A big name in the industry wanting to make a successor to one of the insutry's big names...and he is resorting to public funding?
It doesn't compute. If he wanted to make a low budget MMO he should have no problem securing funding, and the freedom to make the game he wanted to make.
But instead he is choosing to take advantage of the public, using the Camelot name to secure free capital he doesnt need to pay back. The whole thing seems off to me.
Just consider: If you use borrowed money, you have incentive to succeed. If you use free money, then it doesnt matter, you dont have to pay anyone back.
Kickstarter for a startup company of unknown developers is one thing. For a big name person developing a big name game though...It doesnt add up.
First Mark is a big name in game development history, but his new company is not. He is putting money into CU if the KS goal is hit. He is using KS to judge player interest. Think of it as a straw poll. If the public proves they want the game 60% or more of the total money will come from Mark and his other investors. If KS goal doesn't get reached then it will not be made because the public had shown there isn't enough interest.
Trion was able to get MAJOR funding for a startup company.
Its a backwards way of deciding to make a game or not. Of course there is massive demand for a successor to DAoC. He doesn't need kickstarter to determine that. Its if people are willing (or gullibe enough) to donate some risk free, free capital to him. If he cant get enough handouts, he wont make the game.
Its a major red flag. if he *really* wanted to make CU, he would make CU.
I like your reasoning. Because he is using Kickstarter when he gets the money for the game he is just going to go out and make a super shitty game? Come on...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
Originally posted by MortisRex Originally posted by craftseeker Originally posted by MortisRex Originally posted by craftseeker Originally posted by MortisRex Originally posted by craftseeker Originally posted by MortisRex Originally posted by Burntvet Originally posted by MortisRex Originally posted by Jojin As time goes on everyone will start to capitalize on kickstarter. There is no reason why they shouldn't, from a business perspective.It is a source of funding which has no legal obligation associted for delivering a product nor paying back.Look at it like the next evolution of pre-purchase, where money is made availalble at the start of development and all the risk is on those who have a desire to have a game of their dreams created.Personally, I want the independent developers to have personal financial risk involved, so they are more catious and devoted. I am not really comfortable with the fact, they can fail and move on with only a reputation hit.
I specifically quoted in the post right above yours the Kickstarter TOS. You are lying, period. Anyone that has read Kickstarter's TOS knows for a fact that the developers have a legal obligation to deliver the product or return the money. Instead of spreading more lies and misinformation, why don't you take 5 minutes out of your day and read Kickstarter's TO?. You really have no ideal how clueless you sound of the whole process to those of us who have actually taken a little time to do some reading.
That "legal obligation" bit is totally unenforcible. If a developer uses up the KS donated money, and it is still not enough to get the game released? Then what? Or if the KS money is used for a tech demo but the company can not get a publisher/investor? Hmmm? I'll tell you what: Nothing happens. No refund or need to give one. So long as the company that took the KS money did not take the money home in bags, there is nothing to say. Frankly to me, that is the most likely scenario for a KS scam: A company raises $1 mil, spends a year or two paying themselves salaries, and then says "Sorry, ran out of money, can't release, kthxbye." So long as they "tried" to make a game, I doubt you could even sue.
I gave the exact quote from the TOS specifically contradicting what he said. You want to argue the enforcability of Terms of Service and breach of contract? You are arguing legal hypotheticals that apply to basically any contract. How is any contract enforable when in breach? I didn't write the TOS, Kickstarter did. If you have a problem with it, take it up with them. Since they've not been shut down by the SEC and I've not heard of a great deal of fraud, I'm going to not assume that people are thieving scum that just ignore contractual obligation. I think people deserve that consideration. You evidently do not. I trust Mark Jacobs will live up to his contractual obligation under the Kickstarter TOS. I certainly live up to every TOS I agree to, but I have a lot of intergrity and don't agree to contracts without reading them.
Lots of normal contracts are largely unenforcable in the case of bankruptcy. It happens all the time. Also the particular form of words used by Kickstarter is not really a contract more of bailment. In which case players who send funds would rank below unsecured creditors in the event of bankruptcy. Which means unless all unsecured creditors got paid out in full the players would not recieve any money back at all.
You sound an awfull lot like the angry depositors in Credit Cooperatives or small Banks that go bust. Where is my money they scream, and then they get upset when they get paid pennies in the dollar.
In funding a kickstarter project you are giving someone money to spend to make something. In the event of failure do not be surprised if the money has in fact been spent.
What are you even talking about? How do I sound like an angry depositor? I'm not investing in this game. My only contention is that attacking a person's integrity without a legitimate reason is a pretty shitty thing to do. I pointed out the TOS which is in direct contradiction to what the guy said, and then you guys trying to weasel and play word games. Look, the TOS says if the game doesn't get made he is obligated to refund your money. Come up with whatever magical hypotheticals you want so you can feel good about being right, but what you're saying and what the TOS says are 2 different things and you just want to put people down to feel better about yourselves instead of acknolwedge that the TOS says exactly what I've been saying all along. I guess this is the internet and people feel safe to level any accusations and implications at people wether there is any evidence to support it or not (hence your characterization of me being an "angry creditor" when I'm not even buying the game, mighty astute analysis of the situation you have going on there) and will ignore the actual truth and evidence when it's shoved right in their face. I can't really explain having decency and respect for others when so many people are intent on feeding their own egos by tearing others down.
I will say it again for you ::
"In funding a kickstarter project you are giving someone money to spend to make something. In the event of failure do not be surprised if the money has in fact been spent."
Having an obligation to do something and having the ability to do so are two seperate things.
It is you who are ignoring reality, you insist on relying on an internet statement of intent (the TOS) over the rational analysis of what is happening.
Now if the project is succesfull the whole point is moot, the developer will have delivered.
Look, you're clearly intent upon being wrong and you're don't strike me as the type that really cares about learning or facts. If people want to know the truth they can read Kickstarter's TOS. Either you're really uneducated about the topic at hand or your twisting the meaning of the term TOS in a self-serving way as "an internet statement of intent", which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You are absolutely wrong. A TOS is not an "internet statement of intent". Once again, I have no ideal what you're trying to communicate here. Here is the actual definition of TOS for those interested in reality and facts. This definition has absolutely nothing remotely resembling anything about intenet letters of intent no matter how you contort the phrasing.
terms of service
The rules a person or organization must observe in order to use a service. Generally legally binding unless it violates federal or local laws, the terms of service agreement (TOS) may change from time to time, and it is the responsibility of the service provider to notify its users of any such change. A Web site that provides only information or sells a product often does not have terms of service. However, Internet service providers (ISPs) and all Web sites that store personal data for a user do; in particular, social networking sites, online auctions and financial transaction sites. See acceptable use policy.
LOL very funny.
People here in the past of flogging a dead horse, I will add another one for you: you can not get blood out of a stone.
If there is no money left, there is no money left. If there is some money left it will be divided first to secured creditors, next to prefered creditors (like the IRS, or holders of prefered debentures) then what is left (if any) will be divided between the unsecured creditors including kickstarter donors. There is no "magic pudding" here. Nor is the kickstarter funding kept in an account unused and available for reimbursement.
You donate it to assist in product development. It gets spent. The only way you get it back is if the developer decides not to procede before it is spent. Only if there is a case of fraud and you persue the assets of the principals in a legal action would the terms of service come into the argument. My expectation in that case would be legal costs high, assets recovered low, amount reimbursed to donors negligible.
(I must state at this point that I believe that the developer in this case is legitimate and fully intends to work towards producing a game and that I further believe that no fraud is intended. The above is included solely for completness.)
If you like the idea of this game and would like to donate to assist in its development do so. However do not expect the return of the money in any case. If the development succedes you will recieve the benefits indicated by the developer. IF the development fails that will be the end of the matter.
