Quote:
Originally Posted by fov
I think it's interesting that people are basing the success of this campaign (after one day! with 43 days to go!) and of others on what happened with Double Fine's. That was an anomaly, and it was awesome, but not every campaign needs to follow the same curve in order to be successful. As people have pointed out, Jane's fan base is different, and the situation is different (when Double Fine's happened it was the first, now people are being more selective about projects like this and the press are less eager to talk about it). It certainly didn't help that another Sierra game went up on Kickstarter two days earlier (and one day *after* Jane started teasing this announcement -- too late to change course). That's life... but it doesn't mean instant failure.
(... But worrying about it and posting that we're worried about it isn't necessarily productive.)
Something that does help, though, is feedback on what grabs you about the campaign and what doesn't make as much sense.
Ah yes - this is also more productive than worrying! Something I have noticed is negative comments about the campaign from people who probably aren't Jane's fans...
|
I've never played the Gabriel Knight games - thought they're at the top of my list, but it didn't stop me from donating $50 as soon as it was live, because I believe in supporting the art form, creative developers, and writers/legends who were pioneers of the medium - and also, so their work will help open opportunities to new writers and developers.
But, there were/are some problems with the announcement. And this is a forum, a community where we can vent anything we want. I don't mind the yahoos being negative about a game they won't support, they have every right to express.
But they sound like clowns. I tend to ignore those who'll gripe about problems in the genre, and then don't make any effort to support those who are trying to solve them.
But - those of worrying, and I am one of them, in a huge way, use this place to vent and I think that's fine.
Why did DFA/W2 succeed so quickly where Jane is stumbling out of the block?
For one, Tim has over 7 thousand followers on Twitter and has released games on multiple platforms to multiple audiences. He's also a personality. He gives lectures. When he announces a game, all those folks know about it on Twitter. Right now.
Jane set up her Twitter account today.
That's ok with me - I don't love social media, but I have to know it and understand it for my job. But it severely hampered the initial push for it to go viral. Tim had a built-in, enthusiastic audience.
Jane has the old school gamer audience, who are slower on the take - hopefully, this means higher yields when most KS campaigns start to wane, which is usually around 14-25 days to go. I think her making it for 44 days was BRILLIANT.
The adventure community is bigger in Europe and the word needs to get out there, I hope it does.
I am glad she changed the name. This worked for Chris Serellan.
I would have led with "The Maker of Gabriel Knight" somewhere. The form is a bit presumptive we all know Jane Jensen. All of us here do - but even as a gamer, before I was on this forum, the name didn't ring a bell like Tim's or Interplays (Brygo's recognition isn't his name, but the company he founded, all of us late 30-year-olds played one Interplay game, and probably loved it at some point).
Dammit, I have so many more thoughts. One last one, I wish she'd started smaller with one project, and built to the CSG next year. We might all of us developers be getting big heads about what's possibile because of Tim - he has advantages others don't, and an audience that's tech-savvy and hungry for more of his Psychofandangotentacleness.
I think Pinkerton should have launched with GM2 on KS, then built an audience the CSG could take advantage of.
Off to meeting...
Scottzo