It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor
Quite simply, if there are no games made or continuing for my gameplay in the MMORPG genre I will play other games or find other pastimes. I certainly will not be giving developers money for games regardless
Sure. It is not like there is a lack of video games to play, or movies to watch. That is what i say all the time.
Plus, many non-MMOs have some MMO features anyway. PoE has public zones. Do you play that game?
No, the point of playing an MMO for me is the interactivity of the virtual world, if it is just tacked on with the players there for no reason I might as well play something different.
Wait .. you just say you play non-MMOs .. "i will play other games"
PoE is not a MMO ... so the point is obviously not the interactivity of the virtual world .. since it has none. Public zones != virtual worlds. So you don't play it because it is not a MMO? Or because it is not "good" to you for other reasons?
You honestly believe you can correct me over what games I choose to play and why?
No. Just want to clarify what you said .. since you seem to be contradicting yourself. I was asking questions .. see the question mark at the end?
Originally posted by Xthos I did a little reading on this, and it seems this is bent maybe more for the Ultima series gamer, and not as much towards the Ultima Online mmo gamers. The not being a mmo thing really disappoints. Did learn something though, that oddly it cost more to make a 2d game, according to them, than a 3d game. Always wondered why no one has tried to make a UO knock off, thinking it would be really cheap to make...Guess not, if they are accurate.
Why? If he is resorting to KS, it is a shoe string budget game .. probably better as a non-MMO. Not every RPG needs to be a MMO. Not every devs who have made MMO before needs to make MMO again.
Lord British persist! It won't be long now!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Originally posted by Sephros While I understand where you are going with that. $25 at this point won't effect the life style of me or my family. And if it did, I certainly would spend more time trying to improve that situation rather than playing video games. And come on ... who you trying to kid, lol. You can't go to the movies for $25 anywhere. Well not in SoCal anyway.
While I understand the principle those who argue against you and where they are coming from... I still find it funny how some think $25 is a great investment and compare it to Wall Street.....
My sandwiches cost me $25 for crying out loud.
Originally posted by Briansho Lord British persist! It won't be long now! $929,150
Anyone still wanting to get in on the lowest KS tier left that includes a digital dl of the game and both early bird alpha and beta access may want to move it, support is now up to $946,545, less than $55k before it's over. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalarium/shroud-of-the-avatar-forsaken-virtues-0
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor
It is your sadly limited idea of interactivity that causes that misunderstanding
Originally posted by Sephros Lol. This has takin a seriously hilarious turn. You guys are seriously comparing a $25 donation to a project you want to help see through to the end, to wall st? My Wall St. portfolio has abosultely nothing to do with a $25 kickstarter. There is absolutely no way it can be compared. If I want a monetary return, I invest in my portfolio, not kickstarters. Get a grip. We all get it, you don't want to be apart of anything. Let others do it. I think if $25 is so hard for you to part with, maybe less mmo website posting, or more working is what you need. This is just hilarious now.
I've been amused by some of the people involved in this as well. They seem to confuse investing, and donating. I have no problem what so ever in backing a Kickstarter project that looks interesting. I'm not in it for the perks. What I want is an entertaining game. I can always get more money, but good, entertaining games are MUCH more difficult to come by.
Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor
I think is your inability to communicate clearly with the English language. So do you or do you not play games other than MMOs?
Originally posted by Wraithone
People seem to confuse about donating and buying. Why should anyone donate to a business?
And you contradict your own logic. YOu said "What I want is an entertaining game". Then buy it when it is released. It is not like you can't buy it then.
You know there is a chnace that it work be produced, right? So you don't get what you want. All you may be getting is an empty promise.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Wraithone
Why donate? To get an entertaining game, that might other wise not be made. As I stated, I can always get more money. Thats the least of my concern. The contradiction involves, the "when its released". If they lack the money to produce it, there is a good chance it will not be released.
Many of these game concepts do not appeal to those who are only looking for the next clone of what ever happens to be popular. Make no mistake, investors do not care about games, all they want is the best ROI they can get. Which is why so many good concepts never get made into entertaining games. If I can help get an entertaining game made, then I'm more than happy to do so.
