He's not right. CoE IS a Kickstarter. Its the subject of this very thread. I have problems with other Kickstarters as well. We can start a general "Kickstarter" thread if we want... plenty to talk about. But as I said multiple times, in general there is ZERO accountability. Not just regarding time as Staal stated, but others like stating a certain technology would be used as the fabric the project would be built on and then later scratching it. That is a MAJOR change in the project. In this case it was SpatialOS. For another project maybe it would be something else. That is not a Strawman. The fact that a Kickstarter can do this with no accountability to the backers is a major Kickstarter flaw. Same thing with not posting on the Kickstarter main page that the amount of funding was not the full amount needed. Again, that Kickstarter allowed this is a flaw with Kickstarter. It actually seems to fly in the face of the Kickstarter rules, but again there does not appear to be any accountability.
Here is what Kickstarter says:
Projects must be honest and clearly presented.
Our community is built on trust and communication. Projects can’t mislead people or misrepresent facts, and creators should be candid about what they plan to accomplish.
--------------
But there is no accountability (that word again). Here we have a project that misstated the time it would take by multiple years and counting, the amount of money needed, the source of the money, the "fabric" the game would be built on (technology)...
... and none of that matters. It's a problem with CoE, but also a problem with Kickstarter in general because if Kickstarter was functioning properly this type of behavior should never be allowed.
So Strawman? Hardly. Please do not belittle actual tangible arguments with dismissive words like that.
No, it is a strawman when someone is arguing against the Kickstarter point with CoE specific stuff only, stuff that's about CoE's failures and not about Kickstarter/crowdfunding.
If you find it belittling, okay, but it is strawmanning to argue that Kickstarting is bad only by citing how CoE fails at it.
Your point about zero accountability is an interesting one, and I agree there's flaws with Kickstarter, but that's not the subject of my post that you quoted, which, again, is that it's flawed to use only CoE's failures as an argument for why Kickstarter in general is bad, so please don't strawman me.
Arguing that Kickstarter has flaws by pointing out flaws in a Kickstarter is the opposite of a Strawman. Do you want me to go into StarCitizen? Or Greedmonger? Or Pathfinder Online? Not the place for that discussion but start a thread in the Pub and I'd be happy to do so
See my edits, a TL;DR of those edits is:
I agree you're (probably) not strawmanning, but you're, at best, misunderstanding the rules of Kickstarter.
And I still think your criticisms of CoE don't hold much water as demonstrations of Kickstarter's flaws, because:
- missing deadlines for info-updates, features, or the launch is NOT misleading or a misrepresentation of facts or a flaw with Kickstarter, this is a part of reality of imperfect project management for games, and
- changing the amount of money needed is only misleading if they knew they'd need more beforehand (not knowing beforehand means they made a good faith effort, and, after the kickstarter, discovered they'd need more funding).
And again, I'm not commenting on whether Kickstarter has flaws, I'm commenting on whether your specific criticisms of CoE are true ways they've violated of Kickstarters rules that have gone unaccounted-for/unpunished (and are thus proof of Kickstarters flaws).
And I'm saying CoE hasn't broken those rules (though maybe the total funding requirement one they have broken? But I'd need to see evidence that they knew they'd need more money before the kickstarter to believe that rule was broken).
Slapshot1188 said: There is simply to repercussion to a company that gets money and then breaks those rules.
...what rules were broken?
I literally posted one of their rules and what was broken a few posts above... Do you read Bro?
Seriously...
Projects must be honest and clearly presented.
Our community is built on trust and communication. Projects can’t mislead people or misrepresent facts, and creators should be candid about what they plan to accomplish.
-------------
That is an actual posted rule.
CoE did not show that the amount being asked for was not the full amount of the project on the KS main page. KS actually required this. This was pointed out when it was revealed, but it was not revealed until AFTER the campaign closed. No action was taken. Is that clear enough example of a rule that was broken with no accountability?
And until someone proves definitively that 80%+ of games launch within the originally scheduled time, I'm gonna say that missed timelines is an unsolved problem within game development and therefore missed deadlines are not a Kickstarter-specific flaw.
Also would need to see proof that 80%+ of games in development don't get more funding than originally planned when they run into unforeseen problems.
