposed to be released. That means the model is a poor fit for this kind of game development.
Ashes of creation, let's ask for $750k to make a game on a $30M budget, trust me I'm going to make this game happen because I'm rich. Crowfall, let's ask for $800k, we will conjure up the rest of the $10M elsewhere, just to reach out to do more crowdfunding when you originally were supposed to deliver the game and after 3.5 years in development they finally get the last funds to make the game, hopefully.
By that assessment KS would be a poor model for any development. You're making the assumption that other games that have been released didn't have any additional funding kicked in. Both Grim Dawn and Wolcen Lords of Mayhem asked for less than $300k and that got them multiple years of development. Even for a relatively small developer, that is unsustainable.
Legends of Aria asked for $50k. Are you insinuating that was their real ask? No, you're assuming that there will be additional fundraising going on. If you don't think that then you're crazy. KS is merely a marketing platform and it can provide the developer with funds to get off and running.
For that reason, I don't think that crowdfunding is a "bad" model for MMOs, it just isn't what people believe it should be. I mean even you say that delays are expected, but then you question the model because projects aren't where you think they should be. You seem to completely disregard the fact that there was marked progress is NUMEROUS titles, nevermind those which are already in release.
Release: Life is Feudal ELITE: Dangerous Albion Online Gloria Victus AdventureQuest 3d
In alpha or beta: Crowfall Pantheon Ever, Jane Star Citizen Project Gorgon Legends of Aria Shroud of the Avatar
Expected test phase soon: Camelot Unchained Identity
In reality, these games have longer timelines than most to develop, so they take longer to develop, and the release rate for these games is steadily increasing on an annual basis which only serves to support this idea.
So while you're right that few games ask for all the money they require to develop the game, it's the model that allows them to prove their concept to investors and secure the money to complete their game.
Yeah there are likely lots of fail mmorpgs on there, but Ashes OF Creation & Crow Fall were both there?
My argument is against the model on how to fund development of games and the success based on the current model relies on outside investors funding the project long after the game was supposed to be released. That means the model is a poor fit for this kind of game development.
Ashes of creation, let's ask for $750k to make a game on a $30M budget, trust me I'm going to make this game happen because I'm rich. Crowfall, let's ask for $800k, we will conjure up the rest of the $10M elsewhere, just to reach out to do more crowdfunding when you originally were supposed to deliver the game and after 3.5 years in development they finally get the last funds to make the game, hopefully.
We don't live in a perfect utopia world. Everyone knows it would be best if investors come out with large budget and keep throwing money making mmorpg. But it don't look like it is happening in the mmorpg genre, so people make the most out of it.
And you already seen how those kick starter funding works. They just keep asking for more funds, start selling alpha pass etc. They obviously raised much more funds than the initial kick starter.
Yeah there are likely lots of fail mmorpgs on there, but Ashes OF Creation & Crow Fall were both there?
My argument is against the model on how to fund development of games and the success based on the current model relies on outside investors funding the project long after the game was supposed to be released. That means the model is a poor fit for this kind of game development.
Ashes of creation, let's ask for $750k to make a game on a $30M budget, trust me I'm going to make this game happen because I'm rich. Crowfall, let's ask for $800k, we will conjure up the rest of the $10M elsewhere, just to reach out to do more crowdfunding when you originally were supposed to deliver the game and after 3.5 years in development they finally get the last funds to make the game, hopefully.
And you already seen how those kick starter funding works. They just keep asking for more funds, start selling alpha pass etc. They obviously raised much more funds than the initial kick starter.
And that's the reason it sucks for MMORPGs.
I don't buy that these MMORPG devs are merely marketing for investors. Investors would laugh at the timelines and budgets these devs are claiming are sufficient; it screams ignorant dev team to claim such unrealistic timelines and budgets for what they're promising. No, the majority of KS for MMORPGs has largely become about how far they can stretch reality to convince folks to buy into the "vision," at which point sunk cost fallacies start kicking in in response to reality slapping these devs in the face, and all of a sudden you have groups of gamers paying exponentially more for promises of future greatness than they would ever consider paying for a released game (even if that game was exactly what the crowdfunding devs were describing as their vision).
