Originally posted by BurninatorX

Originally posted by Zekiah

Money donated to Kickstarter programs should be considered a monetary loss until proven otherwise.

Period.

 

All things paid for should be considered a monetary loss untill proven usefull/entertaining.

 Period

 I like your logic

I would rather have a monetary loss to the needy atleast they can survive for another day.

Originally posted by xmenty

Originally posted by BurninatorX

Originally posted by Zekiah

Money donated to Kickstarter programs should be considered a monetary loss until proven otherwise.

Period.

 

All things paid for should be considered a monetary loss untill proven usefull/entertaining.

 Period

 I like your logic

 

I would rather have a monetary loss to the needy atleast they can survive for another day.

Just to be clear, I was making fun of his logic not being serious lol

The majority of successful kickstarters at least in terms of games were probably already going to be made with most of them using them as additional funding.

I dislike kickstarter in general because I hate the idea of giving money for a phantom product.

I expect more and more using kickstarter as an avertising campaign though. In that respect its not bad.

But I consider it foolish for donors to think they are "buying" stuff on kickstarter.

At the risk of sounding like a troll, I read the comment that you made about Shava's comment.  Her comment itself is a good commentary on how to live your life and at the risk of using a cliche I usually have to agree with the idea of not assuming... until I have walked a mile in siomeones shoes.  

However on the topic of SWtor,  I feel absolutely justified in judging EA and Bioware for what their game lacks, I have paid (and continue) to pay my subscription for a year while they pissed around and tried to make the sub-par product that they release monetarily feasable.  I have stood by a company because of a history of games that I like. That said,  I am a customer, at McDonalds,  when I order my cheesburger  I don't care what someone had for breakfast,  if they got a ticket on the way to work,or if their wife left them. The same goes for gaming, I want a good product,  when we came back during  beta and told them that SWTOR was not all it could be they should have listened, when we came back after playing their space game and said this isn't an acceptable representation of what a Star Wars space game should represent (especially considering all the GREAT single player content out there that it has to compete with, and TOR is the most expensive MMO ever) they should have listened.  When they totally revamped their entire billing model; because of exit interviews in hopes that it would save a game which is almost textbook following a failed game scenario, they would not listen.  I am tired of being constructive,  SWTOR sucks plain and simple and the team at EA/Bioware totally screwed the pooch.   It doesn't matter if the price is 15 dollars a month,  or free,  or if they pay us to play it,  SW will not now,  or ever be good, until they fix the problems that left the initial customers disatisfied. 

---

Originally posted by Jeardawg

The same goes for gaming, I want a good product,  when we came back during  beta and told them that SWTOR was not all it could be they should have listened, when we came back after playing their space game and said this isn't an acceptable representation of what a Star Wars space game should represent (especially considering all the GREAT single player content out there that it has to compete with, and TOR is the most expensive MMO ever) they should have listened.

---

Stop hiding behind mysterious "we" entity and dressing it up like everyone had same opinion as you. There are many voices to be heard and devs decided to listen to other than yours. They are not obliged to make the game YOU like.

It also does not mean that following your own desires would actually make the game to perform any better.

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

 

It does not matter who is distributing money but who and HOW they spend them.

Does not matter if donators are motivated, gaming companies as donation receivers are not motivated to spent them in any effective way.

That is as I pointed out already the difference between donation and investment. When you receive an investment, you are motivated to produce something that will generate gain. You are liable for the money you received.

With donations, you are not. You can produce absolutely anything...or nothing.

This is complete bs.  Investment doesn't drive motivation to produce a good, quality game, but instead pushes developers to please investors.  If your argument had any merit to it there would be very little dissatisfaction with the way this genre has progressed.   Yet, when players talk about great games it is always the ones that were released almost 10 years ago, and not the ones released in recent years.  

Originally posted by Gdemami

 

---

Originally posted by Jeardawg

The same goes for gaming, I want a good product,  when we came back during  beta and told them that SWTOR was not all it could be they should have listened, when we came back after playing their space game and said this isn't an acceptable representation of what a Star Wars space game should represent (especially considering all the GREAT single player content out there that it has to compete with, and TOR is the most expensive MMO ever) they should have listened.

