3 ms·

Do you think the costs and complexity to develop a game this way are too high now? I know there is the occasional Angry Birds, but I would imagine that it would

Do you think the costs and complexity to develop a game this way are too high now? I know there is the occasional Angry Birds, but I would imagine that it would be fairly hard to coordinate the number of people needed to build a serious or complex game? Has any game been developed via Kickstarter?

wbc 8y ago
Well I think this counts as a AAA game, but how "developed" is a bit controversial: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen
leakybit 8y ago
I would say it easier than ever to make a game. You have game engines, like Unity and Unreal, asset stores where you can buy graphics, and a distribution system; steam.
Tossrock 8y ago
Pillars of Eternity was successfully funded through Kickstarter, and they just put out the sequel, which also had a Kickstarter campaign.
- baud147258 8y ago
  I think they got some other funding sources, in addition to Kickstarter.
Mirioron 8y ago
>Do you think the costs and complexity to develop a game this way are too high now? There's two answers to this depending on what you mean by "develop a game". 1. This is the "let's make a game like X, but better" category. If you're talking about developing a game that companies like current day Blizzard do, then the answer is probably yes. These are games that aren't trying to do something new or necessarily even focus on the fun aspect. They are more about making a game of a specific type that has already existed before, but they're just trying to do it better. Usually they don't even try to do it better in terms of how fun it is, but rather how impressive and amazing it is to the player. This is where the push for graphics and all those things comes from. This can require a large amount of investment if you're trying to create a game in a popular genre. These are also the types of games that players usually dream up when they think about their "dream game" (a mash up of other types of games). 2. If you're talking about developing a game that is fun and new, that could seem like a new genre, then I think the answer is no, but with an asterisk. We don't understand game design well enough to be able to argue that something is or is not fun without trying and testing it. We can guess, but sometimes even rather boring activities become fun in a game if done well. We can reason about it after the fact, but we can't sit down with a blank piece of paper, come up with a game design and say "this is going to be fun!" without it falling into category #1. This means that there's plenty of room for people to explore, but it also means that we can't guarantee success. As a result this might require a lot of iteration. >Has any game been developed via Kickstarter? Yes. Pillars of Eternity, Pillars of Eternity II, FTL, Elite: Dangerous, Factorio, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Divinity: Original Sin, Divinity: Original Sin 2 and many more. Oh, and I guess there's also Star Citizen.

wbc 8y ago

Well I think this counts as a AAA game, but how "developed" is a bit controversial: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cig/star-citizen

leakybit 8y ago

I would say it easier than ever to make a game. You have game engines, like Unity and Unreal, asset stores where you can buy graphics, and a distribution system; steam.

Tossrock 8y ago

Pillars of Eternity was successfully funded through Kickstarter, and they just put out the sequel, which also had a Kickstarter campaign.

baud147258 8y ago
I think they got some other funding sources, in addition to Kickstarter.

Mirioron 8y ago

>Do you think the costs and complexity to develop a game this way are too high now? There's two answers to this depending on what you mean by "develop a game". 1. This is the "let's make a game like X, but better" category. If you're talking about developing a game that companies like current day Blizzard do, then the answer is probably yes. These are games that aren't trying to do something new or necessarily even focus on the fun aspect. They are more about making a game of a specific type that has already existed before, but they're just trying to do it better. Usually they don't even try to do it better in terms of how fun it is, but rather how impressive and amazing it is to the player. This is where the push for graphics and all those things comes from. This can require a large amount of investment if you're trying to create a game in a popular genre. These are also the types of games that players usually dream up when they think about their "dream game" (a mash up of other types of games). 2. If you're talking about developing a game that is fun and new, that could seem like a new genre, then I think the answer is no, but with an asterisk. We don't understand game design well enough to be able to argue that something is or is not fun without trying and testing it. We can guess, but sometimes even rather boring activities become fun in a game if done well. We can reason about it after the fact, but we can't sit down with a blank piece of paper, come up with a game design and say "this is going to be fun!" without it falling into category #1. This means that there's plenty of room for people to explore, but it also means that we can't guarantee success. As a result this might require a lot of iteration. >Has any game been developed via Kickstarter? Yes. Pillars of Eternity, Pillars of Eternity II, FTL, Elite: Dangerous, Factorio, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Divinity: Original Sin, Divinity: Original Sin 2 and many more. Oh, and I guess there's also Star Citizen.