Some do end up with investor funding (and a few have admitted to needing it during their original funding round), but, for most, only after they've blown through the fantasy plan set to sucker- err, persuade gamers to throw money at them for words on a website and a spiffy hype video. They then reassess and admit reality, insisting that outside forces caused delays that could not have been foreseen (despite, currently, every MMORPG crowdfunded development so far hitting these same "unforeseen" delays), at which point the development completed on the backs of the gamers who originally funded the game makes it a pretty low risk for the investor, relatively speaking.
Negative. The reason why mmos have to utilize KS is the bane of mmos.
You will never reach deeper levels of understanding by merely scratching the surface of a subject. I'm actually shocked that some of the previous posts are touching upon the real details of the issue.
Kickstarter and crowdfunding in general is a pretty terrible model for developing anything, let alone MMOs.
I am definitely of the opinion that if you cannot convince investors / publishers to get on board with your idea, then the chances are that your idea is just not good enough or your ability to pitch an idea sucks. With MMO's specifically, you should be able to produce market research to show the size of the market, average spend etc. Then promote your game ideas and back it up with further research into psychology, gamer habits to show that it has the potential to be successful. If you've done your research and can pitch well, you should be able to find an investor or publisher.
That said, whilst I believe crowdfunding sucks, there are definitely situations where that is the only option. Within gaming, because the costs are so high, traditional investors and publishers are unwilling to sink money into unproven ideas as it is too risky. This is what has caused the stagnation at the top of the market and so crowdfunding can be the only way to get new ideas to market. I'm still not happy about the situation, I would prefer that publishers funded more diverse projects, but as there is nothing I can do I'll just accept it for what it is and keep my money in my pocket until I can actually play something.
The problem is that crowdfunding doesn't have much regulation around it so can be very misleading. With MMOs specifically, they're all asking for low amounts of money which will never be enough to get the game to market, yet most of the campaigns aren't clear about that. From what's happening with the indie MMOs at the moment, it's looking like total cost of development is sitting between $20m and $30m, yet the crowdfunding tends to only look for about 10% of those costs. They should be clear that crowdfunding is only enough to build a "proof of concept" which they can then use to attract actual investors.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Negative. The reason why mmos have to utilize KS is the bane of mmos.
You will never reach deeper levels of understanding by merely scratching the surface of a subject. I'm actually shocked that some of the previous posts are touching upon the real details of the issue.
I really don't think it is worth the time and effort to write a 6000 word essay to explain my position on kickstarters.
Let me say this:
Just because someone gets a free game engine and makes a few scenes then go to a crowdfunding site with intent to get money for an idea is not going to work out well. 99% of the development of a MMO is server side.
The cost of making anything even remotely close to a MMO is going to cost between 20 and 30 million bucks or it is probably going to look and play like shit. Most of the initial investment is hardware and assets.
Most table top developers do not even know what a query is. Some even think it is related to homosexuality.
The number of failures will exceed the number of success by 20 to 1 so people will start shying away from these projects because most projects don't know the business end of making a MMO.
There is no money in this business due to the high cost of overhead so smart game companies have went elsewhere.
Exactly, This is what you get when you scrape a pile of shit off the bottom. That's all you get to build with. You use shit to build shit with shit.......what do you think you end up with?
Isn't it supposed to be shit salad?
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
Must be an alien hand, because that's a lot of fingers.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
Must be an alien hand, because that's a lot of fingers.
I guess we just have different expectations for success. Seeing that you are promoting TOR, I can see out expectations are extremely divergent.
If you standard is that the box sales recouped the outlay then most MMOs succeeded. I have a different standard though.
Almost all games post 2004 were merging servers after a few months at most. VG, AoC, WAR, TOR, TR, SL, STO, LOTRO, DDO, and Wildstar all fall into that category.
That is not what happened with the previous batch with EQ2, WoW, DAoC, and CoH.
They all had varying issues but a common denominator was antsy publishers or investors unfinished or untested games out.
However e.g. NCSoft with Carbine / Wildstar show that "big company" investment may not be the right fit either.
At least Wildstar launched...How many kickstarter MMOs have even reached that point?
Albion launched. Shroud of the Avatar is advertising a launch date in 2 months.
I think you lack perspective. Carbine started developing Wildstar's engine back in 2005 before they went with NCSoft for funding in 2007. It did not launch until 2014.
The posterchild for crowdfunding time to release complaints, Star Citizen, started in 2012. CU started the same year but the others are all more recent.
UO came out in 1997 starting the VC model MMO track record. That is over 20 years ago. WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
If crowdfunding is dead then publishers have decomposed completely.
