Chronicles of Elyria's Walsh posts ridiculous self-help Hero's Journey blog

Wargfoot

Slapshot1188 said:

Wargfoot said:

Slapshot1188 said:
Again-  In neither case can you present false information.  No more than a charity can do so.  

You know more about this case than I do, for sure.

However, I'd like to see anyone make a pitch for a game, that upon finding out he's in over his head and failing, who at that point couldn't have all of his previous claims cast as intentional lies.

Greetings,

I just completed a project plan for a game that seamlessly melds PvE and PvP in an environment that will feature cutting edge graphics and a virtual world that you can impact through player choices.  The game will offer a low monthly sub fee of $4.99.  Anyways, for a mere $10 pledge I should be able to hire some guys and have this game done by Christmas.

Wargfoot

So Christmas rolls around and in that time I've learned that developers want 100K+ per year - and office space + software is even more expensive, that the document I called a "project plan" isn't recognized as such - the guy I hired considers it "scrawls on a napkin".  I'm now told that it would take at least 2 years to put together the plan.  Also, the market changed as monthly subs are about as popular as dental surgery.

^--- So I had a massive learning curve there.

And now I've got people on Reddit enumerating my 'lies'.

• Wargfoot said it would be done by Christmas.
• Wargfoot said he had a project plan, well in the latest project blog he claims he's now halfway through it.  
• Wargfoot abandoned the $4.99 sub promise and now is considering a shop.
• Wargfoot promised PvP + PvE but has now dropped PvP entirely after having it explained to him that games that mix the two don't do so well.

There are any number of 'lies' you can get out of my initial (admittedly ignorant) pitch.

so I'm a liar now? (based on that pitch) or was I just inexperienced?

If Wargfoot shows THIS:



And says it represents the state of the game, and then many years later he shows THIS as the state of the game.



I would say that Wargfoot was a fraud.

Again, I didn't follow this game but to me that drastic of a change suggests they changed the game engine (started over).

Hytale did this recently - as have many others.

That would still fall under 'learning curve', IMHO - and not fraud.   The fact it was shared, suggests a good faith effort to get this thing working.

Slapshot1188

Wargfoot said:

Slapshot1188 said:

Wargfoot said:

Slapshot1188 said:
Again-  In neither case can you present false information.  No more than a charity can do so.  

You know more about this case than I do, for sure.

However, I'd like to see anyone make a pitch for a game, that upon finding out he's in over his head and failing, who at that point couldn't have all of his previous claims cast as intentional lies.

Greetings,

I just completed a project plan for a game that seamlessly melds PvE and PvP in an environment that will feature cutting edge graphics and a virtual world that you can impact through player choices.  The game will offer a low monthly sub fee of $4.99.  Anyways, for a mere $10 pledge I should be able to hire some guys and have this game done by Christmas.

Wargfoot

So Christmas rolls around and in that time I've learned that developers want 100K+ per year - and office space + software is even more expensive, that the document I called a "project plan" isn't recognized as such - the guy I hired considers it "scrawls on a napkin".  I'm now told that it would take at least 2 years to put together the plan.  Also, the market changed as monthly subs are about as popular as dental surgery.

^--- So I had a massive learning curve there.

And now I've got people on Reddit enumerating my 'lies'.

• Wargfoot said it would be done by Christmas.
• Wargfoot said he had a project plan, well in the latest project blog he claims he's now halfway through it.  
• Wargfoot abandoned the $4.99 sub promise and now is considering a shop.
• Wargfoot promised PvP + PvE but has now dropped PvP entirely after having it explained to him that games that mix the two don't do so well.

There are any number of 'lies' you can get out of my initial (admittedly ignorant) pitch.

so I'm a liar now? (based on that pitch) or was I just inexperienced?

If Wargfoot shows THIS:



And says it represents the state of the game, and then many years later he shows THIS as the state of the game.



I would say that Wargfoot was a fraud.

Again, I didn't follow this game but to me that drastic of a change suggests they changed the game engine (started over).

Hytale did this recently - as have many others.

That would still fall under 'learning curve', IMHO - and not fraud.   The fact it was shared, suggests a good faith effort to get this thing working.

It was shared after 7 years and AFTER a lawsuit.   Come on man.  You are not being honest here. The earlier videos were when he was soliciting money.  The last one is when no money is being solicited. 

