Howdy, Stranger!

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

How is EQL/EQN crowd funded?

NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 2,912

I see people claiming this a lot and it's perplexing to me. SOE selling founder packs for alpha access in no way makes this crowd funded. Sure they have a more open earlier development but that doesn't make this crowd funded, there was no kickstarter, SOE had the funds to start this, players are not investors or backers.

Just seems like pulling the wool over peoples eyes so they can get more money by emulating kickstarter.

Feel free to enlighten me on the subject...

Don't get me wrong this has nothing to do with the game which I think has some cool concepts but the way it's being branded. I'm not even sure SOE called it crowd funded but they hammer the help us build the game thing all the time which seems a little disingenuous.

So to go back to the title: How is this game crowd funded?

"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer



«1

Comments

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    It's similar to KS as people who bought a pack probably wanted to support the idea. This is along with getting items and playing early.

    The use of player structures in EQN has already been seen and not disingenuous at all. They showed the Dark Elf submissions from players as a racial city/outpost. They took the pieces and formed the whole setup which is now in EQN.

    They are currently doing this with Kerran structures and I imagine the other races as well. It's a scenario where everyone, who is actually involved, wins.
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 2,912

    Sure they have player structures. Point taken.

    Thing is I am still confused how this got labeled crowd funded when SOE has the capital to produce the game. It's not like this would have been shut down if a certain goal of founders was not met. Is it? This is like saying ArcheAge was crowd funded because they sold founders packs that let players support the game. Just seems like a complete misuse of the term crowd funded.

    • Flushing Money Down the Drain?
    • Column created on 9/12/14
    • Victor finds toilets have come to Landmark, and wonders if he’s flushing money down the drain supporting crowd-funded gaming efforts.
    When an entire article on this site is based on the notion the game is crowd funded I have to raise the question. How is this crowd funded? I'm pretty sure SOE has the capital to make the game without needing to put in on kickstarter.
     
    When I look up crowdfunding I get this: Crowdfunding is the practice of funding a project or venture by raising monetary contributions from a large number of people, typically via the Internet.
     
    I'm not making a monetary contribution it's a purchase and SOE didn't need to raise money to make this.

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer



  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904

    Its not crowd funded lol.

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • TelilTelil Member Posts: 282

    I don't think anyone is arguing that it is technically crowd funded. words are black and white but the meaning is not :)

    The article is expressing disappointment that the money that is being put into the game at the moment feels like all it gains them is props and not game direction. Its a simple opinion and nothing to do with fact. we should all be adult enough to allow someone an opinion these days without getting too upset. by all means we should discuss, but when we just dismiss someone's opinion we should really be questioning our own intelligence.

     

    Myself... I haven't played the game because as soon as I installed it when my first invite came along I realised that my core I5 pc was just not powerful enough to play the game as it the optimisation was so bad..... I then decided to look into buying a new pc so I could play it. Before I went out and purchased a new pc I also watched the updates and felt the game was moving at such a slow pace that it would not be worth it.

    I was led to believe this was a step towards EQN and its not turning out that way at all in my opinion. I may be wrong but at the moment the hype is dying for me after watching the progress of Landmark.

    Again this is all the opinion of someone who has not touched the game at all.

  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 2,912
    Originally posted by Telil

    I don't think anyone is arguing that it is technically crowd funded. words are black and white but the meaning is not :)

    The article is expressing disappointment that the money that is being put into the game at the moment feels like all it gains them is props and not game direction. Its a simple opinion and nothing to do with fact. we should all be adult enough to allow someone an opinion these days without getting too upset. by all means we should discuss, but when we just dismiss someone's opinion we should really be questioning our own intelligence.

    From the article:

    "I‘ve spent the better part of an hour wondering about whether or not I should back any further crowdfunding initiatives, whether they come from established companies or independent groups. The reason for that is because I struggle to see why development of “toilet props” is something I should legitimately find enthralling."

    My point is the game is not crowdfunded. It's not an opinion. Everything else in the article is opinion based on the false assumption that the game is crowdfunded.

    So before I get accused of being intellectually dishonest in my title and opening post, how the hell can anyone defend the claim that it's crowdfunded when from my perspective it clearly isn't.

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer



  • AwDiddumsAwDiddums Member UncommonPosts: 416
    Originally posted by nilden

    I see people claiming this a lot and it's perplexing to me. SOE selling founder packs for alpha access in no way makes this crowd funded. Sure they have a more open earlier development but that doesn't make this crowd funded, there was no kickstarter, SOE had the funds to start this, players are not investors or backers.

