T

R

So how much can get developed without the kickstarter? just curious. I am sure people would feel more comfortable giving money to a project that they can see with their own eyes vurse words spoken to us and a project we cant see.

so how much of the project can get done without the kickstarter backing? You may convince more people to back the game if more visual details were shown to consumers.

march sometime

Originally posted by Raagnarz
Yup he pretty much said if the KS goal isn't met the game won't be made because it will prove there isn't enough interest for it to be. He is using a KS campaign not only to raise some money so he can remain independent, but to also gauge player desire for a game like this. If the KS doesn't fund its goal then it will be proof that not enough people want this style of game so no reason to bother making it.

Which is a very unintelligent way to look at it.

Kickstarter doesnt gauge interest alone, it gauges people that are interested and willing to donate.  There is a rather large difference between the two.

You want to gauge real interest?  Create polls.  Or a website and see how many people sign up.

No, he is seeing how many people are both interested and gullible/idealistic enough to donate to a paper description of a game.  If there was a tech demo or something that would be a different story. But we have no clue how good the programmers an extreme low budget project can hire, among other varables.

Originally posted by strangiato2112

Originally posted by Raagnarz
Yup he pretty much said if the KS goal isn't met the game won't be made because it will prove there isn't enough interest for it to be. He is using a KS campaign not only to raise some money so he can remain independent, but to also gauge player desire for a game like this. If the KS doesn't fund its goal then it will be proof that not enough people want this style of game so no reason to bother making it.

Which is a very unintelligent way to look at it.

Kickstarter doesnt gauge interest alone, it gauges people that are interested and willing to donate.  There is a rather large difference between the two.

You want to gauge real interest?  Create polls.  Or a website and see how many people sign up.

No, he is seeing how many people are both interested and gullible/idealistic enough to donate to a paper description of a game.  If there was a tech demo or something that would be a different story. But we have no clue how good the programmers an extreme low budget project can hire, among other varables.

He is doing it because without a doubt it proves there is interest in it. Polls and forums do nothing more than allow people to say they are interested, only to never be heard from again once the game launches. KS on the other hand lets the general populace, those with disposable income, back something they truly believe in. It separates those that talk from those that act. He expects a small player base compared to big MMO's. By having KS going he gauges interest in that hardcore, old school base that he hopes to attract. If he gets what he needs out of that he has a good representation of the core base he'll get.

Let's face it, if and when the game launches, it will have a playerbase far exceeding only those who donated on KS at least for awhile. What KS will show there is there is a core player base that is willing to put up or shutup in a way polls/forums can't do because most people are full of shit when talking on forums.

Not saying if he would or wouldnt, but He can make the game all on his own without Kickstarter with ease. Given that DAoC had RVR and a bunch of PVE enviroments, it only took them 18 months to develop the game with a dozen developers and 2.5million dollars.

I know there is already a sizeable fan base that are eager to donate, but since he doesnt even have a game engine picked out so therefor he wont have any footage to show, that will hamper the kickstarter outcome since there are alot of people that like to see some demo footage before investing, but regardless it should still bring it a bunch of funding without.

Guys, let's be real...

It's a gamble on the side of the backers.

It's a gamble on the side of Mark Jacobs as well.

First off, if the goal isn't met, no one will be charged for their donation and there will be no money handed to the developer. It's and all or nothing setup.

Secondly, Yes, the backers are basing their trust on the words MJ is pushing. It most definitly could flop and be a horrible game (i doubt it). But that is what you take a risk in.

Thirdly, MJ is taking a risk in that he is putting up a lot of money himself and if the game doesn't do well, he will not recoup that money back.

It is what it is... It's like any other investment. You can buy stock in a company and you might be broke a year from now or you might be rich. It's an investment. You either believe he can deliver and want to invest or you don't invest for whatever reasons you may have. It doesn't change the fact that for the game to survive and make it to development, it needs investors.

Originally posted by strangiato2112

Originally posted by Raagnarz
Yup he pretty much said if the KS goal isn't met the game won't be made because it will prove there isn't enough interest for it to be. He is using a KS campaign not only to raise some money so he can remain independent, but to also gauge player desire for a game like this. If the KS doesn't fund its goal then it will be proof that not enough people want this style of game so no reason to bother making it.

Which is a very unintelligent way to look at it.