---

 

Stop hiding behind mysterious "we" entity and dressing it up like everyone had same opinion as you. There are many voices to be heard and devs decided to listen to other than yours. They are not obliged to make the game YOU like.

It also does not mean that following your own desires would actually make the game to perform any better.

 From my personal experience with the game, I can't believe they managed to spend more than $150 million.  The first 20 levels or so aren't bad. I actually liked some of the story arc. I played a trooper (commando) to level 50.

 But there are so many cut corners, so many QA oversights and out right bad level and game design decisions, that its obvious that the game was released well before it should have been. Given EA's past history, thats hardly surprising. 

Couple that with use of the early Hero engine, and its a train wreck looking for a place to happen.  As always I speak for no one but myself. But much of this could have been avoided if someone with the proper technical experience had been calling the shots, instead of suits. 

First off, good response to the reader / commenter.  Although you may not have buysiness or design experience, as a gamer who plays games, that gives you a certain amount of expertise on the subject of games. Assuming the games you write about are the same ones you play, which they apparently are. Many businesses hit a point where the skills needed to maintain financial growth and healthy fiscal activity are NOT the same creative skills needed to engage the buying public in the first place. That is where I have my major issues. Iam not impugning anyone's programming or writing skills, but don't sell me the same old ten rat tails quest or one trick raid boss and tell me you are creative. You aren't, you are getting by because you no longer have to engage the public in the same way you did when no one was playing your game or similar games. The industry has a general lack of creativity in games and its because new is ofen fiscally dangerous.

Queue Kickstarter. I get that many humans, gamers as well as others, are not always the most fiscally esponsible group.  That is a minority of course, most of us are on the average side of fsically aware. So when I give $10 or $20 or $30 to a Kickstarter, I am not taking away the mortgage money to pay for a game I may never play.  I am not mortgaging my Oriental Ave to pay for a new MMO I am more than likely moving my money budgeted for fun from one thing to another. I might even go to McDonald's a little less this month to pay for it. So an article cautioning me about funding an artistic endeavor that may never come to fruition is a little bit insulting. Sure, its good common sense and someone can always use that. What is comes across as though is discouraging people from taking a chance on something new. I want something new. I cannot program it myself nor start my own business right now to do it. So I look around for other artists who can and I throw money at them.  It might be wasted, but better $15 on a dream than $15 on a game I will delete right away. I am willing to take the chance.

And while no one wants to be the guy who says "Oh yeah! Sure bet!" and have his friends (or readers) hate him for being wrong, I still think we should be encouraging these creative endeavors with our $$ and not discouraging them.

Good read.

In fact this "tearing down" has become so bad in here, it's hardly worth reading about new games here any more. Who wants to sift through hundreds of pages of crap to find a few objective nuggets?

Originally posted by Norden

Good read.

In fact this "tearing down" has become so bad in here, it's hardly worth reading about new games here any more. Who wants to sift through hundreds of pages of crap to find a few objective nuggets?

I use these types of sites as a collector/filter for games that may be of interest.  I then do my own research and decide if they are worth my time.   I do not expect "objective" reviews or columns.  EVERYONE has an agenda, and that fact has to be kept in mind, when examining the opinions and information one comes across. 

To single out a point that was made, I think an article on how the internet has become a teardown society is a very good idea.  Any of us who have spent time perusing the forums have most likely realized that virtually any game no matter how good is likely to be hit by a tidal wave of moaning and screaming immediately upon release and the flood of negativity is bound to have an effect on people debating whether to play a game or to stick with one.  Not only that, but people who choose to remain positive are often attacked as well.  As an example the term "fanboy" only has one purpose and that is to try to insult and invalidate the opinion of someone who doesn't jump on the teardown bandwagon.  If you don't agree that game x is the worst ever you are just a fanboy and thus your opinion doesn't count.

So write away sir, and I will be sure to add my two cents to the conversation.