I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
Yes, this basically happened to CU. Mark apologized, went back to the design board.... and still offered refunds....
I'm still not going to concede this process is anywhere as random as you are trying to make it out to be.
If that is really the case, then say so up front, regardless of the financial consequences.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The entire notion of a pre-order is that you're ordering a game that no one knows when it will truly be done. A court order can't make that knowledge magically materialize. To punish companies for guessing wrong would be an implicit tax of sorts on pre-orders, or perhaps force companies to nominally launch when the game is obviously not ready. Nothing good comes of that.
Then again, not much good comes of pre-orders, anyway.
If I pre-order a car with a 2019 delivery date when should I expect to get the car? If I don't what happens? That's right, I get my money back.
There is no reason for game companies to be allowed to delay games for years and have no repercussions.
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
Yes, this basically happened to CU. Mark apologized, went back to the design board.... and still offered refunds....
I'm still not going to concede this process is anywhere as random as you are trying to make it out to be.
If that is really the case, then say so up front, regardless of the financial consequences.
Do you really believe that game developers know up front exactly when their game will be ready to launch and are intentionally giving out the wrong dates?
Developers with a lot of experience will have a better understanding of the sort of things that can go wrong. But even then, they'll make mistakes and run into unwanted surprises. Developers relying on crowdfunding for a game are disproportionately less skilled and less experienced, which is why they can't get their game funded by more traditional means. And that means that they tend to have much less idea of what will go wrong and how long things will take.
The entire notion of a pre-order is that you're ordering a game that no one knows when it will truly be done. A court order can't make that knowledge magically materialize. To punish companies for guessing wrong would be an implicit tax of sorts on pre-orders, or perhaps force companies to nominally launch when the game is obviously not ready. Nothing good comes of that.
Then again, not much good comes of pre-orders, anyway.
If I pre-order a car with a 2019 delivery date when should I expect to get the car? If I don't what happens? That's right, I get my money back.
There is no reason for game companies to be allowed to delay games for years and have no repercussions.
Do people really pre-order cars these days?
The problem is one of, you can't sue people who don't have any money. Or perhaps rather, even if you sue and win, you can't collect the money. If a Kickstarter raises $1 million for a game and the developers spend it on other things besides developing the game, then sure, they should be prosecuted for fraud.
But what if they spend it on developing the game they promised, and when the money is gone, the game is nowhere near complete? What then? They can't refund the money because they spent it on developing their game--exactly as they promised. If they had other money that they could use to provide refunds, they could have just used it to develop the game and not needed to go the crowdfunding route in the first place. Nor can they deliver the promised game, as the money is gone and the game isn't done.
I really don't understand all the anger everyone seems to have towards crowd funding. If it angers you, don't participate.
I bet the same people that get mad when a dev misses a release date would also get out the pitchforks and join the angry mobs when a publisher forced a dev to release a buggy game "early."
I hate when there is no tentative release date for a game. So much so I do not contribute to funding games that don't seem to have even a the ability to make a guesstimate (with a few exceptions). But I don't want them taken to court or sued, or limit other people's ability to freely and openly make a decision to make a funding contribution or not.
I really don't understand why people seem so hellbent on forcing their view on the world and how things should be on others. If a game is asking for crowd funding and doesn't have a project management track record of being able to release a game within a reasonably competent frame of time and budget, just ignore it. Problem solved. Stick to only buying finished products or developers with proven track records of generally being able to release on time and budget - like inXile.
In Troika got back together and crowd funded a game I would throw money at them hand over fist knowing full well their track record. Sometimes the higher risk is worth it for the possible reward. Live and let live and stop trying to force the world and everyone in it to comply with how you think things should be. Freedom to choose always trumps authoritarianism.
So you think there should be ZERO accountability for developers that publish a date, take money from customers, have no refund policy, and then push back release dates by YEARS?
It seems like a strange and one-sided way to look at things. These transactions have TWO parties. Both should have some accountability.
How did you feel when a publisher forced a developer to release a game before it was finished because the dev went over budget and missed milestones?
