Adventure Gamers - Forums

inm8#2 - 14 March 2013 11:50 PM

I don’t have an opinion on the nature of the existence of the reward in question.

However, I find it a bit erroneous (and cynical) to view this as people paying money to have their faces or likenesses in the game. Rather, the backers at these very high levels are people who, for all I could imagine, can easily afford such a high donation and also care deeply about the project/developer. The reward is just that - a reward for those who pledge maximum amounts to the project to help it succeed.

I don’t think we can guess what the motivations of the backers are. I’m just completely turned off by the tone of some of these project videos, with someone like Chris Jones acting like it’s a huge bonus for us to be giving them material for their game and paying for it. And I don’t know, for some people maybe it is. It just seems kinda… sleazy, or something.

Maybe this is why I’m not a businessman

So why guess, then? You said people were paying to have their likenesses in the game. I’d say that’s a very specific (and inaccurate) conjecture of why people pledge high amounts.

I’d say my broader interpretation, that people are supporting the projects at high levels because they are passionate about the projects and developers, is a more logical one versus assuming high backers are dumbasses falling for the marketing of the rewards.

Of course project creators have to offer some incentive to people. They can’t just say, “Give us $10k”. They need to show that they greatly appreciate the faith and support of those high tier backers. And of course they need to present these rewards in an enticing way. That doesn’t make it disingenuous.

But to each their own interpretation, although it doesn’t surprise me this mini discussion was spurred by Frogacuda. You know, the guy who says he doesn’t care what other people do with their money but at the same time needs to voice his concerns about kickstarter and seek validation for said concerns in multiple forums on the web (after getting banned from a major one for, in their words, derailing multiple kickstarter threads).

(I have no problem with people having criticisms of kickstarter. I think it’s far from perfect. However, if other people are making conscious decisions with their hard-earned money to support projects even at high levels, I see no reason for me to question them.)

Oscar - 15 March 2013 01:52 AM

I don’t think we can guess what the motivations of the backers are. I’m just completely turned off by the tone of some of these project videos, with someone like Chris Jones acting like it’s a huge bonus for us to be giving them material for their game and paying for it. And I don’t know, for some people maybe it is. It just seems kinda… sleazy, or something.

Maybe this is why I’m not a businessman

Sleazy or something? Huh? That doesn’t even make any sense. So you think games can be made for free? Let’s hope you never have to fundraise for an organization or market a product, because it seems like you think generous people financially backing something and then getting acknowledged for it is somehow sinister.

Honestly, it’s no one’s business what I do with my money. The decision of whether or not to back a project is based on our own free will.

If it weren’t for Kickstarter and the fun reward tiers, we wouldn’t be looking forward to a coming year full of major adventure game releases like we are this year.

Quest1 - 15 March 2013 02:20 AM

Oscar - 15 March 2013 01:52 AM

I don’t think we can guess what the motivations of the backers are. I’m just completely turned off by the tone of some of these project videos, with someone like Chris Jones acting like it’s a huge bonus for us to be giving them material for their game and paying for it. And I don’t know, for some people maybe it is. It just seems kinda… sleazy, or something.

Maybe this is why I’m not a businessman

Sleazy or something? Huh? That doesn’t even make any sense. So you think games can be made for free? Let’s hope you never have to fundraise for an organization or market a product, because it seems like you think generous people financially backing something and then getting acknowledged for it is somehow sinister.

Honestly, it’s no one’s business what I do with my money. The decision of whether or not to back a project is based on our own free will.

If it weren’t for Kickstarter and the fun reward tiers, we wouldn’t be looking forward to a coming year full of major adventure game releases like we are this year.

Of course, all I’m saying is it turns me off personally. You remember Stan from Monkey Island? Well, I can’t criticise his customers, but I can have a distaste for his salesmanship. No, I’m not saying any kind of customer manipulation is going on here. It’s about the way it’s presented. Let’s be honest here - it’s not a favor. The developers get free material from me: I pay for it. No thanks.

I pledged enough to Tex Murphy to get my photo in the game. And I do consider it a huge bonus that I’ll be able to find my own face and maybe hear Tex say a few words about it. This is my favourite video game series, so it’s like a dream come true that I’ll get to be a teeny tiny part of it. I see nothing sleazy about that. Sure, they’re probably saving some bucks because they won’t have to hire random actors to pose for pictures in the posters, newspapers, photos etc. in the game, but I only see that as a plus since the saved money can go to making the game better in some other way. If this was a non-Kickstarter project and they had a proper budget from a publisher, then it would feel a little off to me.

I think in many games backer cameos won’t be that distracting, if all the characters in the game are somewhat realistic… I guess it’s then quite easy to make the backer characters fit to the style of other characters.

However, in LSL these backer cameos are more problematic, because they stick out. In previous games women were realistic and other characters were cartoonish, and that rule which is which was so obvious that it wasn’t distracting. In this new LSL that rule is forgotten and those two distinctive styles are mixed too much.

The game looks awesome, but mixing those more realistic backer characters with cartoonish characters without some obvious rule makes especially the Lefty’s bar scene look distracting and not so good as it could have been… which is kinda sad, because that scene is probably the most recognizable scene in the whole LSL series.