You are wrong. Period. Get it through your head. What part of "If the developer fails to complete the project, he must return the funds" do you just not get? Sure, he can file for protection under bankruptcy laws, just like he would have to do with any other investors. You are really out of your league here. Do you understand the concept of "legal precedent"? Do you understand tort law? Do you understand that tthere have been many cases that have made it to court (see Facebook, Dell, Sony, Overstock, etc) and legal precedent has set that a TOS is a legally binding contract? Get this through your head. You are not "donating" money for anything. You are providing capital in exchange for goods. If the goods are not provided, then there are legal remedies to obtain them. No matter how muich hard evidence I've provided you with, you're like a child who has stuck his fingers into their ears so they can refuse to hear something they don't want to hear.
What part of: if there is no money there is no money do you not get?
You can cite large companies that continue to trade all you like. They are not relevant in this case: they secure there funding in other ways.
Kickstarter themselves say that:
"Project creators keep 100% ownership of their work. Kickstarter cannot be used to offer financial returns or equity"
and in respect of refunds:
"We hope that backers will consider using this provision only in cases where they feel that a creator has not made a good faith effort to complete the project and fulfill."
finally:
"If the problems are severe enough that the creator can't fulfill their project, creators need to find a resolution. Steps could include offering refunds, detailing exactly how funds were used, and other actions to satisfy backers."
In other words if they spent the money on the project, then they spent the money legitamately and there is no responsibility to pay it back.
Which is what I said, although not in such detail a bunch of posts ago. So long as there is no fraud, no game actually need be released and there is no legal requirement to issue a refund of a donation, should the be money be spent and the company fold. LLCs do not exist by accident.
Having been motivated into doing some looking around about this project I wonder how City State Entertainment LLC went from being:
"a brand-focused studio creating intellectual property for the mobile, tablet and social networking spaces."
press release published on Business wire 30 Sept 2011.
and a partner of GigaMedia who said on the 22 Nov 2011:
“We are proud to be working with him and thrilled to have him and his newly formed team develop new games and brands with us. By expanding our product offerings to games for Internet-enabled mobile devices, we are positioning ourselves to benefit from the ongoing shift from PCs to mobile computing and the continued strong popularity and growth of social gaming."
To working on his own and about to start a Kickstarter funding project for a (presumably) PC based MMO focussed on RvR PvP.
Also who was the Singapore based partner (hence the city state name) and why was that partnership disolved? (GigaMedia is based in Taipei)
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by craftseeker
Having been motivated into doing some looking around about this project I wonder how City State Entertainment LLC went from being:
"a brand-focused studio creating intellectual property for the mobile, tablet and social networking spaces."
press release published on Business wire 30 Sept 2011.
and a partner of GigaMedia who said on the 22 Nov 2011:
“We are proud to be working with him and thrilled to have him and his newly formed team develop new games and brands with us. By expanding our product offerings to games for Internet-enabled mobile devices, we are positioning ourselves to benefit from the ongoing shift from PCs to mobile computing and the continued strong popularity and growth of social gaming."
To working on his own and about to start a Kickstarter funding project for a (presumably) PC based MMO focussed on RvR PvP.
Also who was the Singapore based partner (hence the city state name) and why was that partnership disolved? (GigaMedia is based in Taipei)
Wow, seriously? So I've stayed out of this thread because frankly, it's more than a bit insulting to me at times. If you had truly done your research you would have also found out:
The CSE name came from both the fact that I was talking to GM after my NCA ran its course and that when the deal was taking too long to complete (we were going to be based in Singapore) I started the studio with my own money and that I liked the name so I kept it. Here's a link to one story (http://www.forbes.com/sites/traceyjohn/2011/09/30/former-mythic-ceo-mark-jacobs-starts-city-state-entertainment/) and other places. There has also been speculation that I chose that name in reference to EA's statements regarding treating its studios as separate "city states" in the past.
As to GigaMedia, the deal between us is still in place but that was for mobile games and smaller budget projects. I spoke to them last month actually about where we stand in terms of mobile games like Oz. Please don't say things like "that partnership was dissolved" when it wasn't.
The amount of incorrect information in this thread and innuendo directed at me is, as I said, really insulting especially when it comes to my use of Kickstarter which has been represented as either a) unusual for someone like me; b) a scam; c) a desperate plot, etc. since only people who can't raise money use KS, etc.
Now, the problem with that is that KS and crowd funding has been used by studios such as Obsidian (Project Eternity raised 3.9M and Obsidian's resume of games is outstanding), Bones (3.4M from a well regarded miniature company), Double Fine (3.4M Tim Schafer both has a great resume and top selling games now), Wasteland 2 (2.9M, owned by Brain Fargo, founder of Interplay & Digital Chocolate), Star Industry (Chris Roberts got 2.1M through KS, 4,1M through website and his resume is outstanding), Pathfinder Online (Goblinworks), Steve Jackson Games (Ogre Special Edition 900K and Steve has been in the industry longer than me and SJG has been selling games since the 1800s I believe ) and many more. All you need to do is go to the Kickstarer page and use Games and Most Funded buttons to comfirm this. Many of these companies have significant ongoing royalty streams, founders who have bought and sold more companies than me, companies whose games have sold a lot more than me in aggregate and yet this thread seems to make it seem like because I'm using Kickstarter, well, you know the rest.
Anyway, I would really urge anyone who is attacking me personally or using innuendo to do so to at least get their facts straight.
Mark
P.S. As to why we are focusing on the MMO right now, that has also been covered in interviews and postings. Nothing mysterious, vague or otherwise.
Having been motivated into doing some looking around about this project I wonder how City State Entertainment LLC went from being:
"a brand-focused studio creating intellectual property for the mobile, tablet and social networking spaces."
press release published on Business wire 30 Sept 2011.
and a partner of GigaMedia who said on the 22 Nov 2011:
“We are proud to be working with him and thrilled to have him and his newly formed team develop new games and brands with us. By expanding our product offerings to games for Internet-enabled mobile devices, we are positioning ourselves to benefit from the ongoing shift from PCs to mobile computing and the continued strong popularity and growth of social gaming."
To working on his own and about to start a Kickstarter funding project for a (presumably) PC based MMO focussed on RvR PvP.
Also who was the Singapore based partner (hence the city state name) and why was that partnership disolved? (GigaMedia is based in Taipei)
Wow, seriously? So I've stayed out of this thread because frankly, it's more than a bit insulting to me at times. If you had truly done your research you would have also found out:
The CSE name came from both the fact that I was talking to GM after my NCA ran its course and that when the deal was taking too long to complete (we were going to be based in Singapore) so I started the studio with my own money and that I liked the name so I kept it. Here's a link to one story (http://www.forbes.com/sites/traceyjohn/2011/09/30/former-mythic-ceo-mark-jacobs-starts-city-state-entertainment/) and other places. There has also been speculation that I chose that name in reference to EA's statements regarding treating its studios as separate "city states" in the past.
As to GigaMedia, the deal between us is still in place but that was for mobile games and smaller budget projects. I spoke to them last month actually about where we stand in terms of mobile games like Oz. Please don't say things like "that partnership was dissolved" when it wasn't.
The amount of incorrect information in this thread and innuendo directed at me is, as I said, really insulting especially when it comes to my use of Kickstarter which has been represented as either a) unusual for someone like me; b) a scam; c) a desperate plot, etc. since only people who can't raise money use KS, etc.