Did you side with the publisher holding the developer accountable? The publisher being the funder and all? The second party in the transaction.
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
It does affect me directly - when a dev looking for funding is unable to give an estimated release date, or seems to not have any project management experience, or any track record to speak of regarding keeping to a budget and time constraints - I don't fund because of it. If they do, and it is a game I want to play and don't think I will get without contributing, then I don't.
Also, I celebrate mother's day because my mother would be sad if I just ignored her on her special day. She, and all mothers, deserve a special day of recognition. I don't do it because of marketing. And I didn't celebrate father's day when my father was alive because he gave a shit about it as much as I do. My father's day present from my wife to me is a day of peace. My wife is not allowed to yell at me or force me to do anything or go anywhere - for one day. It costs zero dollars and benefits every company zero dollars. Sometimes my kid's art class at school has them make me something - but my kids have spent zero dollars on me on father's day.
I don't know why you are trying to use such twisted logic saying people are somehow pressured into funding games with poor project management. Its not true.
Funding is a risk. Be smart and don't fund any games if it causes everyone so much anxiety and butthurt and enough rage to sue crowd funding into oblivion.
Let the rest of us use our brains to make smart and/or stupid decisions as we want. Its risk/reward.
Crowd funding is around because publishers/capitalists analyzed the game or developers were too risky or not profitable enough to fund. We can decide if the game is interesting enough to us, we can fund the risky project, usually be non or semi-professionals with no project management experience.
Magic isn't real - making a law stating people without the experience to know the correct budget or time needed to make a game have to magically accurately know this information isn't going to help anyone on either side of the transaction. Period. Even companies with experienced project managers who have put out tons of games have big issues with this. Especially when it comes to getting out physical goods from what I have read.
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
As said a few time... don’t list a date.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
What I've proposed before: an independent review of the design documents, any builds currently made, as well as any and all financial documents and information pertaining to the development of the game and studuo attempting to raise funds by someone with the expertise to review it accurately with no financial incentive to bias the review, and disseminate the information clearly to potential backers on the Kickstarter page. As an added kick of objectivity, I would hide the amounts pledged tracker because it guards against social proof bias.
The review would be linked on the Kickstarter or crowdfunding landing page, and then you could truly assert that, if a backer pledged without knowing full well what they were backing, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Here is an actual response from a Kickstarter developer that has raised over $4M in Crowdfunding:
Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.
A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?
This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release. People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline. Should there be no accountability?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
What I've proposed before: an independent review of the design documents, any builds currently made, as well as any and all financial documents and information pertaining to the development of the game and studuo attempting to raise funds by someone with the expertise to review it accurately with no financial incentive to bias the review, and disseminate the information clearly to potential backers on the Kickstarter page. As an added kick of objectivity, I would hide the amounts pledged tracker because it guards against social proof bias.
The review would be linked on the Kickstarter or crowdfunding landing page, and then you could truly assert that, if a backer pledged without knowing full well what they were backing, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Who conducts this independent analysis? Who pays for it? And if they have the skills to genuinely be better at it than the people developing the game, why would they want to estimate someone else's project rather than doing something for themselves? If you were a skilled game developer, would you really want to attract the hatred of a ton of people for misestimating how long someone else's project would take when you really had no control over what they did?
Even if I have some idea of how long it would take me to do some part of a project, I have much less of an idea how long it will take someone else to do another part of the project. It depends tremendously on how many people they hire, how good they are, and whether they can keep them around. It also depends tremendously on how willing the project leaders are to let the scope of the game expand as they have more cool ideas.
Here is an actual response from a Kickstarter developer that has raised over $4M in Crowdfunding:
Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.
A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?
This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release. People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline. Should there be no accountability?
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
As said a few time... don’t list a date.
How is not giving information any sort of accountability? Its the opposite of accountability.
Then that rules out my funding 99% of the KS I have. Why would I ever fund a game that I am sure is not managed well enough to be on budget/time?
