[millenia]

Yes Gabriel Knight is more of a best seller kind of thing while Gray Matter is more of a curiosity. I myself found the characters and the themes good though and enjoyed the game immensely. But I never even tried to compare it to Gabriel Knights - which is most likely why I could enjoy GM so much.

[Banter]

GK had a kind of universal appeal that GM doesn't have. Millenia is right though, as long as you don't compare the two games both will be very enjoyable.

I have to admit most of my complaints regarding Gray Matter are based on the silly expectations I had that it was going to level with the GK series. Even if it did, the content and focus of both series are too different. Really silly to keep comparing the two(although somewhat unavoidable).

[lobotomy42]

My favorite element of Gray Matter was the contrast between the skeptical, rationalist magician and the spiritual, haunted neuroscientist.

[millenia]

Originally Posted by lobotomy42

My favorite element of Gray Matter was the contrast between the skeptical, rationalist magician and the spiritual, haunted neuroscientist.

Yep, this kind of contrast has been used again and again - because it works. For instance Mulder and Scully were quite a pair.

In a game with several controllable characters I think it's especially rich as you can experience the same scenes and happening from two very different perspectives. I enjoyed the Grace segments on GK games very much, the different characters do different kind of tasks and pay attention to very different details, it's truly engaging. This is one of the reasons why I liked Alter Ego very much even though it has some bigger flaws, the prude detective and the Irish thief were a fun pair.

Also in the case of Gray Matter it's not only the characters but the whole themes that are contradicting each other and make the game much more interesting than just one of them would - at least for me.

[zane]

For me gray matter had huge potential with its build-up and themes: the mysterious mansion, the anguished dr. styles, the world inside of the mind, a shadowy cabal of magicians, and the concept of the "game", all great ideas that made the adventuring lots of fun.
Where it falls short is: puzzles dont go far enough, the reveals arent as intriguing as the build-up was, and it feels like a "campy" teen novel by the end. Honestly though, i liked the game more than gk3, and the fun i had outweighed the flaws.

Back to the topic at hand, for day 6 we got about 140 backers, marking perhaps the first real incline we've had, and if we can keep this up for a few more days before the vote, it could be a sign that we have staying power. The most likely route to 300k involves 10-ish more people donating 5k or more. Thats alot of flying around for concerts potentially

[diego]

That's a really interesting discussion on "different personalities". Even the best Hollywood writers fall into the "trap" of writing two or more characters in the same "pattern", like the similar way they think and express themselves or do the jokes.

I haven't played GM so i can't judge on it, but "classics" such as GK, Monkey Island... are that for, among other reasons, having contrast between the picturesque characters. I should mention Toonstruck also - it's got plentiful of characters, and because of the writing, voice acting... every one of them could have their own adventure game.

[michael1123]

Originally Posted by Banter

Gray Matter was a really good game. I guess what mostly hucked people was the fact that Sam and Dr. Styles compare very unfavorably to Gabe and Grace. They just don't have the same charisma. That and the fact that people had unrealistic expectations about it... 13 years without a Jane Jensen adventure hurts. Plus all the development setbacks it had.

I thought Gray Matter was pretty great until the presentation kind of fell apart at the end. Not surprised at all to hear Jane say they ran out of money and had to rush the end of it.

[cesarbittar]

Hey guys!

Jane sent us at Phoenix Online a few words explaining a bit more of her campaign for our fans. Thought it might be interesting for you to read.

Head over to Phoenix Online and take a look at the news section. Or just follow the link below.

http://www.postudios.com/blog/

Thanks!

[zane]

OhhHH, just read the description about what the design bibles are... pretty excited at the prospect of getting those

[cesarbittar]

Yeah, it's what's commonly known as the Game Design Doc. It's Sierra lexicon. Jane still uses a lot of vocabulary that is very rooted in Sierra's time. I've picked up a bunch of them as I talk to her about games.

[inm8#2]

I can't contain myself anymore. I'm utterly disgusted and even furious with the gaming community and some of the specific adventure gamers who have chosen to not support Jane's project.

87000 Tim Schafer supporters. 1700 Jane Jensen supporters. You can't tell me there aren't thousands of people backing the DFA who were huge GK/JJ/Sierra fans but are not pledging.

