Adventure Gamers - Forums

Agustín Cordes - 02 November 2015 05:14 PM

To the rest of you, I don’t blame you if you couldn’t care less about this drama. After all, there are dozens of games released every week and one or two less developers wouldn’t make much difference.

Well for some of us, it does make a difference, especially if it is developers that have shown in the past, that they can make games that we love - Keep up the good work Agustin

Iznogood - 02 November 2015 06:31 PM

The problem is however that in software development you are often doing things that you have never done before, using new tools, developing for a new platform, or simply making a type of program that you have never made before, and it is impossible to foresee what problems you might encounter or how long things will take if you have never done it before.

So what you’re saying is that Kickstarter game developers are well aware they shouldn’t make empty promises to their backers. And yet they do. All the time.

Karlok - 01 November 2015 07:06 AM

But they’re used as excuses. I don’t know much about game development and I’m glad I learned interesting stuff from the many Kickstarter projects and updates. Kickstarter also taught me that developers continue to perpetuate the myth that game development is a very special kind of industry, where predicting, planning and organising are virtually impossible. I never really bought that,

I am now retired. But I owned a marketing and management consulting firm for thirty years. During those years I never, and I mean NEVER, met a client who didn’t think his or her business was different than anybody else’s. You name an industry, I’ve probably been involved in it at one time or another. Including trade associations, software developers, Horse Track owners, architects, consumer electronics manufacturers….

Every one of them thought that standard marketing and management principles didn’t apply to them because they were different. Of course they weren’t. Getting past that battle was 90% of the war.

I totally understand where you are coming from. Your use of phrase “the myth that game development is a very special kind of industry” is the equivalent of my hearing “those rules don’t apply to me because my business is different.”

Nice analysis.

SoccerDude28 - 03 November 2015 06:40 AM

Now whether people are ok with delays or not based on them paying money to fund the game on kickstarter is another thing completely. For me personally, if I’m not okay with delays to the promised deadlines, I can simply choose not to fund any kickstarter projects anymore, instead of funding them and complaining afterwards that they are delayed. Put your money where your mouth is like they say.

Yes, a new mindset has emerged since 2012, the year that so many gamers discovered Kickstarter. Now you’re supposed to donate money (not too much) from the fullness of your heart. The key word is patronage and unconditional love is in the air. If a game is released after a few years, great. If not, hey man, I’m sure you did the best you could, better luck next time and I support you anyway. Backers who complain only have themselves to blame because their motives and decision to back the project in 2012 should now of course be viewed in the light of the new 2015 mindset.

Some twisted logic at work here…

I do believe in crowdfunding, but Kickstarter is just one lame form of crowdfunding without much future. No more Kickstarter for me. I back all kinds of projects (no games, oh no!) and I’m very happy with the results so far.

Take it easy

I`m sure Asylum will be splendid game and I hope for 2016 release Keep up the good work Agustin!

Karlok - 02 November 2015 06:43 PM

So what you’re saying is that ...

No.
What I am saying is exactly what I said - Nothing more and nothing less!

Iznogood - 02 November 2015 06:37 PM

Well for some of us, it does make a difference, especially if it is developers that have shown in the past, that they can make games that we love - Keep up the good work Agustin

I could have added to my above comment that a record of past performance excellence isn’t always enough to retain clients. If three large companies, (e.g. United, Motorola, Kraft,) lay off 2000 administrative staff each, (not unheard of) and 10% of those are marketing people, all of a sudden there are 600 new out-of-work competitors who will do just about anything to get work.

I don’t know if is the same as what Karlok calls the 2015 mindset, But it represents a situation where the buyer, not the seller is in control.

And while there are developers that have shown in the past they they are capable of making games we love, it is also true that some of those same developers are also capable of making games that are hard to like.

Everything I’ve seen about Asylum so far is wonderful. But, forgive me Agustin, all will only be known definitively when the final product is delivered. It’s a buyers market.

giom - 03 November 2015 09:37 PM

Oscar - 03 November 2015 08:44 PM

If the phenomenon is as common as you say it is - and it sounds like it is ubiquitous - then why not add a few months to the schedule? Aim to finish - completely finish - 6, 12 or 18 months before it’s scheduled to come out. Then if things go wrong, they can be fixed. If they don’t then work can begin on something else.

Multiplying estimates or adding time to estimates is something a lot of developers do when asked to give estimates, it helps to have some margin of errors when it comes to unknowns… Of course the issue is that it also means that you ask for a higher budget (more time needed = more expenses in term of salaries = higher budget) which might or might not be possible with Kickstarter (or a harder sale to publishers, managers, etc…).

There is sort of a standing joke in the software business:
When a developer is asked to give an estimate of how long I will take to make something, then they make their best estimate, and then double it to allow for unexpected problems, before passing it on to their boss. The boss then doubles it before passing it on to the project manager, because he knows that his developers always underestimate things. The project manager then doubles that estimate, because he is tired of projects going over budget and time, before passing it on to the seller. The seller then completely ignores all the estimates, and instead look the customer deep in the eye and try to guess how long they think it will take, and how much they are willing to pay for it.

It is of course both an exaggeration and a joke, but there is also an element of truth to it, and when I look at some of the estimates on kickstarter projects, then I often get the feeling that it is a similar story. That instead of trying to estimate how much time and monkey they actually need, they instead ask themselves the question: How much can we realistically expect to raise from this kickstarter?