And, I'll ask again, did you side with publishers who forced a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game that was over budget and missed milestones?
Why are you acting like said review would be infallible? No one said it would be, it would merely be unbiased. That's a 100% improvement over the status quo. As for who will do it, like any regulatory need ever, once it's required, I have no doubt orgs would spring up to meet the new demand, maybe even an additional duty of someone like the FTC. Projects requesting a certain threshold of funds would be required to pay for it as part of the Crowdfunding attempt. If they aren't willing to at least put that much into their own project to search for funding, why would they have reason to ask any of their backers to contribute on any kind of good faith the project will be completed successfully?
Here is an actual response from a Kickstarter developer that has raised over $4M in Crowdfunding:
Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.
A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?
This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release. People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline. Should there be no accountability?
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
As said a few time... don’t list a date.
How is not giving information any sort of accountability? Its the opposite of accountability.
Then that rules out my funding 99% of the KS I have. Why would I ever fund a game that I am sure is not managed well enough to be on budget/time?
And, I'll ask again, did you side with publishers who forced a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game that was over budget and missed milestones?
I dont think you are following along. Companies should be held accountable for what they say and advertise. If you are not confident in a date then do not list one. If you list one, you should be accountable for it. Your second paragraph is an example of how they currently abuse the system. You would not pledge if they don’t show a date, but will pledge if they show one. So they put up a date that they will never hit. What does that accomplish? Nothing except entice people to pay up. There is no accountability and no negative effect. They simply say “Yes we will be x years late. No refunds.”
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
That seems to be the boiled down issue many folks seem to be having with accountability: yea, but if you hold them accountable, then they can't just pick a date that helps convince people to fund them, meaning they won't be able to get funding!
And the world will keep turning just as it did before, because there's no reason whatsoever these projects need to get funded.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
As said a few time... don’t list a date.
How is not giving information any sort of accountability? Its the opposite of accountability.
Then that rules out my funding 99% of the KS I have. Why would I ever fund a game that I am sure is not managed well enough to be on budget/time?
And, I'll ask again, did you side with publishers who forced a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game that was over budget and missed milestones?
I dont think you are following along. Companies should be held accountable for what they say and advertise. If you are not confident in a date then do not list one. If you list one, you should be accountable for it. Your second paragraph is an example of how they currently abuse the system. You would not pledge if they don’t show a date, but will pledge if they show one. So they put up a date that they will never hit. What does that accomplish? Nothing except entice people to pay up. There is no accountability and no negative effect. They simply say “Yes we will be x years late. No refunds.”
I pledge on Fig to hopefully make money - I need more than a date. I need to know the project manager has an established track record of releasing games within a reasonable amount of projected time and budget.
I have pledged on KS to projects I wanted independent of my thinking it is not a sound investment. I pledge knowing there is a decent chance I'll never see or play the game. But if I do, and they deliver the product advertised, it could be worth it. Risk/reward. Simple concepts that predate the wheel and fire.
You are saying accountability some how can be achieved by not giving a projected release date. This thinking makes most fallacies look like extremely sound logic in comparison.
Not giving a date, to me, means the project is so poorly managed by such incompetent people they have no idea what needs doing and how long any of that doing will take. Not even an idea. How can you make a budget off of no idea?
I am assuming you hope they have an idea so the money they are asking for isn't based off of whimsy and magic and an actual budget is somewhere that makes sense to people with all the correct chromosomes - in which case you want them to just hide the information from the people funding the game.
Hiding information isn't accountability. It is the opposite of accountability.
When they give a projected date, the people who funded the game can actually hold them accountable. And, since most crowd funding doesn't stop at the end of the fig or kickstarter, and they continue to pander for it through other sources like their website and Steam, potential backers that are capable of thinking and reasoning can find that information and not back the game. Like with your example above with the game that was supposed to come out in 2017 and is not even in alpha.
A publisher forcing a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game because it went over budget and missed milestones is them holding the developer responsible for what the pitched and agreed to for funding.
I honestly don't see a difference with what you guys are stating. You guys now want to step in and take the place of the "evil" publisher.
