Balance of Power Creator Says Kickstarter Used To Be Cool

Riobux

New member
Apr 15, 2009
1,955
0
0
$150,000 to fund a game you can just pick up for free and with lousy benefits to paying particular amounts (i.e. a shopping bag, a pin, and maybe some in game recognition). Yes, Kickstarter has a semi-charitable compartment to it, but you have to keep in mind you have to market the game still. Thousands of people put Kickstarters up, what makes his project any more interesting that other ones? You could argue that it's because it's an educational game, but part of me wonders what this achieves that Fate Of The World doesn't. Yes, Fate Of The World has a price tag, but if you want an environmental serious game, is it possible to pick a better game?

Seriously, Kickstarter was the wrong venue for a game that's purely educational, has low production values and is a very niche game. He would of probably been better off trying to seek funding from one of the various educational or environmental groups about (governmental or charitable).
 

Racecarlock

New member
Jul 10, 2010
2,497
0
0
From the kickstarter

"The game is only one turn long: you set your taxes and subsidies and then turn the simulation loose to calculate the effects of your policies over the course of the next 60 years. It then presents you with your score, which will usually be negative. For each of the 80 factors, you get a bar graph showing how that factor rose and fell over the course of the 60-year period. By comparing all those bar graphs, you can figure out how everything fits together and figure out the best set of tax and subsidy policies."

Wow. Sounds about as exciting as having an actual job as a lower level accountant.
 

DoomyMcDoom

New member
Jul 4, 2008
1,411
0
0
I find that though it is pointless to point this out, but aside from this guy's lack of market understanding, and annoying screen presence, he is also a guy who "effectively retired in 1992"
comes back 20 fucking years later, and tries to get people who the majority were just starting to walk when he left, to pay him to remake a game that was practically the definition of "boring guilt trip" before they even said their first word, and every one else, either knew about the game it was based off of, and didn't give a shit because it's a dumb idea, or felt sorry for him and threw him a few dollars...

Because being blatantly ignorant and thinking you're smart for it, DOESN'T PAY, especially when you're trying to sell something to the kind of people who actively peruse kickstarter to look for projects, since those people generally have a brain, and know what they want, and don't want some preachy patronizing moron from a bygone age, trying to turn everyone who already knows shit is bad on this fuckball of a planet is going to go to shit because "WE RUIN EVERYTHING", into some kind of guilt driven hippie.

Thing is, that doesn't solve problems, and hell it might cause some of the more impressionable/stupid members of our community to buy a prius or something and do even more damage to the environment with the processing of chemicals and the overal crap fuel mileage compared to competitive DIESEL FUELLED CARS...

Think of it, if he succeeded, he might have destroyed this little insignificant ball of waste FASTER!

Seriously though... In every single possible way I can express "I'm glad he failed" I'm glad he failed.
 

Michael O'Hair

New member
Jul 29, 2010
79
0
0
Eppy (Bored) said:
So, what exactly about Kickstarter has changed, if anything? I don't see how anything about Kickstarter is different other than its larger audience. It was always a gamble; this just looks like a gamble that Chris Crawford lost.

Also, was Kickstarter ever 'Semi-Charitable?' I don't know its history that well but I thought the 'no charities' thing was always there.
Kickstarter was defined as "a crowd funding website for creative projects." Currently, the projects with the highest funds raised are games, and some kind of wristwatch. Now Kickstarter seems to be a method of pre-ordering games that haven't been completely built yet. Asking for money to fund something that doesn't exist yet seems charitable enough, or at least an investment of some kind, and not every investment generates a return; the people funding these games should pay particular attention to that.

FelixG said:
Some ambitious projects like Planetary Annihilation get funded like crazy. The difference? PA sounds FUN!
Fun is far too subjective a word to describe the final objective of games. We must kill fun for the sake of preserving and advancing games, or we must kill games for the sake of preserving and advancing fun. Many games are not fun, especially competitive games where there is at least one winner (who many experience "fun" during the game) and at least one loser (who most likely does not experience "fun" at the end of the game).

Back in the day, I found the pursuit of mastery to be fun; learning the ins and outs of a system to determine all the ways to pull it apart, exploit the rules and weaknesses of the opponent, and win (occasionally). Now, it seems, that "fun" is described merely as sensory stimulation; bells and whistles and explosions and blinking lights. Kids are so easily entertained these days...

Fiend Dragon said:
Seriously watching that video makes me want to punch this guy in the face, its so ANNOYING
I suggest you play Street Fighter... you obviously have some issues with aggression to work out.

