Im just learning about Kickstarter myself, and it is very exciting to see the funding they are getting for online games in 'very' early development.

I believe the best value it provides is allowing very small independents to test out new ideas, ideas that normally would require a large publisher to ever see the light of day.   3d models, rigging/animating, engine licenses, programming and more programming, illustration art, sound effects, and all the salaries/bonsues/benefits/team building events, cost lots of money.

Someone is going to come up with a new twist on MMORPGs and it will be amazing.

I know Im not the only one, but I hope I can make my own cool little twist to a beloved genre, and now I have Kickstarter as another tool to increase the chance of that happening.

-Blitz

Originally posted by BlitzVF

 

3d models, rigging/animating, engine licenses, programming and more programming, illustration art, sound effects, and all the salaries/bonsues/benefits/team building events, cost lots of money.

 

I agree.  And even a modest sum of money can be a big help in achieving these things.  I'm sure a big name game spends more going to one convention than an Indie spends on a year of development.

I'm anxious to see Embers (name?) and Repop make it to release.  Frankly if either (or both) releases a non-buggy sandbox of medium quality, that's a huge win for the genre.

Originally posted by JC-Smith

I don't really understand the resentment towards Kickstarter though, or people who like to condascend others for contributing to projects. There are generally good incentives from most projects, which allows players to get some added value for their contributions when the game ships. Obviously it doesn't do you much good if the game doesn't ship, but that's where using your head and choosing your projects wisely comes into play.

The problem is, at least with this thread, is its dishonest bs.  Guy with big Repopulation sig making an absurd question that anyone with half a brain knows is the answer to with the intent of getting more attention (and more money) to repopulation.

What I also find tacky is you, as an indie dev, talking up indie devs and trashing the bigger companies.  Sorry, you are in too biased of a position and it just comes across as more indirect, dishonest hyping of your product.

Let your product do the selling.  Talk about why we should donate to it, what it offers to us.  Instead you seem to be trying to make your product better by making whats around t look worse, which makes me think that the product isnt good enugh to stand on its own.

Originally posted by teakbois

The problem is, at least with this thread, is its dishonest bs.  Guy with big Repopulation sig making an absurd question that anyone with half a brain knows is the answer to with the intent of getting more attention (and more money) to repopulation.

What I also find tacky is you, as an indie dev, talking up indie devs and trashing the bigger companies.  Sorry, you are in too biased of a position and it just comes across as more indirect, dishonest hyping of your product.

Let your product do the selling.  Talk about why we should donate to it, what it offers to us.  Instead you seem to be trying to make your product better by making whats around t look worse, which makes me think that the product isnt good enugh to stand on its own.

The guy who started this thread is in not affiliated with Repop. He's a regular on our forum though.

That having been said, on the second and third paragraph, please do point out where I trashed other products or hyped Repop? I spoke entirely in generalisms about areas where Kickstarter would benefit the genre. I'm not in the business of trashing other games. That having been said, what your suggesting is that since I am a part of a project that has kickstarted that I have no business in a Kickstarter discussion. I disagree with that.

---

Originally posted by JC-Smith

1) Generated and player created content requires a lot more initial work. Once they are functional though they require a lot less long term work, because players will be creating situations and content can be reused with generation. Each game is different, but in general I can't see any reason that someone could claim a sandbox would cost them more money to produce than a theme park game.

---

This is fairly shortsighted perception, and I would even say incorrect.

There is hands down way more minimal initial work needed for narrated content because of simple fact that narrated content does not allow as much repetitiveness as sandbox designed games.

The main difference is in long term development though and in that regards, narrated content is way better because the longevity is dependent on volume rather than repetitiveness. With years of development, themepark game gains an advantage while sandbox becomes a nightmare to develop due broad horizontal growth.

This is where sandbox is more expensive in long term - sandbox game content added over the years requires exponentially more work to keep the content updated. Unlike in case of themepark narrated content that is stacked and "consumed" and you can just add at same pace for years.

---

Originally posted by JC-Smith

I don't really understand the resentment towards Kickstarter though, or people who like to condascend others for contributing to projects. There are generally good incentives from most projects, which allows players to get some added value for their contributions when the game ships. Obviously it doesn't do you much good if the game doesn't ship, but that's where using your head and choosing your projects wisely comes into play.

---

You don't?

Donations are a form of charity to give money to those who are in need, cannot help themselves or suffer a handicap. Are you the case? Are you disabled, are you homeless, do you live in 3rd world country, etc? Because those are people you are supposed to be like when asking for money...

You either do business or charity.