Albion launched, and is soulless shit. SotA will probably launch soon, and is soulless shit. Is that the best the Kickstarter MMOs have to offer so far?
I'm interested in SC, Pantheon, Crowfall, and CU personally.
Garriott hasn't made a decent game since 1997. I'm not sure what SotA proves either way. He has no idea how to do dynamic real time combat. That card system he contrived just shows how out of touch he is with modern gamers.
Albion was a low budget offering. Soulless? Not fond of that characterization as is it has nothing real on either end of the analogy. Shallow and low tech? Sure but it was a low budget offering.
The point of those offerings is that the funding model can see a project to completion even on a low budget.
What you're saying can be determined after Pantheon, CU & Crowfall come out.
imagine any one of them with the certainty of a proper budget.
I can and I imagine a CFO type with little to no programming knowledge nor interest in the game forcing decisions including the release of the game. They don't have the stones to see things through when the budget hits 8 figures.
The only thing other than capital that a publisher provides is financial oversight and that can be gotten without a publisher by hiring your own CFO type and listening to them. You don't need a huge conglomerate to properly manage a business.
When I think of recent US MMOs and how they failed they include things like Funsoft releasing AoC early without 2/3rd of their features, EA forcing WAR out with netcode they knew was bad, and NCSoft releasing Wildstar without allowing QC to finish their job. It's not as if the status quo has a history of success over the past 15 years.
To me cheering for publishers or venture capitalists reminds me of royalists, people that cheer for the house at blackjack, and bank lobbyists
Considering at least one project seems to be in a downward spiral of layoffs because they refused to take on any investors, and the rest of the crowdfunded endeavors have shown nothing close to a complete game yet, there's currently not a lot of evidence MMORPG devs can release a game without the pushback of a publisher.
Because some endeavours fail does not mean that the model is failed. You're cherry picking an anecdote --I'm not even sure which one-- and ignoring VC's relative success rate which has been terrible. Remember Dark and Light? SOE already canned all their projects and layed everyone off.
SOme companies are always going to be poorly managed. Pretending publisher's have a great record in developing MMO's is laughable nonetheless.
Ashes of Creation, Crowfall, Star Citizen, Shroud of the Avatar, Camelot Unchained, and Pantheon are the significant titles. Albion did launch on a significantly.
Claiming that crowdfunding is a failed development model is unfounded.
Good thing I didn't label it a failed development model. I said there's no evidence to be had that it is a good fit for MMORPGs, and the evidence quite frankly points towards it being a bad one. Greed Monger, Pathfinder, CoE, SotA to name a few that show evidence for my point. Name me one that's even close to releasing anything resembling a completed MMORPG that's been well-received by any stretch of the imagination.
Publishers aren't the devil. They're just not interested in pandering to us gamers. Sometimes, that leads them to make shitty moves. More often than that, they're the reason these games get made in the first place.
The issues with publishers is they do not see projects through to completion time and time again. Producers and VC types in general are more risk averse than at any point in the past 70 years or so. It's why visual media is a rehash of the same old super hero and remakes shit we've been seeing for the past decade or so.
Mythic knew after their first beta test that there was a flaw in their engine that led to an issue with ability firing. Instead of the lag being at the front end --think smashing buttons through lag to get an ability to fire-- the lag was after the client on server side. You ended up with these weird freezes of variable lengths similar to WoW's loot lag that became extremely evident in mass PVP.
When Jacobs and co went to EA and told them they needed to redo the engine, EA told them no. I just think to Star Citizen changing their engine several to merge various functionalities and fix issues and what a Funsoft or EA would have done. Or more poignant, Jacobs being able to completely revamp the ability system in CU when early testing showed it poorly functioning in CU.
AoC was forced out the door unfinished after a Funcom investor meeting. Entire zones were never completed and all the work wasted.
NCSoft was very vocal in allowing Carbine to install all their features for Wildstar before release. Of course they gave no time for proper QC. We all saw the buggy aftermath.
The issue with the publisher/VC model is the disconnect with the developers and the product as well as a disproportionate level of control over the project. It's been a debilitating problem in MMO development for over a decade.
Frankly the only systemic or mechanical issue I have seen you guys present for funding outside of the publisher model has been this poorly described notion of financial responsibility. However, as I pointed out before that can be achieved by hiring a CFO and empowering them in the corporate charter. You don't need EA to do that.