Hero-U just came out. It had a long and ridiculous road from original KS to the recent final release. The devs were veterans of the industry. And they still had huge problems. But, their problems and that huge hassle they went through eventually benefitted me because I think the game is fucking awesome. Money well spent. Projected release date grossly and ridiculously missed. Check. Tons of shit changed. Check. Still money well spent. It was a risk that panned out for me. It is evil developers needing to be sued into oblivion to you guys it seems.
That seems to be the boiled down issue many folks seem to be having with accountability: yea, but if you hold them accountable, then they can't just pick a date that helps convince people to fund them, meaning they won't be able to get funding!
And the world will keep turning just as it did before, because there's no reason whatsoever these projects need to get funded.
Given that it is generally impractical to meaningfully hold developers accountable when a good faith effort to create a game fails, do you think that we ought to ban the crowdfunding of games entirely? Any other approach will continue to lead to projects that take longer than expected or run out of money and fail entirely.
That seems to be the boiled down issue many folks seem to be having with accountability: yea, but if you hold them accountable, then they can't just pick a date that helps convince people to fund them, meaning they won't be able to get funding!
And the world will keep turning just as it did before, because there's no reason whatsoever these projects need to get funded.
Given that it is generally impractical to meaningfully hold developers accountable when a good faith effort to create a game fails, do you think that we ought to ban the crowdfunding of games entirely? Any other approach will continue to lead to projects that take longer than expected or run out of money and fail entirely.
No, just solve the inequity of information between the two and it becomes a better transaction overall.
Why not? Our legal system is not overworked or anything
I've tried giving input a couple of times and decided against it. Basically, I believe everyone is responsible for their own lives. Why do people look to Governments to compensate for their lack of judgement. There should be oversight, and there is.
Fraud, which many are giving examples of here, is quite different than "meeting a release date." Fraud has specific rules in place, including intent. Investor's remorse is what the actual topic is, in my opinion.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
Yes, this basically happened to CU. Mark apologized, went back to the design board.... and still offered refunds....
I'm still not going to concede this process is anywhere as random as you are trying to make it out to be.
If that is really the case, then say so up front, regardless of the financial consequences.
Do you really believe that game developers know up front exactly when their game will be ready to launch and are intentionally giving out the wrong dates?
Developers with a lot of experience will have a better understanding of the sort of things that can go wrong. But even then, they'll make mistakes and run into unwanted surprises. Developers relying on crowdfunding for a game are disproportionately less skilled and less experienced, which is why they can't get their game funded by more traditional means. And that means that they tend to have much less idea of what will go wrong and how long things will take.
You keep using the word "exactly" which I've never said.
Three games in particular come to mind, Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen and Chronicles of Elyria.
All three promised in their Kickstarters to deliver a game in two years.
Two of those are led by industry vets with about as much experience as one can have.
The third started several years later, well after the first two had totally blown their dates, and then used their Discord and website to clarify the KSer was only for seed money, but did not update the actual KSer page.
I, with absolutely no game development experience (but many years as a software delivery PM) knew the early promises of delivering completed MMOS in 2 years and on stupidly low budgets were very likely invalid, yet these industry vets didn't?
I do believe developers have unintentionally given out unrealistic dates in order to get funded, or worn incredibly optimistic rose colored glasses in their estimates.
Lets throw all of that out though. Two of those games have been in development for over 5 years now. The "cone of uncertainty" has certainly narrowed considerably, yet still they make almost no prediction on a completion date.
In all fairness Mark said end of 2019 was possible if all beta testing went well, but....July 4th came and went, no revised date for beta 1, so the schedule continues to slide.
Yet again, one of these three devs continues to offer refunds, interestingly enough the game I backed, yet I've got no interest in getting one as I really did consider it a donation regardless of the outcome.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The entire notion of a pre-order is that you're ordering a game that no one knows when it will truly be done. A court order can't make that knowledge magically materialize. To punish companies for guessing wrong would be an implicit tax of sorts on pre-orders, or perhaps force companies to nominally launch when the game is obviously not ready. Nothing good comes of that.