Kyleran

As history shows, almost all crowd funded MMOs that have long been in development have had one or more restarts or major refactorings as their original designs didn't hold up.

CU, Pantheon, SC/SQ42, heck, even some games by major publishers like Tabula Rasa or New World have made mid-stream design changes which often lead to long delays or less than satisfactory game play experiences once finally released.  (SotA, Crowfall, etc.)

Still at days end COE was a level of incompetence far and above most others, especially considering it was basically a waste of $7 MM or so dollars of other people's money.

Wargfoot

Slapshot1188 said:

Wargfoot said:

Slapshot1188 said:

Wargfoot said:

Slapshot1188 said:
Again-  In neither case can you present false information.  No more than a charity can do so.  

You know more about this case than I do, for sure.

However, I'd like to see anyone make a pitch for a game, that upon finding out he's in over his head and failing, who at that point couldn't have all of his previous claims cast as intentional lies.

Greetings,

I just completed a project plan for a game that seamlessly melds PvE and PvP in an environment that will feature cutting edge graphics and a virtual world that you can impact through player choices.  The game will offer a low monthly sub fee of $4.99.  Anyways, for a mere $10 pledge I should be able to hire some guys and have this game done by Christmas.

Wargfoot

So Christmas rolls around and in that time I've learned that developers want 100K+ per year - and office space + software is even more expensive, that the document I called a "project plan" isn't recognized as such - the guy I hired considers it "scrawls on a napkin".  I'm now told that it would take at least 2 years to put together the plan.  Also, the market changed as monthly subs are about as popular as dental surgery.

^--- So I had a massive learning curve there.

And now I've got people on Reddit enumerating my 'lies'.

• Wargfoot said it would be done by Christmas.
• Wargfoot said he had a project plan, well in the latest project blog he claims he's now halfway through it.  
• Wargfoot abandoned the $4.99 sub promise and now is considering a shop.
• Wargfoot promised PvP + PvE but has now dropped PvP entirely after having it explained to him that games that mix the two don't do so well.

There are any number of 'lies' you can get out of my initial (admittedly ignorant) pitch.

so I'm a liar now? (based on that pitch) or was I just inexperienced?

If Wargfoot shows THIS:



And says it represents the state of the game, and then many years later he shows THIS as the state of the game.



I would say that Wargfoot was a fraud.

Again, I didn't follow this game but to me that drastic of a change suggests they changed the game engine (started over).

Hytale did this recently - as have many others.

That would still fall under 'learning curve', IMHO - and not fraud.   The fact it was shared, suggests a good faith effort to get this thing working.

It was shared 7 years alter AFTER a lawsuit.   Come on man.  You are not being honest here. The earlier videos were when he was soliciting money.  The last one is when no money is being solicited. 

I told you I didn't follow this one closely.
I don't even know the result of the lawsuit.

Wargfoot

Kyleran said:
.... it was basically a waste of $7 MM or so dollars of other people's money.

If you're gonna waste money tho...

Wargfoot

Kyleran said:

As history shows, almost all crowd funded MMOs that have long been in development have had one or more restarts or major refactorings as their original designs didn't hold up.

Although not crowd funded, I worry a bit about Hytale.

I have to think the people over at Minecraft are keeping an eye on Hytale and they'd be idiots to not pump out major updates to keep Minecraft competitive - at least by the time Hytale releases.

They recently added significantly to Minecrafts vertical axis and the Caves & Cliffs update really made nice changes to the underground.

If Hytale holds off another two years a great many of its advantages may be lost.

The point being: Those refactorings can cost ya.

Brainy

Slapshot1188 said:

So yes, in your case there are investments in drugs that go nowhere. But there are also companies like Theranos which I think more closely resemble what happened here.

Well the one major difference is that the scam with Theranos affected powerful investors and investment banks.  These people use the government to protect their investments and make people that deceive them go to jail.  Which is what happened in the Theranos case where the CEO went to jail for misleading investors (Elizabeth Holmes).

With Kickstarter the little consumers have no power and have no protections.

People say its the consumers fault .... yet have no problem defending big investors and giving them protections.  Heck in many cases we bail them out even when the rules say not too.  Why should big investors get a pass if consumers dont.