I have no issue with people throwing their money on some fun stuff projects but funding someone else living? C'mon...

As I said before, Kickstarter is just for milking money from naive people.

Originally posted by XAPGames

My estimation:

100 MMOs on kickstarter

• 1 makes it huge big.
• 9 make a profit after release and can continue development.
• 10 make it to release and struggle.
• 80 don't make it to release (not enough funding or management issues).

 

 

Overall impact?  Minimal except in rare cases.

 

Savior of the genre?  One can only hope.

That's the risk you take when starting a business.  I was just reading an article that stated the average rate of failure of a new small business is about 60%.

Entrepreneurship is a good thing.

---

Originally posted by dave6660

That's the risk you take when starting a business. 

Entrepreneurship is a good thing.

---

Problem is, this is no entrepreneurship as you are not taking the risks - your donators are...

@Gdemani: If your talking about the amount of work that goes into developing a proper generated content scheme then your talking about a bit more initial work to design that system as opposed to a static quest system.

Once you have created that system though you do not need as many quests as a static quest game. Because you can resuse your templates. Rather than creating 5000 storylines that a character will use once, or maybe never use at all, with a generated system you can focus on creating 500 templates that can be reused. That doesn't mean simplistic, they can be complex. But by randomizing the goals, npcs, and providing branches they have some replayability.

That's what I'm talking about with a generated system as opposed to static. In the longrun players can keep reusing the templates you've created, years down the road, and you can continue adding new ones. Where in a typical level based treadmill each of those storylines is used just once, typically.

As far as your last bit, pretty trollish. Calling Kickstarter a charity just shows your ignorance on the subject. Kickstarter is just for milking money from naive people? So what your saying is you know better than everyone who has used Kickstarter. And your goal here is to protect them from themselves, because your apparently smarter than they are?

Every game needs funding to be produced. That money typically comes from a publisher who you then pay to pre-order or order post-launch. What Kickstarter is offering players (in most cases at least) is a chance to pre-order directly to the devopers and cut out the publisher. That ensures that the developers keep control of their own projects. And typically the rewards offered for pledges are pretty generous. Your often getting half off with additional incentives. So long as the game ships, it's a beneficial arrangement for both parties.

Kickstarter,  in general, is a very exciting development that I believe will help foster an atmosphere where alot of different creative projects, including games in general can flourish.

I think it remains to be determined exactly how much impact it'll have on the MMO market specificaly. I DO believe it can provide a benefit for indie MMO projects to get some good exposure and proof of interest along with a bit of seed cash that they can utilize to help them attract the kind of funding sources (Angel Investors) which they need in order to get products launched. Exactly how much of a benefit it will be in that regard, I'm not sure, but I think it does have some potential.

As far as funding an MMO outright, I'm uncertain....

One things that is encouraging is the availability of quality tool-sets and engines, etc for MMO Development seems to be increasing and the price-point for those offerings seems to be dropping. It's also the case that operating costs (hosting) for such services also has dropped quite a bit in recent times.

Taken together, this MAY mean that the cost to produce small, indie MMO's becomes far more affordable and the barrier to entry is decreased in future (and Kickstarter could have a role in these). Note we are not talking AAA style MMO's, we are talking about vehicles with reduced graphics/production qualities, possibly limited feature sets/limited content. For certain sets of fans, this MAY NOT MATTER much though. As there are quite a number of people willing to trade such production qualities for more personalized service and direct interaction catered to thier tastes. I thinking a dynamic similar to the promulgation of MUD's in the early years...or experiences similar to NeverWinter servers but with enhanced capability to scale.

I don't neccesarly think this will replace/eclipse the AAA market....but it MAY create an enhanced alternate scene where people disatisfied with the offerings provided by the AAA market...might be able to find offerings that cater to thier preferences....much like the independant muisic/movie scene has become. Anyway, that would be my hope.

---

Originally posted by JC-Smith

Where in a typical level based treadmill each of those storylines is used just once, typically.

...

Calling Kickstarter a charity just shows your ignorance on the subject.

---

1) Yes, it is indeed used once only and that is why you need to invest way more work into it compared to generates quests system.

The point you are missing is that people will likely go through all those 5000 storylines you created over the years than going through 10x 500 templates...

Repetitive content costs less development time but does not ensure same longevity.

2) If you think that Kickstarter is the same as Kickstarter...

Every business needs funding, that does not mean donation though. Donated business is no longer a business but charity or hobby - something lacking market survivability without said donation.

I am not here to protect anyone, just pointing out the absurdity of the donating someone who does not need money, but want them only.