Now, the problem with that is that KS and crowd funding has been used by studios such as Obsidian (Project Eternity raised ,3.9M), Bones (3.4M), Double Fine (3.4M), Wasteland 2 (2.9M), Star Industry (2.1M through KS, 4,1M through website), nXile (Wasteland, owned by Brain Fargo, founder of Interplay & Digital Chocolate) , Pathfinder Online (Goblinworks), Steve Jackson Games (Ogre Special Edition 900K) and many more. All you need to do is go to the Kickstarer page and use Games and Most Funded buttons to comfirm this. Many of these companies have significant ongoing royalty streams, founders who have bought and sold more companies than me, companies whose games have sold a lot more than me in aggregate and yet this thread seems to make it seem like because I'm using Kickstarter, well, you know the rest.
Anyway, I would really urge anyone who is attacking me personally or using innuendo to do so to at least get their facts straight.
Mark
P.S. As to why we are focusing on the MMO right now, that has also been covered in interviews and postings. Nothing mysterious, vague or otherwise.
Thanks for the prompt reply. Glad to have that cleared up. I apologise for any offense I have given to you. I tried to distance you and your firm from the debate I was having about the "refund issue" but I know I strayed across the line a couple of times. I have tried to state that I feel you are genuine in your desire to develop this game and will spend the money appropriately.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by craftseeker
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by craftseeker
Having been motivated into doing some looking around about this project I wonder how City State Entertainment LLC went from being:
"a brand-focused studio creating intellectual property for the mobile, tablet and social networking spaces."
press release published on Business wire 30 Sept 2011.
and a partner of GigaMedia who said on the 22 Nov 2011:
“We are proud to be working with him and thrilled to have him and his newly formed team develop new games and brands with us. By expanding our product offerings to games for Internet-enabled mobile devices, we are positioning ourselves to benefit from the ongoing shift from PCs to mobile computing and the continued strong popularity and growth of social gaming."
To working on his own and about to start a Kickstarter funding project for a (presumably) PC based MMO focussed on RvR PvP.
Also who was the Singapore based partner (hence the city state name) and why was that partnership disolved? (GigaMedia is based in Taipei)
Wow, seriously? So I've stayed out of this thread because frankly, it's more than a bit insulting to me at times. If you had truly done your research you would have also found out:
The CSE name came from both the fact that I was talking to GM after my NCA ran its course and that when the deal was taking too long to complete (we were going to be based in Singapore) so I started the studio with my own money and that I liked the name so I kept it. Here's a link to one story (http://www.forbes.com/sites/traceyjohn/2011/09/30/former-mythic-ceo-mark-jacobs-starts-city-state-entertainment/) and other places. There has also been speculation that I chose that name in reference to EA's statements regarding treating its studios as separate "city states" in the past.
As to GigaMedia, the deal between us is still in place but that was for mobile games and smaller budget projects. I spoke to them last month actually about where we stand in terms of mobile games like Oz. Please don't say things like "that partnership was dissolved" when it wasn't.
The amount of incorrect information in this thread and innuendo directed at me is, as I said, really insulting especially when it comes to my use of Kickstarter which has been represented as either a) unusual for someone like me; b) a scam; c) a desperate plot, etc. since only people who can't raise money use KS, etc.
Now, the problem with that is that KS and crowd funding has been used by studios such as Obsidian (Project Eternity raised ,3.9M), Bones (3.4M), Double Fine (3.4M), Wasteland 2 (2.9M), Star Industry (2.1M through KS, 4,1M through website), nXile (Wasteland, owned by Brain Fargo, founder of Interplay & Digital Chocolate) , Pathfinder Online (Goblinworks), Steve Jackson Games (Ogre Special Edition 900K) and many more. All you need to do is go to the Kickstarer page and use Games and Most Funded buttons to comfirm this. Many of these companies have significant ongoing royalty streams, founders who have bought and sold more companies than me, companies whose games have sold a lot more than me in aggregate and yet this thread seems to make it seem like because I'm using Kickstarter, well, you know the rest.
Anyway, I would really urge anyone who is attacking me personally or using innuendo to do so to at least get their facts straight.
Mark
P.S. As to why we are focusing on the MMO right now, that has also been covered in interviews and postings. Nothing mysterious, vague or otherwise.
Thanks for the prompt reply. Glad to have that cleared up. I apologise for any offense I have given to you. I tried to distance you and your firm from the debate I was having about the "refund issue" but I know I strayed across the line a couple of times. I have tried to state that I feel you are genuine in your desire to develop this game and will spend the money appropriately.
Apology cheerfully and gratefully accepted but all you had to do was ask me, I would have been happy to tell you.
In truth, I'm not angry at you but I am a little dismayed at some of the things people have said here, especially when it comes to the use of KS or in regards to raising VC. Whether people like WAR or not, my investors did really, really well from the sale of Mythic (which is why one of the two of them are backing us) and the other one (TA Associates) specializes in shareholder liquidity deals. A SLD is when they buy stock of existing companies with a significant revenue stream (when they bought into Mythic, we were making about $20M+ per year) and then get their exit when the company is sold again or goes public. Well, I'm certainly not making 20M+ anymore because if I was, I'd fund the game totally on my own as I did with Mythic and Warhammer (before EA bought us) I have turned down some VC interest/offers because what they want to see is a different path than the one I want to walk down as well as issues with control/valuation/etc. It really is as simple as that.
Also, I've said before that I'll be putting in 2M of my own money into this project because I believe in it and, BTW, that 2M is in addition to what I've put into CSE already. I'm willing to put my neck and my money on the line to make this happen but I need the Kickstarter to fund to prove to the other investors (and to myself) that I'm not just this grumpy old game guy who thinks he has a good idea but nobody wants to play the game but a few other old school gamers. Our KS will be the proof of interest from our target market.
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Arya Stark
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by Slappy1
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
Yep, we peaked just after Shrouded Isles launched and while we declined like every other MMORPG, it wasn't till WoW hit that our numbers really went down a lot. I can talk about those numbers since I did so in the past before EA bought us.
As to UO vs. DAoC numbers, they are actually quite similar. I can't give you the actual numbers since those are confidential to EA but you might be able to find stuff on the web from when other people have spilled the beans. UO has been running a few years longer but its numbers were in decline when we launched. Then our numbers went down, etc.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
Yep, we peaked just after Shrouded Isles launched and while we declined like every other MMORPG, it wasn't till WoW hit that our numbers really went down a lot. I can talk about those numbers since I did so in the past before EA bought us.
As to UO vs. DAoC numbers, they are actually quite similar. I can't give you the actual numbers since those are confidential to EA but you might be able to find stuff on the web from when other people have spilled the beans. UO has been running a few years longer but its numbers were in decline when we launched. Then our numbers went down, etc.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
.... and its very nice to see someone developing a niche game. Not my niche unfortunately but nice to see none the less.
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by craftseeker
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Slappy1
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
Yep, we peaked just after Shrouded Isles launched and while we declined like every other MMORPG, it wasn't till WoW hit that our numbers really went down a lot. I can talk about those numbers since I did so in the past before EA bought us.
As to UO vs. DAoC numbers, they are actually quite similar. I can't give you the actual numbers since those are confidential to EA but you might be able to find stuff on the web from when other people have spilled the beans. UO has been running a few years longer but its numbers were in decline when we launched. Then our numbers went down, etc.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
.... and its very nice to see someone developing a niche game. Not my niche unfortunately but nice to see none the less.
Thanks! I'm happy with it being a niche game, it really is quite freeing not having to worry about how the heck to keep tons of people happy and playing for years and years. It is also nice not to have to work on a game for 5 years and then see the market/industry change around them.
Anyway, glad we straightened everything out and I truly do appreciate your apology. As I know full well, that's not an easy thing to do, ever.
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
DAoC did cost $2.5mil to make, 250k subs at ~$14/month each is $3.5mil per month (it's way more complicated than that but I'm just trying to make a point). How is that not a big success?
edit: also don't forget the box sales, expansions etc.