Lord British persists! Should be good to go this week!
Originally posted by Briansho Lord British persists! Should be good to go this week! $982,663
Damn I paid my $25, but I wish it would hit 1 million so you would shut up.
Originally posted by rikwes Even if and when this bloke would produce the best game ever to grace a PC/console he wouldn't get a dime from me since the Tabula Rasa fiasco. He won the lawsuit he filed against NCsoft ( at the tune of 23 million US$) and instead of trying to accomodate all those players - for example by including the rights to the IP Tabula Rasa in the lawsuit and rebooting/saving it - he starts a new company to rip them off all over again.
Wonder how fat a salary he will pay himself out of the KS money.
Probably not enough for another space trip .. but may be he can take a cheaper submarine trip this time.
I played Tabula Rasa from the day it launched to the day it closed. I quite enjoyed aspects of the game. But there is more than enough blame to go around to all parties. I fault NCsofts upper level suits for playing political games (their antics eventually ended up costing them $32 million).
Richard Garriott, lead developer of Tabula Rasa, sued NCsoft for US$47 million in damages concerning his termination from the company. Garriott asserted in his suit that he was forced out of the company and was made to sell his 400,000 shares in NCsoft's stock, losing him millions of dollars. In addition, he claimed that the company was guilty of fraud by forging his resignation announcement. On July 30, 2010, a jury in a Texas federal court awarded him US$28 million in damages. NCsoft appealed the ruling. Garriott again prevailed on appeal and NCsoft was required to pay an additional US$4 million, bringing the total damages awarded to Garriott to US$32 million.
I also fault RG for his focus on his trip to space, rather than on his game.
If NCsoft had settled, I could see the IP rights to TR going to RG. But adding them to the court case would have made it much more complicated. I miss TR as well, it was a fun game. Unfortunately, these things happen, when dealing with these types of political/legal issues.
I'm quite looking forward to Shroud, and I hope it turns out to be an entertaining game.
Originally posted by Wraithone I'm quite looking forward to Shroud, and I hope it turns out to be an entertaining game.
I think it will be interesting like the new skill system. But entertaining? I will withhold my judgment until the game is released. 10000 things can go wrong in development.
While I understand the principle those who argue against you and where they are coming from... I still find it funny how some think $25 is a great investment and compare it to Wall Street..... My sandwiches cost me $25 for crying out loud.
Please don't mistake the intent of my earlier posts: I was only pointing out how silly it is to use the word "investment" when talking about Kickstarter. I was not in any way suggesting alternative investments. Sometimes it takes a ridiculous comparison to point out an absurdity.
I'm even more uncomfortable with the word "donation" though. This isn't charity, it's business. $25 may not be a lot to some, but for others it's the weekly grocery budget. If you're fortunate enough to have disposable income, I encourage you to donate to your local food bank rather than buying fancy sandwiches or throwing cash at eccentric multi-millionaires.
Originally posted by Greyface While I understand the principle those who argue against you and where they are coming from... I still find it funny how some think $25 is a great investment and compare it to Wall Street..... My sandwiches cost me $25 for crying out loud.
Does this imply you might find the idea more tolerable if it were some indy startup run out of a basement by a team of starving artistes than when it's being proposed by a guy who could, theoretically, buy out his own campaign with pocket change?
Meh. I bought in because of the combination of interest in what he's trying to do and my respect for Amanda Palmer.
(Though I'll understand if you don't see the connection or dislike what she's saying.)
As for the food bank, I could throw that back at *anyone* who pays for unnecessary luxury items. Like, say, video games.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by RefMinor
U caught him pretending to like MMORPGs and trying to convince u (& this forum) that non-mmos are now mmos.. all-the-while also not understanding that we are only concerned about MMORPG's.
Narius wants all games free and arcade style.. so that he can try them all free, at his leisure...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Originally posted by Greyface Originally posted by Aeolyn Thankfully there's alot of gamers who feel the same way and are willing to spend a bit to prove it thus making the chance of success a little greater.