Falterfire said:
I think his issue was that he didn't market it well enough. One of the reasons the Double Fine Adventure did so well was that word about it spread very quickly to everybody who was interested. If nobody who cares knows it's happening, it's not gonna hit its target.
I doubt running advertisements would have somehow improved the situation. One of the key elements of games funded via Kickstarter is that many of them really are just games that have already been made, with a few changes here and there to make them sound unique or thoughtful. Another key element is that many are projects by developers whose fame faded long, long ago. And for good reason.

Nightmare99 said:
That promotional video is the worst. I went from not knowing who he was to wanting to stomp on his face inside the first minute.
You are in need of more Super Mario Bros... or need to refrain from Super Mario Bros. for a while. Not exactly sure...

Krantos said:
I'm sorry Mr. Crawford, but I think the problem is your expectations.

Also, I believe you value your work a lot higher than other people would.

*ahem*
"people could assist worthy creative projects that might not make it commercially, but still ought to be done"

That right there is your problem. No one else thinks this about your project. Welcome to real life.

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure we even needed this article. It's essentially a grown man whining because no one else likes his idea. But he can't admit it's a poor idea, so he instead blames the system.

Awesome. Some body get this man a can of "Wake the hell up."
Games have changed.
It's not about critical thinking, or the quest for mastery.
It's not even about immersion, social commentary, or the exploration of complex subjects.
It's an endless series of duplicated experiences,
developed by individuals who dream of building the exact same games they enjoyed years ago.
Games, and their vast consumption of money and time,
have become a rational, well-oiled business transaction.
Games... have changed.

cursedseishi said:
My god that was the most boring piece of crap I've ever had to force myself to read on a website for a game. Plus those rewards? Completely uninspired.
It's no longer enough to contribute to a creative project... people demand REWARDS. That kind of attitude keeps the exploitative methods used by game publishers of squeezing every penny from their consumers alive; pre-order bonuses, DLC, etc. It's not enough just to play a game anymore, you need to get achievements and trophies just for turning it on...

Falterfire said:
Oh god. I didn't watch the video until people mentioned it here. 40 seconds in and I want to beat him. No I've never heard of you. I wasn't even BORN when your games came out. So instead of telling me what you did 20 years ago, tell me why you deserve my money NOW. No, don't tell me why you're doing this, tell me what it is I'm paying you to do and why it's worthwhile.
Kids these days are so violent... maybe it's the video games they play...

Judgement101 said:
Kickstarter is going to be the death of innovation. People like what is familiar so they will throw money at remakes of old games, minecraft variations, and other non-imaginative games. I know this may not be true but based on the games that are currently being largely donated to, it seems like this may end up becoming the truth.
Kickstarter certainly isn't improving innovation, but it won't kill it. It's difficult to look at a project on Kickstarter and say "this has never been done before." If a Kickstarter project is fully funded and sells well, you can bet that the next interation or project from that same developer will be sold by EA or Activision or another large publishing establishment.

Formica Archonis said:
If you'll excuse me, I'll be over here throwing money at the Giana Sisters Kickstarter [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/project-giana/project-giana]. Seriously, playable demo? Demos = goodness.
The European clone of Super Mario Bros? Maybe Kickstarter WILL kill innovation in games...

thethird0611 said:
Honestly, I think that he is pouting that his project didnt make it, but it seems to me Kickstarter is just a way for gamers to become EA. Why?

Well we are given the chance to green light projects with the service. Look back at alot of games being made. Sequels, games similar to ones we already enjoy, or the such.

Double Fine Adventures
Wasteland 2
Shadowrun sequel
Ouya (Android pretty much)
Penny Arcade's ad's

The top 4 are the only 'games' that broke a million. Sequels or 'safe' investments. I will say Ouya is a good creative risk though. But look at that, from the list of when it was 'sensationalized', 4 out of 5 of the big funded projects are sequels or 'safe' investments. Im not saying its a bad thing, but there are so many people out there that are calling out publishers/developers for only making sequels, and look at what was funded.
Ouya? The Android gaming platform? Unfurl sails and chart a course for the Sea of Rampant Piracy!

Too many game players want play the same games over and over again.
Chris Hecker's Presentation on "The Dysfunctional Three-Way" in Games [http://chrishecker.com/The_Dysfunctional_Three-Way]

... and I think that's enough for now.
 

cervie

New member
Apr 14, 2009
12
0
0
Merciful Zeus that video was PAINFUL to watch! Guy needs to quite bitching and make a better video to promote himself...