If anything big investors should have more experience .... Oh but they do, they make sure to change the rules for anything they put their money in.  And sometimes that means changing the rules after the fact to get what they want.

Kyleran

Wargfoot said:

Kyleran said:
.... it was basically a waste of $7 MM or so dollars of other people's money.

If you're gonna waste money tho...

Yes, but then you shouldn't be surprised if people start doxxing photos of where you live and start making threats against the health of you and your family.

Not saying it's right, but few are as crazy as a gamer scorned.

Slapshot1188

Was the “lead” he repeatedly tossed under the bus Snipehunter? Or was it Vye?

Scot

Wargfoot said:

Scot said:

Wargfoot said:

Scot said:

Adamantine said:

Unfortunately, for programmers, missing the date of self set goals is pretty normal.

You always underestimate the complexity of the problem, and you are never save from having bad bugs that take ages to find and fix.

I agree, but what should happen when you never produce something playable? Do studios expect their fans to patiently wait for this seasons "amazing updates"until they are drawing their pensions, get dementia and forget they ever were fans?

I worked in pharmaceuticals for a few years.

In the creation of a new drug a company may throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the development of product only to have it fizzle out and be worth absolutely nothing.  I actually worked with a product that cost $50,000.00 a gram to produce - and in the end it turned out to be worth nothing at all.

The point is, I think throwing a ton of money at something and getting nothing in return is quite common in most businesses.   That doesn't excuse fraud, but creating a new studio from scratch to chase a MMORPG vision is about as risky a proposition as I can imagine.

You take a chance on a founder's pack with an unproven team, an unproven concept, the only assurance being a few marketing texts on a website - yeah, you're gonna get burned a few times.

I say that as the proud owner of a lifetime subscription to Fractured Online.

I don't think a CF campaign for fans is equatable with investors putting into a pharmaceutical company. For one they are investing in the company, not the project, they invested for a monetary return, not for specific drugs to come out. Also any investor knows the risks, I don't think the fans did and to this day I don't think they make it clear what the risks are. Does anyone know of any CF game that does?

My point is that frequently tons of money is thrown at a concept that ultimately fails.  The salient difference between the pharmaceutical company and a kick-started game is that the pharmaceutical company has other products that help cover any losses.

We see this in gaming, where a successful developer releases a dud, but survives because they've a catalog of profitable products.

Some guy on the internet talking about a game he wants to build (and a company, from the ground up, no less) is probably one of the riskiest things to throw money at right now.  The risks should be rather obvious.

Even a person with the purest motives and best work ethic is likely to fail on such a venture.  The person doesn't have to be a crook.

Certainly the person does not have to be a crook. But I have been on  government projects where I have seen something similar to what happens in a failed CF game. A project is launched, funding is not sustained or the money and resources were underestimated and the project does not deliver at all or barely limps over the finish line.

As the problems start to become apparent a siege mentality can set in and key figures try to give the impression the project is moving forward. What they can end up doing is wilfully misleading their departments, it is a psychosocial mindset rather than planned criminal activity.

I see that in Caspian, he even has the blame everyone but himself delusion. I realise many think this is an act, but he could genuinely believe that and believe he can still pull something out of the mess that is CoE.

Of course this is no help to those who put money into the game, they are likely to see nothing at all coming from him.

Wargfoot

Kyleran said:

Wargfoot said:

Kyleran said:
.... it was basically a waste of $7 MM or so dollars of other people's money.

If you're gonna waste money tho...

Yes, but then you shouldn't be surprised if people start doxxing photos of where you live and start making threats against the health of you and your family.

Not saying it's right, but few are as crazy as a gamer scorned.

I know it wasn't what you wrote, but what I read was: We need to crowd fund hit squads to go after bad developers.

Wargfoot

Kick Starter Funded Hitman:

Wargfoot: "So, did you get the job done?"

Hitman: "We're getting there.  Need to meet the goal of $100K though."

Wargfoot: "I thought you could get it done for $50K."

Hitman: "Right, that was the initial projection; however, once I got a good look at the job we found he has a dog, so that needs to be addressed."

Wargfoot: "Why would a dog matter?"

Hitman: "Also, I was going to use my current rifle but I want to upgrade all of that, so by the time I purchase the weapon, configure it, and take it to the range a couple of dozen times we're probably looking at needing another funding drive."

