72 réponses à ce sujet

[Malsumis]

Obsidian kickstarter.

www.kickstarter.com/projects/obsidian/project-eternity

Do the right thing people and plege this out of sight.

Obsidian Entertainment and our legendary game designers Chris
Avellone, Tim Cain, and Josh Sawyer are excited to bring you a new
role-playing game for the PC. Project Eternity (working title) pays homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment.


Project Eternity aims to recapture the magic, imagination,
depth, and nostalgia of classic RPGs that we enjoyed making - and
playing. At Obsidian, we have the people responsible for many of those
classic games and we want to bring those games back… and that’s why
we’re here - we need your help to make it a reality!

[Allan Schumacher]

Contributed.

[Allan Schumacher]

Cimeas wrote...

Hmm, I don't know about the isometric-only camera. Why not just make it like NWN2 where you could choose? I don't understand why they would go backwards. I like to play RPGs from a zoomed out 3rd person perspective (MMO-style).

If they end up going with a 2D prerendered backdrop, adjusting the camera angle just won't be possible.

[Allan Schumacher]

DominusVita wrote...

If they're making an entirely new IP, I doubt they'd go with a 2D backdrop. My guess is it would be something similar to how Wasteland 2 is looking. If it were an enhanced edition of previous work, a 2d prerendered background would be plausible.

I'm not sure why a new IP would or would not affect whether or not they were to go with a 3D backdrop or a 2D one.


I do believe it'll be a 3D engine because in many ways development has become a lot more efficient on them, but at the same time they have said it will be very similar to the Infinity Engine games.  So even if I doubt they'd go away from 3D, it is possible.

[Allan Schumacher]

Effectively we're preordering mega early.

This game and Wasteland 2 are games I'd likely buy super early, so I have less issue contributing.

[Allan Schumacher]

Cultist wrote...

$1,117,465 hell yeah!
BioWare called us a vocal minority, those who hated arcadeness, jRPG and AWESOME BUTTON RPG. Well, looks like vocal minority managed to gather a million $ to support a game they wanted.
To add salt to the injury - that money could be with BioWare, should they not turn to Call of Duty crowd and turn Origins into abominable Dragon Age 2.
Now, looks like BioWare will have some competition in the future.

Errr, just to keep things in perspective, look at the total number backers.

And I say this as a contributor that loves Obsidian as a developer.

[Allan Schumacher]

Allan, first let me say that I appreciate your sincere engagement with your company's consumers on this forum, but with all due respect, that is PRECISELY the attitude that has brought Kickstarter into being and forced "lesser" developers and studios into private capital raising venues to address, what a great many apparently feel is, an underserved market.

Given I donated, I am quite clear on feeling it's an underserved market.  I want to see what they do as well.

Taking this and making it evidence that this confirms (or denies) that the group was a vocal minority isn't correct.  There frankly isn't enough numbers in the kickstarter contribution to be able to qualify whether or not a group is or is not a vocal minority.

here are fairly strong indicators all around us that many gaming consumers (who at least perceive themselves as disenfranchised) want products that the market is just not providing; and that the market, acting as markets do, perhaps has begun to find remedies for these underserved consumers in opportunities like Kickstarter that might well lead to alternate delivery methods for niche (truly an unknown at this point) demand products to the marketplace. 

No kidding.  I've been an avid support of Kickstarter ever since Tim Schaefer started his, and while I didn't contribute (since I'm not erally an adventure gamer), I did contribute to Wasteland 2.  In fact, I have actively encouraged people on this very forum to check it out since I think it'd be right up a lot of their alleys.

Merely stating this in the manner that you have, only invites one of these consumers to ask you what you know of market projections and capital finance. Do you really know something of these projections, or are you just a bit miffed that your company was called out and, in turn lashed out rather unfairly, even as "a supporter?"

No, I'm NOT qualified.  Yet you talk down to me as though you are.  Or are you just miffed because I called you out that perhaps this doesn't actually have any bearing on whether or not someone is a "vocal minority."  If you think that this demonstrates that it's not just a vocal minority after all, then I guess we agree to disagree.  I don't think this demonstrates that it is or isn't.  What it does tell me is that there's a decent sized group of people that really want to see a game of this quality and they are organized and have enough capital distributed amongst them for Obsidian to achieve the target that they wanted to.

If you're thinking I was defensive, yeah I was.  Because someone was taking this not as evidence that "hey here's a game that I want to play and yay kickstarter for allowing it to happen" it becomes "See BioWare.  You were wrong!"