It's not about proving anything. Brand loyalty is a bad foundation for identity. I donate to a lot of things that I believe in: autism research, public radio, war veterans, my local food bank. I'm a fan of Richard Garriot's past work, but that does not make him into a charity.
Capitalistic ventures are not philanthropic causes, no matter how much you or I want what they're (potentially) selling. Admittedly, the crowdfunding movement has made some worthy projects possible, but I'm very uncomfortable with giving away money to be used by others to build for-profit companies. If KS adpoted a microfinance model instead of its current donation-based model, I'd be all over it. As it is, the whole thing smells like consumer exploitation to me.
The crowdfunding movement is destined for scandal. You heard it here first.
It's not about a cause, it's no different than people who chip in to help local music scenes support themselves. It's about doing something to support the entertainment that you enjoy. There are so many different forms of crowd funding, anything from modding communities, to special interest websites etc, etc... are supported in this manner over the net, why not games as well? Especially considering the road many major publishers have taken successful dev studios down over the last decade (and then some).
I understand being cautious, at the same time, it makes a lot of sense why many projects are taking this route, it gives them full control, that's what we as gamers would benefit from.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by KaosProphet
The whole idea of KS is not "tolerable" to me .. hence i wont spend a cent on rich had-beens who flew to space, and i won't spend a cent on starving idealist living in his mom's basement.
However, i have no objection if someone else does .. after all, they are risking THEIR money so i have a chance to play a game, no matter how low that chance is. I should say "thank you".
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by KaosProphet
Bites tongue, hard.
Originally posted by Aeolyn Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by KaosProphet
Nah, I just laugh. ^^ As long as such types don't move to impose their ideologies on others, they are more than welcome to their opinions. But I'd not be surprised, if such types get the various political scum involved. Just to "protect" people of course.
Kickstarter is an interesting idea, and only time will tell how it turns out. Everyone should do their own research, and make their own choices. I back projects that are of interest to me. If it doesn't work out, I can always get more money.
Originally posted by KaosProphet Does this imply you might find the idea more tolerable if it were some indy startup run out of a basement by a team of starving artistes than when it's being proposed by a guy who could, theoretically, buy out his own campaign with pocket change? Meh. I bought in because of the combination of interest in what he's trying to do and my respect for Amanda Palmer. http://www.ted.com/talks/amanda_palmer_the_art_of_asking.html (Though I'll understand if you don't see the connection or dislike what she's saying.) As for the food bank, I could throw that back at *anyone* who pays for unnecessary luxury items. Like, say, video games.
I admit it, RG's habit of ostentatious spending isn't exactly warming me to the idea of Kickstarting his new project. I do see the theoretical value of crowdfunding as a means of supporting the arts, but there is little expectation of financial gain in gallery exhibitions or music festivals. Computer games are a different monkey. Like film, interactive media occupies a gray area between creative expression and consumer product. Ultimately, the goal is to create something that can be sold for a profit.
Garriot wants to be free from the meddling of his investors. I get that. Going to the fans means he can make the game he wants without interference, but it also frees him from accountability and the obligation to share his gains. Yes, $10 or $25 is chump change, but multiplied by 10,000 it starts to look like real money. When he failed to produce a saleable product for EA or NCSoft, those companies had recourse. Whether or not those corporations treated him fairly (and I believe that they did not), their financial backing gave them leverage. What leverage do the fans have? What happens if Garriot spends 75% of his budget on strippers and ice sculptures? Who gets to call foul? I support creative freedom but I can't support freedom from accountability.
It's funny you bring up Amanda Palmer.... it was actually the controversy surrounding her KS projects that led me to questioning the crowdsourcing movement in the first place.
Originally posted by Greyface I admit it, RG's habit of ostentatious spending
I read that and find that comment quite funny, because Richard Garriott do consider himself "LORD British" lol.
Pretending to be king too much one ends up thinking that they are really king, just like Burger King.