Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

"If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished." Port response to funding questions

13

Comments

  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    SEANMCAD said:

    Also, the number of publishers doesnt matter, how much money do those publishers have? what is the contract agreement regarding funding from those publishers?

    I agree that the number of publishers should not matter, but there are three publishers for this game and their only job is to publish the game.  The main publisher is also the development company and they have taken so much money and made so many promises for launch that when I read something that says the game will never be finished if people don't continue to spend in the add-on store that I get offended.  Why does that surprise you?  No, I don't think anyone is owed a game, but when a service provider makes promises and solicits for funds to do something they should know how to do it and they should make every effort to do what was promised.
    GdemamiAragon100
  • Aragon100Aragon100 Member RarePosts: 2,686
    SEANMCAD said:

    I think we have gotten off tract a bit.
    The OP is suggesting what he sees as a contradiction.
    buying the items is a choice: TRUE
    but if you dont buy the items the game might not happen: TRUE
    Is that fair? likely not but fairness cant change reality


    make sense?
    Again, they did not say it might not happen, they said it will not happen.

    If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished.

    They are three publishing companies with millions of dollars at their disposal and they threaten backers that if the game doesn't launch it's our fault because we did not spend enough in the add-on store.  There is something very wrong here, with fundamental nature of all game development in question.
    Yeah i see it as a fact and a treath at the same time.

    The real problem is where are all the money?

    Why threat the consumer when developers themself have a poor system for funding their game?

    Why is the game so unpopular and understanding this why dont developers do needed changes to their game that will attract more players to their game?

    For instance - why keep the card combat?
    Why not make a hardcore version of the game with full loot as the old UO players wanted?
    Why keep the hated map?
    Why sell houses and castles for thousands of dollars?
    Why keep the pay to win system?

    There is many more question to be made why developers so stubbornly keep features and system that the majority of players dislike. 

    The only one's to blame for a poorly funded game is developers themself that made all the wrong choices.


    Gdemami
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited November 2017
    Aragon100 said:
    SEANMCAD said:

    I think we have gotten off tract a bit.
    The OP is suggesting what he sees as a contradiction.
    buying the items is a choice: TRUE
    but if you dont buy the items the game might not happen: TRUE
    Is that fair? likely not but fairness cant change reality


    make sense?
    Again, they did not say it might not happen, they said it will not happen.

    If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished.

    They are three publishing companies with millions of dollars at their disposal and they threaten backers that if the game doesn't launch it's our fault because we did not spend enough in the add-on store.  There is something very wrong here, with fundamental nature of all game development in question.
    ....

    Why is the game so unpopular and understanding this why dont developers do needed changes to their game that will attract more players to their game?

    ....

    but here is the thing I dont think people seem to understand.
    Fairness and how things SHOULD be doesnt make money magically appear, it doesnt magically make one a good developer, dosent magically make a good team.


    So many of you are having a hard time differentiating between fairness and should with actually physically possible in the material world of reality.

    if they are not good developers then they are not good developers and no amount of fairness and SJW work will transform them into good developers

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    SEANMCAD said:
    I would like the conversation to stay on topic so perhaps you can contribute by sharing your opinion on the subject of how sometimes its simply not possible to create the game despite promises

    thoughts?

    On topic would be great, what are your thoughts on the development of Shroud of the Avatar and the statement that basically says that if backers don't buy from the add-on store the game will never be finished?

    What are your thoughts, reasons for those those thoughts and how do you see the developers finding ways to keep their product alive without scaring their backers into spending more money out of fear of losing their pledges?  Do you have any theories?  Do you believe what's going on could be something else entirely?  Do you believe they are just bad developers and don't understand the industry?  Instead of telling everyone else what they should think, why don't you try telling people what you think?
    GdemamiKyleranXodic
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    SEANMCAD said:
    I would like the conversation to stay on topic so perhaps you can contribute by sharing your opinion on the subject of how sometimes its simply not possible to create the game despite promises

    thoughts?