Then again, not much good comes of pre-orders, anyway.
If I pre-order a car with a 2019 delivery date when should I expect to get the car? If I don't what happens? That's right, I get my money back.
There is no reason for game companies to be allowed to delay games for years and have no repercussions.
Do people really pre-order cars these days?
The problem is one of, you can't sue people who don't have any money. Or perhaps rather, even if you sue and win, you can't collect the money. If a Kickstarter raises $1 million for a game and the developers spend it on other things besides developing the game, then sure, they should be prosecuted for fraud.
But what if they spend it on developing the game they promised, and when the money is gone, the game is nowhere near complete? What then? They can't refund the money because they spent it on developing their game--exactly as they promised. If they had other money that they could use to provide refunds, they could have just used it to develop the game and not needed to go the crowdfunding route in the first place. Nor can they deliver the promised game, as the money is gone and the game isn't done.
They sure do preorder cars these days, over a half a million people put down a deposit for Tesla's Model 3, including a co worker of mine.
She's also one of the 12 to 25% who refunded after long production delays as she actually needed to really buy a new car after a 2 year wait. Also, there was some sort of big tax credit electric car buyers were supposed to be getting that may have expired at the end of 2017.
Here in Florida the delay is really telling, a brand new Tesla dealership got all set up about 6 months ago near my house, but sits totally empty and dark waiting to have some actual new cars to sell.
So here we are, Elon certainly must have spent some of the preorder cash, yet still giving refunds.....
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Here is an actual response from a Kickstarter developer that has raised over $4M in Crowdfunding:
Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.
A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?
This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release. People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline. Should there be no accountability?
Heh, I recall slamming JW pretty hard at the time over that comnent. But in his case it clearly was a case of ignorance and pride, not willful malfeasance as some might appear to be.
One thing to keep in mind though, there hasn't really been any great player revolt against crowd funding, even on projects long past their dates.
Both CU and SC haven't seen any huge surge of refund requests, even though one offers them freely.
In fact both continue to pull in new donations from people who should be very well aware of the delays thus far and the lack of a firm promise date.
I personally feel this rewards bad behavior and may be a disincentive to meet any sort of date, but one assumes more revenue can be made by launching (maybe) so perhaps that's not really much of a consideration at this point.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you. The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either. They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.
If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates. You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download. If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline. But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism. In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.
Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made. That's an issue. More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
Very well then: what do you propose? If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?
Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work. In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun. You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly. You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
As said a few time... don’t list a date.
Found an interesting article which shows delays are almost guaranteed in this industry, and very well known by anyone working in it.
Therefore those really short estimates were in fact disingenuous and not really any sort of oversight.
No date is probably the best way to go until this industry gets its act together.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It still would not mean automatic refunds once a date has passed, just giving consumers right to request that refund once certain date has passed. There are crowdfunding projects like Camelot Unchained that pass their dates, give anyone asking for refund, and still manage to do okay.
I don't think it would kill many good crowdfunding projects. But if it kills some bad crowdfunding projects that have lost their initial backer's trust, then imho that is only good for the industry.
Estimating is a fundamental tool of any company. Companies that are bad at estimating go bankrupt and fold. They use estimates all the time. And most of the time they will get the estimates right. No one should suggest or believe anything else.
This is not about getting the estimated release date "right every time" but about "giving out realistic estimates".
There are three parts to any debate: the estimate (date), the what (e.g. game) and the price.
Take an example: You want to hire a company to put a tent up for a big wedding say. A pretty simple task
Company 1 says they can do it as do company 2 but they are 20% more expensive. So you go with company 1 and ..... they miss the date the wedding is ruined.
You are pissed. This was a simple task how could they get it wrong. Ah says company 1 some of the staff went sick you know how it is you can't estimate for that.
Out of curiosity you ask company 2. Oh yeah they say we know about staff getting sick and we have contractors ready to cover that possibility. We have to pay extra of course which is why we charge more.