Slapshot1188 said: There is simply to repercussion to a company that gets money and then breaks those rules.
...what rules were broken?
I literally posted one of their rules and what was broken a few posts above... Do you read Bro?
Seriously...
Projects must be honest and clearly presented.
Our community is built on trust and communication. Projects can’t mislead people or misrepresent facts, and creators should be candid about what they plan to accomplish.
-------------
That is an actual posted rule.
CoE did not show that the amount being asked for was not the full amount of the project on the KS main page. KS actually required this. This was pointed out when it was revealed, but it was not revealed until AFTER the campaign closed. No action was taken. Is that clear enough example of a rule that was broken with no accountability?
That's the first example I've seen of a rule-break by CoE, and it only counts as one if they knew beforehand that the funding wouldn't be enough. Did they?
Yes they did. See here:
Massively OP: The sticking points seem to be the Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments). […] What do you say to those who argue the original funding goal as stated in the Kickstarter was misleading?
Jeromy Walsh:
Snip
Unfortunately, and what this whole thing is about, is we assumed the fact that we were going to be seeking additional funds was common knowledge and somehow it didn’t make it onto our Kickstarter page. It wasn’t intentional. But it happened. While we regret that, it ultimately doesn’t change anything. The commitment we made to our backers is, “you provide us the Kickstarter funds we need, and we commit to delivering you the game.” That hasn’t changed, as we stand by the same commitment today. Regardless of whether other people realized we needed additional funds or not, what’s important is that we did, and we made that commitment to them with that in mind. We stand firm in our commitment.
—————-
Note that when this was brought to light they closed refunds at the same time:
What about the new refund policy? Will you change your mind and offer refunds to those folks?
First, I want to say it was a complete coincidence that we announced our refund policy going forward in the same update where we evidently made people aware we’re still looking for money from investors, etc. Beginning early September we started telling people who contacted us that we were no longer offering refunds. We felt 90 days from the close of Kickstarter was a sufficient cooldown period and any requests that came in after that our answer was no.
We made it explicit in this update because we’d previously said we would let people know what our refund policy going forward would be, before opening the store. And, making the decision we ultimately did came down to a debate between the stigma and perception behind not allowing refunds, and the risk involved in not having a stable bottom line. In the end, we decided it was better to risk putting people off by having a “No refund” policy, than having people pledge, us make decisions based on our current funds, and then having that money taken away.
With respect to offering refunds again, the answer is no. You see, this whole thing is ultimately an issue of perceived risk vs. real risk. For those people who weren’t aware, or didn’t realize that we were raising additional money aside from Kickstarter, there’s now a perceived risk to losing their pledge money that wasn’t there before. But as I said, we knew that we were raising other money, so the real risk to their pledge isn’t any higher today than it was back in May.
That being said, if people react to this perceived increase in risk, and start requesting refunds, our principle goes down, we’ve got less money to develop with, and that creates *real* risk for everyone – us, the people who knew about our need to raise additional funding, and those who didn’t, but who understand and are ok with it.
In the end, offering refunds to those who have a higher perceived risk today, only creates more real risk for everyone going forward.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
TL;DR of my TL;DR is that games are hard to make, good games are harder, most games need more money and time than originally planned (and get both), and therefore these problems are not specific to Kickstarter but are game-dev problems generally.
“The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments).
The "full amount" is just your insertion.
An amount stated on KS page is just an amount they need per KS project, whether they need more overall money is a non-factor.
No, there is a promise to attempt to complete the project, that is all.
Publishing deadlines is just fluffy nice to haves but ultimately has no relevance as to whether the project is completed. Don't get me wrong I think they should do it if they said they have but this is not an argument against "Kickstarter".
Sure but the point of the thread is that CoE specifically is doing stuff that's not good.
Your general point about Kickstarters is a good point, and people arguing against it while citing only CoE stuff, that doesn't make sense.
But it does make sense for them to continue to criticize CoE.
His comment that he has the "only" valid criticism/complaint against crowdfunding is utterly wrong.
Might be because Kickstarter understands Shit happens. Sometimes these ideas fail, and fail miserably, even if they get funded.
As far as CoE goes, they are still making an effort which, to be honest, is impressive in it's own right, and honors what they said in Kickstarter that this money would be used to make the game.