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by JC-Smith

Where in a typical level based treadmill each of those storylines is used just once, typically.

 

...

Calling Kickstarter a charity just shows your ignorance on the subject.

---

 

1) Yes, it is indeed used once only and that is why you need to invest way more work into it compared to generates quests system.

The point you are missing is that people will likely go through all those 5000 storylines you created over the years than going through 10x 500 templates...

Repetitive content costs less development time but does not ensure same longevity.

 

2) If you think that Kickstarter is the same as Kickstarter...

Every business needs funding, that does not mean donation though. Donated business is no longer a business but charity or hobby - something lacking market survivability without said donation.

 

I am not here to protect anyone, just pointing out the absurdity of the donating someone who does not need money, but want them only.

Seems like we are at an empasse so no point argueing also some of that post is some what hard to fathom if anybody wants a pop at it be my guest.

Just a big thanks to all who gave their opinions and input it's been mostly civil thank the stars,and if I have helped a start up company get a foothold then great ,one day we may get the games of our dreams with a Kickstarter ideology.

LOL ...

1) Is there ANY MMO produced using kickstarter?

2) How much a MMO cost? What is the biggest kickstarter project funded? 200k? a million? 10 million?

Are you so desperate so put money in a mirage?

@Gdemani: Fact is a generated quest can be just as complex as a static quest. You can have 20 quest steps with a proper generated system, with each of those steps having random reusable elements, only sharing a storyline. 90% of players skip the quest stories in modern MMOs and just hit the accept buttons.  It's the actions they are doing in the missions that keep them busy.

Again with the charity thing. I'm not sure where you think that any game doesn't need money to be completed. You can take a small and efficient indie project like Repop, and it still costs a significant amount of money to produce. I've personally put about 20-25% of my income over the past four years being poured into the game, not to mention bypassing contract work which would have been in six figures during that time in order to dedicate time the game. Josh Halls has also poured money into the game and the whole team has poured large amounts of time into the game. You don't pour that kind of time or money into projects without believing in them. But money and time are not unlimited, especially for indie developers.

Could we finish the game without any outside funding? Yes, but it would significantly increase the time to release, and likely result in a less polished product. That's not what the games fans want. Given the track record of MMOs that launch poorly, it's not what we want either. 

Kickstarter funding doesn't sound like a lot of money, but for an indie developer it is huge. In six months time we'd have gotten what would have taken us 2 years to get done from a world design and content standpoint. Kickstarter will not only allow us to get to launch more quickly, but it will also allow us to pack in more polished content. From a coding standpoint the game will have no issues launching in a year either way. From an art, content and polish standpoint, Kickstarter will make a huge difference. What's the biggest complaint about indie MMOs? Lack of polish. Lack of content. Buggy. Those are all things that Kickstarter can aid with.

So for an indie project like Repop, it's a good thing for both the developer, and for people who plan on playing it. From their standpoint it allows them to get things at a discounted price and obtain some unique items or titles, or at higher pledges a permanent place in the games lore. For the developer, it allows us to create a better game, which also benefits the players, and to see that game sooner rather than later.

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

2) If you think that Kickstarter is the same as Kickstarter...

Every business needs funding, that does not mean donation though. Donated business is no longer a business but charity or hobby - something lacking market survivability without said donation.

 

I am not here to protect anyone, just pointing out the absurdity of the donating someone who does not need money, but want them only.

 

Using this logic, how does anyone build a house / boat etc?

And don't you get something if you pay more than 5 or w/e the amount? normally a game / month sub; in this case.

So its like a pre-order system?

---

Originally posted by JC-Smith

Fact is a generated quest can be just as complex as a static quest.

...

I'm not sure where you think that any game doesn't need money to be completed.

---

1) That is no fact, that is an opinion and complexity isn't everything. Try to make storylines like SWTOR has with some quests generator - with voice-overs, cut scenes, phasing, etc.

I do not think actions are a motivator. What drives players running quests in narrated content is progression - the sense you are moving somewhere. This is unlike to be provided by quest generator.

You are comparing two things strictly mechanics wise but they both have very different purpose and role.

2) I explicitly said that any business needs funding, didn't I? Do you consider game development not a business? Fair enough, but do not ask money for the product once it is released though.

Do not take me wrong, I fully understand your perception of someone running a business - you just try to gather any money you can. That is absolutely fine but I say that from a donator perspective, you will unlikely find a reasonable justification for the donation(especially one that does not even have a product to offer yet).

