Broken Age Needs More Money

[Lightknight]

Two chapters, brilliant. They made the game that they could afford to make off the money we gave them and will use that to fund a sequel to it.

I honestly expected something like this but two chapters is an eloquent design since backers already bought the game so this is just getting revenue during the dev cycle. Smart smart smart.

 

[crazyarms33]

Great, here we go. A great opportunity for internet inhabitants to criticize someone as a fashion statement. Nothing quite like a bit of cheap mud-slinging to make you feel witty. Ignore the fact that a small developer has stretched themselves a bit thin simply because they're thinking big, and trying to deliver a better game. Never mind that the whole situation is actually being handled quite tastefully, and the details are freely given to you in a transparent manner. Turn a blind eye to the reasonable explanations behind this mistake, and overlook the fact that things are in fact being rectified here. No, don't bother taking any of this into consideration. Make your seething, incendiary comments because they make you cool. Keep talking crap, because it builds your reputation. Disparage and belittle others for the purpose of self-aggrandizement. Enjoy it.

He had 800% more money than he requested for the game! If you cannot manage to deliver your promised product, which is clearly what people wanted, with a budget 8 times the size of what you thought you would need people SHOULD be mad! You're right it's great to want to make an improved game, but it is a very shitty thing to do when it means people essentially funded one half of the product they were promised. Essentially you will be paying for the same game twice and that's ok? Sorry, I don't see it that way.

 

[Entitled]

So... what's the problem? He's coming out with the first half off the game so we can play something and they can start reaping revenue sooner. We all still get the game and we get part of it sooner.

I don't understand the hate.

Are you people getting dumber or just louder?

Except the people that backed the Kickstarter weren't paying for the expanded game. They were paying for the game proposed by the kickstarter.

Well, they are all getting the game proposed on Kickstarter by January, and if they think that expanding the $3 million plan is a betrayal, thn they aren't forced to download the free second part update...

 

[crazyarms33]

I love how everyone is acting like this is the first example of any piece of entertainment going over-budget in the history of mankind. Shit happens sometimes. I mean what's the alternative. I mean would you rather see a statement coming from double fine saying "Well we ended up going over budget so no one's getting the game at all." Honestly this is a much better alternative.

I disagree. He promised "Product X" and needed X amount of dollars to make it happen. He received eight(8!) times what he requested, and as a result of his poor planning, he is releasing "Product Y" to people who donated in expectation of "Product X." Essentially he didn't meet his end of the agreement. What he should have done is made "Product X" as it was originally pitched and then added on to it with his extra money, if he had any.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Instead they try and justify their money grubbing... "our development team is bigger than just the guys working on Broken Age, they need to work on a game too". So you want us to pay for it? Again? No thanks, I'd rather be sensible and see if anything good came of the first one before I throw more cash at promises and promo artwork.

Just like Sony Entertainment said to Naughty Dog when they pitched "The Last of Us." Except they fucking didn't and we are all better off for that. I honestly don't care about most of this either way due to my apathy towards adventure games, but your argument here makes absolutely no sense. If they come up with another game to pitch so that they don't have to cut members of their team, as long as that game is worth the effort, then that isn't bad financial planning, that is in fact very good financial planning, as that means they will maintain a talented staff and keep them all busy while increasing their production. It also means they aren't keeping all their eggs in one basket.

 

[Entitled]

He had 800% more money than he requested for the game! If you cannot manage to deliver your promised product, which is clearly what people wanted, with a budget 8 times the size of what you thought you would need people SHOULD be mad! You're right it's great to want to make an improved game, but it is a very shitty thing to do when it means people essentially funded one half of the product they were promised.

Now which is it? $

400k was the scope of the "promised product"? You say, that people were promised a $400k game put together in 6 months, and he was only supposed to finish that?

At the same time, should be mad that they are only getting a $3 million game in January? And then a second, equally long story in July?