    Just seems like pulling the wool over peoples eyes so they can get more money by emulating kickstarter.

    Feel free to enlighten me on the subject...

    Don't get me wrong this has nothing to do with the game which I think has some cool concepts but the way it's being branded. I'm not even sure SOE called it crowd funded but they hammer the help us build the game thing all the time which seems a little disingenuous.

    So to go back to the title: How is this game crowd funded?

    It was never advertised as crowd funded, it has not relied upon crowd funding to become a reality, it has not had to hit a crowd funding target to even get made.

    Those that have been spouting off that this is crowd funded may aswell call any game that collects a subscription as a crowd funded game, the definitions could quite easily be loosely attached to any product, if your willing to mislead ppl.

    I look upon the founders packs as an advertising gimmick, one that has become alot more popular with the gaming industry, they saw an opening whereby players wanted to get into a developing game ASAP, no matter the cost or state of the game there are many ppl out there that want to get in on the ground floor, SoE took advantage of that.

    However it makes no difference to me if ppl want to believe this is crowd funded, I am just looking forward to it's release.

     

  • SulaaSulaa Member UncommonPosts: 1,329
    Landmark itself is an sort of Alpha for Everquest Next.  Same engine, same animations, same developement tools, same network code, same graphic assets created by Sony and a lot of graphic assets created by Players that will be used in EQ Next.

     

    It is much more crowdfunded than most kickstarter projects.

     

    Players spent money on EQNext years before it is released AND they do also spend their time creating assets for EQNext years before release.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by Sulaa

     

    Players spent money on EQNext years before it is released AND they do also spend their time creating assets for EQNext years before release.

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

  • SulaaSulaa Member UncommonPosts: 1,329
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

    Thank you, but you're wrong. It is you who is perpetuating the misconception.

    It does not matter what names Sony puts here and there. 

     

    Facts are important.  People by spending money (and time and skills) on Landmark - they fund development of network code, graphics, graphic engine, animations and several other things that will be used in EQNext.  Thus they are directly funding it's creation.  By paying they are directly and financially involved in development of EQNext.

    That is really simple.

  • TelondarielTelondariel Member Posts: 1,001
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

    Thank you, but you're wrong. It is you who is perpetuating the misconception.

    It does not matter what names Sony puts here and there. 

     

    Facts are important.  People by spending money (and time and skills) on Landmark - they fund development of network code, graphics, graphic engine, animations and several other things that will be used in EQNext.  Thus they are directly funding it's creation.  By paying they are directly and financially involved in development of EQNext.

    That is really simple.

    People who play other SOE games are also paying for EQN's development.  For instance, EQ2.  In fact, they've recently jacked up the prices of a handful of Cash Shop items that see high purchasing traffic from endgame players.  This coincides with an upcoming expansion when those items (like spell upgrades) will be a hot ticket item.  It's a burst of cash flow to increase the revenue that is siphoned off and re-directed to EQN.

    image
  • SulaaSulaa Member UncommonPosts: 1,329
    Originally posted by Telondariel
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

    Thank you, but you're wrong. It is you who is perpetuating the misconception.

    It does not matter what names Sony puts here and there. 

     

    Facts are important.  People by spending money (and time and skills) on Landmark - they fund development of network code, graphics, graphic engine, animations and several other things that will be used in EQNext.  Thus they are directly funding it's creation.  By paying they are directly and financially involved in development of EQNext.

    That is really simple.

    People who play other SOE games are also paying for EQN's development.  For instance, EQ2.  In fact, they've recently jacked up the prices of a handful of Cash Shop items that see high purchasing traffic from endgame players.  This coincides with an upcoming expansion when those items (like spell upgrades) will be a hot ticket item.  It's a burst of cash flow to increase the revenue that is siphoned off and re-directed to EQN.

    Sure, money spent on other SOE products may be used to develop Landmark/EQNext.  But that is separate and mature product.

    Landmark started to take money in alpha.

    Additionally Landmark assets, engine, network code, animations and many other things are same things that will be used in EQNext.

     

    Some people use argument 'But SOE does not need our money and time to make Landmark/EQNext'.

    First of you don't know that.  You don't know if SOE would develop EQNext if not for that.

    Secondly - not all Kickstarter or Steam Greenlight or other crowd sourced project need those money too.  Some those crowd-sourced projects use crowdfunding because it is free money + free marketing at same time.

  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123

    Seriously guys. Claiming if you spend money on Game A then you are secretly funding game B and that is crowdfunded!!!!!

    There are some bitter people on this site!!!