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
In todays market,don't you feel that being in a niche crowd will seriously hurt the CU potential?I mean just look at TSW,yes it's a great game and has a loyal following,but it's potential is limited by it's subs/funding.
Game's seem to be held back from full potential nowaday's because of lack of subs/funding.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
DAoC did cost $2.5mil to make, 250k subs at ~$14/month each is $3.5mil per month (it's way more complicated than that but I'm just trying to make a point). How is that not a big success?
edit: also don't forget the box sales, expansions etc.
I should have elaborated more,it was a big success at that time,but when you look at number's today it's not overly impressive.If those number's are impressive today,then I guess TSW is very successful also.Yet many don't see TSW as being successful.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
DAoC did cost $2.5mil to make, 250k subs at ~$14/month each is $3.5mil per month (it's way more complicated than that but I'm just trying to make a point). How is that not a big success?
edit: also don't forget the box sales, expansions etc.
I should have elaborated more,it was a big success at that time,but when you look at number's today it's not overly impressive.If those number's are impressive today,then I guess TSW is very successful also.Yet many don't see TSW as being successful.
There are different types of success. For example D3 was surely financially successful (>12 mil sales) but in the eyes of the players it was a failure.
DAoC was both financially successful and exceeded the players' expectations. If you look back at daoc 10 years later and compare it to WoW then yes you might think it wasn't successful, but then again no MMO is.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by Slappy1
Originally posted by MarkJacobs
Originally posted by Slappy1
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
In todays market,don't you feel that being in a niche crowd will seriously hurt the CU potential?I mean just look at TSW,yes it's a great game and has a loyal following,but it's potential is limited by it's subs/funding.
Game's seem to be held back from full potential nowaday's because of lack of subs/funding.
Absolutely! I couldn't agree more. I know it sounds really counter-intuitive for a guy to say "Yep, we know the path we are going down won't lead riches and gold for everyone!" but that's why I'm making this game and not *that* game (insert favorite high budget MMORPG). If's not that I don't know how to make a bigger budget game but for me personally, there's too much downside risk for example:
1) "AAA" MMORPGs are now on a miniumum of a 5 year development cycle. Dark Age of Camelot was developed in 18 months, Warhammer Online in a tad over 3 years. SWToR weighed in at either 6 years or 5 years depending on how you calculate when their development timeline really started. TESO has been in development for either 4 or 5 years since Matt joined Bethesda in 2007 and I know from talking to him then, he didn't start TESO day one.
2) "AAA" MMORPGs budgets now top 100M on the low end simply because of the team size and the development timelines.
3) "AAA" MMORPGs need teams of 300+ to complete, thus the big budgets.
All of the above would require me to be more of the business guy, head of the studio, etc. than hands on guy that I am now. I can do the business side just fine as is indicated by Mythic's successful sale but I don't like running big studios. It means too many layers of management, too much politics and frankly, too many issues. I like doing what I'm doing now at CSE and believe it or not, I really like doing this too. I've been talking to players this way since the 1980s (GOD, NOW I FEEL REALLY OLD) and I missed it. Yeah, I've gotten grumpy at times, saracastic at times and there are a few things I'd take back but here it is Saturday night and instead of being home with my family, I'm sitting in the office talking to you and others, including a whole bunch of people for whom the name Mark Jacobs is a curse word at times.
That's me all over a guy who truly loves to make games more than anything else in the world and, if we could all just communicate without nastiness would spend so much of his time simply talking to people about game ideas, theory, etc.
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
In todays market,don't you feel that being in a niche crowd will seriously hurt the CU potential?I mean just look at TSW,yes it's a great game and has a loyal following,but it's potential is limited by it's subs/funding.
Game's seem to be held back from full potential nowaday's because of lack of subs/funding.
Absolutely! I couldn't agree more. I know it sounds really counter-intuitive for a guy to say "Yep, we know the path we are going down won't lead riches and gold for everyone!" but that's why I'm making this game and not *that* game (insert favorite high budget MMORPG). If's not that I don't know how to make a bigger budget game but for me personally, there's too much downside risk for example:
1) "AAA" MMORPGs are now on a miniumum of a 5 year development cycle. Dark Age of Camelot was developed in 18 months, Warhammer Online in a tad over 3 years. SWToR weighed in at either 6 years or 5 years depending on how you calculate when their development timeline really started. TESO has been in development for either 4 or 5 years since Matt joined Bethesda in 2007 and I know from talking to him then, he didn't start TESO day one.
2) "AAA" MMORPGs budgets now top 100M on the low end simply because of the team size and the development timelines.
3) "AAA" MMORPGs need teams of 300+ to complete, thus the big budgets.
All of the above would require me to be more of the business guy, head of the studio, etc. than hands on guy that I am now. I can do the business side just fine as is indicated by Mythic's successful sale but I don't like running big studios. It means too many layers of management, too much politics and frankly, too many issues. I like doing what I'm doing now at CSE and believe it or not, I really like doing this too. I've been talking to players this way since the 1980s (GOD, NOW I FEEL REALLY OLD) and I missed it. Yeah, I've gotten grumpy at times, saracastic at times and there are a few things I'd take back but here it is Saturday night and instead of being home with my family, I'm sitting in the office talking to you and others, including a whole bunch of people for whom the name Mark Jacobs is a curse word at times.
That's me all over a guy who truly loves to make games more than anything else in the world and, if we could all just communicate without nastiness would spend so much of his time simply talking to people about game ideas, theory, etc.
Thank you for the response.I'm going to keep an eye on you and this game.Maybe the way for me to observe the game is like what GGG has done with PoE.Smaller audience,but exceed expectation's,thus a true winner
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Why would anyone invest in him? He was beating on this drum back with WAR, which they spent a crapton of money on and was an epic failure. Why would any investors trust him that he will do it right this time?
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by boxsnd
Originally posted by Slappy1
Originally posted by boxsnd
Originally posted by Slappy1
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
DAoC did cost $2.5mil to make, 250k subs at ~$14/month each is $3.5mil per month (it's way more complicated than that but I'm just trying to make a point). How is that not a big success?
edit: also don't forget the box sales, expansions etc.
I should have elaborated more,it was a big success at that time,but when you look at number's today it's not overly impressive.If those number's are impressive today,then I guess TSW is very successful also.Yet many don't see TSW as being successful.
There are different types of success. For example D3 was surely financially successful (>12 mil sales) but in the eyes of the players it was a failure.
DAoC was both financially successful and exceeded the players' expectations. If you look back at daoc 10 years later and compare it to WoW then yes you might think it wasn't successful, but then again no MMO is.
It's always relative I guess. If you looked at the dollar sales for Gone With the Wind, you'd wonder why everyone called it the most successful movie ever. OTOH, if you looked at the number of ticket sales relative to the total population of the US at the time (and the era it launched in), you'd go OMG! Kind of the same for games like EQ, UO, etc. Relative to the total number of people playing MMOs, Dark Age was a smash hit. Once WoW hit the market, the yardstick changed. Here's something to ponder though:
Dark Age of Camelot - Development budget: $2.5M, marketing budget: 660K.Total initial development expenses about 3.2M with incidentials not counting some leases. Total topline revenue earned by game prior to 2006 (EA acquisition, can't talk about numbers after it), 150M+ Our operating margins were quite high during most of its years and we earned royalties from GOA (they bore all the expenses for operating the game in Europe) so Mythic turned quite a good profit. Our first round investor (Abandon Entertainment) earned a fabulous return when we sold the company and they also got a piece of the revenue stream for a while. So, while Dark Age didn't have the numbers of WoW or EQ of course, the ROI on the game was outstanding and that counts for an awful lot especially for companies that value profit versus revenues. Of course, Dark Age is still operating today.
Originally posted by evilastro Why would anyone invest in him? He was beating on this drum back with WAR, which they spent a crapton of money on and was an epic failure. Why would any investors trust him that he will do it right this time?