The truth is, there comes a responsibility and expectations with an investment, with donation there is none. Donations encourage irresponsible business.

---

Originally posted by jpnz

Using this logic, how does anyone build a house / boat etc?

---

Not sure what you mean...

Sole purpose of a business is to make money.

If you are not making money, your business deserves to be closed.
If you are making money, there is no need for donation.

Funding a starting business is still a part of the business and it is no exception to the rule. In your previous post you argued that Kickstarter may provide sign of demand but such argument is false.

What people are donating is idea, not the product nor business. Those are very different things.

When you are investing money, you are not funding ideas but ability to utilize the idea and turning it into profit - we talk business here.

You can have a fantastic idea for the best game ever(in your personal opinion) but if your numbers behind your business do not fit, your idea is very much worthless and your business does not deserve to exist. Why supporting such behavior?

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by jpnz

Using this logic, how does anyone build a house / boat etc?

 

---

 

Not sure what you mean...

Sole purpose of a business is to make money.

If you are not making money, your business deserves to be closed.
If you are making money, there is no need for donation.

Funding a starting business is still a part of the business and it is no exception to the rule. In your previous post you argued that Kickstarter may provide sign of demand but such argument is false.

What people are donating is idea, not the product nor business. Those are very different things.

When you are investing money, you are not funding ideas but ability to utilize the idea and turning it into profit - we talk business here.

You can have a fantastic idea for the best game ever(in your personal opinion) but if your numbers behind your business do not fit, your idea is very much worthless and your business does not deserve to exist. Why supporting such behavior?

 

You seem to know exactly how 'Kickstarter' works and how all projects within it operate. /sarcasm

Exactly what's the difference between crowd-source funding and Kickstarter?

As someone who seem to talk 'business' alot you don't present very much logic.

Logic isn't generalizing millions of people that have backed kickstarter projects and saying 'What people are donating is idea, not the product nor business. Those are very different things.'

The 'point-and-click' project that got 3M, some would have backed it because they want the game at the end.

They essentially pre-purchased a PRODUCT.

Edit 1

I'll try to explain my 'build a boat' example.

If I want to build a house or a boat or a building, I would normally pay someone to build one for me.

Similar to how I would back a kickstarter project for someone to build something I want for me.

Get it?

Originally posted by darker70

Originally posted by JC-Smith

Originally posted by Moaky07

Well first off, I believe you are one of the Devs working on the Repopulation, so it is funny to hear your claim that making player creatd content systems actually requires less of a team. If you ever listened to the general MMO sandbox fan around here, they would claim a sandbox costs more to make.

Second off....it is a bit shifty IMO to be propping up the system you aim to use(Kickstarter), and not at least identify yourself.

Third off....I will wish ya luck on your venture. I can respect someone actually trying to make something they want, vs being forced to endure constant whining cause the world doesnt work how you wish. I mean this with the utmost sincerity.

1) Generated and player created content requires a lot more initial work. Once they are functional though they require a lot less long term work, because players will be creating situations and content can be reused with generation. Each game is different, but in general I can't see any reason that someone could claim a sandbox would cost them more money to produce than a theme park game.

2) Not hiding that I'm a developer, I think it's relatively well known. I post semi-regularly in the pub on various topics. The only time I've ever felt the need to identify myself is when answering questions about the game in comments threads, etc. The things I said about Kickstarter a generalized things.

Having been making indie games for many years now, and having worked on Repop for the past four years probably gives me a bit more of a perspective from the indie side of things and on maximizing your dollar. But not all of the people kickstarting these projects are newcomers. In the past few months we've seen a new Wasteland, Leisure Suit Larry, Shadowrun games get funded, as well as projects from the creators of SpaceQuest and Monkey Isle receive funding. And certainly not all of them are people who were rejected by publishers (as someone here suggested) either.

There are some harsh realities on how game publishing works:

The publisher generally advances the funds, and take a large chunk of the royalties for that investment. Your advance must be paid back before you see any royalties. This is why you often here that most games don't make money. Often developers don't make back enough royalties and they turn to their next game and a new advance.

Developers generally get their advances in installments. They have milestones to get the next deal. If things go poorly in development, they often are forced to launch before they are ready. Sometimes games get cancelled. Sometimes creative control is lost. Many of the decisions behind the scenes are not in the control of the developer's, but in the hands of publisher's who may not be on the same page as them.

From a developer's standpoint you don't really want to deal with any of  that... but for years that was the only way to get your game on shelves. With electronic distribution that is less of a problem than it was in the past. It's still a route many people go down though because it gives them exposure and often funds their development. That's not going to change.