    On topic would be great, what are your thoughts on the development of Shroud of the Avatar and the statement that basically says that if backers don't buy from the add-on store the game will never be finished?

    What are your thoughts, reasons for those those thoughts and how do you see the developers finding ways to keep their product alive without scaring their backers into spending more money out of fear of losing their pledges?  Do you have any theories?  Do you believe what's going on could be something else entirely?  Do you believe they are just bad developers and don't understand the industry?  Instead of telling everyone else what they should think, why don't you try telling people what you think?
    my thoughts are that if the developer doesnt have the funding to complete the project it can not be completed. I think players who are 'afraid' need to grow up and understand that the future is not something they can control.

    My thoughts are also that if the majority of those knowledgeable about this developer feel the developer is not good at their job then they will likely not get a good product anyway so they should cut their losses and move on. you cant MAKE a developer be good at what they do.

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • TalonsinTalonsin Member EpicPosts: 3,619
    SEANMCAD said:
    SEANMCAD said:

    I think we have gotten off tract a bit.
    The OP is suggesting what he sees as a contradiction.
    buying the items is a choice: TRUE
    but if you dont buy the items the game might not happen: TRUE
    Is that fair? likely not but fairness cant change reality


    make sense?
    Again, they did not say it might not happen, they said it will not happen.

    If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished.

    They are three publishing companies with millions of dollars at their disposal and they threaten backers that if the game doesn't launch it's our fault because we did not spend enough in the add-on store.  There is something very wrong here, with fundamental nature of all game development in question.
    no they said it 'will not happen' if they dont secure funding. Not will not happen only if the in game item purchases do not happen.

    your own OP doesnt even suggest you read it that way originally.

    please try not to paint an in game purchase of a video game as a 'threat' by the big bad developer against you. its rather unbecoming.

    Can you please point me to where Port said "if they dont secure funding"? 

    They did not say that in the ops link.  Why do you always do this?  You go off on crazy tangents that have no relevance to the actual issue.

    They said:

    The reason some things (not the majority by any stretch) are in the store is to ensure we can continue to develop and eventually finish the game. If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished. No one is forced to buy those items, so it is entirely up to you.

    Show me where they said "if they dont secure funding"The only thing they reference in that statement is the cash shop, no other mention of additional funding sources is implied.

    Once again Sean is up on his high-horse spewing all kinds of nonsense that has no relevance to the actual issue
    Gdemami
    "Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game."  - SEANMCAD

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 38,178
    SEANMCAD said:
    I would like the conversation to stay on topic so perhaps you can contribute by sharing your opinion on the subject of how sometimes its simply not possible to create the game despite promises

    thoughts?

    On topic would be great, what are your thoughts on the development of Shroud of the Avatar and the statement that basically says that if backers don't buy from the add-on store the game will never be finished?

    What are your thoughts, reasons for those those thoughts and how do you see the developers finding ways to keep their product alive without scaring their backers into spending more money out of fear of losing their pledges?  Do you have any theories?  Do you believe what's going on could be something else entirely?  Do you believe they are just bad developers and don't understand the industry?  Instead of telling everyone else what they should think, why don't you try telling people what you think?
    I would need to understand what the developer meant by "finished."

    It's already "released",  are they talking about "fully launched" or some other marker such as additional content, land masses, dungeons etc.

    It would be even more helpful to understand what is the full list of features needed to "finish" the game along with estimated costs and timelines to reach this "finished" state.

    If the game is never "finished" what are the consequences? Will they pull the plug or just let it run in what ever state its at when they call it quits and move on.

    Which I think they are itching to do, there are other irons in the fire Richard wants to focus on.
    YashaX

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,849
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    "I don't wait for games. Games wait for me."
    -- CHUCK NORRIS

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    wait a comedian said 'Daddy left because you cry' that isnt funny that is assholish.

    anyway, what happens if the developer cant do it. either the money is not there or (my favorite part) the talent isnt there. just because its morally right or wrong can not change change reality often times.