Keep in mind Kickstarter makes it clear that this is NOT a sale of goods, you are backing an idea, (Which may or may not happen) you are NOT buying a product.
You are not guaranteed their ability to accomplish anything, only that they will make their best effort to do it.
In that light, Mr Walsh is not taking the money to build a house in Maui, and sip pinacolidas on a beach somewhere, he is actively trying to make this game happen, albeit poorly, and looking more like a monkey humping a football as opposed to a professional designer with a clue, but that is not the issue.. he is trying.
And Kickstarter makes it clear, you are responsible for your own buyer beware.
I am getting really tired of needing to explain that to you.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
No, there is a promise to attempt to complete the project, that is all.
Publishing deadlines is just fluffy nice to haves but ultimately has no relevance as to whether the project is completed. Don't get me wrong I think they should do it if they said they have but this is not an argument against "Kickstarter".
Sure but the point of the thread is that CoE specifically is doing stuff that's not good.
Your general point about Kickstarters is a good point, and people arguing against it while citing only CoE stuff, that doesn't make sense.
But it does make sense for them to continue to criticize CoE.
His comment that he has the "only" valid criticism/complaint against crowdfunding is utterly wrong.
Yep, agreed.
But Slap's points about CoE breaking Kickstarter rules as demonstrations of those flaws (i.e. CoE broke the rules and has faced no consequences) don't add up [edit: actually one of them does, see below].**
Edit: the ones about CoE launch timelines and feature timelines and underlying-tech choices and info-update timelines don't yet add up to me as legit failures of Kickstarter, but one of the other of Slap's points does add up! As Slap showed, SBS knew they'd need more money originally, which is against the rules (and I'm assuming on faith that SBS hasn't faced Kickstarter consequences for breaking that rule..?).
That's the first example I've seen of a rule-break by CoE, and it only counts as one if they knew beforehand that the funding wouldn't be enough. Did they?
Yes they did. See here:
Massively OP: The sticking points seem to be the Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments). […] What do you say to those who argue the original funding goal as stated in the Kickstarter was misleading?
Jeromy Walsh:
Snip
Unfortunately, and what this whole thing is about, is we assumed the fact that we were going to be seeking additional funds was common knowledge and somehow it didn’t make it onto our Kickstarter page. It wasn’t intentional. But it happened. While we regret that, it ultimately doesn’t change anything. The commitment we made to our backers is, “you provide us the Kickstarter funds we need, and we commit to delivering you the game.” That hasn’t changed, as we stand by the same commitment today. Regardless of whether other people realized we needed additional funds or not, what’s important is that we did, and we made that commitment to them with that in mind. We stand firm in our commitment.
—————-
Note that when this was brought to light they closed refunds at the same time:
What about the new refund policy? Will you change your mind and offer refunds to those folks?
First, I want to say it was a complete coincidence that we announced our refund policy going forward in the same update where we evidently made people aware we’re still looking for money from investors, etc. Beginning early September we started telling people who contacted us that we were no longer offering refunds. We felt 90 days from the close of Kickstarter was a sufficient cooldown period and any requests that came in after that our answer was no.
We made it explicit in this update because we’d previously said we would let people know what our refund policy going forward would be, before opening the store. And, making the decision we ultimately did came down to a debate between the stigma and perception behind not allowing refunds, and the risk involved in not having a stable bottom line. In the end, we decided it was better to risk putting people off by having a “No refund” policy, than having people pledge, us make decisions based on our current funds, and then having that money taken away.
With respect to offering refunds again, the answer is no. You see, this whole thing is ultimately an issue of perceived risk vs. real risk. For those people who weren’t aware, or didn’t realize that we were raising additional money aside from Kickstarter, there’s now a perceived risk to losing their pledge money that wasn’t there before. But as I said, we knew that we were raising other money, so the real risk to their pledge isn’t any higher today than it was back in May.
That being said, if people react to this perceived increase in risk, and start requesting refunds, our principle goes down, we’ve got less money to develop with, and that creates *real* risk for everyone – us, the people who knew about our need to raise additional funding, and those who didn’t, but who understand and are ok with it.
In the end, offering refunds to those who have a higher perceived risk today, only creates more real risk for everyone going forward.
Great, so they did actually break that rule then.