I don’t know how important the recognition of these characters is to the backers who pledged, but personally I would have preferred to see a cartoonish version of myself (if I had the money to get that character reward).

LSL looks fantastic.

I have no idea what you whingers are on about.

Does anyone have a screenshot of Lefty’s Bar which shows the backer characters? I know I could watch the alpha footage on YouTube, but I’m still trying to avoid seeing too much before I get my copy of the finished game. I’m just curious to see the juxtaposition between the divergent art styles.

You can probably count me amongst one of those who were never too keen on members of the public getting their faces in games; it’s nice that they care enough about the project to pony up the cash, but it really is just an exercise in vanity, and a private joke of sorts between them and the people who know them.

I can understand how it must complicate things for developers, as they struggle to balance the needs of satisfying their high-level supporters, and at the same time trying to ensure that it doesn’t have too much of a negative impact on the experience of thousands of other people who will be playing the game.

I think my preference would be to have the backer characters blend into the background as much as possible, so that the people who pledged for it can still recognise their own likeness, but everyone else can simply ignore their presence like they would any other non-interactive NPC.

tomimt - 15 March 2013 04:02 AM

I don’t think anyone would have complained of having their cartoonish likeness presented in a cartoonish game.

I’d like to think that would be the case. If these backers pledged high primarily to support the project, and getting their faces in the game was just a small bonus, then you’d imagine that they’d be happy with something which was in keeping with the overall aesthetic. If they really wanted a highly realistic and recognisable representation of themselves in the game, even if it compromised the look and feel of it overall, then that would essentially tell everyone that they pledged not for the benefit of the game itself, but for their own egos. Regardless of people’s true motivations, I don’t think they’d want to be reflected in that light.

Oscar - 15 March 2013 02:42 AM

Of course, all I’m saying is it turns me off personally. You remember Stan from Monkey Island? Well, I can’t criticise his customers, but I can have a distaste for his salesmanship. No, I’m not saying any kind of customer manipulation is going on here. It’s about the way it’s presented. Let’s be honest here - it’s not a favor. The developers get free material from me: I pay for it. No thanks.

I’m pretty sure dealing with amateur submissions, trying to make sure it doesn’t stick out or compromise the quality of the game, while also making sure the contributors are happy (e.g. you can’t cut that scene where that one extra appears, even if it’s not really working, because he paid to be in the finished game), is more work and causes more problems for the designers than just getting a professional to do it (or not including it at all) would be. So no, they’re not really getting “free material,” they’re taking on additional work and headache in order to honor the high-paying backers.

Jatsie - 15 March 2013 10:09 AM

Does anyone have a screenshot of Lefty’s Bar which shows the backer characters? I know I could watch the alpha footage on YouTube, but I’m still trying to avoid seeing too much before I get my copy of the finished game. I’m just curious to see the juxtaposition between the divergent art styles.

LINK

VampireNaomi - 15 March 2013 02:49 AM

I pledged enough to Tex Murphy to get my photo in the game. And I do consider it a huge bonus that I’ll be able to find my own face and maybe hear Tex say a few words about it. This is my favourite video game series, so it’s like a dream come true that I’ll get to be a teeny tiny part of it. I see nothing sleazy about that. Sure, they’re probably saving some bucks because they won’t have to hire random actors to pose for pictures in the posters, newspapers, photos etc. in the game, but I only see that as a plus since the saved money can go to making the game better in some other way. If this was a non-Kickstarter project and they had a proper budget from a publisher, then it would feel a little off to me.

The photo thing doesn’t bother me so much (although the high number of photos could get a little awkward, I think there are like 180), but the half dozen “walk-on roles” for the $10,000 and up backers worries me a little more because they’ll have to actually act.

Not that Tex is a series known for its amazing acting or anything. I’m sure it’ll be fine, it just seems like it could potentially be distracting in those moments.

I’m still reeeeeaaally excited for that game. More than any other by far.

teme - 15 March 2013 10:55 AM

Jatsie - 15 March 2013 10:09 AM

Does anyone have a screenshot of Lefty’s Bar which shows the backer characters? I know I could watch the alpha footage on YouTube, but I’m still trying to avoid seeing too much before I get my copy of the finished game. I’m just curious to see the juxtaposition between the divergent art styles.

LINK

Thanks. 

They’re really not the most attractive bunch, but then I guess Lefty’s is supposed to be a dive bar, haha. The tubby one reminds me of Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons, the bald one of that wrestler Steve Austin, and the one on the far left is like a skinny Billy Mays.

I see can now what everyone is saying about them feeling out of place, it’s a bit like one of those composite photographs where people try to insert themselves into an existing scene, but just end up standing out awkwardly, despite their best attempts to look natural.

Other random observations: I’m not quite sure why the girl is so pale compared to others; she looks somewhat like a vampire with this undead vibe going on. Larry also seems very short next to the rest, barely tall enough to see over the bar.

On the whole it is a pretty nice looking scene though, the backer sprites just could have used a little more of the artist’s magic to give them some actual character.