5 ms·

in essence, the crowd-funding model is working just fine. Game publishing will never be the same.

by sami36 14y ago

Devilboy 14y ago
Only one single game in that list actually got released and half of the rest are way overdue.
- sami36 14y ago
  the dev cycle for a game is 12~24 months. The first Kickstarter breakthrough was Double Fine Adventure in Feb 2012. It's on track as most are per the article. It's too early to tell but I don't expect a higher failure rate than publisher backed games.I'll concede much, most creators were over-optimistic with their timelines.
  - thristian 14y ago
    Also, a lot of the ship-dates were based on the original funding goals. If you're planning to make a game with budget X, then fans throw budget 3*X at you and demand you produce something more epic in scope, it's only natural the development time becomes more epic to match.
- belorn 14y ago
  But what does it actually mean compared to other game companies? Looking at valve and blizzard, both has had a long standing style of only releasing a game once its is "done", no matter the years that has passed since the first estimated release date. And maybe this is wrong and the future of game development will shed those tendencies. Looking historically on game development, rushing a product out of the door to meet a release date has rarely produced a good game (anyone heard of E.T?). So the question might be, what alternative do we have between rushing a product for relase date, and waiting until it is "done", which might mean fifteen years to find out that the game is rather crappy (duke nukem forever). We can also look at development processes like Debian, and compare a static release schedule with a dynamic one.
  - ctdonath 14y ago
    waiting until it is "done", which might mean fifteen years to find out that the game is rather crappy (duke nukem forever) DNF wasn't done. IIRC, the developer gave up, sold what they had, which was tidied up and shipped otherwise as-is. It's another example of shipping a product before it's "done". ...and sometimes an idea just doesn't work out, no matter how much effort.
  - intended 14y ago
    Other companies don't pre-sell games or promises before the game is launched, though.
    - belorn 14y ago
      Thats the issue that arrives when return of investment is a copy of a game and not stock options. If one treat kickstarter as an investment, then there is not much of a difference.
    - whatusername 14y ago
      http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111166-10-Year-Old-Duke-Nukem-Forever-Preorder-Honored-With-Swag http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111166-10-Year-Old...
    - hythloday 14y ago
      Not sure what you mean here? Pre-orders are an absolutely critical part of publishers' revenue, which is the cause of the weird structural problems around magazine reviews (where 8/10 means "below-average game").
      - jivatmanx 14y ago
        Stock market analysts do the same thing as game critics, and never, ever give sell ratings: http://www.cnbc.com/id/42790061/Stock_Analysts_Too_Scared_of_Sell_Ratings_or_Too_Stupid http://www.cnbc.com/id/42790061/Stock_Analysts_Too_Scared_of... I'm guessing in both cases it's because the best raters get the best access from companies. Same problem probably exists in other industries too.
- coffeeaddicted 14y ago
  Two games - Faster Than Light and Project Giana. Also I haven't seen too many project in the game industry yet which were right on time, so as long as the guys still work on it that doesn't worry me too much.
aw3c2 14y ago
that really is not what I took from it. many (half?) of them are behind on their schedule. 3(?) good ones were released. they were successful for the developers (and only those were selected). for the funders there really is not much closure yet to say anything about the future.
- pfisch 14y ago
  Most of the other projects have been posting updates so they definitely are working on the products. Unless those devs are really in dire straits it would be kind of silly for them to abandon the games. They already have so much time put into development and the point of a kickstarter for games is not to make a bunch of money on the kickstarter. It is to make a bunch of money on selling the game since a publisher isn't basically taking everything on the actual sales of the game. Then there is more money to be made on actually getting to own the IP because you didn't get gouged by a publisher. If they were going to run off with the money they already should have by now. At this point it is really in their interest to finish the game. It isn't a guarantee of course, but it seems much more likely now then it did when the games were initially funded.

in essence, the crowd-funding model is working just fine. Game publishing will never be the same.

by sami36 14y ago

in essence, the crowd-funding model is working just fine. Game publishing will never be the same.

Devilboy 14y ago

Only one single game in that list actually got released and half of the rest are way overdue.

sami36 14y ago
the dev cycle for a game is 12~24 months. The first Kickstarter breakthrough was Double Fine Adventure in Feb 2012. It's on track as most are per the article. It's too early to tell but I don't expect a higher failure rate than publisher backed games.I'll concede much, most creators were over-optimistic with their timelines.
- thristian 14y ago
  Also, a lot of the ship-dates were based on the original funding goals. If you're planning to make a game with budget X, then fans throw budget 3*X at you and demand you produce something more epic in scope, it's only natural the development time becomes more epic to match.
belorn 14y ago
But what does it actually mean compared to other game companies? Looking at valve and blizzard, both has had a long standing style of only releasing a game once its is "done", no matter the years that has passed since the first estimated release date. And maybe this is wrong and the future of game development will shed those tendencies. Looking historically on game development, rushing a product out of the door to meet a release date has rarely produced a good game (anyone heard of E.T?). So the question might be, what alternative do we have between rushing a product for relase date, and waiting until it is "done", which might mean fifteen years to find out that the game is rather crappy (duke nukem forever). We can also look at development processes like Debian, and compare a static release schedule with a dynamic one.
- ctdonath 14y ago
  waiting until it is "done", which might mean fifteen years to find out that the game is rather crappy (duke nukem forever) DNF wasn't done. IIRC, the developer gave up, sold what they had, which was tidied up and shipped otherwise as-is. It's another example of shipping a product before it's "done". ...and sometimes an idea just doesn't work out, no matter how much effort.
- intended 14y ago
  Other companies don't pre-sell games or promises before the game is launched, though.
  - belorn 14y ago
    Thats the issue that arrives when return of investment is a copy of a game and not stock options. If one treat kickstarter as an investment, then there is not much of a difference.
  - whatusername 14y ago
    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111166-10-Year-Old-Duke-Nukem-Forever-Preorder-Honored-With-Swag http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111166-10-Year-Old...
  - hythloday 14y ago
    Not sure what you mean here? Pre-orders are an absolutely critical part of publishers' revenue, which is the cause of the weird structural problems around magazine reviews (where 8/10 means "below-average game").
    - jivatmanx 14y ago
      Stock market analysts do the same thing as game critics, and never, ever give sell ratings: http://www.cnbc.com/id/42790061/Stock_Analysts_Too_Scared_of_Sell_Ratings_or_Too_Stupid http://www.cnbc.com/id/42790061/Stock_Analysts_Too_Scared_of... I'm guessing in both cases it's because the best raters get the best access from companies. Same problem probably exists in other industries too.
coffeeaddicted 14y ago
Two games - Faster Than Light and Project Giana. Also I haven't seen too many project in the game industry yet which were right on time, so as long as the guys still work on it that doesn't worry me too much.

aw3c2 14y ago

that really is not what I took from it. many (half?) of them are behind on their schedule. 3(?) good ones were released. they were successful for the developers (and only those were selected). for the funders there really is not much closure yet to say anything about the future.

pfisch 14y ago
Most of the other projects have been posting updates so they definitely are working on the products. Unless those devs are really in dire straits it would be kind of silly for them to abandon the games. They already have so much time put into development and the point of a kickstarter for games is not to make a bunch of money on the kickstarter. It is to make a bunch of money on selling the game since a publisher isn't basically taking everything on the actual sales of the game. Then there is more money to be made on actually getting to own the IP because you didn't get gouged by a publisher. If they were going to run off with the money they already should have by now. At this point it is really in their interest to finish the game. It isn't a guarantee of course, but it seems much more likely now then it did when the games were initially funded.