Avatar

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Badges

blamo2000

About

Username
blamo2000
Joined
Visits
485
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
280
Rank
Uncommon
Posts
418
Badges
12
  • Are vague release dates the next legal battleground?

    blamo2000 said:



    Again. You are not following along.  If you do not give a date obviously you cannot be held accountable to a date.  But people giving you money are doing so knowing this.  If you do give a date then you need some accountability to that date.  

    As you said, you would not give money to 90% of the projects you backed if they didn’t have a date. IMHO this is why companies put dates out that they know they will not reach.  There are no repercussions to missing the date.

    So if game development is too hard to forecast then don’t throw a useless date out there just to get people to give you money. 

    Its a fairly simple concept.  
    Not being able to be held accountable isn't accountability.  Why are you against accountability?

    More information, not less, equals more transparency and accountability and sane, reasonable people being able to make better decisions.

    Hiding information is not good.  I want access to the budget.  I want access to all PPE.  I want access to everything.  If I have access, and I see how funds will be budgeted, and I can tell if the project manager believes in magic, has experience, and how risky contributing to the game will be.

    Lets break this down to the core issue and you just say yes or no to the following two questions -

    1) Do you believe potential funders of a game should have information hidden from them, like budgeting and release dates?

    2) Do you think publishers that forced game developers to release buggy games because they missed milestones and went over-budget were doing the right thing?

    You still seem to be unable to grasp this concept.   The claim is that some/most developers cannot accurately give a date.  So, knowing that... they should not give one.  Giving a date that they have no confidence in, or know to be wrong... is misleading at best and fraudulent at worst.     If someone wants to give money for a product with no estimated delivery date, well... assuming that person is an adult.. that is their choice.   As you yourself stated, you would not do that and I think most people won't.   Conversely, if a developer states a date, then they need to deliver reasonably close to what they say or there should be some penalty/opt out for the customer.   This is the 3rd time at least I am explaining it to you so I hope you now understand the difference.  I will not explain it again.

    What is important is that people on both sides do what they say they will do.

    You still have ignored the simple questions I asked.  I do not know why you are for developers hiding information from people, or putting out information they can actually be held accountable for.  

    And, I've said a bunch of times I back games with no or a ridiculous release date and bad project management.  I do that for games I want.  I do not do that for the vast amount of games I back, which is through vine and is to make a return.  Hero-U is a perfect example of the devs you want to litigate out of business, and regulate into doing nothing instead of making games I like.


    Hiding information is not good for anyone.


    People should stop being authoritarians and try to inflict their beliefs on everyone.  Live and let live.  Don't fund and let fund.  More information instead of less.  More freedom instead of the yolk of all your regulations and laws that press the small guys out of business.


    More information.  More transparency.  More accountability I can get behind.  Rules that restrict and hamper small dev teams with big dreams, while consolidating all the power into the hands of the few with big pockets helps no one and hurts everyone.



    I also think it is hilarious you are using the same exact argument in your above response that publishers used to force developers to release bug ridden messes.  You just seem to hate regular gamers and anything that would actually benefit people like me that like mostly low-profile indy games.  
    Kyleran
  • Are vague release dates the next legal battleground?

    Here is an actual response from a Kickstarter developer that has raised over $4M in Crowdfunding:

    Q: The stated timeline of end of 2017 for FULL RELEASE is not a realistic one. Not even close.

    A: Noted. I'm curious, however, what you're basing that on? Is it based on your development experience? Your insider knowledge into what business deals we've been working on? Have you peeked at our Gantt chart? Maybe you feel like using purchased assets from the Unreal Marketplace won't speed up development? Could it be you know that our choice of programming language for the server will slow down development? Anything? You got anything to substantiate your claim?


    This game has not even entered Alpha yet and it’s July 2018. Best case is another year and a half to release.  People gave money based on his statements and defense of the timeline.  Should there be no accountability?  

    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    Quizzical said:
    I have a solution.  If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
    Have you ever celebrated mother's day?  Father's day?  Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day?  Worn deodorant?

    Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have.  I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought."  That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.

    The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
    The problem isn't that the game developer is hiding information from you.  The problem is that the game developer doesn't know when the game will be ready, either.  They could stick an arbitrary date on something and declare it a launch, but a pre-alpha game that is nominally launched isn't really what you're looking for.

    If you wait until after a game launches before paying for it, there isn't any ambiguity about future release dates.  You pay today, and you get to play today, as soon as you're done with the download.  If you pay for a game before the promise is that you'll get to play immediately, then you know full well that you don't know when--if ever--the game will really be ready for you.
    You can't tell me, for example, CoE's timeline for all that was promised was a sound timeline.  But he ardently defended it at the time against criticism.  In fact, crowdfunding projects have routinely listed timelines that seem much more marketing than actual plan.

    Backers are only getting the marketing, with no good recourse to evaluate the claims made.  That's an issue.  More transparency and an independent investigative review of project claims only serves to help consumers make an informed decision.
    Very well then:  what do you propose?  If something is unknowable even to the people most directly involved in developing the game, how do you propose to make it known to people with only a casual interest?

    Sometimes what happens in large programming projects is that you put a bunch of work into developing something, and then you realize that it just doesn't work.  In the context of game design, one way this could happen is that you put a bunch of work into creating a game mechanic and then, once you can test it, you discover that it just isn't fun.  You then end up having to toss out a bunch of work and redesign some major things on the fly.  You don't know where or how often it's going to happen, but it can cause all sorts of problems when it does.
    As said a few time... don’t list a date.
    How is not giving information any sort of accountability?  Its the opposite of accountability.