For the most part it's been gratuitous characterizations and emotional generalizations which boil down to "I don't like it!"
WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
Must be an alien hand, because that's a lot of fingers.
I guess we just have different expectations for success. Seeing that you are promoting TOR, I can see out expectations are extremely divergent.
If you standard is that the box sales recouped the outlay then most MMOs succeeded. I have a different standard though.
Almost all games post 2004 were merging servers after a few months at most. VG, AoC, WAR, TOR, TR, SL, STO, LOTRO, DDO, and Wildstar all fall into that category.
That is not what happened with the previous batch with EQ2, WoW, DAoC, and CoH.
They all had varying issues but a common denominator was antsy publishers or investors unfinished or untested games out.
Just as a quick correction, LotRO didn't have server merges for many years, at least not in the EU. I played it for 5 years without seeing server merges in Europe, in fact they had to add a couple of additional servers.
I would guess that was because it didn't follow your model. The game was pretty well tested and polished at launch, as it was one of the first big "wow clones" it was actually really well designed. Loads of group content, social options, deep combat system, good story lines.....it may never have hit massive numbers but it was definitely a success.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
It's a lot easier to grow when you start with 10,000 players versus starting with 1 million players.
My definition of success is attracts a lot of players makes a lot of money and is around for a long time. Most of the MMORPGs on the market have done that including Swtor.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I say that when its first start, and I say its now, fail fail fail, I wont pay for something never exist. back then peoples bashing me for it, now you understand. use your brain.
WoW came out in 2004 and you can count the model's successes since then on one hand.
Must be an alien hand, because that's a lot of fingers.
I guess we just have different expectations for success. Seeing that you are promoting TOR, I can see out expectations are extremely divergent.
If you standard is that the box sales recouped the outlay then most MMOs succeeded. I have a different standard though.
Almost all games post 2004 were merging servers after a few months at most. VG, AoC, WAR, TOR, TR, SL, STO, LOTRO, DDO, and Wildstar all fall into that category.
That is not what happened with the previous batch with EQ2, WoW, DAoC, and CoH.
They all had varying issues but a common denominator was antsy publishers or investors unfinished or untested games out.
Just as a quick correction, LotRO didn't have server merges for many years, at least not in the EU. I played it for 5 years without seeing server merges in Europe, in fact they had to add a couple of additional servers.
I would guess that was because it didn't follow your model. The game was pretty well tested and polished at launch, as it was one of the first big "wow clones" it was actually really well designed. Loads of group content, social options, deep combat system, good story lines.....it may never have hit massive numbers but it was definitely a success.
Good stuff. LOTRO is probably the best post WoW MMO. I personally did not like it as I felt it was too shallow but it had a sustained community and consistent updates and expansions. Hard to argue that and I stand corrected.
I'm not saying the ideal is 5M subs mind you.
I think my overall point stands though. The publisher and venture capitalist model has had a terrible track record these past 15 years. A success rate under 20% is god awful.
Of course it is, MMOs knowingly expensive and long to create are pretty much always underestimated by those who attempt and go to KS pitching one, then struggling with it, the only way KS works for MMOs if you get either a lot of money to be able to properly invest and have a margin, or you get external investors supporting, or even a publisher.
Now those who go to KS "Hey give me few hundred K and I do x and y MMO" on large-scale projects, tends to be doomed to struggle to ever achieve it.
People are comparing these kickstarter to AAA titles. I just see it as another indie game like fallen earth or darkfall.
I'm not sure if these kickstarter do harm to the genre in someway. People presume some big investor will invest in them if the game isn't crowd funded. Which is probably not the case.
What you're saying can be determined after Pantheon, CU & Crowfall come out.
imagine any one of them with the certainty of a proper budget.
I can and I imagine a CFO type with little to no programming knowledge nor interest in the game forcing decisions including the release of the game. They don't have the stones to see things through when the budget hits 8 figures.
The only thing other than capital that a publisher provides is financial oversight and that can be gotten without a publisher by hiring your own CFO type and listening to them. You don't need a huge conglomerate to properly manage a business.
When I think of recent US MMOs and how they failed they include things like Funsoft releasing AoC early without 2/3rd of their features, EA forcing WAR out with netcode they knew was bad, and NCSoft releasing Wildstar without allowing QC to finish their job. It's not as if the status quo has a history of success over the past 15 years.