It seems to me that you are angry both about the game being too big, and it being too small.

Essentially you will be paying for the same game twice and that's ok?

Yes, because in this special case, "twice" only means "once". RTFA.

 

[Frostbite3789]

For shame. 8 x your needed budget, poops out only half a game. Sounds like some classic development hell mismanagement. The rest of the product will be a free release but this still smells.

Actually this has nothing to do with that, this is just crappy journalism. It seems Andy made everyone think that they are only gonna get half a game, when really they are gonna get the entire game but in two parts. (Backers get both parts without paying extra, and so does everyone else. They just have to pay it in two rather than in one)

Hence nothing is wrong here, if they had not said a peep, nobody would have complained. But the internet is able to take the most clearest of explanations on what seems, at least to me to be a perfectly win/win solution, and mutate it into dodgy fraud.

You're assuming it'll get funded. As a Double Fine fan who didn't fund the Kickstarter, I'm also not buying into half the game in the hope that other people follow suit and buy in as well. I'm sorry, I'm paying for a finished product, I expect a finished product. This isn't a mod or fan project. This is a retail product.

 

[tautologico]

Great, here we go. A great opportunity for internet inhabitants to criticize someone as a fashion statement. Nothing quite like a bit of cheap mud-slinging to make you feel witty. Ignore the fact that a small developer has stretched themselves a bit thin simply because they're thinking big, and trying to deliver a better game. Never mind that the whole situation is actually being handled quite tastefully, and the details are freely given to you in a transparent manner. Turn a blind eye to the reasonable explanations behind this mistake, and overlook the fact that things are in fact being rectified here. No, don't bother taking any of this into consideration. Make your seething, incendiary comments because they make you cool. Keep talking crap, because it builds your reputation. Disparage and belittle others for the purpose of self-aggrandizement. Enjoy it.

He had 800% more money than he requested for the game! If you cannot manage to deliver your promised product, which is clearly what people wanted, with a budget 8 times the size of what you thought you would need people SHOULD be mad! You're right it's great to want to make an improved game, but it is a very shitty thing to do when it means people essentially funded one half of the product they were promised. Essentially you will be paying for the same game twice and that's ok? Sorry, I don't see it that way.

First, no one will pay for the same game twice. Backers will receive the full game.

Second, the game now in development is much bigger than it would be with the original 300k amount (100k was for the documentary). I'm sure if they had released a 300k flash game and pocketed the rest of the money a lot of people would be pissed.

 

[Neonit]

if everything was 100% transparent, someone would notice that "Oi! We will run out of money soon!".

Now, I do agree that their money management skills are lacking, but I think that's pretty much what just happened. They realized they didn't actually have enough money to make what they wanted to make, and then discussed whether they should cut the game down, or just release the first half of it to grab a little extra non-backer revenue they could use to finish the second half how they wanted to. This is their decision.

Fair enough. They should have rough estimates of costs before doing anything, but yeah, shit happens - at least it will not turn out to be a disaster, and they had the guts to admit the problem before it escalated. At least thats how it looks to me.

 

[imagremlin]

I'm trying to remain positive, but the bottom line is

* we may never see the second half of the game *

They need to convince more people -people who did not back in the first place- to buy the unfinished game, I don't think there are too many of those.

That would horrible for two reasons:

1) We paid, a lot, and would be getting half of what was promised
2) Adventure games would be definitely dead - stick a fork in it. No matter how passionate, or how many of us Adventure Game types are still around, we can't keep the genre alive. That saddens me.

I already made a comment about this. I think the amount of money they got was their undoing, he could no longer make a small, humble game. Everyone expected something big, but costs blow up, quickly, when the scope increases. I figure that a game that is 8 times bigger is at least 20 times more expensive to make.

I'm reminded of how uneasy Ron Gilbert appears on the first documentaries, maybe he was right.

 

[Excludos]

if everything was 100% transparent, someone would notice that "Oi! We will run out of money soon!".