Bottomline: companies estimate and they base their costs on what they estimate.
For consumers what it comes down to is clarity. Giving us - the consumers - the information with which to make a "more informed" choice.
Any suggestion though that companies do not estimate is laughable. And mostly they get the estimates right! This type of ruling will help protect those companies who "try" and "cover the risks" from those that don't. Companies that know better but prefer to mislead.
Just to reiterate:
This is not about getting the estimated release date "right every time" but about "giving out realistic estimates".
Bottomline: companies estimate and they factor that into their costs.
And what it comes down to is clarity. Giving us - the consumers - the information with which to make a "more informed" choice.
Any suggestion that companies do not estimate though is laughable. And mostly they get it right. This type of ruling will help protect those companies who "try" and "cover the risks" from those that don't. Companies that know better but prefer to mislead.
It is not about getting the estimated release date "right every time" but about "giving out realistic estimates".
Noooooooooooooo they don't!
Here's the thing if you take a conservative estimate you are asking your client to be paying more, aka the higher budget cost, if you want to be a competitive company you must offer the best estimate/cost ratio to your client...
Even goes for you hiring a construction company, or a plumber, etc... To keep competitive they must give competitive estimates that will determine the price you will pay, so that pressure will always be there.
In a game dev reality I'd say is exactly how it works with publishers if you go pitch your game to one and with a conservative estimate because X and Y and Z can push it back for years, they'll frown upon it because it'll force them to give you a bigger budget from the ground-up, they don't like conservative estimates either because studios working with aggressive deadlines are said to remain more focused and gain more momentum, what otherwise results in relaxation and more likeness to fail even that conservative deadline.
Comments
and still offered refunds....
I'm still not going to concede this process is anywhere as random as you are trying to make it out to be.
If that is really the case, then say so up front, regardless of the financial consequences.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
There is no reason for game companies to be allowed to delay games for years and have no repercussions.
Developers with a lot of experience will have a better understanding of the sort of things that can go wrong. But even then, they'll make mistakes and run into unwanted surprises. Developers relying on crowdfunding for a game are disproportionately less skilled and less experienced, which is why they can't get their game funded by more traditional means. And that means that they tend to have much less idea of what will go wrong and how long things will take.
The problem is one of, you can't sue people who don't have any money. Or perhaps rather, even if you sue and win, you can't collect the money. If a Kickstarter raises $1 million for a game and the developers spend it on other things besides developing the game, then sure, they should be prosecuted for fraud.
But what if they spend it on developing the game they promised, and when the money is gone, the game is nowhere near complete? What then? They can't refund the money because they spent it on developing their game--exactly as they promised. If they had other money that they could use to provide refunds, they could have just used it to develop the game and not needed to go the crowdfunding route in the first place. Nor can they deliver the promised game, as the money is gone and the game isn't done.
Did you side with the publisher holding the developer accountable? The publisher being the funder and all? The second party in the transaction.
It does affect me directly - when a dev looking for funding is unable to give an estimated release date, or seems to not have any project management experience, or any track record to speak of regarding keeping to a budget and time constraints - I don't fund because of it. If they do, and it is a game I want to play and don't think I will get without contributing, then I don't.
Also, I celebrate mother's day because my mother would be sad if I just ignored her on her special day. She, and all mothers, deserve a special day of recognition. I don't do it because of marketing. And I didn't celebrate father's day when my father was alive because he gave a shit about it as much as I do. My father's day present from my wife to me is a day of peace. My wife is not allowed to yell at me or force me to do anything or go anywhere - for one day. It costs zero dollars and benefits every company zero dollars. Sometimes my kid's art class at school has them make me something - but my kids have spent zero dollars on me on father's day.
I don't know why you are trying to use such twisted logic saying people are somehow pressured into funding games with poor project management. Its not true.
Funding is a risk. Be smart and don't fund any games if it causes everyone so much anxiety and butthurt and enough rage to sue crowd funding into oblivion.