Wargfoot: "..but we can still get it done by this Holiday Season?"

Hitman: "Uh, probably not - I still haven't finished hiring the entire team yet.  The one guy I got was grossly incompetent, and he blew quite a bit of money."

Wargfoot: "Okay.. this is discouraging, if not this season then when do you think you can get the job done?"

Hitman: "I'm thinking maybe 2028, 2029 - something like that.  I hope to publish a progress update on the blog by July 2024. I'll post screenshots of the new weapons I bought."

Wargfoot: "Thanks, Chris."

olepi

Brainy said:

Slapshot1188 said:

So yes, in your case there are investments in drugs that go nowhere. But there are also companies like Theranos which I think more closely resemble what happened here.

Well the one major difference is that the scam with Theranos affected powerful investors and investment banks.  These people use the government to protect their investments and make people that deceive them go to jail.  Which is what happened in the Theranos case where the CEO went to jail for misleading investors (Elizabeth Holmes).

With Kickstarter the little consumers have no power and have no protections.

People say its the consumers fault .... yet have no problem defending big investors and giving them protections.  Heck in many cases we bail them out even when the rules say not too.  Why should big investors get a pass if consumers dont.

If anything big investors should have more experience .... Oh but they do, they make sure to change the rules for anything they put their money in.  And sometimes that means changing the rules after the fact to get what they want.

The big difference with Theranos is that their product has to be legally validated to be sold. Blood testing has rigorous standards and you have to get certified to do them. Theranos was doing blood testing and lying about the results. They eventually had only one minor test certified, but they continued to lie to the investors.

Theranos used industry standrd equipment to do the blood tests. Although they told the investors it was their own hardware, they really were using industry standard hardware, but not in the approved way. That lead to employees blowing the whistle. Nobody really knows who was hurt because of faulty blood test results.

In gaming, there is no certification required. So lying is a lot easier to get away with.

Slapshot1188

olepi said:

Brainy said:

Slapshot1188 said:

So yes, in your case there are investments in drugs that go nowhere. But there are also companies like Theranos which I think more closely resemble what happened here.

Well the one major difference is that the scam with Theranos affected powerful investors and investment banks.  These people use the government to protect their investments and make people that deceive them go to jail.  Which is what happened in the Theranos case where the CEO went to jail for misleading investors (Elizabeth Holmes).

With Kickstarter the little consumers have no power and have no protections.

People say its the consumers fault .... yet have no problem defending big investors and giving them protections.  Heck in many cases we bail them out even when the rules say not too.  Why should big investors get a pass if consumers dont.

If anything big investors should have more experience .... Oh but they do, they make sure to change the rules for anything they put their money in.  And sometimes that means changing the rules after the fact to get what they want.

The big difference with Theranos is that their product has to be legally validated to be sold. Blood testing has rigorous standards and you have to get certified to do them. Theranos was doing blood testing and lying about the results. They eventually had only one minor test certified, but they continued to lie to the investors.

Theranos used industry standrd equipment to do the blood tests. Although they told the investors it was their own hardware, they really were using industry standard hardware, but not in the approved way. That lead to employees blowing the whistle. Nobody really knows who was hurt because of faulty blood test results.

In gaming, there is no certification required. So lying is a lot easier to get away with.

To me it's about falsely representing progress and reality.  IMHO both companies built a facade that portrayed a quite different version of reality. While I also believe that in both cases the people knowingly made comments that they knew were not fully true, but maybe contained just enough truth to be believed.

olepi

Slapshot1188 said:

olepi said:

Brainy said:

Slapshot1188 said:

So yes, in your case there are investments in drugs that go nowhere. But there are also companies like Theranos which I think more closely resemble what happened here.

Well the one major difference is that the scam with Theranos affected powerful investors and investment banks.  These people use the government to protect their investments and make people that deceive them go to jail.  Which is what happened in the Theranos case where the CEO went to jail for misleading investors (Elizabeth Holmes).

With Kickstarter the little consumers have no power and have no protections.

People say its the consumers fault .... yet have no problem defending big investors and giving them protections.  Heck in many cases we bail them out even when the rules say not too.  Why should big investors get a pass if consumers dont.

If anything big investors should have more experience .... Oh but they do, they make sure to change the rules for anything they put their money in.  And sometimes that means changing the rules after the fact to get what they want.