Kickstarter doesnt gauge interest alone, it gauges people that are interested and willing to donate.  There is a rather large difference between the two.

You want to gauge real interest?  Create polls.  Or a website and see how many people sign up.

No, he is seeing how many people are both interested and gullible/idealistic enough to donate to a paper description of a game.  If there was a tech demo or something that would be a different story. But we have no clue how good the programmers an extreme low budget project can hire, among other varables.

We usually agree on a lot of things here but I do not agree with this though . I think hes very intelligent to do this using kickstarter honestly. It may not gauge everything properly but there is SO many finnicky gamers nowadays and the general population of games hop from one to the next he has to use something before he invests his own money into a huge project that could leave him completely broke and unable to keep his small studio going.

Ever since WOW no game has held a large population that stays more than a couple of months at the most so I dont think I would want to gamble my money on this market either if I was making an mmorpg. Look at games like Rift AOC and Warhammer. People here have different reasons everytime they post why they quit or hated those games, its not just one reason which means people are picky and they cannot gauge why everyone is leaving.

This guy is doing the exact same thing he basically did to start up mythic , maybe not a kickstarter but being a independant studio without allowing outside companies to tell him what to make and how to make it and trying to listen to what the fans instead want. You can look at Bioware and EA right now as a perfect example of what they think make people play games and see he is doing the right thing avoiding those sort of investors and letting the fans do the investing.

Originally posted by SyrixII

Guys, let's be real...

It's a gamble on the side of the backers.

It's a gamble on the side of Mark Jacobs as well.

 

First off, if the goal isn't met, no one will be charged for their donation and there will be no money handed to the developer. It's and all or nothing setup.

Secondly, Yes, the backers are basing their trust on the words MJ is pushing. It most definitly could flop and be a horrible game (i doubt it). But that is what you take a risk in.

Thirdly, MJ is taking a risk in that he is putting up a lot of money himself and if the game doesn't do well, he will not recoup that money back.

 

It is what it is... It's like any other investment. You can buy stock in a company and you might be broke a year from now or you might be rich. It's an investment. You either believe he can deliver and want to invest or you don't invest for whatever reasons you may have. It doesn't change the fact that for the game to survive and make it to development, it needs investors.

... agree with what you said just one gripe.  Kickstarter is not a vehicle for investors, you would be donating not investing.  Investors own shares in the venture and, at least in theory, can sell back those shares.  Once the goal is met and your money is handed over its gone.

Now the money will be used to develop the game and you will recieve some rewards when the game launches, but it is not an investment its a contribution.

Originally posted by craftseeker

Originally posted by SyrixII

Guys, let's be real...

It's a gamble on the side of the backers.

It's a gamble on the side of Mark Jacobs as well.

 

First off, if the goal isn't met, no one will be charged for their donation and there will be no money handed to the developer. It's and all or nothing setup.

Secondly, Yes, the backers are basing their trust on the words MJ is pushing. It most definitly could flop and be a horrible game (i doubt it). But that is what you take a risk in.

Thirdly, MJ is taking a risk in that he is putting up a lot of money himself and if the game doesn't do well, he will not recoup that money back.

 

It is what it is... It's like any other investment. You can buy stock in a company and you might be broke a year from now or you might be rich. It's an investment. You either believe he can deliver and want to invest or you don't invest for whatever reasons you may have. It doesn't change the fact that for the game to survive and make it to development, it needs investors.

... agree with what you said just one gripe.  Kickstarter is not a vehicle for investors, you would be donating not investing.  Investors own shares in the venture and, at least in theory, can sell back those shares.  Once the goal is met and your money is handed over its gone.

Now the money will be used to develop the game and you will recieve some rewards when the game launches, but it is not an investment its a contribution.

Yea... I was mostly getting at the point that it's a gamble though. But you are still investing... Your return is NOT cash, but rather a product and the joy of playing the final game. If you get many years of great enjoyment out of it, then the money spent kickstarting it was a good investment. If not, then it was a poor investment.

Depends on the devs. The ppl from Black Eye Games are currently working on Gloria Victis. Alot of them are doing it next to their normal jobs. They've had an unsuccesfull kickstarter and are now working till they got more to show for I guess. Then they will try another kickstarter. The game will release but they might have to leave some features out if they don't get funding: 

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1688404825/gloria-victis-dark-medieval-mmorpg/posts/359857