All the unfair whining and criticism of Jane's pitch video despite the fact that she has been honest, direct, and informative. She has provided details of the game ideas with conceptual drawings. More than DFA ever did. She has provided 5 updates in a week and rapidly answered people's questions.

It seems to me she's being singled out unfairly. People are complaining that it's not a new GK game when Jane said on her facebook that it wasn't GK. The concept art was clearly Gray Matter 2 or some other kind of gothic/psychological game. There's an older thread where the first image popped up and I said GM2. I was right. http://adventuregamers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30722

The story with GK and the rights belonging to Activision is clear. People set their expectations for a new GK game and then claimed they've been misled somehow. Jane would never make an empty promise and I respect her so much for that. She has said that if the CSG is successful it would bring her one step closer to a new GK game. I trust that. Using GK3 footage for the promo was not misleading at all to me. It was saying, "Hey, if you like Gabriel Knight and Gray Matter, the creator of those games has a new project in store for you!"

I've also read people saying that even if the Kickstarter doesn't meet the goal, the project will happen anyway because Jane mentioned that in an interview. Well, don't you people think that Double Fine, a company with 65 employees, would have made an adventure game anyways? Or how about Al Lowe's LSL remake which was announced last fall? Wouldn't that have happened anyways? So, why is Jane being singled out? Why are people trying to rationalize every possible reason to NOT support this project?

I'll give Double Fine credit for their pitch video and the inclusion of a documentary series. I have nothing against DF or their project (I supported it). But reading the forums over there all I can see is this unfounded arrogance and snobbery about how they're not going to back Jane's project for whatever reason (pitch wasn't as good as Tim's, it will be funded anyways, the story is not fleshed out enough). What the hell? Double Fine hasn't provided a single bit of information about the game they're making, yet Jane is the one not doing enough or providing enough information? Bull****.

This has made me extremely frustrated. Jane deserves so much more from the adventure gaming community, but it seems so many have not supported her and are grasping at reasons to not fund the project.

$78/pledge for Jane's CSG. $38/pledge for DFA. Obviously the backers are doing all they can to help Jane, but WE NEED MORE PEOPLE TO PLEDGE.

What the hell is going on? Where are all the Jane Jensen, Gabriel Knight, and old Sierra fans? Why are people turning their backs on this?

Complete bull**** in my opinion. It's a raw deal. There is not one single reason for someone who supported DFA, who is capable of funding, to not support Jane's kickstarter. And from what I've gathered on other forums, they don't have any rational reason other than illegitimate complaints I noted above. The hypocrisy is astounding.

[Banter]

Chillax inm8#2, I don't think that is what happening. I think every Jensen fan is supporting this, even if they are unfairly whining about it(been there).

Comparing this to DFA doesn't make sense anyway. Schaefer and Gilbert have been active in maisntream gaming and are involved with adventure franchises more well known that GK. They are way more popular than Jane, fairly or not, and it is just natural that both kickstarters do very differently.

I do think people unconfortable about the kicstarter idea are being really silly though. And the funny thing is those are probably the most vocal people always whining about the lack of quality adventure games on the market. It is ironic.

[inm8#2]

I'm not saying Jane should have 87000 backers. I've commented on how Tim and Ron have had more exposure over the years while Jane was stuck in development hell. But it's the reasoning people are using that's pissing me off.

I agree that comparing Jane's project to DFA doesn't make sense. But people are doing it to make erroneous criticisms and rationalize their lack of support. If you're not going to pledge because you're not interested, don't have money, etc. I would never infringe on that. But when people bitch about how the video wasn't like Tim's or how the message about what the game will be isn't clear (a completely stupid, 100% untrue statement that actually would apply more to DFA), I'm going to call those people out.

I'm not being overly dramatic here, but I genuinely thought the AG community was better than this. I thought adventure gamers would LOVE the idea of Jane Jensen making more games in the vein of GK and Gray Matter. Many of us do love this, but this kickstarter has also brought out a lot of negativity, and people have jumped at the opportunity to bitch about how Jane's project doesn't meet their premeditated, unrealistic, illogical expectations.