The big difference with Theranos is that their product has to be legally validated to be sold. Blood testing has rigorous standards and you have to get certified to do them. Theranos was doing blood testing and lying about the results. They eventually had only one minor test certified, but they continued to lie to the investors.

Theranos used industry standrd equipment to do the blood tests. Although they told the investors it was their own hardware, they really were using industry standard hardware, but not in the approved way. That lead to employees blowing the whistle. Nobody really knows who was hurt because of faulty blood test results.

In gaming, there is no certification required. So lying is a lot easier to get away with.

To me it's about falsely representing progress and reality.  IMHO both companies built a facade that portrayed a quite different version of reality. While I also believe that in both cases the people knowingly made comments that they knew were not fully true, but maybe contained just enough truth to be believed.

We had a case like this. We did a chip that came out late, and did not perform anywhere close to what we had claimed it would. It could not be sold. The shareholders sued for damages due to the mis-information. Fortunately for me, I had avoided that project like the plague, so when the lawyers came around to gather information, I had nothing.

But that wasn't a crime. Misleading investors isn't a crime usually. One startup I was in had gotten millions from a state educational retirement fund just weeks before we ran out of money and closed down. Again, no crime.

I think Theranos went over the line by actually doing blood tests with uncertified equpment, and lying about it and even hiding it from investors who came to visit. Doing those tests was a crime.

90% of high-tech startups fail, and there is almost never any criminal charges and rarely even lawsuits.

Kyleran

olepi said:

Slapshot1188 said:

olepi said:

Brainy said:

Slapshot1188 said:

So yes, in your case there are investments in drugs that go nowhere. But there are also companies like Theranos which I think more closely resemble what happened here.

Well the one major difference is that the scam with Theranos affected powerful investors and investment banks.  These people use the government to protect their investments and make people that deceive them go to jail.  Which is what happened in the Theranos case where the CEO went to jail for misleading investors (Elizabeth Holmes).

With Kickstarter the little consumers have no power and have no protections.

People say its the consumers fault .... yet have no problem defending big investors and giving them protections.  Heck in many cases we bail them out even when the rules say not too.  Why should big investors get a pass if consumers dont.

If anything big investors should have more experience .... Oh but they do, they make sure to change the rules for anything they put their money in.  And sometimes that means changing the rules after the fact to get what they want.

The big difference with Theranos is that their product has to be legally validated to be sold. Blood testing has rigorous standards and you have to get certified to do them. Theranos was doing blood testing and lying about the results. They eventually had only one minor test certified, but they continued to lie to the investors.

Theranos used industry standrd equipment to do the blood tests. Although they told the investors it was their own hardware, they really were using industry standard hardware, but not in the approved way. That lead to employees blowing the whistle. Nobody really knows who was hurt because of faulty blood test results.

In gaming, there is no certification required. So lying is a lot easier to get away with.

To me it's about falsely representing progress and reality.  IMHO both companies built a facade that portrayed a quite different version of reality. While I also believe that in both cases the people knowingly made comments that they knew were not fully true, but maybe contained just enough truth to be believed.

We had a case like this. We did a chip that came out late, and did not perform anywhere close to what we had claimed it would. It could not be sold. The shareholders sued for damages due to the mis-information. Fortunately for me, I had avoided that project like the plague, so when the lawyers came around to gather information, I had nothing.

But that wasn't a crime. Misleading investors isn't a crime usually. One startup I was in had gotten millions from a state educational retirement fund just weeks before we ran out of money and closed down. Again, no crime.

I think Theranos went over the line by actually doing blood tests with uncertified equpment, and lying about it and even hiding it from investors who came to visit. Doing those tests was a crime.

90% of high-tech startups fail, and there is almost never any criminal charges and rarely even lawsuits.

Actually, lying to investors is in fact a crime, especially in a financial situation

https://www.keglawyers.com/securities-fraud

Your scenario is a much more gray area. Trying to do something new, like inventing anti-gravity and failing isn't a crime, unless it can be proven that you knew from the start it was totally impossible yet told investors you had a sure fire, secret technology that could overcome the laws of physics when you actually didn't.

Jeremy's effort was more along the lines of the latter.

But hey, crowd funding isn't investing, more like donations or retail sales so protections are as great.