Let the rest of us use our brains to make smart and/or stupid decisions as we want. Its risk/reward.
Crowd funding is around because publishers/capitalists analyzed the game or developers were too risky or not profitable enough to fund. We can decide if the game is interesting enough to us, we can fund the risky project, usually be non or semi-professionals with no project management experience.
Magic isn't real - making a law stating people without the experience to know the correct budget or time needed to make a game have to magically accurately know this information isn't going to help anyone on either side of the transaction. Period. Even companies with experienced project managers who have put out tons of games have big issues with this. Especially when it comes to getting out physical goods from what I have read.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
The review would be linked on the Kickstarter or crowdfunding landing page, and then you could truly assert that, if a backer pledged without knowing full well what they were backing, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.
A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?
This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release. People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline. Should there be no accountability?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Even if I have some idea of how long it would take me to do some part of a project, I have much less of an idea how long it will take someone else to do another part of the project. It depends tremendously on how many people they hire, how good they are, and whether they can keep them around. It also depends tremendously on how willing the project leaders are to let the scope of the game expand as they have more cool ideas.
Then that rules out my funding 99% of the KS I have. Why would I ever fund a game that I am sure is not managed well enough to be on budget/time?
And, I'll ask again, did you side with publishers who forced a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game that was over budget and missed milestones?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
And the world will keep turning just as it did before, because there's no reason whatsoever these projects need to get funded.
I have pledged on KS to projects I wanted independent of my thinking it is not a sound investment. I pledge knowing there is a decent chance I'll never see or play the game. But if I do, and they deliver the product advertised, it could be worth it. Risk/reward. Simple concepts that predate the wheel and fire.
You are saying accountability some how can be achieved by not giving a projected release date. This thinking makes most fallacies look like extremely sound logic in comparison.
Not giving a date, to me, means the project is so poorly managed by such incompetent people they have no idea what needs doing and how long any of that doing will take. Not even an idea. How can you make a budget off of no idea?
I am assuming you hope they have an idea so the money they are asking for isn't based off of whimsy and magic and an actual budget is somewhere that makes sense to people with all the correct chromosomes - in which case you want them to just hide the information from the people funding the game.
Hiding information isn't accountability. It is the opposite of accountability.
When they give a projected date, the people who funded the game can actually hold them accountable. And, since most crowd funding doesn't stop at the end of the fig or kickstarter, and they continue to pander for it through other sources like their website and Steam, potential backers that are capable of thinking and reasoning can find that information and not back the game. Like with your example above with the game that was supposed to come out in 2017 and is not even in alpha.
I honestly don't see a difference with what you guys are stating. You guys now want to step in and take the place of the "evil" publisher.
Hero-U just came out. It had a long and ridiculous road from original KS to the recent final release. The devs were veterans of the industry. And they still had huge problems. But, their problems and that huge hassle they went through eventually benefitted me because I think the game is fucking awesome. Money well spent. Projected release date grossly and ridiculously missed. Check. Tons of shit changed. Check. Still money well spent. It was a risk that panned out for me. It is evil developers needing to be sued into oblivion to you guys it seems.
I've tried giving input a couple of times and decided against it. Basically, I believe everyone is responsible for their own lives. Why do people look to Governments to compensate for their lack of judgement. There should be oversight, and there is.
Fraud, which many are giving examples of here, is quite different than "meeting a release date." Fraud has specific rules in place, including intent. Investor's remorse is what the actual topic is, in my opinion.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Three games in particular come to mind, Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen and Chronicles of Elyria.
All three promised in their Kickstarters to deliver a game in two years.
Two of those are led by industry vets with about as much experience as one can have.
The third started several years later, well after the first two had totally blown their dates, and then used their Discord and website to clarify the KSer was only for seed money, but did not update the actual KSer page.
I, with absolutely no game development experience (but many years as a software delivery PM) knew the early promises of delivering completed MMOS in 2 years and on stupidly low budgets were very likely invalid, yet these industry vets didn't?