    Then that rules out my funding 99% of the KS I have.  Why would I ever fund a game that I am sure is not managed well enough to be on budget/time?  

    And, I'll ask again, did you side with publishers who forced a dev to release a buggy, unfinished game that was over budget and missed milestones? 
    MadFrenchieSlapshot1188
  • Are vague release dates the next legal battleground?

    blamo2000 said:
    I really don't understand all the anger everyone seems to have towards crowd funding.  If it angers you, don't participate.  

    I bet the same people that get mad when a dev misses a release date would also get out the pitchforks and join the angry mobs when a publisher forced a dev to release a buggy game "early."

    I hate when there is no tentative release date for a game.  So much so I do not contribute to funding games that don't seem to have even a the ability to make a guesstimate (with a few exceptions).  But I don't want them taken to court or sued, or limit other people's ability to freely and openly make a decision to make a funding contribution or not.

    I really don't understand why people seem so hellbent on forcing their view on the world and how things should be on others.  If a game is asking for crowd funding and doesn't have a project management track record of being able to release a game within a reasonably competent frame of time and budget, just ignore it.  Problem solved.  Stick to only buying finished products or developers with proven track records of generally being able to release on time and budget - like inXile.  

    In Troika got back together and crowd funded a game I would throw money at them hand over fist knowing full well their track record.  Sometimes the higher risk is worth it for the possible reward.  Live and let live and stop trying to force the world and everyone in it to comply with how you think things should be.  Freedom to choose always trumps authoritarianism.  
    So you think there should be ZERO accountability for developers that publish a date, take money from customers,  have no refund policy, and then push back release dates by YEARS?

    It seems like a strange and one-sided way to look at things.  These transactions have TWO parties.  Both should have some accountability.
    How did you feel when a publisher forced a developer to release a game before it was finished because the dev went over budget and missed milestones?

    Did you side with the publisher holding the developer accountable?  The publisher being the funder and all?  The second party in the transaction.  

    Quizzical said:
    I have a solution.  If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
    Have you ever celebrated mother's day?  Father's day?  Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day?  Worn deodorant?

    Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have.  I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought."  That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.

    The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.

    It does affect me directly - when a dev looking for funding is unable to give an estimated release date, or seems to not have any project management experience, or any track record to speak of regarding keeping to a budget and time constraints - I don't fund because of it.  If they do, and it is a game I want to play and don't think I will get without contributing, then I don't.  

    Also, I celebrate mother's day because my mother would be sad if I just ignored her on her special day.  She, and all mothers, deserve a special day of recognition.  I don't do it because of marketing.  And I didn't celebrate father's day when my father was alive because he gave a shit about it as much as I do.  My father's day present from my wife to me is a day of peace.  My wife is not allowed to yell at me or force me to do anything or go anywhere - for one day.  It costs zero dollars and benefits every company zero dollars.  Sometimes my kid's art class at school has them make me something - but my kids have spent zero dollars on me on father's day.  

    I don't know why you are trying to use such twisted logic saying people are somehow pressured into funding games with poor project management.  Its not true.  

    Funding is a risk.  Be smart and don't fund any games if it causes everyone so much anxiety and butthurt and enough rage to sue crowd funding into oblivion.

    Let the rest of us use our brains to make smart and/or stupid decisions as we want.  Its risk/reward.  

    Crowd funding is around because publishers/capitalists analyzed the game or developers were too risky or not profitable enough to fund.  We can decide if the game is interesting enough to us, we can fund the risky project, usually be non or semi-professionals with no project management experience.  

    Magic isn't real - making a law stating people without the experience to know the correct budget or time needed to make a game have to magically accurately know this information isn't going to help anyone on either side of the transaction.  Period.  Even companies with experienced project managers who have put out tons of games have big issues with this.  Especially when it comes to getting out physical goods from what I have read.  
    MadFrenchie
  • Clicker Heroes 2 Beta Kicks Off with Infinite Adventures for Aspiring ARPGers - MMORPG.com News

    Anyone else think it should be illegal to turn a noun into a verb?
    mazut
  • Beta Delayed 'Between Days and Weeks' - Adherence to EU Regulations Caused Some Delay - Camelot Unch


    You actually left out what might be the crux of it at the beginning of the paragraph you cite.  The system cannot provide the privacy as an addition to an already existing system; it must be built from the ground up to include the privacy requirements needed to comply with GDPR.  If the system they were using was not built from the ground up to meet the GDPR standards, they would've had to migrate to a new system for storing PII and other consumer information.

    Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
    But that assumes they have a reason for the PII information being tied to the beta client.  Are there purchases allowed in-game during the beta?  If not, why is any of it tied to the client?  

    I agree they would have to change their database and storage, but that wouldn't involve moving game developers to work on it I wouldn't think.  One person above stated the "beta" patch is being released and just the beta date being pushed back, which makes me think the delay was, rightfully, on the admin side/non-game dev side.  The changes in data storage/collection took up admin/non-game dev hours, and not game dev hours.

    But what I still want to know from the horses mouth is that they didn't have and won't have any of the ESO data collection crap in the game in the US/NA. 

    I have to say, I like the key elements of GDRP.  I hope we can pass something like that in the US.  
    MadFrenchieLonestryderGdemami