But I want poop besides extra game copies... like a character with my likeness, a high dollar collector's edition, an in-game town named after me or something along those lines.
A lot of people (myself included) don't like kickstarters. I think there will come a time when a lot of the less publicized ones who succeeded thier targets will fail to produce anything.
I kind of agree with @ajwz and @The_New_Romance. There doesn't seem to be much reason to have Kickstarter since they already are able to create the game. If they were trying to build up the initial set of funds for the game, sure, but since that isn't an issue I don't see any advantage for a kickstarter.
With a relatively small development team, any time spend doing extra non-game objectives, T-shirts, boxed version, etc seems like it would have an adverse effect on their primary objective.
They a;ready are planing to do BG2:EE... If all go well they won,t need any kickstarter... I have supported Wasteland 2 and both ShadowRun game... But mpt everything need to pass by there
A lot of people (myself included) don't like kickstarters. I think there will come a time when a lot of the less publicized ones who succeeded thier targets will fail to produce anything.
I like KickStarter. KickStarter allows me and other of similar interests to fund games that we couldn't otherwise obtain without KickStarter(or the equivalent of KickStarter).
True, there is a risk of funding a project that fails, whether that be a bad game or a game that is never released. If you're terrified of losing a 10 or 15 dollar investment on a single game that's designed to fill your niche(hopefully), then KickStarter isn't for you. I've wasted a lot more on new $50-60 games countless times so $10-15 on the average KickStarter game is pretty tame to me.(Although I have pledged more than that for Wasteland 2)
But anyways, I've only pledged towards those I am confident will turn out alright, as any reasonable person should do. I have confidence in inXile, DoubleBear, Harebrained Schemes, and Stoic to deliver. And should Overhaul Games and Trent Oster KickStart a game, I wouldn't hesitate to pledge towards their game either.
On topic though, I don't think any of the enhanced editions will need or really justify a KickStarter. If you're going to do a KickStarter, I figure you might as well make a new game.
I like kickstarter as well. Always figured that if I were a billionaire, one of the things I'd do would be to fund game development without regards for marketability, political correctness, target audiences, etc. Just imagine those sweet, story-driven, single-player RPGs where it'd take 30 hours just to play through the introduction.
I think the appeal of a kickstarter package is that it lets us, the gamers, feel more involved. It's not just "yeah, I bought that", it's "I financially supported that product from the beginning, by more than I had to".
I suppose Beamdog could use that, but I doubt they'll need to. I would pay far more than US$20 for this game though, and do have a weakness for quality wearables. Boo plushies at the $30 level anyone?
Kickstarter takes 5% of the funds so if you don't need it you basically throw 5% of your funds/income away. True that some would rather pay 100$ to get some tiny bonus and feel good about themselves rather than buy 5 copies of the game though. Not read up that much on the kickstarter rules but I'd bet that any funded project that don't meet delivery or a certain standard would be in debt for the rest of their lives. I wouldn't expect to get my money back on a failed project but I do think kickstarter would work hard to do just that.
I really don't see WoTC and the other IP holders of the Baldur's Gate franchise giving the rights of one of their products to a company that has to appeal to a gamer based money raising scheme.
Their reaction would quite clearly be "if you don't have the money to license our IP why are you even bothering us?".
If a BG title was done wouldn't it still be under the thumb of a publisher? I don't have enough info on that to hold an oppinion either way, only to raise it as interesting.
@Jozape It's not just the risk of a project failing that is the issue, what's more likely is a lot of unscrupulous people are using them as a way to make a quick buck, promising projects which will never materialise, or being wildly deceptive on what they are actually going to deliver.
I might go for this.. Say they finish up the EE's (BG, IWD's PS:T) and they're sitting on a good chunk of change after paying expenses, salaries etc.. They then come out with a kickstarter where they pledge a huge amount of company cash plus whatever the Kick starter makes to produce a huge, truly epic BG 3 AAA release because they had the additional funds to staff up for the project..count me in.
As an aside I believe either the Shadowrun guy or Wasteland guy put up 100k of his own money to kickstart the kick starter. That's awesome and shows commitment putting money where mouth is..if Beamdog/Overhaul did this on a BG3 that'd be cool..