I love what kickstarter has done.  Just like I love the opportunity that digital distribution services have done.  Removing barriers to entry in the gaming market only allows for the talent pool of prospectful game developers to grow.  You want to know why?  Because a game developer is more able to deliver a quality product to a group, even if that group were ONLY 30,000 people.  You know what's awesome about Kickstarter... the game literally doesn't need to sell a single copy in order to be a success.  All it needs to do is satisfy those that have contributed.  I think that's amazingly powerful.

That a niche title is able to achieve the requisite funding and (hopefully) deliver a game that the target audience wants doesn't mean that it's not still a niche title with a smaller audience.

I hate to say it, but this is the attitude we have come to expect from Bioware; an attitude that is giving rise to the likes of Kickstarter.

An attitude of not letting someone take some data and make a claim from it that can't be supported by such data?

I really hate to preach, but this just rubbed me the wrong way...and yes I know you probably meant no real offense by it, as your engagement from my perspective is normally honest, sincere and fair minded. Perhaps the fangs just came out when someone called your company out? 

Perhaps the fangs came out in you when someone didn't agree that this doesn't mean that it's not a vocal minority?  Look in the mirror and wonder if my response didn't illicit in you what you think Cultist's response does for me.

The main reason why I qualified that I contributed is because I am not someone against Kickstarter or the opportunities it provides.

As for myself, there were no "fangs out" until someone literally decided to post a disrespectful post towards me.  Which I found your post.  I found it hypocritical since you basically call me out for being overly sensitive and essentially being a jerk to the fanbase, while demonstrating (and even admitting) that the same has happened to you.

I had a post with two sentences in it.  One encouraged a poster to keep some perspective since they were using this to make claims.  The other qualified that I'm not against the kickstarter model since I actively contribute to it.  Apparently that slights you enough to imply that I was not being honest, sincere, or fair minded with it.  At least you did acknowlege that I probably didn't mean any offense, even if you decided to tear into me.


On Obsidian's boards I even state that I hope the game is a runaway success and they can post huge sales numbers because I'd love data points that show this is a more viable market than many may give it credit for.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 16 septembre 2012 - 02:09 .

[Allan Schumacher]

That I still hold Obsidian's games in high regard despite their tech issues (though I've rarely been burned on them as bad as others it seems) speaks to just how well done I find their characters and narratives.

[Allan Schumacher]

wsandista wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

That I still hold Obsidian's games in high regard despite their tech issues (though I've rarely been burned on them as bad as others it seems) speaks to just how well done I find their characters and narratives.

You know, I've never had any more problems with Obsidian bugs than I have other developers.(Except Strom of Zehir, which when installed screwed up NWN2). In fact in some cases, there are less, like DA2 at release.(Not trying to take a potshot, just being honest)

It is a real shame they get singled out for bugs as much as they do.

I agree.  I seem to live a relatievly charmed life when it comes to playing games that are reportedly very buggy.  KOTOR 2 was the only one in that there was a sequence when escaping the mining station where my game stalled and Atton was stuck in an animation loop about enabling the Ebon Hawk.  It actually looked pretty damn funny hahaha

[Allan Schumacher]

Brockololly wrote...

Allan, if BioWare would just make a game with the same attributes as Project Eternity seems to be aiming for and just set in the Dragon Age universe, I'd be all over that. 

No doubt that you and many others would

I am curious why big publishers don't do smaller projects like this though? Is it because they focus on the number of backers being small and assume thats too small a number of people to recoup costs using a traditional sales model? Cause thats the great thing about Kickstarter- you can basically pay as much as you want up front! Its sort of the opposite of Free to Play games where you're only able to pay in small chunks after you've played the game or just a normal model where everyone pays the same rate or slightly more for a collector's edition or something.

Or is it that even though a Kickstarter is instantly profitable once its finished and the game released, that big publishers just don't think whatever profit there is to made would be enough, compared to your big blockbuster games?

Don't know the exact reasons.  On some level there's probably a curve of what is minimally required for a game of say, PE's scope, and without huge increases in manpower you can probably start to ramp up the potential sale revenue.  Sort of maybe, (numbers made up) with 50 people we can make a game we expect to make 1 million profit from, but with 75 people we can pull in 2 million.  Maybe?  I don't know.

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think you could just, for example, take the DA team and split them up into parts and have enough manpower to make enough games that would cover the amount of revenue expected for an "all in" project that the team usually works on.  So even if the ROI is roughly the same, you're making more actual dollars.

Although ironically, splitting our games would diversify the risk somewhat, although there'd likely be the ability to reuse things like game engines and whatnot.  Another factor is probably just the creative element.  Could be more difficult to have content creators that split up and still come up with stuff that is new and not just carbon copies of what is in each of the other projects.

[Allan Schumacher]

What I find interesting is how much more than a standard box people are willing to pay.