Or, maybe the real adventure gamers are better than that and it's mostly the hipsters who supported the DFA because everyone was doing it. I've never considered myself any kind of elitist in any sense of my various tastes, but I almost feel like one now as I see many other adventure gamers turning their backs on Jane and singling her out for bull**** reasons.

[Kurufinwe]

Originally Posted by inm8#2

But when people bitch about how the video wasn't like Tim's or how the message about what the game will be isn't clear (a completely stupid, 100% untrue statement that actually would apply more to DFA), I'm going to call those people out.

Please don't. You can't bully people into getting enthusiastic about something. When people are on the fence, harassing them (whether it's getting angry at them, or bombarding them with questions, or telling them over and over again how great the thing is), is the surest way to make them not want to do it.

There have been too many Kickstarters of late; people are tired of them emotionally and financially. There will be time to remind them (tastefully) of the existence of the project later, for instance next week when the game has been chosen, and later on. And of course, there are many people who just don't know about the Kickstarter, especially older gamers, and trying to reach out to them would be great, though I'm not sure how that can be done.

For whatever reason, I tend to be fan of struggling things, whether it's a niche gaming genre or TV shows that keep getting cancelled, so seeing Jane Jensen's Kickstarter struggle is not something I'm unfamiliar with, and definitely not something I enjoy. Sharing your enthusiasm and trying to get more people on board is great. But believe me, getting all angry or hysterical or obsessive around people who, for whatever reason, are not particularly interested even though you'd think they would be, is the most counter-productive thing you could do.

[inm8#2]

I'm not on a crusade or anything. But I feel people are putting a lot of misinformation out there about Jane's project when many of the details in question have been addressed and fleshed out. I want to correct that misinformation and show people the POSITIVES about this kickstarter.

[teme]

Originally Posted by inm8#2

I'm not on a crusade or anything. But I feel people are putting a lot of misinformation out there about Jane's project when many of the details in question have been addressed and fleshed out. I want to correct that misinformation and show people the POSITIVES about this kickstarter.

Well, to be honest, while I like the idea of CSG and voting for the new game, it all makes the Kickstarter project more complicated and harder to understand correctly and many people probably don't want to fund a project when they don't actually know which game they're going to get.

It would have been better if voting and all unclear things were dealt outside Kickstarter, and then put finished plans to Kickstarter page. I'm not saying that Jane's project is all wrong, because it definitely isn't, but it is more complicated than the typical Kickstarter game project.

[aimless]

Originally Posted by Kurufinwe

And of course, there are many people who just don't know about the Kickstarter, especially older gamers, and trying to reach out to them would be great, though I'm not sure how that can be done.

There are a lot of older gamers on Gameboomers, Kurufinwe, and Jane's Kickstarter campaign is stickied there so those of us who frequent that forum do know about it.

Please don't. You can't bully people into getting enthusiastic about something. When people are on the fence, harassing them (whether it's getting angry at them, or bombarding them with questions, or telling them over and over again how great the thing is), is the surest way to make them not want to do it.

Kurufinwe is right, inm8#2. Please think again. I'm one of those people he's talking about. Jane Jensen hasn't made a game I like in years though I'm sure she's capable of it and could so I'm still thinking, but getting angry with those of us who aren't sure we want to donate yet really does act against her.

I'm also one of those who can't afford to put much money toward something like this yet I anted up for DFA, but your comment that "There is not one single reason for someone who supported DFA, who is capable of funding, to not support Jane's kickstarter", comes at the tail end of your impassioned post and someone without a lot of disposable funds may be hot under the collar long before they read it and cool off. If they notice the qualification in italics at all.

And it's not really true anyway. There are other developers, like Bryan Wiegele, who're struggling. If someone wants to support Double Fine and not Jane Jensen but Bryan or someone else - or no one else, that's their call based on what they like and want in a game.

[inm8#2]

I've cooled off a bit but I stand by my points.

Let me explain what I meant by this statement: "There is not one single reason for someone who supported DFA, who is capable of funding, to not support Jane's kickstarter."

