@Lokero... This! I couldn't agree more. Some point soon I hope..
Quote "Seriously though, these conversations would be a lot more interesting if they'd ever finally just get something out there for people to actually see. It's all just tires spinning in mud until then... as amusing as it is to watch the back-and-forth.
Hopefully, at some point, there will actually be some type of gameplay footage or something, at least."
Anyhow.. as fun as this trip down NDA lane has been...
How about that cash shop? Any guesses about what will be sold next?
I'm going to suggest a festive outfit that merges the two sides:
Mystic Slappy's Hazy Harbinger Robes of Hope and Prophecy
Seriously though, these conversations would be a lot more interesting if they'd ever finally just get something out there for people to actually see. It's all just tires spinning in mud until then... as amusing as it is to watch the back-and-forth.
Hopefully, at some point, there will actually be some type of gameplay footage or something, at least.
Yeah... my CoE posting is waaaaay down. Apathy is not a good sign.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Here's the thing: I don't assume the game needs to be built. That's not a binary choice, you're creating one because you want this game to be made. Since it's binary in your mind, there appears to be no room for the idea that not all ideas pitched turn into actual products.
When you include that third option, you can then acknowledge that just because a practice works to garner funds, it doesn't necessarily mean it's an equitable and non-manipulative way to garner those funds. The ends do not justify any and all means.
If you went into this hoping it would get made and contributing your money, you had to (or should have) realize(d) that the game may not actually be attractive enough to bring to market. Your (or anyone else) backing it does not make it a market imperative that this development is completed. It certainly doesn't absolve SBS of any responsibility for the way they generate those funds from backers. If you see pushback from folks about selling powerful titles and items, you should accept that the pushback is actually a direct result of extreme funding efforts by SBS and may, in and of itself, cripple long-term efforts to complete the game.
No it is not a market imperative and I have never claimed that it is.
It doesn't need to be equitable and their cash-shop is not more manipulative than any other. It is a game industry standard after all. I don't like cash-shops but if that is the only way to make the game then so be it. I don't think any rational person can expect them to give up at this point.
Anyhow.. as fun as this trip down NDA lane has been...
How about that cash shop? Any guesses about what will be sold next?
Unique silk underwear. Not sure what the character models look like but I assume they have standard white loincloth things? Coloured undies for £10 a pop.
Anyhow.. as fun as this trip down NDA lane has been...
How about that cash shop? Any guesses about what will be sold next?
Unique silk underwear. Not sure what the character models look like but I assume they have standard white loincloth things? Coloured undies for £10 a pop.
Well they sold ChainMail bikini's already so that's not a huge stretch... And Valentine's Day is not too far away.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Here's the thing: I don't assume the game needs to be built. That's not a binary choice, you're creating one because you want this game to be made. Since it's binary in your mind, there appears to be no room for the idea that not all ideas pitched turn into actual products.
When you include that third option, you can then acknowledge that just because a practice works to garner funds, it doesn't necessarily mean it's an equitable and non-manipulative way to garner those funds. The ends do not justify any and all means.
If you went into this hoping it would get made and contributing your money, you had to (or should have) realize(d) that the game may not actually be attractive enough to bring to market. Your (or anyone else) backing it does not make it a market imperative that this development is completed. It certainly doesn't absolve SBS of any responsibility for the way they generate those funds from backers. If you see pushback from folks about selling powerful titles and items, you should accept that the pushback is actually a direct result of extreme funding efforts by SBS and may, in and of itself, cripple long-term efforts to complete the game.
No it is not a market imperative and I have never claimed that it is.
It doesn't need to be equitable and their cash-shop is not more manipulative than any other. It is a game industry standard after all. I don't like cash-shops but if that is the only way to make the game then so be it. I don't think any rational person can expect them to give up at this point.
Sunk cost fallacies are dangerous things.
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
That's irrelevant since SBS isn't an investor. They are not making an investment decision, neither are any of the backers. That is the whole point of a Kickstarter.
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
That's irrelevant since SBS isn't an investor. They are not making an investment decision, neither are any of the backers. That is the whole point of a Kickstarter.
Absolutely. An investor would be competent enough at judging the merits of the project pitched to know he should keep his wallet closed on this one. Specifically at this point.
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
That's irrelevant since SBS isn't an investor. They are not making an investment decision, neither are any of the backers. That is the whole point of a Kickstarter.
Absolutely. An investor would be competent enough at judging the merits of the project pitched to know he should keep his wallet closed on this one. Specifically at this point.
There is a reason that Caspien could not get an investor/publisher despite his promising that he would and that the burden of future funding would not fall on the players.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
That's irrelevant since SBS isn't an investor. They are not making an investment decision, neither are any of the backers. That is the whole point of a Kickstarter.
Absolutely. An investor would be competent enough at judging the merits of the project pitched to know he should keep his wallet closed on this one. Specifically at this point.
There is a reason that Caspien could not get an investor/publisher despite his promising that he would and that the burden of future funding would not fall on the players.
It sounds incredibly harsh, and it is, but that's because we've seen them fall behind while simultaneously cutting large swathes of promised work.
Cutting overall product + failing to make self-selected deadlines, even after cutting out parts of the overall product = not a good bet.
My remaining question about CoE and its legacy is this. When does not attracting an investor signal that a project should not be continued?
Projects aren't guaranteed to come to fruition, and a large part of that has to do with financing. When the money doesn't come forward, is it viable to shift the monetary responsibilities to crowdfunding sources? After financial people, who make a living by investing and are pretty good at judging a project in its infancy, say that a project isn't worth them investing in it, when does a developer accept that their idea isn't good enough?