"You have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie..."
MarkJacobsCEO City State EntertainmentMemberRarePosts: 649
Originally posted by evilastro Why would anyone invest in him? He was beating on this drum back with WAR, which they spent a crapton of money on and was an epic failure. Why would any investors trust him that he will do it right this time?
WAR sold over 1.2M boxes in its first quarter. It sold more boxes that since then and had high sub numbers for the first 3 months even though the numbers declined quickly once Blizzard launched its expansion. It also continued to have subscirption revenues, even today. It was anything but an epic failure especially since the cost to develop the game for EA was quite small compared to SWToR (2 years of development at EA versus 5-6). FYI, the press releases/earnings calls from EA will confirm the sales/sub numbers. I wish I could give out other numbers but EA didn't so I can't. Now, was WAR a huge success, of course not. But calling it an epic failure when most MMORPGs don't even launch and certainly, even when they do, don't sell as many box copies as WAR did really isn't fair especially when you consider the 3 year development cycle (total) and only 2 years at EA. Oh, and Mythic's team was smaller than Blizzard's when it created WoW and SWToR's team at peak so we were spending a lot less money and we had almost no VO and marketing support, so it's safe to say that WAR didn't cost anywhere near what those games cost.
In tems of investors, well, because I made both my investors happy with their returns and as per above, one of the two of them are investing with me again and the other doesn't do deals with companies until they have a significant revenue stream and BTW, we are still in touch.
At the end of the day, investors care about making a profit on their investment. My first investor (Abandon Entertainment) made a big profit (4x) when we did the deal with TA (32M). The 2nd investor also made a profit but I can't divulge the amount because EA hasn't done so yet but since I have said that TA put in 32M for about a third of the company, well, you can do some back of the envelope calculating. FYI, Abandon also got a big check when EA bought us. So, their 4X went up, a lot.
That's why someone would invest in me if I wanted to do something other than a niche game, which I don't and since I don't, well, even though they would like the fact that I made both my investors happy, most wouldn't want to back the game but the one that is, well, they like the long-term plan of building this MMORPG to last and are satisfied with a smaller but longer tail to the revenue.
Look, as I've said before, WAR was both not the game I wanted it to be and it certainly wasn't the success EA wanted it to be but saying it was an epic failure or implying that investors wouldn't touch me, is just plain wrong especially in light of what I did for my investors the last time, which is one of the things that really counts the most to investors, a track record. The other thing that counts is what kind of exit they can expect and since I won't create a game that could have say 500K subs or the equivalent revenue stream, well, there are other people out there who are chasing bigger dreams. I have a nice small dream, it's called CU (for now) and that's good enough for me. If it's good enough for our Kickstarter backers, well, we go into development. If we don't, then that's fine as the market has told me that there isn't enough interest in it and I'll go back another game as I should.
Night all. Heading home and to bed me thinks. It's been a long day at work. Cya.
Originally posted by evilastro Why would anyone invest in him? He was beating on this drum back with WAR, which they spent a crapton of money on and was an epic failure. Why would any investors trust him that he will do it right this time?
If this is referring to the upcoming kickstarter campaign, You are not investing in him, you are donating money to support his project, to help it come to life, not to financially profit or even get your money back. Yes there will be some rewards in terms of the game when delivered but not financial ones.
I´m always wondering why people seriously believe, that everything has to be compared to World of Warcraft. I won´t say WoW is the devil and brought nothing but evil. I played it myself several years because of social attachements. Still, not only did WoW change the MMO-market completely, its also one of the biggest success ever up to now.
Does it always have to be that big? Although I´m quite fond of chasing epic dreams, I think its important sometimes to stay realistic and modest. Whats wrong with a nichegame, that costs 5.000.000$, where you get 2.000.000$ via a kickstart, the rest from boxsales and then have - let us say - 50.000 players subscribing to the game for several years, giving you like 750.000$ per month to pay your staff, server etc and some profit? You´ll get more than enough money yourself here, allowing you to develop another game, that might succed in a similar way.
I know these numbers are very simplistic and I´m not saying, thats how I would guess it´ll happen here - but those numbers aren´t totally off the mark.
Personally, if I would have to choose to design
1) a AAA-game with five years developement, more than 100.000.000 $ production costs, where I try to cater to everyone, hyping the game and using every angle to get more customers by changing features, making it more mainsteam and gambling whether or not I get the big success to justify all this effort and money
OR
2) a nichegame with two years developement, not more than 10.000.000 $ production costs, where I stick to my targetgroup, get them into the boat as soon as possible, keep my initial game principles, deliver a bugfree working and fun game some 50.000-100.000 gladly subscribe for several years and then maybe doing that once or twice more with other ideas, thereby supporting 2-3 super working nichegames, all of them satisfying the players while being profitable...
Well, thats a no-brainer for me. I´ll choose option 2 over anything anytime, no matter what I´m offered. Thats why I support Mark and his team all the way. Its just the right thing to do and in my opinion how it should be everywhere.
The MMO-community is so diverse, it would be more satisfying for everyone, if more companies would focus on a real targetgroup, making a good longliving and profitable game here instead of a game "for everyone" that has no chance of really becoming what everyone is looking for.
I´m always wondering why people seriously believe, that everything has to be compared to World of Warcraft. I won´t say WoW is the devil and brought nothing but evil. I played it myself several years because of social attachements. Still, not only did WoW change the MMO-market completely, its also one of the biggest success ever up to now.
Does it always have to be that big? Although I´m quite fond of chasing epic dreams, I think its important sometimes to stay realistic and modest. Whats wrong with a nichegame, that costs 5.000.000$, where you get 2.000.000$ via a kickstart, the rest from boxsales and then have - let us say - 50.000 players subscribing to the game for several years, giving you like 750.000$ per month to pay your staff, server etc and some profit? You´ll get more than enough money yourself here, allowing you to develop another game, that might succed in a similar way.
I know these numbers are very simplistic and I´m not saying, thats how I would guess it´ll happen here - but those numbers aren´t totally off the mark.
Personally, if I would have to choose to design
1) a AAA-game with five years developement, more than 100.000.000 $ production costs, where I try to cater to everyone, hyping the game and using every angle to get more customers by changing features, making it more mainsteam and gambling whether or not I get the big success to justify all this effort and money
OR
2) a nichegame with two years developement, not more than 10.000.000 $ production costs, where I stick to my targetgroup, get them into the boat as soon as possible, keep my initial game principles, deliver a bugfree working and fun game some 50.000-100.000 gladly subscribe for several years and then maybe doing that once or twice more with other ideas, thereby supporting 2-3 super working nichegames, all of them satisfying the players while being profitable...
Well, thats a no-brainer for me. I´ll choose option 2 over anything anytime, no matter what I´m offered. Thats why I support Mark and his team all the way. Its just the right thing to do and in my opinion how it should be everywhere.
The MMO-community is so diverse, it would be more satisfying for everyone, if more companies would focus on a real targetgroup, making a good longliving and profitable game here instead of a game "for everyone" that has no chance of really becoming what everyone is looking for.
I vote niche game. For me this is not my niche and therefore not my game. But I like the principal.
2) a nichegame with two years developement, not more than 10.000.000 $ production costs, where I stick to my targetgroup, get them into the boat as soon as possible, keep my initial game principles, deliver a bugfree working and fun game some 50.000-100.000 gladly subscribe for several years and then maybe doing that once or twice more with other ideas, thereby supporting 2-3 super working nichegames, all of them satisfying the players while being profitable...
2 years/10 million is too low to reasonably expect a niche game to be pulled off well. Thats a big part of the issue with kickstarter for MMOs. You are looking for both niche AND watered down. Small world, lesser graphcs, limited races, not many armor styles...that sort of thing will cut down time and money.