    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,478
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    Reminds me of Oral Roberts and his needing 8 million dollars or gods going to call him home.
    IselinOctagon7711

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    laserit said:
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    Reminds me of Oral Roberts and his needing 8 million dollars or gods going to call him home.
    which begs the question. If Oral Roberts cant literally get you into heaven despite his promises to do so, is he the person you really want to make that happen for you?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,478
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    Reminds me of Oral Roberts and his needing 8 million dollars or gods going to call him home.
    which begs the question. If Oral Roberts cant literally get you into heaven despite his promises to do so, is he the person you really want to make that happen for you?
    "the god I believe in... isn't short of cash Mr"

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    laserit said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    Reminds me of Oral Roberts and his needing 8 million dollars or gods going to call him home.
    which begs the question. If Oral Roberts cant literally get you into heaven despite his promises to do so, is he the person you really want to make that happen for you?
    "the god I believe in... isn't short of cash Mr"
    then how about the second part of the question.

    why would you want a clearly under qualified scamister to complete your heaven for you?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 3,217
    Supporting a kickstarter is like an investment, you put your money into an unknown and hope you get some benefit for it.

    With crowd funding, you are investing in the company for a hopeful experience where you have something special and investment is just going for more money.

    Cryomatrix 
    GdemamiYashaX
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    Supporting a kickstarter is like an investment, you put your money into an unknown and hope you get some benefit for it.

    With crowd funding, you are investing in the company for a hopeful experience where you have something special and investment is just going for more money.

    Cryomatrix 
    but like investments you are never guaranteed a positive return

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • laseritlaserit Member LegendaryPosts: 6,478
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    laserit said:
    Iselin said:
    This kind of reminds me of that stand-up one-liner (I forget who the comic was)... "Daddy left because you cry."

    Nothing quite as morally dubious as trying to use guilt to generate more cash. Especially since the only ones who it will work on are those already invested in the game who have given and given some more.
    Reminds me of Oral Roberts and his needing 8 million dollars or gods going to call him home.
    which begs the question. If Oral Roberts cant literally get you into heaven despite his promises to do so, is he the person you really want to make that happen for you?
    "the god I believe in... isn't short of cash Mr"
    then how about the second part of the question.

    why would you want a clearly under qualified scamister to complete your heaven for you?
    I don't believe in religion Sean, it's a man made invention.

    I make my own heaven, or my own hell for that matter.

    I'm just one of the fortunate, most don't have that luxury.
    KyleranYashaX

    "Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee

  • Tiamat64Tiamat64 Member RarePosts: 1,545
    They probably wouldn't have had to resort to these measures to keep the game's development afloat if the game was actually any good.
    Nilden
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited November 2017
    Tiamat64 said:
    They probably wouldn't have had to resort to these measures to keep the game's development afloat if the game was actually any good.
    and that is the second point I am getting to.
    if he is unqualifed even if he could make the game why would people want him to do so?

    incidently this is exactly why I havent given money to SC. I think the jury is still out of CR but I have concerns so I dont buy until I see more evidence of output

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    SEANMCAD said:
    Tiamat64 said:
    They probably wouldn't have had to resort to these measures to keep the game's development afloat if the game was actually any good.
    and that is the second point I am getting to.
    if he is unqualifed even if he could make the game why would people want him to do so?

    incidently this is exactly why I havent given money to SC. I think the jury is still out of CR but I have concerns so I dont buy until I see more evidence of output
    I'm assuming you've never heard of Richard Garriott... for that matter I'll assume you'd probably never heard of Chris Roberts before SC got loud.

    There's very good reason these games got the up front money they got.  Time has passed and SC proved itself a winner and it is where it is.  SotA on the other hand is now resorting to thug tactics to keep funding coming in.  SotA has been in trouble for a long time but now it's ugly.
  • BruceYeeBruceYee Member EpicPosts: 2,401
    SEANMCAD said:
    Tiamat64 said:
    They probably wouldn't have had to resort to these measures to keep the game's development afloat if the game was actually any good.
    and that is the second point I am getting to.
    if he is unqualifed even if he could make the game why would people want him to do so?

    incidently this is exactly why I havent given money to SC. I think the jury is still out of CR but I have concerns so I dont buy until I see more evidence of output
    I'm assuming you've never heard of Richard Garriott... for that matter I'll assume you'd probably never heard of Chris Roberts before SC got loud.