Besides imagine the uproar if someone announced that they had actually only spend half of the kickstarter money on making the game, because they had overestimated how much they needed?

Iznogood - 03 November 2015 11:50 PM

It is of course both an exaggeration and a joke, but there is also an element of truth to it, and when I look at some of the estimates on kickstarter projects, then I often get the feeling that it is a similar story. That instead of trying to estimate how much time and monkey they actually need, they instead ask themselves the question: How much can we realistically expect to raise from this kickstarter?

Besides imagine the uproar if someone announced that they had actually only spend half of the kickstarter money on making the game, because they had overestimated how much they needed?

So what you’re saying is that Kickstarter game developers are well aware they shouldn’t make empty promises to their backers. And yet they do. All the time.

But like I said, I don’t agree with you and the many others here who keep repeating that software development is a very special industry. Do you really think that only in software you often do things you have never done before, use new tools, or simply make a type of product you have never made before? Do you honestly believe that in other industries it is possible to foresee what problems you might encounter or how long things will take if you have never done it before? Have you ever done any work in a different industry?

The problem is however that in software development you are often doing things that you have never done before, using new tools, developing for a new platform, or simply making a type of program that you have never made before, and it is impossible to foresee what problems you might encounter or how long things will take if you have never done it before.

Oscar - 03 November 2015 08:44 PM

If the phenomenon is as common as you say it is - and it sounds like it is ubiquitous - then why not add a few months to the schedule? Aim to finish - completely finish - 6, 12 or 18 months before it’s scheduled to come out. Then if things go wrong, they can be fixed. If they don’t then work can begin on something else.

It’s not that simple, especially if you aim to have a multiplatform release simultaniously. Look at what happened to Batman Arkham Knight for an example. That’s something that happens quite a bit in AAA business, as there’s dead lines and at some point those deadlines can’t be pushed any further. In the case of Batman, WB is going to loose a good chunk of money because at this point there’s bound to be a lot of people who are going to use their chnage to refund the game on PC no questions asked if they’ve bought the game before the “fixed” re-release.

Poorly done software often is a sum of the things that can go wrong in developement. There’s too tight schedules, unrealistic expectations from hardware, compatibility issues which can’t always be foreseen, problems with 3rd party middleware, game design choices that need to be re-designed as they’re just not fun in actual gameplay etc. In a word, even today, with know quantities, there’s a lot of trial and error going on in software. You can prepare for some of them, but not always to all of them.

So yeah, software design still is a bit of a special case. It might be hard to believe it, but it is, mainly because there’s no homogenous set of hardware that does it all in software. The field is far too heterogenous for its own good, which is also a cause of many issues.

giom - 03 November 2015 07:43 PM

Now I’m curious Karlok, which games did you back and which games are you unhappy about? Are you only unhappy about the delay and broken promises but might be happy about the results?

I backed 26 Kickstarter games and a few on other crowdfunding sites, like Indiegogo.  Fourteen KS games have been released so far. Two projects failed. One is still struggling against all odds.

The first one I backed in 2010 was text adventure Hadean Lands. After four years the author with a track record in IF released an excellent, innovative game, but his broken promises and arrogant attitude rubbed me the wrong way

Cognition was an okay game. I don’t remember much about its development.

Blind Side was not as good as I’d expected. The voiceacting was rather bad. Hardly any updates. But its innovative concept was the reason I backed it and I still hope there will be more audio adventure games.

Broken Age. I’ve said all I wanted to say about its development. The game was sort of okay I guess, unfortunately my expectations of a new Tim Schafer adventure were high. 

Moebius. Endresult disappointing. No problems with anything else.

Tex Murphy: Tesla Effect. For me, the best run KS campaign. The best trailer. Informative updates. I enjoyed the game in spite of the many casual elements. It is no Pandora Directive though. I’m sorry that it didn’t sell well.

Lilly Looking Through.  Modest little puzzle game. Nice. Backed because the developer had worked on Myst Exile.

Quest for Infamy. I’m not too keen on retro games and I’m not too keen on RPG hybrids. So why did I back this one? Fullness of the heart. The result was okay, I predictably hated the fighting.

Broken Sword: The Serpent’s Curse. Best 15 bucks I spent on a KS game. Pleasantly surprised, had a lot of fun with it. 

Armikrogh.  Not on the same level as The Neverhood. Disappointing but still fun. I’m sad it wasn’t received well.

Stasis. I forgot all about it because at some point I stopped reading updates of most KS games. Another nice surprise. Haven’t finished it yet (not much time for gaming right now).

Contradiction.  Backed because I love FMV and detective games. Haven’t played it yet.

Dead Synchronicity. Wonderful game, loved it.  Hoping for a sequel.

Sunset. Backed because of the developers.  Mixed feelings about the game, but no regrets that I broke my own rule of staying clear of KS.

There is no relation between the dollar amount I “invested” or “donated” and my enjoyment of the released game. But there is a relation between the dollar amount and any feelings of disappointment in the development process and/or the end result, even though I never spend money I cannot afford to lose. Doesn’t sound fair, but there it is. You give 15 bucks to a game project and two years later it has disappeared into thin air or the game is bad? Shrug, that’s the risk you take. You give more or much more than 15 bucks, and regret sets in.