I do believe developers have unintentionally given out unrealistic dates in order to get funded, or worn incredibly optimistic rose colored glasses in their estimates.
Lets throw all of that out though. Two of those games have been in development for over 5 years now. The "cone of uncertainty" has certainly narrowed considerably, yet still they make almost no prediction on a completion date.
In all fairness Mark said end of 2019 was possible if all beta testing went well, but....July 4th came and went, no revised date for beta 1, so the schedule continues to slide.
Yet again, one of these three devs continues to offer refunds, interestingly enough the game I backed, yet I've got no interest in getting one as I really did consider it a donation regardless of the outcome.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
She's also one of the 12 to 25% who refunded after long production delays as she actually needed to really buy a new car after a 2 year wait. Also, there was some sort of big tax credit electric car buyers were supposed to be getting that may have expired at the end of 2017.
Here in Florida the delay is really telling, a brand new Tesla dealership got all set up about 6 months ago near my house, but sits totally empty and dark waiting to have some actual new cars to sell.
So here we are, Elon certainly must have spent some of the preorder cash, yet still giving refunds.....
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/about_us/the_team/
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
One thing to keep in mind though, there hasn't really been any great player revolt against crowd funding, even on projects long past their dates.
Both CU and SC haven't seen any huge surge of refund requests, even though one offers them freely.
In fact both continue to pull in new donations from people who should be very well aware of the delays thus far and the lack of a firm promise date.
I personally feel this rewards bad behavior and may be a disincentive to meet any sort of date, but one assumes more revenue can be made by launching (maybe) so perhaps that's not really much of a consideration at this point.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Therefore those really short estimates were in fact disingenuous and not really any sort of oversight.
No date is probably the best way to go until this industry gets its act together.
Definitely some room for improvement.
https://kotaku.com/why-video-games-are-delayed-so-often-1795473828
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
It still would not mean automatic refunds once a date has passed, just giving consumers right to request that refund once certain date has passed. There are crowdfunding projects like Camelot Unchained that pass their dates, give anyone asking for refund, and still manage to do okay.
I don't think it would kill many good crowdfunding projects. But if it kills some bad crowdfunding projects that have lost their initial backer's trust, then imho that is only good for the industry.
This is not about getting the estimated release date "right every time" but about "giving out realistic estimates".
There are three parts to any debate: the estimate (date), the what (e.g. game) and the price.
Take an example: You want to hire a company to put a tent up for a big wedding say. A pretty simple task
Company 1 says they can do it as do company 2 but they are 20% more expensive. So you go with company 1 and ..... they miss the date the wedding is ruined.
You are pissed. This was a simple task how could they get it wrong. Ah says company 1 some of the staff went sick you know how it is you can't estimate for that.
Out of curiosity you ask company 2. Oh yeah they say we know about staff getting sick and we have contractors ready to cover that possibility. We have to pay extra of course which is why we charge more.
Bottomline: companies estimate and they base their costs on what they estimate.
For consumers what it comes down to is clarity. Giving us - the consumers - the information with which to make a "more informed" choice.
Any suggestion though that companies do not estimate is laughable. And mostly they get the estimates right! This type of ruling will help protect those companies who "try" and "cover the risks" from those that don't. Companies that know better but prefer to mislead.
Just to reiterate:
This is not about getting the estimated release date "right every time" but about "giving out realistic estimates".
Here's the thing if you take a conservative estimate you are asking your client to be paying more, aka the higher budget cost, if you want to be a competitive company you must offer the best estimate/cost ratio to your client...
Even goes for you hiring a construction company, or a plumber, etc... To keep competitive they must give competitive estimates that will determine the price you will pay, so that pressure will always be there.
In a game dev reality I'd say is exactly how it works with publishers if you go pitch your game to one and with a conservative estimate because X and Y and Z can push it back for years, they'll frown upon it because it'll force them to give you a bigger budget from the ground-up, they don't like conservative estimates either because studios working with aggressive deadlines are said to remain more focused and gain more momentum, what otherwise results in relaxation and more likeness to fail even that conservative deadline.