Now, I do agree that their money management skills are lacking, but I think that's pretty much what just happened. They realized they didn't actually have enough money to make what they wanted to make, and then discussed whether they should cut the game down, or just release the first half of it to grab a little extra non-backer revenue they could use to finish the second half how they wanted to. This is their decision.

Fair enough. They should have rough estimates of costs before doing anything, but yeah, shit happens - at least it will not turn out to be a disaster, and they had the guts to admit the problem before it escalated. At least thats how it looks to me.

They did have a rough estimate. In fact they had a very down to earth good budget set up. The project ended up costing, both in time and money, way more than they projected. Thus, actions needed to be taken. I don't see how they could have been more transparent. They've told us every step of the line what they've been doing with the 2pp documentary episode that comes out about once a month. They've talked about the money trouble before, and have solved it other ways (humble bundle and release of brutal legend on steam).

How would you have gone forward if you where them? Copy paste the entire budget, staff salary, and workload onto kickstarter so your regular Joe could try to analyze it?

 

[Formica Archonis]

Well, I said when I backed it that I'd either get a game or a trainwreck, so looks like it's time to get out the popcorn and actually start watching those documentaryish updates.

 

[crazyarms33]

Now which is it? $

400k was the scope of the "promised product"? You say, that people were promised a $400k game put together in 6 months, and he was only supposed to finish that?

Yes, because that is how businesses work! If I agree to have a project for you ready in X amount of months, within a budget of X dollars and I do not, then I have failed my business partner and they have every right to be mad! The anger comes from what people were TOLD they were going to get, and now they are not getting that. Regardless of if the developer wants a "better game", he still has to meet his ORIGINAL OBLIGATIONS in order to not look like he is screwing people over.

Or phrased another way: It would be the same as if you asked for a loan of $100 from a friend to fund a business and then he gave you $800 because he believed in it so much. You said you would pay him back in 6 months with a productive business and some unique stock options, and you two were agreed. Now at the end of the 6 months he comes to you and says "Oh hey, by the way. I can't pay you back yet. I only have half of the business set up, but its totally ok because I am gonna get you some super fresh new money in a second instance, that I will make from selling the unique stock options I told you about in the incomplete company!" The problem here is that your friend hasn't met what he and you agreed to, and now in order to fulfill his promise he has to market an incomplete(probably the wrong word here but it goes with the example) product and hope that people will buy in because if they don't, he will be stuck holding the bag. Which is the same thing as saying you are stuck holding the bag. And the bag is full of lies and broken promises.

At the same time, should be mad that they are only getting a $3 million game in January? And then a second, equally long story in July?

You only get the second story if the first game sells well. Seems to me that if he promised one story, that's all he had to do. This is simple business. No need to go super over the top. Just meet your obligations and do it the maximum of your ability. Don't promise one thing and in this case, deliver 2 separate things. As the article says, "We will use the funds from the sales of Game 1 to make Game 2."

Yes, because in this special case, "twice" only means "once". RTFA.

I hope I covered this or I misunderstood it so maybe you can clarify. If you weren't a backer you have to buy game 1. Then when game 2 is released, you have to buy it as well. That's two purchases if my understanding is correct. It's not a package deal for nonbackers in that when they buy Game 1 they automatically get Game 2 right? Or wrong?

 

[crazyarms33]

First, no one will pay for the same game twice. Backers will receive the full game.

Second, the game now in development is much bigger than it would be with the original 300k amount (100k was for the documentary). I'm sure if they had released a 300k flash game and pocketed the rest of the money a lot of people would be pissed.

There is no second part of the game if the first part doesn't sell well. It is entirely possible that the game could flop and people could be left wanting. Essentially if you really want the full game and it doesn't sell the backers are screwed because they only got half of what they were promised. And nonbackers are equally screwed in that they bought "Game 1" for lack of better words, will they have to buy "Game 2" to have the full experience of a product that originally promised 1 game? If so, then yes. They are paying twice. Does that make more sense?