2) "AAA" MMORPGs budgets now top 100M on the low end simply because of the team size and the development timelines.
3) "AAA" MMORPGs need teams of 300+ to complete, thus the big budgets.
While I think it cost more than the 50 million that gets thrown around, Trion made a AAA MMORPG for less than 100 Million and a staff around 120 people.
People look at the extreme (SWTOR) too much.
I think its mostly mismanagement on the part of games like SWTOR.
Comments
I like your reasoning. Because he is using Kickstarter when he gets the money for the game he is just going to go out and make a super shitty game? Come on...
That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!
I specifically quoted in the post right above yours the Kickstarter TOS. You are lying, period. Anyone that has read Kickstarter's TOS knows for a fact that the developers have a legal obligation to deliver the product or return the money. Instead of spreading more lies and misinformation, why don't you take 5 minutes out of your day and read Kickstarter's TO?. You really have no ideal how clueless you sound of the whole process to those of us who have actually taken a little time to do some reading.
That "legal obligation" bit is totally unenforcible. If a developer uses up the KS donated money, and it is still not enough to get the game released? Then what? Or if the KS money is used for a tech demo but the company can not get a publisher/investor? Hmmm? I'll tell you what: Nothing happens. No refund or need to give one. So long as the company that took the KS money did not take the money home in bags, there is nothing to say. Frankly to me, that is the most likely scenario for a KS scam: A company raises $1 mil, spends a year or two paying themselves salaries, and then says "Sorry, ran out of money, can't release, kthxbye." So long as they "tried" to make a game, I doubt you could even sue.I gave the exact quote from the TOS specifically contradicting what he said. You want to argue the enforcability of Terms of Service and breach of contract? You are arguing legal hypotheticals that apply to basically any contract. How is any contract enforable when in breach? I didn't write the TOS, Kickstarter did. If you have a problem with it, take it up with them. Since they've not been shut down by the SEC and I've not heard of a great deal of fraud, I'm going to not assume that people are thieving scum that just ignore contractual obligation. I think people deserve that consideration. You evidently do not. I trust Mark Jacobs will live up to his contractual obligation under the Kickstarter TOS. I certainly live up to every TOS I agree to, but I have a lot of intergrity and don't agree to contracts without reading them.
Lots of normal contracts are largely unenforcable in the case of bankruptcy. It happens all the time. Also the particular form of words used by Kickstarter is not really a contract more of bailment. In which case players who send funds would rank below unsecured creditors in the event of bankruptcy. Which means unless all unsecured creditors got paid out in full the players would not recieve any money back at all.
You sound an awfull lot like the angry depositors in Credit Cooperatives or small Banks that go bust. Where is my money they scream, and then they get upset when they get paid pennies in the dollar.
In funding a kickstarter project you are giving someone money to spend to make something. In the event of failure do not be surprised if the money has in fact been spent.
What are you even talking about? How do I sound like an angry depositor? I'm not investing in this game. My only contention is that attacking a person's integrity without a legitimate reason is a pretty shitty thing to do. I pointed out the TOS which is in direct contradiction to what the guy said, and then you guys trying to weasel and play word games. Look, the TOS says if the game doesn't get made he is obligated to refund your money. Come up with whatever magical hypotheticals you want so you can feel good about being right, but what you're saying and what the TOS says are 2 different things and you just want to put people down to feel better about yourselves instead of acknolwedge that the TOS says exactly what I've been saying all along. I guess this is the internet and people feel safe to level any accusations and implications at people wether there is any evidence to support it or not (hence your characterization of me being an "angry creditor" when I'm not even buying the game, mighty astute analysis of the situation you have going on there) and will ignore the actual truth and evidence when it's shoved right in their face. I can't really explain having decency and respect for others when so many people are intent on feeding their own egos by tearing others down.
I will say it again for you ::
"In funding a kickstarter project you are giving someone money to spend to make something. In the event of failure do not be surprised if the money has in fact been spent."
Having an obligation to do something and having the ability to do so are two seperate things.
It is you who are ignoring reality, you insist on relying on an internet statement of intent (the TOS) over the rational analysis of what is happening.
Now if the project is succesfull the whole point is moot, the developer will have delivered.
Look, you're clearly intent upon being wrong and you're don't strike me as the type that really cares about learning or facts. If people want to know the truth they can read Kickstarter's TOS. Either you're really uneducated about the topic at hand or your twisting the meaning of the term TOS in a self-serving way as "an internet statement of intent", which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You are absolutely wrong. A TOS is not an "internet statement of intent". Once again, I have no ideal what you're trying to communicate here. Here is the actual definition of TOS for those interested in reality and facts. This definition has absolutely nothing remotely resembling anything about intenet letters of intent no matter how you contort the phrasing.
terms of service
The rules a person or organization must observe in order to use a service. Generally legally binding unless it violates federal or local laws, the terms of service agreement (TOS) may change from time to time, and it is the responsibility of the service provider to notify its users of any such change. A Web site that provides only information or sells a product often does not have terms of service. However, Internet service providers (ISPs) and all Web sites that store personal data for a user do; in particular, social networking sites, online auctions and financial transaction sites. See acceptable use policy.
LOL very funny.
People here in the past of flogging a dead horse, I will add another one for you: you can not get blood out of a stone.
If there is no money left, there is no money left. If there is some money left it will be divided first to secured creditors, next to prefered creditors (like the IRS, or holders of prefered debentures) then what is left (if any) will be divided between the unsecured creditors including kickstarter donors. There is no "magic pudding" here. Nor is the kickstarter funding kept in an account unused and available for reimbursement.
You donate it to assist in product development. It gets spent. The only way you get it back is if the developer decides not to procede before it is spent. Only if there is a case of fraud and you persue the assets of the principals in a legal action would the terms of service come into the argument. My expectation in that case would be legal costs high, assets recovered low, amount reimbursed to donors negligible.
(I must state at this point that I believe that the developer in this case is legitimate and fully intends to work towards producing a game and that I further believe that no fraud is intended. The above is included solely for completness.)
If you like the idea of this game and would like to donate to assist in its development do so. However do not expect the return of the money in any case. If the development succedes you will recieve the benefits indicated by the developer. IF the development fails that will be the end of the matter.
You are wrong. Period. Get it through your head. What part of "If the developer fails to complete the project, he must return the funds" do you just not get? Sure, he can file for protection under bankruptcy laws, just like he would have to do with any other investors. You are really out of your league here. Do you understand the concept of "legal precedent"? Do you understand tort law? Do you understand that tthere have been many cases that have made it to court (see Facebook, Dell, Sony, Overstock, etc) and legal precedent has set that a TOS is a legally binding contract? Get this through your head. You are not "donating" money for anything. You are providing capital in exchange for goods. If the goods are not provided, then there are legal remedies to obtain them. No matter how muich hard evidence I've provided you with, you're like a child who has stuck his fingers into their ears so they can refuse to hear something they don't want to hear.
What part of: if there is no money there is no money do you not get?
You can cite large companies that continue to trade all you like. They are not relevant in this case: they secure there funding in other ways.
Kickstarter themselves say that:
"Project creators keep 100% ownership of their work. Kickstarter cannot be used to offer financial returns or equity"
and in respect of refunds:
"We hope that backers will consider using this provision only in cases where they feel that a creator has not made a good faith effort to complete the project and fulfill."
finally:
"If the problems are severe enough that the creator can't fulfill their project, creators need to find a resolution. Steps could include offering refunds, detailing exactly how funds were used, and other actions to satisfy backers."
In other words if they spent the money on the project, then they spent the money legitamately and there is no responsibility to pay it back.