More importantly, is there an ethical aspect to crowdfunding that is lacking? (Along with regulations that come with traditional financial investments). As it stands now, the crowdfunding movement seems to lack any ethical standards. Developers allow players to donate without any tangible financial protection, leaving the process open to sketchy and near-criminal activities. Individuals are being asking to step in for the financial backers, without the protection, rights, and perhaps the knowledge of the professionals. They only qualification is that the individuals may have money.
To me, it seems that developers that are rejected by the traditional financial routes need to accept that 'no means no' (to borrow a quote). Ignoring the opinion of professional financiers and trying to continue anyway on the backs of potential customers is one of the shadiest forms of business, in my opinion.
Will future projects follow the CoE/SBS route?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I think that the entire system would be better served as a publisher to consumer relationship, rather than developer to consumer.
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. I think publishers using crowdfunding as market research might end up actually working better than giving devs a blank canvas to paint whatever idea they can dream up to get folks to open their wallets.
For example: the dev pitches a potentially risky idea to the pub, the pub then runs a crowdfunding campaign aimed at gauging whether the risky idea would attract potential customers. If a threshold is met that makes the publisher comfortable (laid out at the beginning of the campaign), money is collected from the backers and the publisher uses that as part of the funding of the project (along with whatever agreed amount of investment they themselves will provide to devs), the backers can get something for early support, but the publisher still retains the directive control over the dev.
It still satisfies the desire for gamers to have input on what ideas are taken up by development studios, while retaining the publisher relationship that assesses the viability of the project.
If the pub pulls the plug, backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs via assets or remaining capital because the consumers weren't part of that publisher's decision to pull further support.
I think that the entire system would be better served as a publisher to consumer relationship, rather than developer to consumer.
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. I think publishers using crowdfunding as market research might end up actually working better than giving devs a blank canvas to paint whatever idea they can dream up to get folks to open their wallets.
For example: the dev pitches a potentially risky idea to the pub, the pub then runs a crowdfunding campaign aimed at gauging whether the risky idea would attract potential customers. If a threshold is met that makes the publisher comfortable (laid out at the beginning of the campaign), money is collected from the backers and the publisher uses that as part of the funding of the project (along with whatever agreed amount of investment they themselves will provide to devs), the backers can get something for early support, but the publisher still retains the directive control over the dev.
It still satisfies the desire for gamers to have input on what ideas are taken up by development studios, while retaining the publisher relationship that assesses the viability of the project.
If the pub pulls the plug, backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs via assets or remaining capital because the consumers weren't part of that publisher's decision to pull further support.
Very interesting concept
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. .........
backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs
Lol, yeah... I think I see a flaw in the logic here
Haha I get your point. That's the trade off for investors getting initial cash from backers; remember, they're getting a cash in hand picture of market willingness to purchase said product.
Considering the backers then have zero oversight power on the project using their money, it seems fair that if the publisher unilaterally pulls the plug, backers should get their money back first if possible.
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. .........
backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs
Lol, yeah... I think I see a flaw in the logic here
Haha I get your point. That's the trade off for investors getting initial cash from backers; remember, they're getting a cash in hand picture of market willingness to purchase said product.
Considering the backers then have zero oversight power on the project using their money, it seems fair that if the publisher unilaterally pulls the plug, backers should get their money back first if possible.
Backers should assume their money has all been spent up front and never expect any to ever be returned regardless what happens.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. .........
backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs
Lol, yeah... I think I see a flaw in the logic here
Haha I get your point. That's the trade off for investors getting initial cash from backers; remember, they're getting a cash in hand picture of market willingness to purchase said product.
Considering the backers then have zero oversight power on the project using their money, it seems fair that if the publisher unilaterally pulls the plug, backers should get their money back first if possible.
Backers should assume their money has all been spent up front and never expect any to ever be returned regardless what happens.
That's my thought, lost money until I get any goods delivered
Comments
Quote "Seriously though, these conversations would be a lot more interesting if they'd ever finally just get something out there for people to actually see. It's all just tires spinning in mud until then... as amusing as it is to watch the back-and-forth.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
It doesn't need to be equitable and their cash-shop is not more manipulative than any other. It is a game industry standard after all. I don't like cash-shops but if that is the only way to make the game then so be it. I don't think any rational person can expect them to give up at this point.
And Valentine's Day is not too far away.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Do we really believe any competent investor would continue funding a project that's already cancelled multiple parts of the project and still hasn't been able to even get a proof of concept put together as this long?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Cutting overall product + failing to make self-selected deadlines, even after cutting out parts of the overall product = not a good bet.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
A publisher's biggest concern is getting their investment returned, then profit. I think publishers using crowdfunding as market research might end up actually working better than giving devs a blank canvas to paint whatever idea they can dream up to get folks to open their wallets.
For example: the dev pitches a potentially risky idea to the pub, the pub then runs a crowdfunding campaign aimed at gauging whether the risky idea would attract potential customers. If a threshold is met that makes the publisher comfortable (laid out at the beginning of the campaign), money is collected from the backers and the publisher uses that as part of the funding of the project (along with whatever agreed amount of investment they themselves will provide to devs), the backers can get something for early support, but the publisher still retains the directive control over the dev.
It still satisfies the desire for gamers to have input on what ideas are taken up by development studios, while retaining the publisher relationship that assesses the viability of the project.
If the pub pulls the plug, backers are prioritized in getting their investment back before the pub tries to recoup any costs via assets or remaining capital because the consumers weren't part of that publisher's decision to pull further support.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Considering the backers then have zero oversight power on the project using their money, it seems fair that if the publisher unilaterally pulls the plug, backers should get their money back first if possible.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018