And even if they did include that wording in the Kickstarter originally, it's still a rule-break regardless.
That's good to know, and doesn't reflect well on them, so I give you points for the fact they did break that rule.
And if they haven't faced any consequences for it, then I'll agree that that's a demonstrable flaw with Kickstarter that you've pointed out.
So, I was wrong to say that none of your points show real flaws with Kickstarter, because that point does, assuming they've not faced meaningful consequences from Kickstarter - cause "backlash" isn't a consequence that amounts to accountability within Kickstarter.
Though, as far as I can see, only that point shows a flaw in Kickstarter, of the ones you made above about CoE. Which is fine, you're still right about that point.
“The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments).
The "full amount" is just your insertion.
An amount stated on KS page is just an amount they need per KS project, whether they need more overall money is a non-factor.
Troll.
Again... Do you read Bro?
From MassivelyOP: Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project”
Were they trolling too?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
That's the first example I've seen of a rule-break by CoE, and it only counts as one if they knew beforehand that the funding wouldn't be enough. Did they?
Yes they did. See here:
Massively OP: The sticking points seem to be the Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments). […] What do you say to those who argue the original funding goal as stated in the Kickstarter was misleading?
Jeromy Walsh:
Snip
Unfortunately, and what this whole thing is about, is we assumed the fact that we were going to be seeking additional funds was common knowledge and somehow it didn’t make it onto our Kickstarter page. It wasn’t intentional. But it happened. While we regret that, it ultimately doesn’t change anything. The commitment we made to our backers is, “you provide us the Kickstarter funds we need, and we commit to delivering you the game.” That hasn’t changed, as we stand by the same commitment today. Regardless of whether other people realized we needed additional funds or not, what’s important is that we did, and we made that commitment to them with that in mind. We stand firm in our commitment.
—————-
Note that when this was brought to light they closed refunds at the same time:
What about the new refund policy? Will you change your mind and offer refunds to those folks?
First, I want to say it was a complete coincidence that we announced our refund policy going forward in the same update where we evidently made people aware we’re still looking for money from investors, etc. Beginning early September we started telling people who contacted us that we were no longer offering refunds. We felt 90 days from the close of Kickstarter was a sufficient cooldown period and any requests that came in after that our answer was no.
We made it explicit in this update because we’d previously said we would let people know what our refund policy going forward would be, before opening the store. And, making the decision we ultimately did came down to a debate between the stigma and perception behind not allowing refunds, and the risk involved in not having a stable bottom line. In the end, we decided it was better to risk putting people off by having a “No refund” policy, than having people pledge, us make decisions based on our current funds, and then having that money taken away.
With respect to offering refunds again, the answer is no. You see, this whole thing is ultimately an issue of perceived risk vs. real risk. For those people who weren’t aware, or didn’t realize that we were raising additional money aside from Kickstarter, there’s now a perceived risk to losing their pledge money that wasn’t there before. But as I said, we knew that we were raising other money, so the real risk to their pledge isn’t any higher today than it was back in May.
That being said, if people react to this perceived increase in risk, and start requesting refunds, our principle goes down, we’ve got less money to develop with, and that creates *real* risk for everyone – us, the people who knew about our need to raise additional funding, and those who didn’t, but who understand and are ok with it.
In the end, offering refunds to those who have a higher perceived risk today, only creates more real risk for everyone going forward.
Great, so they did actually break that rule then.
And even if they did include that wording in the Kickstarter originally, it's still a rule-break regardless.
That's good to know, and doesn't reflect well on them, so I give you points for the fact they did break that rule.
And if they haven't faced any consequences for it, then I'll agree that that's a demonstrable flaw with Kickstarter that you've pointed out.
So, I was wrong to say that none of your points show real flaws with Kickstarter, because that point does, assuming they've not faced meaningful consequences from Kickstarter - cause "backlash" isn't a consequence that amounts to accountability within Kickstarter.
Though, as far as I can see, only that point shows a flaw in Kickstarter, of the ones you made above about CoE. Which is fine, you're still right about that point.
Thank you. As long as we have established that point then it is just a matter of degree whether it was broken once or multiple times.
They were not punished. They kept the money. They shut down refunds at the same time it was questioned.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
That's the first example I've seen of a rule-break by CoE, and it only counts as one if they knew beforehand that the funding wouldn't be enough. Did they?