    There's very good reason these games got the up front money they got.  Time has passed and SC proved itself a winner and it is where it is.  SotA on the other hand is now resorting to thug tactics to keep funding coming in.  SotA has been in trouble for a long time but now it's ugly.
    Isn't CR in a citibank commercial or am I just seeing things.
  • XodicXodic Member EpicPosts: 1,339
    edited November 2017
    There is no need for a philosophical argument. It's a shitty proposition for any backer that has been with them since the beginning.

    There is no defending this implicit call to cash.
    There is no excuse, period.

    Games don't grow on trees, and neither does money. I can only recommend that everyone pull their support and take the losses, in hopes that Richard will retire quietly with all of the money he embezzled.
    BruceYeeGdemami
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    SEANMCAD said:

    Also, the number of publishers doesnt matter, how much money do those publishers have? what is the contract agreement regarding funding from those publishers?

    I agree that the number of publishers should not matter, but there are three publishers ..
    again 

    1. How much money do those 3 publishers have? two dollars or three dollars?
    2. please show me the contract they signed with the developer that explains how the publisher can give them all the money.

    they could have a BILLION publishers it has nothing to do with money available.
    as I have pointed out twice now

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    SEANMCAD said:
    Tiamat64 said:
    They probably wouldn't have had to resort to these measures to keep the game's development afloat if the game was actually any good.
    and that is the second point I am getting to.
    if he is unqualifed even if he could make the game why would people want him to do so?

    incidently this is exactly why I havent given money to SC. I think the jury is still out of CR but I have concerns so I dont buy until I see more evidence of output
    I'm assuming you've never heard of Richard Garriott... for that matter I'll assume you'd probably never heard of Chris Roberts before SC got loud.

    There's very good reason these games got the up front money they got.  Time has passed and SC proved itself a winner and it is where it is.  SotA on the other hand is now resorting to thug tactics to keep funding coming in.  SotA has been in trouble for a long time but now it's ugly.
    I understand that you are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the money does exist someplace and that he did not just burn it on a yacht tour with strippers. That the money is literally sitting there in a safe somewhere, but I am NOT convinced he did not spend that money on strippers, if he did, the money is gone PEROID and  being a bad boy doesnt make the money magically appear. which is my point.

    my other point is even if he had the money is this the one guy you would want creating your game? is he qualified to make a good game?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • blorpykinsblorpykins Member RarePosts: 466
    SEANMCAD said:
    again 

    1. How much money do those 3 publishers have? two dollars or three dollars?
    2. please show me the contract they signed with the developer that explains how the publisher can give them all the money.

    they could have a BILLION publishers it has nothing to do with money available.
    as I have pointed out twice now

    There is no need to see a contract to understand the responsibility of a publishers when it's their job to publish a game.  If you have access to Google you can look up the press releases that Portalarium did when they announced their partnerships with Black Sun publishing in Russia and Travian Games in Germany.
    Gdemami
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    edited November 2017
    SEANMCAD said:
    again 

    1. How much money do those 3 publishers have? two dollars or three dollars?
    2. please show me the contract they signed with the developer that explains how the publisher can give them all the money.

    they could have a BILLION publishers it has nothing to do with money available.
    as I have pointed out twice now

    There is no need to see a contract to understand the responsibility of a publishers when it's their job to publish a game.  If you have access to Google you can look up the press releases that Portalarium did when they announced their partnerships with Black Sun publishing in Russia and Travian Games in Germany.
    actually you dont understand how it works.

    contracts are written with budgets applied. The publisher does NOT have to give unlimited money to a project to make sure it gets done. They can kill it.

    The number of publishers to this game doesnt mean dick. 

    but let me ask you this, if he is spending the money he is getting on yachts and strippers why do you think the publishers would give him more?

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

Sign In or Register to comment.