To me cheering for publishers or venture capitalists reminds me of royalists, people that cheer for the house at blackjack, and bank lobbyists
Considering at least one project seems to be in a downward spiral of layoffs because they refused to take on any investors, and the rest of the crowdfunded endeavors have shown nothing close to a complete game yet, there's currently not a lot of evidence MMORPG devs can release a game without the pushback of a publisher.
Because some endeavours fail does not mean that the model is failed. You're cherry picking an anecdote --I'm not even sure which one-- and ignoring VC's relative success rate which has been terrible. Remember Dark and Light? SOE already canned all their projects and layed everyone off.
SOme companies are always going to be poorly managed. Pretending publisher's have a great record in developing MMO's is laughable nonetheless.
Ashes of Creation, Crowfall, Star Citizen, Shroud of the Avatar, Camelot Unchained, and Pantheon are the significant titles. Albion did launch on a significantly.
Claiming that crowdfunding is a failed development model is unfounded.
Good thing I didn't label it a failed development model. I said there's no evidence to be had that it is a good fit for MMORPGs, and the evidence quite frankly points towards it being a bad one. Greed Monger, Pathfinder, CoE, SotA to name a few that show evidence for my point. Name me one that's even close to releasing anything resembling a completed MMORPG that's been well-received by any stretch of the imagination.
Publishers aren't the devil. They're just not interested in pandering to us gamers. Sometimes, that leads them to make shitty moves. More often than that, they're the reason these games get made in the first place.
The issues with publishers is they do not see projects through to completion time and time again. Producers and VC types in general are more risk averse than at any point in the past 70 years or so. It's why visual media is a rehash of the same old super hero and remakes shit we've been seeing for the past decade or so.
Mythic knew after their first beta test that there was a flaw in their engine that led to an issue with ability firing. Instead of the lag being at the front end --think smashing buttons through lag to get an ability to fire-- the lag was after the client on server side. You ended up with these weird freezes of variable lengths similar to WoW's loot lag that became extremely evident in mass PVP.
When Jacobs and co went to EA and told them they needed to redo the engine, EA told them no. I just think to Star Citizen changing their engine several to merge various functionalities and fix issues and what a Funsoft or EA would have done. Or more poignant, Jacobs being able to completely revamp the ability system in CU when early testing showed it poorly functioning in CU.
AoC was forced out the door unfinished after a Funcom investor meeting. Entire zones were never completed and all the work wasted.
NCSoft was very vocal in allowing Carbine to install all their features for Wildstar before release. Of course they gave no time for proper QC. We all saw the buggy aftermath.
The issue with the publisher/VC model is the disconnect with the developers and the product as well as a disproportionate level of control over the project. It's been a debilitating problem in MMO development for over a decade.
Frankly the only systemic or mechanical issue I have seen you guys present for funding outside of the publisher model has been this poorly described notion of financial responsibility. However, as I pointed out before that can be achieved by hiring a CFO and empowering them in the corporate charter. You don't need EA to do that.
For the most part it's been gratuitous characterizations and emotional generalizations which boil down to "I don't like it!"
The genre is still suffering from saturation, mainly on the backs of Asian dev teams that are showing no signs of stopping. Of course investors are averse to throwing yet another hat in a crowded ring. None of that means that crowdfunding is a good replacement or fit for MMORPGs.
Again, the best case you can make for crowdfunding at this point, done by ignoring the obvious failures like SotA, is that it's too early to tell how good the method will fit. To assert it's a good fit is to ignore the fact that it's really not given us quality titles at any higher a rate than publishers were giving us, and it's costing consumers significantly more. Seems like a net loss to me.
None of that means that crowdfunding is a good replacement or fit for MMORPGs.
Why does that matter? Are you suggesting crowdfunding dissuade large publisher from investing in MMORPG?
Market saturation dissuades large publishers from investing in MMORPGs. There's definitely such thing as too many releases, specifically in a niche such as traditional MMORPGs.
This idea that crowdfunding is a savior of MMORPG development funding is wishful thinking at best at this point. There's no evidence to suggest it's capable of producing any more quality titles than publishers are able to produce.
Comments
Albion launched, and is soulless shit. SotA will probably launch soon, and is soulless shit. Is that the best the Kickstarter MMOs have to offer so far?
Ashes of creation, let's ask for $750k to make a game on a $30M budget, trust me I'm going to make this game happen because I'm rich.