Which is what I said, although not in such detail a bunch of posts ago.Having been motivated into doing some looking around about this project I wonder how City State Entertainment LLC went from being:
"a brand-focused studio creating intellectual property for the mobile, tablet and social networking spaces."
press release published on Business wire 30 Sept 2011.
and a partner of GigaMedia who said on the 22 Nov 2011:
“We are proud to be working with him and thrilled to have him and his newly formed team develop new games and brands with us. By expanding our product offerings to games for Internet-enabled mobile devices, we are positioning ourselves to benefit from the ongoing shift from PCs to mobile computing and the continued strong popularity and growth of social gaming."
To working on his own and about to start a Kickstarter funding project for a (presumably) PC based MMO focussed on RvR PvP.
Also who was the Singapore based partner (hence the city state name) and why was that partnership disolved? (GigaMedia is based in Taipei)
Wow, seriously? So I've stayed out of this thread because frankly, it's more than a bit insulting to me at times. If you had truly done your research you would have also found out:
The CSE name came from both the fact that I was talking to GM after my NCA ran its course and that when the deal was taking too long to complete (we were going to be based in Singapore) I started the studio with my own money and that I liked the name so I kept it. Here's a link to one story (http://www.forbes.com/sites/traceyjohn/2011/09/30/former-mythic-ceo-mark-jacobs-starts-city-state-entertainment/) and other places. There has also been speculation that I chose that name in reference to EA's statements regarding treating its studios as separate "city states" in the past.
As to GigaMedia, the deal between us is still in place but that was for mobile games and smaller budget projects. I spoke to them last month actually about where we stand in terms of mobile games like Oz. Please don't say things like "that partnership was dissolved" when it wasn't.
The amount of incorrect information in this thread and innuendo directed at me is, as I said, really insulting especially when it comes to my use of Kickstarter which has been represented as either a) unusual for someone like me; b) a scam; c) a desperate plot, etc. since only people who can't raise money use KS, etc.
Now, the problem with that is that KS and crowd funding has been used by studios such as Obsidian (Project Eternity raised 3.9M and Obsidian's resume of games is outstanding), Bones (3.4M from a well regarded miniature company), Double Fine (3.4M Tim Schafer both has a great resume and top selling games now), Wasteland 2 (2.9M, owned by Brain Fargo, founder of Interplay & Digital Chocolate), Star Industry (Chris Roberts got 2.1M through KS, 4,1M through website and his resume is outstanding), Pathfinder Online (Goblinworks), Steve Jackson Games (Ogre Special Edition 900K and Steve has been in the industry longer than me and SJG has been selling games since the 1800s I believe
) and many more. All you need to do is go to the Kickstarer page and use Games and Most Funded buttons to comfirm this. Many of these companies have significant ongoing royalty streams, founders who have bought and sold more companies than me, companies whose games have sold a lot more than me in aggregate and yet this thread seems to make it seem like because I'm using Kickstarter, well, you know the rest.
Anyway, I would really urge anyone who is attacking me personally or using innuendo to do so to at least get their facts straight.
Mark
P.S. As to why we are focusing on the MMO right now, that has also been covered in interviews and postings. Nothing mysterious, vague or otherwise.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
Thanks for the prompt reply. Glad to have that cleared up. I apologise for any offense I have given to you. I tried to distance you and your firm from the debate I was having about the "refund issue" but I know I strayed across the line a couple of times. I have tried to state that I feel you are genuine in your desire to develop this game and will spend the money appropriately.
Apology cheerfully and gratefully accepted but all you had to do was ask me, I would have been happy to tell you.
In truth, I'm not angry at you but I am a little dismayed at some of the things people have said here, especially when it comes to the use of KS or in regards to raising VC. Whether people like WAR or not, my investors did really, really well from the sale of Mythic (which is why one of the two of them are backing us) and the other one (TA Associates) specializes in shareholder liquidity deals. A SLD is when they buy stock of existing companies with a significant revenue stream (when they bought into Mythic, we were making about $20M+ per year) and then get their exit when the company is sold again or goes public. Well, I'm certainly not making 20M+ anymore because if I was, I'd fund the game totally on my own as I did with Mythic and Warhammer (before EA bought us) I have turned down some VC interest/offers because what they want to see is a different path than the one I want to walk down as well as issues with control/valuation/etc. It really is as simple as that.
Also, I've said before that I'll be putting in 2M of my own money into this project because I believe in it and, BTW, that 2M is in addition to what I've put into CSE already. I'm willing to put my neck and my money on the line to make this happen but I need the Kickstarter to fund to prove to the other investors (and to myself) that I'm not just this grumpy old game guy who thinks he has a good idea but nobody wants to play the game but a few other old school gamers. Our KS will be the proof of interest from our target market.
Mark
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
Didn't Daoc top out at about 250k sub's?I see people getting excited for this game,yet it just doesn't seem to add up to me.Sure I liked Daoc,but that doesn't mean it was a big success.Quite frankly I believe UO did better over the year's as far as sub's.
Sorry but I'm just not sold on this.As much as I liked Daoc,just not sold on this.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Arya Stark
Yep, we peaked just after Shrouded Isles launched and while we declined like every other MMORPG, it wasn't till WoW hit that our numbers really went down a lot. I can talk about those numbers since I did so in the past before EA bought us.
As to UO vs. DAoC numbers, they are actually quite similar. I can't give you the actual numbers since those are confidential to EA but you might be able to find stuff on the web from when other people have spilled the beans.
UO has been running a few years longer but its numbers were in decline when we launched. Then our numbers went down, etc.
As to not being sold on it, that's fine, it truly is. CU is definitely geared to a more niche crowd than either Dark Age or WAR.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
.... and its very nice to see someone developing a niche game. Not my niche unfortunately but nice to see none the less.
Thanks! I'm happy with it being a niche game, it really is quite freeing not having to worry about how the heck to keep tons of people happy and playing for years and years. It is also nice not to have to work on a game for 5 years and then see the market/industry change around them.
Anyway, glad we straightened everything out and I truly do appreciate your apology. As I know full well, that's not an easy thing to do, ever.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
DAoC did cost $2.5mil to make, 250k subs at ~$14/month each is $3.5mil per month (it's way more complicated than that but I'm just trying to make a point). How is that not a big success?
edit: also don't forget the box sales, expansions etc.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
In todays market,don't you feel that being in a niche crowd will seriously hurt the CU potential?I mean just look at TSW,yes it's a great game and has a loyal following,but it's potential is limited by it's subs/funding.
Game's seem to be held back from full potential nowaday's because of lack of subs/funding.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Arya Stark
I should have elaborated more,it was a big success at that time,but when you look at number's today it's not overly impressive.If those number's are impressive today,then I guess TSW is very successful also.Yet many don't see TSW as being successful.
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Arya Stark
There are different types of success. For example D3 was surely financially successful (>12 mil sales) but in the eyes of the players it was a failure.
DAoC was both financially successful and exceeded the players' expectations. If you look back at daoc 10 years later and compare it to WoW then yes you might think it wasn't successful, but then again no MMO is.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
Absolutely! I couldn't agree more. I know it sounds really counter-intuitive for a guy to say "Yep, we know the path we are going down won't lead riches and gold for everyone!" but that's why I'm making this game and not *that* game (insert favorite high budget MMORPG). If's not that I don't know how to make a bigger budget game but for me personally, there's too much downside risk for example:
1) "AAA" MMORPGs are now on a miniumum of a 5 year development cycle. Dark Age of Camelot was developed in 18 months, Warhammer Online in a tad over 3 years. SWToR weighed in at either 6 years or 5 years depending on how you calculate when their development timeline really started. TESO has been in development for either 4 or 5 years since Matt joined Bethesda in 2007 and I know from talking to him then, he didn't start TESO day one.