  • TelondarielTelondariel Member Posts: 1,001
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Seriously guys. Claiming if you spend money on Game A then you are secretly funding game B and that is crowdfunded!!!!!

    There are some bitter people on this site!!!

    Your exclamation point abuse skill is raised by 10.

     

    The posts you are talking about don't say what you think they are saying.  They were just countering your assertion that no one has spent money on EQN yet.  Clearly, the public already has.

    image
  • Colt47Colt47 Member UncommonPosts: 549
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

    Thank you, but you're wrong. It is you who is perpetuating the misconception.

    It does not matter what names Sony puts here and there. 

     

    Facts are important.  People by spending money (and time and skills) on Landmark - they fund development of network code, graphics, graphic engine, animations and several other things that will be used in EQNext.  Thus they are directly funding it's creation.  By paying they are directly and financially involved in development of EQNext.

    That is really simple.

    It's funny, because people often ask me why I bought the EQL founders pack but then never really played much of it.  You pretty much summed up why I paid for the founders pack: to support an idea.   EQN sounds like the first step towards actually making something closer to a multiplayer skyrim level experience, especially if the monster population, positions, and terrain alterations are enduring, as it would make the world feel more alive.  Dynamic events were sort of trying this idea, but they still were set pieces that repetitiously replay for eternity.  

    My general philosophy with crowd funding is not to fund the popular games, but the ones messing with new tech so that there are examples around for other design teams to see.  We've had way too much recycling on game systems developed over a decade ago, especially in MMOs.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 34,500
    Originally posted by Colt47
    Originally posted by Sulaa
    Originally posted by Maelwydd

    Just a slight correction.

    No one has spent a penny on EQN yet. Anyone that has currently paid for be part of the development of Landmark has paid for Landmark only.

    When EQN goes into Alpha people can then choose to become involved or not it it's development.

    There is a link between the work done in Landmark and EQN of course because effectively everything in Landmark is going to be used to build EQN but there is a clear distinction. One that I think this site should try harder to address the difference or at least stop perpetuating the misconception.

    Thank you, but you're wrong. It is you who is perpetuating the misconception.

    It does not matter what names Sony puts here and there. 

     

    Facts are important.  People by spending money (and time and skills) on Landmark - they fund development of network code, graphics, graphic engine, animations and several other things that will be used in EQNext.  Thus they are directly funding it's creation.  By paying they are directly and financially involved in development of EQNext.

    That is really simple.

    It's funny, because people often ask me why I bought the EQL founders pack but then never really played much of it.  You pretty much summed up why I paid for the founders pack: to support an idea.   EQN sounds like the first step towards actually making something closer to a multiplayer skyrim level experience, especially if the monster population, positions, and terrain alterations are enduring, as it would make the world feel more alive.  Dynamic events were sort of trying this idea, but they still were set pieces that repetitiously replay for eternity.  

    My general philosophy with crowd funding is not to fund the popular games, but the ones messing with new tech so that there are examples around for other design teams to see.  We've had way too much recycling on game systems developed over a decade ago, especially in MMOs.

    Ergo why the author of the referenced article and other posters sometimes refer to how SOE is selling and building a crowd funded effort.

    Fact is those buying in aren't receiving much, they are basically supporting the idea of the game because they believe in it (theres a thread on these forums where the belief is almost cult like).

    While it of course isn't a true crowd funded effort, it bears many similar parallels, enough to make the term appropriate to get the point across, even if not literally accurate. (stop splitting hairs so much folks, you know what is being said)

    Contrast that to the more traditional model where a developer wouldn't take a dime in until the game launched (those days are long gone I realize) but even now most wait until the game is substantially developed before selling access, at least in the AAA houses)

     

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

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

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE 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






  • DamonVileDamonVile Member CommonPosts: 4,818

    So if I play wow does that make titan crowdfunded ?

    This argument smells a lot like what's an mmo and if I spend money it's not really free.

  • ShaighShaigh Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Its crowdsourced and not crowdfunded. Crowdsourcing is about using the community to create parts of the game, crowdfunding is about getting the community to give money for the development costs.
    The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by DamonVile

    So if I play wow does that make titan crowdfunded ?

    This argument smells a lot like what's an mmo and if I spend money it's not really free.

    Exactly my point.

    I personally invested in Landmark to support SOE in their attempt to revolutionise the MMO genre by creating a different mind-set and philosophy to MMO game design. The consequence of my investment will hopefully be A great game called Landmark and a by-product of my investment will be EQN. 