Crowfall, let's ask for $800k, we will conjure up the rest of the $10M elsewhere, just to reach out to do more crowdfunding when you originally were supposed to deliver the game and after 3.5 years in development they finally get the last funds to make the game, hopefully.
By that assessment KS would be a poor model for any development. You're making the assumption that other games that have been released didn't have any additional funding kicked in. Both Grim Dawn and Wolcen Lords of Mayhem asked for less than $300k and that got them multiple years of development. Even for a relatively small developer, that is unsustainable.
Legends of Aria asked for $50k. Are you insinuating that was their real ask? No, you're assuming that there will be additional fundraising going on. If you don't think that then you're crazy. KS is merely a marketing platform and it can provide the developer with funds to get off and running.
For that reason, I don't think that crowdfunding is a "bad" model for MMOs, it just isn't what people believe it should be. I mean even you say that delays are expected, but then you question the model because projects aren't where you think they should be. You seem to completely disregard the fact that there was marked progress is NUMEROUS titles, nevermind those which are already in release.
Release:
Life is Feudal
ELITE: Dangerous
Albion Online
Gloria Victus
AdventureQuest 3d
In alpha or beta:
Crowfall
Pantheon
Ever, Jane
Star Citizen
Project Gorgon
Legends of Aria
Shroud of the Avatar
Expected test phase soon:
Camelot Unchained
Identity
In reality, these games have longer timelines than most to develop, so they take longer to develop, and the release rate for these games is steadily increasing on an annual basis which only serves to support this idea.
So while you're right that few games ask for all the money they require to develop the game, it's the model that allows them to prove their concept to investors and secure the money to complete their game.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
And you already seen how those kick starter funding works. They just keep asking for more funds, start selling alpha pass etc. They obviously raised much more funds than the initial kick starter.
I don't buy that these MMORPG devs are merely marketing for investors. Investors would laugh at the timelines and budgets these devs are claiming are sufficient; it screams ignorant dev team to claim such unrealistic timelines and budgets for what they're promising. No, the majority of KS for MMORPGs has largely become about how far they can stretch reality to convince folks to buy into the "vision," at which point sunk cost fallacies start kicking in in response to reality slapping these devs in the face, and all of a sudden you have groups of gamers paying exponentially more for promises of future greatness than they would ever consider paying for a released game (even if that game was exactly what the crowdfunding devs were describing as their vision).
Some do end up with investor funding (and a few have admitted to needing it during their original funding round), but, for most, only after they've blown through the fantasy plan set to sucker- err, persuade gamers to throw money at them for words on a website and a spiffy hype video. They then reassess and admit reality, insisting that outside forces caused delays that could not have been foreseen (despite, currently, every MMORPG crowdfunded development so far hitting these same "unforeseen" delays), at which point the development completed on the backs of the gamers who originally funded the game makes it a pretty low risk for the investor, relatively speaking.
You will never reach deeper levels of understanding by merely scratching the surface of a subject. I'm actually shocked that some of the previous posts are touching upon the real details of the issue.
You stay sassy!
I am definitely of the opinion that if you cannot convince investors / publishers to get on board with your idea, then the chances are that your idea is just not good enough or your ability to pitch an idea sucks. With MMO's specifically, you should be able to produce market research to show the size of the market, average spend etc. Then promote your game ideas and back it up with further research into psychology, gamer habits to show that it has the potential to be successful. If you've done your research and can pitch well, you should be able to find an investor or publisher.
That said, whilst I believe crowdfunding sucks, there are definitely situations where that is the only option. Within gaming, because the costs are so high, traditional investors and publishers are unwilling to sink money into unproven ideas as it is too risky. This is what has caused the stagnation at the top of the market and so crowdfunding can be the only way to get new ideas to market. I'm still not happy about the situation, I would prefer that publishers funded more diverse projects, but as there is nothing I can do I'll just accept it for what it is and keep my money in my pocket until I can actually play something.
The problem is that crowdfunding doesn't have much regulation around it so can be very misleading. With MMOs specifically, they're all asking for low amounts of money which will never be enough to get the game to market, yet most of the campaigns aren't clear about that. From what's happening with the indie MMOs at the moment, it's looking like total cost of development is sitting between $20m and $30m, yet the crowdfunding tends to only look for about 10% of those costs. They should be clear that crowdfunding is only enough to build a "proof of concept" which they can then use to attract actual investors.