Yes they did. See here:
Massively OP: The sticking points seem to be the Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments). […] What do you say to those who argue the original funding goal as stated in the Kickstarter was misleading?
Jeromy Walsh:
Snip
Unfortunately, and what this whole thing is about, is we assumed the fact that we were going to be seeking additional funds was common knowledge and somehow it didn’t make it onto our Kickstarter page. It wasn’t intentional. But it happened. While we regret that, it ultimately doesn’t change anything. The commitment we made to our backers is, “you provide us the Kickstarter funds we need, and we commit to delivering you the game.” That hasn’t changed, as we stand by the same commitment today. Regardless of whether other people realized we needed additional funds or not, what’s important is that we did, and we made that commitment to them with that in mind. We stand firm in our commitment.
—————-
Note that when this was brought to light they closed refunds at the same time:
What about the new refund policy? Will you change your mind and offer refunds to those folks?
First, I want to say it was a complete coincidence that we announced our refund policy going forward in the same update where we evidently made people aware we’re still looking for money from investors, etc. Beginning early September we started telling people who contacted us that we were no longer offering refunds. We felt 90 days from the close of Kickstarter was a sufficient cooldown period and any requests that came in after that our answer was no.
We made it explicit in this update because we’d previously said we would let people know what our refund policy going forward would be, before opening the store. And, making the decision we ultimately did came down to a debate between the stigma and perception behind not allowing refunds, and the risk involved in not having a stable bottom line. In the end, we decided it was better to risk putting people off by having a “No refund” policy, than having people pledge, us make decisions based on our current funds, and then having that money taken away.
With respect to offering refunds again, the answer is no. You see, this whole thing is ultimately an issue of perceived risk vs. real risk. For those people who weren’t aware, or didn’t realize that we were raising additional money aside from Kickstarter, there’s now a perceived risk to losing their pledge money that wasn’t there before. But as I said, we knew that we were raising other money, so the real risk to their pledge isn’t any higher today than it was back in May.
That being said, if people react to this perceived increase in risk, and start requesting refunds, our principle goes down, we’ve got less money to develop with, and that creates *real* risk for everyone – us, the people who knew about our need to raise additional funding, and those who didn’t, but who understand and are ok with it.
In the end, offering refunds to those who have a higher perceived risk today, only creates more real risk for everyone going forward.
Great, so they did actually break that rule then.
And even if they did include that wording in the Kickstarter originally, it's still a rule-break regardless.
That's good to know, and doesn't reflect well on them, so I give you points for the fact they did break that rule.
And if they haven't faced any consequences for it, then I'll agree that that's a demonstrable flaw with Kickstarter that you've pointed out.
So, I was wrong to say that none of your points show real flaws with Kickstarter, because that point does, assuming they've not faced meaningful consequences from Kickstarter - cause "backlash" isn't a consequence that amounts to accountability within Kickstarter.
Though, as far as I can see, only that point shows a flaw in Kickstarter, of the ones you made above about CoE. Which is fine, you're still right about that point.
Thank you. As long as we have established that point then it is just a matter of degree whether it was broken once or multiple times.
They were not punished. They kept the money. They shut down refunds at the same time it was questioned.
You're welcome, thanks for persisting to prove a worthwhile point.
And glad to see you re-raise another important one (because I forgot to respond to it above), that they shut down refunds at the same time.
It strikes me as an anxious move by a dev who realizes they're in over their head, but it's still dodgy as fuck to do that.
And I'm pretty hesitant to believe that it's a coincidence they turned off refunds when people realized they'd broken that rule - and realized SBS didn't have all the funding needed.
(I'm sure the following isn't news to you Slap, but @all for any casual observers:) The dodginess I see in that timing is that they're trying to lower their risk for mass refunds when people realize they
a) broke an important Kickstarter rule, and
b) don't actually have enough funding to complete the game, which throws into question whether other future financial backers (e.g. investment firms, publishers) will force changes to the original vision, or whether it gets completed at all.
PS - Hey look! I'm blue! Partial to green, but lovin the blue now!
Congrats~!
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Did Caspian say that the money he was given would complete the entire game, or did he say it would complete something else, like a demo?