Had Obsidian released PE and however you hypothetically think it'll be to justify some of the larger costs, and it cost $100, how much traction would that have?

[Allan Schumacher]

scyphozoa wrote...

Yeah, the idea of donating and supporting a good cause definitely is an incentive to spend, and in most cases, over-spend. With these stretch goals in particular, it is clear that every additional dollar is going directly back into game content, which I think is an entire second "tier" of incentive. Excitement and continued donations can snowball with these kinds of stretch goals, the more people collectively give, the more people get excited. 

I can see how people could feel their dollar goes farther (assuming the goals are met).  I think there's a difference because people see this as "WIthotu may chipping in a good amount, I won't get this" whereas even if the game was the same, if it had already been made, there's some level of "eh those costs are sunk." 

Sadly I already saw one person state that they feel content was intentionally conservative in order to get more money via the kickstarter

[Allan Schumacher]

I mean people who liked Fallout: 3 actually donated to Wasteland: 2

I'm one of those people!

[Allan Schumacher]

Brockololly wrote...

Phoenix_Fyre wrote...

I heard this is also going to be only 25 bucks? Wow.

Only if you pledge on Kickstarter. It will likely be more expensive once the game is actually out.

I think the only real reason to do this is to make sure contributors have the perception of getting a discount.  I doubt that the cost will be significantly more than the $25 as they've already cut out middlemen and, presuming they stay on budget and on schedule, they have already paid for the expense of making the product.


EDIT:  Though they're well within their rights to sell it at whatever price they feel it can sell at.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 18 septembre 2012 - 03:20 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Yrkoon wrote...

WTF is up with that anyway? Since when are bonusses handed out for anything other than SALES? Was that like, some backroom wager that the Bethesda and Obsidian  suits agreed  upon   while ****** drunk at some christmas party?

My best guess is that the buggy nature of prior Obsidian releases influenced something like that.  To be honest I'm not that surprised by it and wouldn't be surprised if other studios had something similar.

I was so annoyed when I heard about that. As far as I'm concerned, the
people behind New Vegas deserve a big fat bonus for a job well done, and
instead they get this? How sad is it to have a bonus system based on
Metacritic score anyway? Metacritic doesn't tell any kind of universal
truth, it is often subject to trends like "duuh, let's all give this
game 0", and New Vegas also isn't quite mainstream enough to really
interest everyone.

Metacritic is hardly perfect, but it takes the media review scores, not the user review scores.  So the odds of there being a "duuh, lets all gives this game 0" is significantly less.

Though my problem with metacritic is that there are some sites that are clearly joke sites that get included in the media review aggregate.  "This game is so bad, it wraps around.  10/10!"

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 18 septembre 2012 - 07:53 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Yrkoon wrote...

Bethesda being wary of Obsidian's bugged games. hahaha. That's a hilarious thought.

The irony isn't lost on me.

[Allan Schumacher]

legion999 wrote...

That really annoys me. Fallout 3 is literally unplayable for me on the PC while New Vegas runs fine. Unbelivable.

Eh, I rarely get hit with bad bugs in almost any game I play.  Hard to take my own perspectives and apply it wholesale to the project.

[Allan Schumacher]

Hah! I was worried about that but I am pretty good at just enjoying a game for what it offers.

[Allan Schumacher]

A lot of people tripping up on the word "house" (which is silly IMO).

I suspect it'll be well done if put in game

[Allan Schumacher]

NKKKK wrote...

Why is the dev posting in this thread getting worked up when they're calling him out?

Are you referring to me?  And specifically the post where I state to keep some perspective with regards to the total number of backers for the project and whether or not that constitutes "proof" that something is or is not a vocal minority?  Or the post where someone else did what you did and assumed I was "lashing out" at people and "called me out" for apparently being defensive and have a bad attitude?

Because I'd strongly encourage no poster to go down that road in this thread again.  If you absolutely MUST follow this up, do it with me in PM.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 22 septembre 2012 - 08:44 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Update 7 makes me giddy!

[Allan Schumacher]

Vampire Bloodliens was a game that outright did not give experience for combat at all. Just accomplishing whatever said goal was that was on the other side of those enemies.

If you haven't played it, check it out. That TIm Cain worked on it helps my enthusiasm. I do agree that RPGs have historically slanted too much XP onto combat.

[Allan Schumacher]

Competitive Multiplayer no doubt

[Allan Schumacher]

NKKKK wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Competitive Multiplayer no doubt

That would be funny if it wasn't coming from a Bioware Developer.

We don't have competitive multiplayer in any of our games.

[Allan Schumacher]

Whether or not we are or are not a vocal minority, the important thing is that alternative means are available for us to get the types of games that we want.

Just hoping that Fargo and Feargus can deliver!