I really don't think it is worth the time and effort to write a 6000 word essay to explain my position on kickstarters.
Let me say this:
Just because someone gets a free game engine and makes a few scenes then go to a crowdfunding site with intent to get money for an idea is not going to work out well. 99% of the development of a MMO is server side.
The cost of making anything even remotely close to a MMO is going to cost between 20 and 30 million bucks or it is probably going to look and play like shit. Most of the initial investment is hardware and assets.
Most table top developers do not even know what a query is. Some even think it is related to homosexuality.
The number of failures will exceed the number of success by 20 to 1 so people will start shying away from these projects because most projects don't know the business end of making a MMO.
There is no money in this business due to the high cost of overhead so smart game companies have went elsewhere.
If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
If you standard is that the box sales recouped the outlay then most MMOs succeeded. I have a different standard though.
Almost all games post 2004 were merging servers after a few months at most. VG, AoC, WAR, TOR, TR, SL, STO, LOTRO, DDO, and Wildstar all fall into that category.
That is not what happened with the previous batch with EQ2, WoW, DAoC, and CoH.
They all had varying issues but a common denominator was antsy publishers or investors unfinished or untested games out.
Garriott hasn't made a decent game since 1997. I'm not sure what SotA proves either way. He has no idea how to do dynamic real time combat. That card system he contrived just shows how out of touch he is with modern gamers.
Albion was a low budget offering. Soulless? Not fond of that characterization as is it has nothing real on either end of the analogy. Shallow and low tech? Sure but it was a low budget offering.
The point of those offerings is that the funding model can see a project to completion even on a low budget.
Mythic knew after their first beta test that there was a flaw in their engine that led to an issue with ability firing. Instead of the lag being at the front end --think smashing buttons through lag to get an ability to fire-- the lag was after the client on server side. You ended up with these weird freezes of variable lengths similar to WoW's loot lag that became extremely evident in mass PVP.
When Jacobs and co went to EA and told them they needed to redo the engine, EA told them no. I just think to Star Citizen changing their engine several to merge various functionalities and fix issues and what a Funsoft or EA would have done. Or more poignant, Jacobs being able to completely revamp the ability system in CU when early testing showed it poorly functioning in CU.
AoC was forced out the door unfinished after a Funcom investor meeting. Entire zones were never completed and all the work wasted.
NCSoft was very vocal in allowing Carbine to install all their features for Wildstar before release. Of course they gave no time for proper QC. We all saw the buggy aftermath.
The issue with the publisher/VC model is the disconnect with the developers and the product as well as a disproportionate level of control over the project. It's been a debilitating problem in MMO development for over a decade.
Frankly the only systemic or mechanical issue I have seen you guys present for funding outside of the publisher model has been this poorly described notion of financial responsibility. However, as I pointed out before that can be achieved by hiring a CFO and empowering them in the corporate charter. You don't need EA to do that.
For the most part it's been gratuitous characterizations and emotional generalizations which boil down to "I don't like it!"
I would guess that was because it didn't follow your model. The game was pretty well tested and polished at launch, as it was one of the first big "wow clones" it was actually really well designed. Loads of group content, social options, deep combat system, good story lines.....it may never have hit massive numbers but it was definitely a success.
My definition of success is attracts a lot of players makes a lot of money and is around for a long time. Most of the MMORPGs on the market have done that including Swtor.
I'm not saying the ideal is 5M subs mind you.
I think my overall point stands though. The publisher and venture capitalist model has had a terrible track record these past 15 years. A success rate under 20% is god awful.
Now those who go to KS "Hey give me few hundred K and I do x and y MMO" on large-scale projects, tends to be doomed to struggle to ever achieve it.
I'm not sure if these kickstarter do harm to the genre in someway. People presume some big investor will invest in them if the game isn't crowd funded. Which is probably not the case.
Again, the best case you can make for crowdfunding at this point, done by ignoring the obvious failures like SotA, is that it's too early to tell how good the method will fit. To assert it's a good fit is to ignore the fact that it's really not given us quality titles at any higher a rate than publishers were giving us, and it's costing consumers significantly more. Seems like a net loss to me.
This idea that crowdfunding is a savior of MMORPG development funding is wishful thinking at best at this point. There's no evidence to suggest it's capable of producing any more quality titles than publishers are able to produce.