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
There was NOTHING on the Kickstarter page that said it was not the whole amount. They "mistakenly" left that part out. It was mentioned in one of the thousands of comments on another page and it was mentioned in random forum posts on their website. They even listed "Stretch goals" to add extra features to the game.
They even said they already had a playable demo (Where'd that go 3 years later?)
We've turned to Kickstarter to fund this project because traditional game publishers won't take this risk. They are incentivized to clone the latest success and merely re-skin it. But not all players want a WoW clone or to play the same game every time. Our innovative ideas come FROM gamers FOR gamers. WE want to play this game, so we turn to YOU to help make that happen.
We also realize that to effectively complete all of these amazing ideas will require a lot of cash. That's why we've invested half a million dollars to self-fund pre-production thus far and have another $500K committed from investors.
We also promised to only go to Kickstarter once we had a playable demo (combat demo released at PAX East) and substantial development to show. This is not just a concept that we're presenting. It's a game in the making that we need your help to bring to fruition.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
But anyhow... we are getting a little off on a tangent here related to this topic. I could go on and on about other issues with CoE but maybe it's best to make new threads to discuss those.
Lets keep this one related to Caspien's tantrums and his threat to "pull" his exclusives from MMORPG and Massively and take them to PCGamer who has run a total of 1 CoE article since it was announced.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Those aren't arguments against Kickstarter. They are arguments against COE. There is the strawman.
Okay. Even though you are the one who injected Kickstarter into this discussion.
An argument against Kickstarter (and crowd-funding in general). A developer attempts to raise money from individuals by encouraging the individuals to believe they are *investing* in their project without providing the same degree of accountability and return as any other financial investment. This can be used, in some cases, to deceive the individual, and may be fraudulent.
Err... this is a Kickstarter project. So it is de facto "injected". Doesn't justify strawmanning my comment with unrelated arguments based on COE perceived failings.
At no point does Kickstarter pretend to be a financial investment. What are you talking about? It is a donation, plain and simple. Kickstarter makes this clear. Using terminology like fraud is just typical internet hyperbole because on that basis virtual any product marketing is fraud. In which case the word loses any practical meaning.
EDIT: *lol* even Slap thinks this thread is about Kickstarter.
You appear to be trying to build a strawman about kickstarters in general, and accuse others of focusing / hating only on COE.
I raised valid concerns about whether or not a backer feels the team is capable of delivering the project, if it is properly funded, or if the goals are even in the realm of possibility yet you ignore, because it dispels your argument?
MadFrenchies comment pissed you off, so rephrased, in what reality are the points being raised invalid, clearly not the one most of the rest of us reside in.
(Though I know of at least one other resident in there with you.)
Those aren't arguments against Kickstarter. They are arguments against COE. There is the strawman.
They are arguments directed at any and all MMORPG kick starters, of which COE is one.
Same applies to CU where I showed even though I had decent reason to believe promises might be kept, clearly things haven't worked out.
Same questions apply to any other KSer, games, new hard goods or otherwise.
Someone puts up a crowd funding effort for flying cars or personal jet packs you can be sure I'm going to want to see a demo of the anti-gravity tech, PhDs of engineering team along with their Nobel prizes for their discovery.
Again, you continue to deflect, you're beat and you know it, time to withdraw gracefully while still possible.
How can I "be beat" by stating that Kickstarter is use at your own risk?
Comments
It is not.
Massively OP: The sticking points seem to be the Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project” and the fact that COE’s Kickstarter verbiage itself doesn’t appear to mention that the $900K sought wasn’t the full amount (it’s buried in the 8000+ comments). […] What do you say to those who argue the original funding goal as stated in the Kickstarter was misleading?
Jeromy Walsh:
Snip
Unfortunately, and what this whole thing is about, is we assumed the fact that we were going to be seeking additional funds was common knowledge and somehow it didn’t make it onto our Kickstarter page. It wasn’t intentional. But it happened. While we regret that, it ultimately doesn’t change anything. The commitment we made to our backers is, “you provide us the Kickstarter funds we need, and we commit to delivering you the game.” That hasn’t changed, as we stand by the same commitment today. Regardless of whether other people realized we needed additional funds or not, what’s important is that we did, and we made that commitment to them with that in mind. We stand firm in our commitment.