     

  • AlleinAllein Member RarePosts: 2,094
    Originally posted by nilden

    Thing is I am still confused how this got labeled crowd funded when SOE has the capital to produce the game. It's not like this would have been shut down if a certain goal of founders was not met. Is it? This is like saying ArcheAge was crowd funded because they sold founders packs that let players support the game. Just seems like a complete misuse of the term crowd funded.

    As you say, they didn't "need" funds from fans as indie and small game companies do. It is a misuse of the term and most likely some people see Landmark's "Pay for Alpha Access" and connect that to "Pay for Early Access" or whatever of actual crowdfunded/KS games.

    EQN isn't Landmark and I believe they've already said the Alpha/Beta process won't be the same.

    Alpha/Beta costs seemed to mainly be there to keep the numbers under control instead of going totally F2P from the start. Landmark was going for $6 on Steam when released. Not going to fund much with that.

    They've been pretty upfront about why they charged for access and that the game will be F2P down the road so no one is "required" to buy in unless they want to be part of development in whatever way (such as the racial stuff they are doing with the Workshop).

    Overall, just a misuse or confusion when looking at the game. As far as I know, no AAA game as been made like this. Just as people instantly jump to "Disney, casual, fail, console, twitch, insert term" when seeing EQN, until it is experienced, we won't really know what it is like. Human nature to compare to what we know, but SOE has said that they are trying to be unlike anything done before. Obviously can only do that to a certain degree within the limits of a genre, but not a bad goal.

  • NitthNitth Member UncommonPosts: 3,904


    Originally posted by Shaigh
    Its crowdsourced and not crowdfunded. Crowdsourcing is about using the community to create parts of the game, crowdfunding is about getting the community to give money for the development costs.

    So if you don't pay your employees is that crowd sourcing too? :p

    image
    TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  • SulaaSulaa Member UncommonPosts: 1,329
    Originally posted by Shaigh
    Its crowdsourced and not crowdfunded. Crowdsourcing is about using the community to create parts of the game, crowdfunding is about getting the community to give money for the development costs.

    It is both.

    Crowdfounded and Crowdsourced.   Since 'crowd' is both spending their time and creativity creating assets and paying money towards Landmark&EQN developement.

    Originally posted by DamonVile

    So if I play wow does that make titan crowdfunded ?

    This argument smells a lot like what's an mmo and if I spend money it's not really free.

    If WoW and Titan would be simultanesly developed and shared most of their assets and tech? Then yes.

    Since they are not, then you're obviously not.

  • AeliousAelious Member RarePosts: 3,521
    EQN will have it's own packs, from a "being public" standpoint Landmark is the only title out. One would argue supporting Landmark is also supporting EQN since the systems being developed in Landmark are also for EQN.

    As a side note the packs themselves come with items equivalent to their price, aside from access. When I said it was like KS it wasn't meant as literal, but the essence of people wanting to fund an idea when they don't have to.

    At no point did SoE mislead people into believing monetary funds for Landmark packs were for EQN. Only the building entities which are shown to be true.
  • MaelwyddMaelwydd Member Posts: 1,123
    Originally posted by Nitth

     


    Originally posted by Shaigh
    Its crowdsourced and not crowdfunded. Crowdsourcing is about using the community to create parts of the game, crowdfunding is about getting the community to give money for the development costs.

     

    So if you don't pay your employees is that crowd sourcing too? :p

    Volunteer work comes to mind.

    And of course the obvious one....open source code....

  • RydesonRydeson Member UncommonPosts: 3,852
         Crowd(insert)..   It is simply good marketing to desperate customers to sustain great game development idea..  LOL ..  People can call it what they want to justify their position, but the end facts are still there..  Customer (crowd) is paying cash to assist in the development of a game..  I'm sure some prefer to call it preferred beta access, or whatever if it makes them feel more comfortable..  How does that old saying go?  If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck..  I think that applies here..  IMO
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,615

    There is a difference between crowd funded and 100% crowd funded.This was simply a sneaky decision by their brass to use the Voxel farm and a plain map "meaning almost NOTHING done towards completing the game" and getting some crowd money to HELP fund it.

    SOE is not stupid,i am sure they are aware of public and media backlash,so they are careful in how they go about doing things.They most likely figured a kickstarter makes them look lame and since Minecraft a VERY cheap program has been charging money they figured why not us.

    If not for being sneaky about it,would not bother me at all,since as mentioned Minecraft is making money from a very limited pixel program so Landmark deserves a cut as well.There si a slight difference however,no variable generating nor do you get a full on make anything anywhere ,albeit similar to instances in Minecraft.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

Sign In or Register to comment.