Oh, I'd like to also say I'd only be into this for a 2D ISO/party based D&D game.. I'd reckon that this kickstarter would raise ALOT of money too..especially if they started it off with a huge opening investment in the project..
@Jozape It's not just the risk of a project failing that is the issue, what's more likely is a lot of unscrupulous people are using them as a way to make a quick buck, promising projects which will never materialise, or being wildly deceptive on what they are actually going to deliver.
Those kinds of projects are, I think, easy to spot. They set their funding goals low(knowing they won't get as many funders), it's a one man team that nobody's heard of, there's no face or even voice, and they promise a Final Fantasy killer. You have to be very naive to fall for that kind of scam.
And the beautiful thing is, if they don't even manage to reach their meager funding goals, they get nothing. No money goes to the project unless the funding goals are met, which cannot be changed.
There's still room for big scams, like OUYA might turn out to be. But I don't think it's as big of a problem as the anti-KickStarter crowd make it out to be.
If freaking Cheetahmen II remade with bug fixes can generate over $90,000 in a kickstarter over a month's worth of time, then damned if there shouldn't be one for BG. However, I think it would be more appropriate for BG3, as they're already planning to do BGII EE, and it mostly involves bug fixes and added content, not the creation of an entire new game.
Comments
I think there will come a time when a lot of the less publicized ones who succeeded thier targets will fail to produce anything.
With a relatively small development team, any time spend doing extra non-game objectives, T-shirts, boxed version, etc seems like it would have an adverse effect on their primary objective.
I have supported Wasteland 2 and both ShadowRun game... But mpt everything need to pass by there
True, there is a risk of funding a project that fails, whether that be a bad game or a game that is never released. If you're terrified of losing a 10 or 15 dollar investment on a single game that's designed to fill your niche(hopefully), then KickStarter isn't for you. I've wasted a lot more on new $50-60 games countless times so $10-15 on the average KickStarter game is pretty tame to me.(Although I have pledged more than that for Wasteland 2)
But anyways, I've only pledged towards those I am confident will turn out alright, as any reasonable person should do. I have confidence in inXile, DoubleBear, Harebrained Schemes, and Stoic to deliver. And should Overhaul Games and Trent Oster KickStart a game, I wouldn't hesitate to pledge towards their game either.
On topic though, I don't think any of the enhanced editions will need or really justify a KickStarter. If you're going to do a KickStarter, I figure you might as well make a new game.
I suppose Beamdog could use that, but I doubt they'll need to. I would pay far more than US$20 for this game though, and do have a weakness for quality wearables. Boo plushies at the $30 level anyone?
Not read up that much on the kickstarter rules but I'd bet that any funded project that don't meet delivery or a certain standard would be in debt for the rest of their lives. I wouldn't expect to get my money back on a failed project but I do think kickstarter would work hard to do just that.
Their reaction would quite clearly be "if you don't have the money to license our IP why are you even bothering us?".
It's not just the risk of a project failing that is the issue, what's more likely is a lot of unscrupulous people are using them as a way to make a quick buck, promising projects which will never materialise, or being wildly deceptive on what they are actually going to deliver.
Say they finish up the EE's (BG, IWD's PS:T) and they're sitting on a good chunk of change after paying expenses, salaries etc..
They then come out with a kickstarter where they pledge a huge amount of company cash plus whatever the Kick starter makes to produce a huge, truly epic BG 3 AAA release because they had the additional funds to staff up for the project..count me in.
As an aside I believe either the Shadowrun guy or Wasteland guy put up 100k of his own money to kickstart the kick starter. That's awesome and shows commitment putting money where mouth is..if Beamdog/Overhaul did this on a BG3 that'd be cool..
I'd reckon that this kickstarter would raise ALOT of money too..especially if they started it off with a huge opening investment in the project..
And the beautiful thing is, if they don't even manage to reach their meager funding goals, they get nothing. No money goes to the project unless the funding goals are met, which cannot be changed.
There's still room for big scams, like OUYA might turn out to be. But I don't think it's as big of a problem as the anti-KickStarter crowd make it out to be.