 

[Sutter Cane]

I love how everyone is acting like this is the first example of any piece of entertainment going over-budget in the history of mankind. Shit happens sometimes. I mean what's the alternative. I mean would you rather see a statement coming from double fine saying "Well we ended up going over budget so no one's getting the game at all." Honestly this is a much better alternative.

I disagree. He promised "Product X" and needed X amount of dollars to make it happen. He received eight(8!) times what he requested, and as a result of his poor planning, he is releasing "Product Y" to people who donated in expectation of "Product X." Essentially he didn't meet his end of the agreement. What he should have done is made "Product X" as it was originally pitched and then added on to it with his extra money, if he had any.

and Schafer made it clear during the kickstarter that if they'd reach certain goals above the initial kickstarter goal he'd add in more features. They reached those goals. The more expensive game is the promised product, and even if you disagree there, honestly is there a better alternative for Double Fine right now. I mean hypothetically you find yourself in a situation where you've already sunk millions into the game and you're going overbudget, what course of action do you take? Or to put it in even a different way, if double fine had been able to raise the money to finish the game on their own without having to split it up, would anyone really care that much? If they had been able to release the game without making a big deal about it going overbudget, even though they had to secure additional funding, would people be freaking out like they are now? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[WarpZone]

Moar like Broke Age amirite?

I kid, I kid. Let's hope this is a big success so that when the time comes to fund Psychonauts 2: What You Actually Wanted Tim To Make, even moar donation money comes in.

Seriously, think about it. Episodic Telltale-style Psychonauts. One, maybe two additional brains per Episode. Where's the kickstarter for THAT!?

 

[crazyarms33]

and Schafer made it clear during the kickstarter that if they'd reach certain goals above the initial kickstarter goal he'd add in more features. They reached those goals. The more expensive game is the promised product, and even if you disagree there, honestly is there a better alternative for Double Fine right now. I mean hypothetically you find yourself in a situation where you've already sunk millions into the game and you're going overbudget, what course of action do you take? Or to put it in even a different way, if double fine had been able to raise the money to finish the game on their own without having to split it up, would anyone really care that much? If they had been able to release the game without making a big deal about it going overbudget, even though they had to secure additional funding, would people be freaking out like they are now? Somehow I doubt it.

I covered this in my original post. He is free to add features AFTER he had gotten accomplished the minimum he wanted. The bottom line to me is he promised to deliver this game at a certain budget, received massively more than he requested and as a result he overextended without completing the original game people expected. I am all for him wanting to make a better game, but NOT at the expense of possibly never seeing part 2, since the development of that is dependent on the sales of part 1. If part one is a masterpiece but doesn't sell well, will part two come out? And if it does will people want it after part 1, knowing that part 2 won't be as good? It would be like having a super nice steak for lunch and then having mcdonalds for dinner instead of having the decent chicken that had been promised for both meals.

 

[Neonit]

snip

They did have a rough estimate. In fact they had a very down to earth good budget set up. The project ended up costing, both in time and money, way more than they projected. Thus, actions needed to be taken. I don't see how they could have been more transparent. They've told us every step of the line what they've been doing with the 2pp documentary episode that comes out about once a month. They've talked about the money trouble before, and have solved it other ways (humble bundle and release of brutal legend on steam).

How would you have gone forward if you where them? Copy paste the entire budget, staff salary, and workload onto kickstarter so your regular Joe could try to analyze it?

If they had an estimate, and they have gone over the estimate, that can mean one of two things: either the estimate was wrong, or they didnt keep to their expenses.

So somewhere along the line they have made a mistake. I just hope they have learned from this mistake.

I do not know what i would do, i do not have the intern knowledge of their budget. Even if i did, i probably would know it.
Thats where experience comes into play, and those people are experienced.