—————-
Note that when this was brought to light they closed refunds at the same time:
What about the new refund policy? Will you change your mind and offer refunds to those folks?
First, I want to say it was a complete coincidence that we announced our refund policy going forward in the same update where we evidently made people aware we’re still looking for money from investors, etc. Beginning early September we started telling people who contacted us that we were no longer offering refunds. We felt 90 days from the close of Kickstarter was a sufficient cooldown period and any requests that came in after that our answer was no.
We made it explicit in this update because we’d previously said we would let people know what our refund policy going forward would be, before opening the store. And, making the decision we ultimately did came down to a debate between the stigma and perception behind not allowing refunds, and the risk involved in not having a stable bottom line. In the end, we decided it was better to risk putting people off by having a “No refund” policy, than having people pledge, us make decisions based on our current funds, and then having that money taken away.
With respect to offering refunds again, the answer is no. You see, this whole thing is ultimately an issue of perceived risk vs. real risk. For those people who weren’t aware, or didn’t realize that we were raising additional money aside from Kickstarter, there’s now a perceived risk to losing their pledge money that wasn’t there before. But as I said, we knew that we were raising other money, so the real risk to their pledge isn’t any higher today than it was back in May.
That being said, if people react to this perceived increase in risk, and start requesting refunds, our principle goes down, we’ve got less money to develop with, and that creates *real* risk for everyone – us, the people who knew about our need to raise additional funding, and those who didn’t, but who understand and are ok with it.
In the end, offering refunds to those who have a higher perceived risk today, only creates more real risk for everyone going forward.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
An amount stated on KS page is just an amount they need per KS project, whether they need more overall money is a non-factor.
Troll.
As far as CoE goes, they are still making an effort which, to be honest, is impressive in it's own right, and honors what they said in Kickstarter that this money would be used to make the game.
Keep in mind Kickstarter makes it clear that this is NOT a sale of goods, you are backing an idea, (Which may or may not happen) you are NOT buying a product.
You are not guaranteed their ability to accomplish anything, only that they will make their best effort to do it.
In that light, Mr Walsh is not taking the money to build a house in Maui, and sip pinacolidas on a beach somewhere, he is actively trying to make this game happen, albeit poorly, and looking more like a monkey humping a football as opposed to a professional designer with a clue, but that is not the issue.. he is trying.
And Kickstarter makes it clear, you are responsible for your own buyer beware.
I am getting really tired of needing to explain that to you.
From MassivelyOP:
Kickstarter FAQ line that states, “The funding goal is the amount of money that a creator needs to complete their project”
Were they trolling too?
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
They were not punished. They kept the money. They shut down refunds at the same time it was questioned.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Gut Out!
PS - Hey look! I'm blue! Partial to green, but lovin the blue now!
What, me worry?
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
There was NOTHING on the Kickstarter page that said it was not the whole amount. They "mistakenly" left that part out. It was mentioned in one of the thousands of comments on another page and it was mentioned in random forum posts on their website. They even listed "Stretch goals" to add extra features to the game.
They even said they already had a playable demo (Where'd that go 3 years later?)
We've turned to Kickstarter to fund this project because traditional game publishers won't take this risk. They are incentivized to clone the latest success and merely re-skin it. But not all players want a WoW clone or to play the same game every time. Our innovative ideas come FROM gamers FOR gamers. WE want to play this game, so we turn to YOU to help make that happen.
We also realize that to effectively complete all of these amazing ideas will require a lot of cash. That's why we've invested half a million dollars to self-fund pre-production thus far and have another $500K committed from investors.
We also promised to only go to Kickstarter once we had a playable demo (combat demo released at PAX East) and substantial development to show. This is not just a concept that we're presenting. It's a game in the making that we need your help to bring to fruition.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Lets keep this one related to Caspien's tantrums and his threat to "pull" his exclusives from MMORPG and Massively and take them to PCGamer who has run a total of 1 CoE article since it was announced.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
At no point does Kickstarter pretend to be a financial investment. What are you talking about? It is a donation, plain and simple. Kickstarter makes this clear. Using terminology like fraud is just typical internet hyperbole because on that basis virtual any product marketing is fraud. In which case the word loses any practical meaning.
EDIT: *lol* even Slap thinks this thread is about Kickstarter.