What I meant to say that someone who was interested in Jane's project and was capable of putting in a small pledge, but not doing so because he/she is making the unfair criticisms/complaints I've mentioned above (and reiterate below), isn't using a valid reason but rather one based on misinformation. If someone's not interested, it's not their cup of tea, burned out from Kickstarter, lacking in funds, etc. then I make no qualms whatsoever. I'm not saying I expect anybody with money to go all in. I'm saying that the reasons people are using to not support the kickstarter are begotten of misinformation, unfounded expectations, and unfair comparisons to DFA's kickstarter.

Many people openly saying they're not going to support Jane's project are saying it's because the video wasn't like DFA, or they wanted Gabriel Knight, etc. Like I said, Jane has provided so much information and responded to all the questions. The idea that somehow the pitch from DFA was more informative is completely absurd. The DFA is by all accounts a leap of faith. Here Jane is giving us rock solid information on the game concepts.

People expected Jane's video to be funny and quirky like Tim's video. Why? Tim is pitching what most expect to be a quirky, humorous, lighthearted adventure. That's his specialty. So why would Jane, who specializes in dark, brooding, mysterious, psychological stories and game design want to market her game that way? It would be misleading. Instead, her pitch video set the tone for her project - dark, mysterious, brooding. Why is this a problem for people?

I feel that much of the AG community doesn't give Jane the benefit of the doubt. She spent something like 6 years trying to make Gray Matter. She was bounced around Europe between publishers. She didn't have the control she wanted over the development of that game, but she stuck with it and still put out what I think is a very solid, perhaps great game with some flaws that arose from budgetary constraints, not from any fault in design. Yet, some people are using their "disappointment" over Gray Matter against the kickstarter when the very purpose of doing the Community Supported Gaming project is so that she can make the games she wants. She has been very transparent and open about this. So why all the doubt? Does she not have a solid enough track record?

See what I mean? All the faulty logic and misinformation out there is hurting this project and keeping it from taking off. The Double Fine forums are one place filled with various negative, misleading posts and false rationalizations of why to not support this project. Just a few days ago our favorite thread starter made a new thread about how Jane is overrated. Isn't this community based on the idea of supporting respected figures like Jane? I simply can't believe how quickly people have been turning against the kickstarter for reasons founded on misinformation.

I'm sick of the damage all this negativity and ignorance about the CSG and the kickstarter is doing.

[Fien]

I kind of liked your passionate post, inm8#2. You made some good points. I was sure JJ would get her 300K in no time (apparently not) and I didn't like Gray Matter enough to finish it. But you're right, she deserves my support just for the GK series alone.

[subbi]

Well, you know, I will support once they made a positive choice (Moebius) and not that Gray matter drivel.

Allow me to disagree with you INM8#2!

I think the bitching is fully justified...some serious mistakes have been made since the beginning of this kickstarter campaign that started with the "somethings coming", getting people's hopes up, fortunately some of them have already been corrected (like the name of the campaign for instance), but it doesn't help.

Look at Tim's Kickstarter: It had all the right elements (and of course also the timing advantage)
- Famous personality Tim and Ron (Check)
- Humourous viral video (Check)
- Unique offering, making of documentary with the game (Check)

If you look at Jane's proposal, then I notice some very big differences:
- Famous personality Jane (check)
- Something about a farm.....and then the english adventure picture ;-)
- Confusing/unclear subscription approach, which may not even appeal to people
- Hint of GK4 thanks to the video, leading to dissapointment
- Choice of 3 games, as they donot all appeal to all, which makes people wait for final choice before they pledge....

The whole english adventure is bringing a kind of Miss Potter appeal to the whole thing and it scared fans off...You can sex it up a bit with titles and stuff, but the picture itself landed wrongly I think.

Then there is the kiddie game thing.....This is not what GK fans are waiting for!

It's a bad call anyway to offer a choice of 3 games. People don't want a season subscription, not knowing what they will get. They want a GK style adventure game by Jane Jensen. Plain and simple. No gray matter sequel that sold poorly in the first place.

So simply do the vote asap, get Moebius (appears to be the spiritual successor of GK) in the spotlights and then a lot of fans will be pooring back in.

No matter how you may dislike, the way you present the campaign is crucial, as shown by the master himself (Tim).
Any wrong impression given, or confusion caused, requires a lot of work to correct and get people back in.

I still believe it will end ok, but quite a few people need some more convincing.