2) "AAA" MMORPGs budgets now top 100M on the low end simply because of the team size and the development timelines.
3) "AAA" MMORPGs need teams of 300+ to complete, thus the big budgets.
All of the above would require me to be more of the business guy, head of the studio, etc. than hands on guy that I am now. I can do the business side just fine as is indicated by Mythic's successful sale but I don't like running big studios. It means too many layers of management, too much politics and frankly, too many issues. I like doing what I'm doing now at CSE and believe it or not, I really like doing this too. I've been talking to players this way since the 1980s (GOD, NOW I FEEL REALLY OLD) and I missed it. Yeah, I've gotten grumpy at times, saracastic at times and there are a few things I'd take back but here it is Saturday night and instead of being home with my family, I'm sitting in the office talking to you and others, including a whole bunch of people for whom the name Mark Jacobs is a curse word at times.
That's me all over a guy who truly loves to make games more than anything else in the world and, if we could all just communicate without nastiness would spend so much of his time simply talking to people about game ideas, theory, etc.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
Thank you for the response.I'm going to keep an eye on you and this game.Maybe the way for me to observe the game is like what GGG has done with PoE.Smaller audience,but exceed expectation's,thus a true winner
Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!
Arya Stark
It's always relative I guess. If you looked at the dollar sales for Gone With the Wind, you'd wonder why everyone called it the most successful movie ever. OTOH, if you looked at the number of ticket sales relative to the total population of the US at the time (and the era it launched in), you'd go OMG! Kind of the same for games like EQ, UO, etc. Relative to the total number of people playing MMOs, Dark Age was a smash hit. Once WoW hit the market, the yardstick changed. Here's something to ponder though:
Dark Age of Camelot - Development budget: $2.5M, marketing budget: 660K.Total initial development expenses about 3.2M with incidentials not counting some leases. Total topline revenue earned by game prior to 2006 (EA acquisition, can't talk about numbers after it), 150M+ Our operating margins were quite high during most of its years and we earned royalties from GOA (they bore all the expenses for operating the game in Europe) so Mythic turned quite a good profit. Our first round investor (Abandon Entertainment) earned a fabulous return when we sold the company and they also got a piece of the revenue stream for a while. So, while Dark Age didn't have the numbers of WoW or EQ of course, the ROI on the game was outstanding and that counts for an awful lot especially for companies that value profit versus revenues. Of course, Dark Age is still operating today.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
"You have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Wu598ENenk
WAR sold over 1.2M boxes in its first quarter. It sold more boxes that since then and had high sub numbers for the first 3 months even though the numbers declined quickly once Blizzard launched its expansion. It also continued to have subscirption revenues, even today. It was anything but an epic failure especially since the cost to develop the game for EA was quite small compared to SWToR (2 years of development at EA versus 5-6). FYI, the press releases/earnings calls from EA will confirm the sales/sub numbers. I wish I could give out other numbers but EA didn't so I can't. Now, was WAR a huge success, of course not. But calling it an epic failure when most MMORPGs don't even launch and certainly, even when they do, don't sell as many box copies as WAR did really isn't fair especially when you consider the 3 year development cycle (total) and only 2 years at EA. Oh, and Mythic's team was smaller than Blizzard's when it created WoW and SWToR's team at peak so we were spending a lot less money and we had almost no VO and marketing support, so it's safe to say that WAR didn't cost anywhere near what those games cost.
In tems of investors, well, because I made both my investors happy with their returns and as per above, one of the two of them are investing with me again and the other doesn't do deals with companies until they have a significant revenue stream and BTW, we are still in touch.
At the end of the day, investors care about making a profit on their investment. My first investor (Abandon Entertainment) made a big profit (4x) when we did the deal with TA (32M). The 2nd investor also made a profit but I can't divulge the amount because EA hasn't done so yet but since I have said that TA put in 32M for about a third of the company, well, you can do some back of the envelope calculating. FYI, Abandon also got a big check when EA bought us. So, their 4X went up, a lot.
That's why someone would invest in me if I wanted to do something other than a niche game, which I don't and since I don't, well, even though they would like the fact that I made both my investors happy, most wouldn't want to back the game but the one that is, well, they like the long-term plan of building this MMORPG to last and are satisfied with a smaller but longer tail to the revenue.
Look, as I've said before, WAR was both not the game I wanted it to be and it certainly wasn't the success EA wanted it to be but saying it was an epic failure or implying that investors wouldn't touch me, is just plain wrong especially in light of what I did for my investors the last time, which is one of the things that really counts the most to investors, a track record. The other thing that counts is what kind of exit they can expect and since I won't create a game that could have say 500K subs or the equivalent revenue stream, well, there are other people out there who are chasing bigger dreams. I have a nice small dream, it's called CU (for now) and that's good enough for me. If it's good enough for our Kickstarter backers, well, we go into development. If we don't, then that's fine as the market has told me that there isn't enough interest in it and I'll go back another game as I should.
Night all. Heading home and to bed me thinks. It's been a long day at work. Cya.
Mark Jacobs
CEO, City State Entertainment
If this is referring to the upcoming kickstarter campaign, You are not investing in him, you are donating money to support his project, to help it come to life, not to financially profit or even get your money back. Yes there will be some rewards in terms of the game when delivered but not financial ones.
I´m always wondering why people seriously believe, that everything has to be compared to World of Warcraft. I won´t say WoW is the devil and brought nothing but evil. I played it myself several years because of social attachements. Still, not only did WoW change the MMO-market completely, its also one of the biggest success ever up to now.
Does it always have to be that big? Although I´m quite fond of chasing epic dreams, I think its important sometimes to stay realistic and modest. Whats wrong with a nichegame, that costs 5.000.000$, where you get 2.000.000$ via a kickstart, the rest from boxsales and then have - let us say - 50.000 players subscribing to the game for several years, giving you like 750.000$ per month to pay your staff, server etc and some profit? You´ll get more than enough money yourself here, allowing you to develop another game, that might succed in a similar way.
I know these numbers are very simplistic and I´m not saying, thats how I would guess it´ll happen here - but those numbers aren´t totally off the mark.
Personally, if I would have to choose to design
1) a AAA-game with five years developement, more than 100.000.000 $ production costs, where I try to cater to everyone, hyping the game and using every angle to get more customers by changing features, making it more mainsteam and gambling whether or not I get the big success to justify all this effort and money
OR
2) a nichegame with two years developement, not more than 10.000.000 $ production costs, where I stick to my targetgroup, get them into the boat as soon as possible, keep my initial game principles, deliver a bugfree working and fun game some 50.000-100.000 gladly subscribe for several years and then maybe doing that once or twice more with other ideas, thereby supporting 2-3 super working nichegames, all of them satisfying the players while being profitable...
Well, thats a no-brainer for me. I´ll choose option 2 over anything anytime, no matter what I´m offered. Thats why I support Mark and his team all the way. Its just the right thing to do and in my opinion how it should be everywhere.
The MMO-community is so diverse, it would be more satisfying for everyone, if more companies would focus on a real targetgroup, making a good longliving and profitable game here instead of a game "for everyone" that has no chance of really becoming what everyone is looking for.
Camelot Unchained Fanpage
https://simply-gaming.com/camelot/
I vote niche game. For me this is not my niche and therefore not my game. But I like the principal.
2 years/10 million is too low to reasonably expect a niche game to be pulled off well. Thats a big part of the issue with kickstarter for MMOs. You are looking for both niche AND watered down. Small world, lesser graphcs, limited races, not many armor styles...that sort of thing will cut down time and money.
While I think it cost more than the 50 million that gets thrown around, Trion made a AAA MMORPG for less than 100 Million and a staff around 120 people.
People look at the extreme (SWTOR) too much.
I think its mostly mismanagement on the part of games like SWTOR.