Where Kickstarter changes that, is that it gives developers a viable alternative to publishers and  venture capitolists. And it allows them to take more risks than publishers may be willing to take. There's a reason there are so many wow-like MMOs these days. Half of that because that is seen as a proven formula. The other half is that investors want to invest in the safe bet. That doesn't mean sandbox or outside of the box MMOs can't get published. There are opportunities out there, but they come with strings attached.

My personal thoughts on Kickstarter is that it's a good thing. That doesn't mean I'm going to go through and put money on every game idea out there, or that anyone else should either. Any time you spend money you should do your homework. I can understand people being skeptical about how they spend their hard earned cash.

I don't really understand the resentment towards Kickstarter though, or people who like to condascend others for contributing to projects. There are generally good incentives from most projects, which allows players to get some added value for their contributions when the game ships. Obviously it doesn't do you much good if the game doesn't ship, but that's where using your head and choosing your projects wisely comes into play.

Thanks JC appreciate the input considering your busy scedhule communication like this  is the one of many reasons I backed Repop.

@mOAKY7  As above this is a typical post from The Co-owner and if you check out the forums and Kickstarter, there is no way they are hideing anything the teams honesty is pretty much their major plus factor among many.

I had never seen/noticed the person post before until the night I quoted them. Unlike some, I dont spend my time on active/pre launch game forums to troll them. If I do go it is to read, and occasionally make a comment.  I was doing some reading about the Owen class announcement, and saw a couple of other threads was only reason I knew person.

The only thing I had really seen of the game prior was from the trolls carrying that tag in the TOR forums.  They actually do a lot of spouting off about TOR, and subs, for someone knocking door to door hoping to get their style of game made.

Anyways the Devs seem like decent chaps....pity their game is attracting some unsavory types, but that is their problem.

@Gdemani: In all honesty each of the things you just mentioned: Cinematics, Voice Overs, and Phasing is all possible with generated systems. They are also a big part of the reason TOR's budget ran so high. I for one, enjoyed the quality of their cinematics. But I also skipped by most of them, like many other players.

I'd guess that indie projects aren't likely going to be fully voicing their games. Too much money for not enough gain. That having been said, it is entirely possible with a generated system. We actually added support for it just before GDC. You assign each NPC in the game a different voice font. You then compile a list of all the major things that need to be said, and the mission or chat bubbles play the best fit. You can actually see that TOR did this, except for the voice fonts. Some of your storyline characters had certain phrases they would say multiple times. So it is possible, but budget constraints will likely prevent it for most titles.

Cinematics are actually very doable with generated missions. Your talking about client side FX here. They are easier to do with static quests because you can set up the cameras exactly how you want them and they will always be perfect. I can tell you that some of Repop's generated missions do use cinematic effects though, and how it works is you instead center the camera based on the player or NPCs location, and then  you offset it and adjust for obstacles. It does allow you to do things like zoom or pan the camera, look at an object, etc, even in fully generated missions.

Phasing is a form of instancing that modifies your spatial awareness. Again that is very possible in a generated system because basically your talking about seamless instancing. You could even generate the NPCs, traps and objects inside of a phase.

That having been said, you aren't likely to match TOR's high quality cinematic effects with a much smaller budget. They had a lot of good people working on the title (over 600). It's one of the features that made their game stand out. But I'm not sure if we'll see that kind of budget again in an MMO in a long time.

Progress moving forward in an MMO is tied to short term goals and advancing your character. It's not tied to having the same story in the same order as every other player of your class. That is how it often occurs in modern theme park games. But the core thing is that players want to max level (or max a skill line). In a game that has 50 levels, your first end goal is 50. Then your end goal is gearing up to the best gear. Quests are what gets you to 50. When MMOs post-wow have run metrics, they find that players usually skip the long details quests in exchange for the quickest form of experience. They also skip the quest text in most cases, and just go by the quest helper's immediate goals.

Generators can provide you those same advantages. They can be automatically tailored or scaled to your characters preferences or skill sets. They can be filtered by area. They can be chained. That's not an opinion, that's a fact.

Last but not least, on the original topic. You keep harping on donating. If your getting something in return then you aren't donating. Your pre-ordering, or your purchasing something else. It would depend on what the pledge levels of that game were offering. As far as donating to an "idea" rather than a product though. I have to wonder if you even bothered to look at some of the Kickstarter pages. In some products, that is the case, in many others they are games that are far along in development. Some are funding demo apps or such, but many were already partially through development before Kickstarter began being seen as a viable option.