The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
Broken Age: Double Fine's 3.3 Million Dollar Kickstarter Game
Posts
My Backloggery
$30 coming from Britain.
Love Double Fine man, made such awesome games recently.
That video is got me reaching for my wallet within seconds.
Can't really thank them enough, Iron Brigade and Brutal Legend are in my top 10 on the 360. Costume Quest was awesome too. Got Stacking on my XBLA 'to play' list, same as Psychonauts on Steam. Happy Action Theatre is a total riot, need to get that Sesame Street game, the demo was way fun. If only I could stop playing Iron Brigade I'd get through a few more of their titles.
And man, those classics like Day of the Tentacle, amazing.
You could easily spend 2-3 million on a game like this so I doubt they're going to run out of ways to spend the money.
Wait, I want that. LORNE! Get on this!
Two hours at class = another $100,000
Fucking insane.
This is the one chance to teach them that the industry is not entirely decided by dudebros and children and that they can take their bullet points and marketing numbers and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.
And by the way, if you haven't played Stacking or Costume Quest you don't even deserve to be part of this!
___
NNID: carmofin
3DS: 2852 6971 9745
Throw me a PM if you add me
Now I feel like a traitor, leaving it gathering digital dust on my hard drive for so long.
I've unlocked the Stacking gear in Trenched, does that count?
Holy shit, the hours I put into Brutal Legend
This is the most awesome thing, I wish I had a counter on my desktop.
Must hipster bullshit invade every corner of the internet?
Now I'm expecting something awesome...
It's insane. INSANE.
Yeah...Umm...What? Because you want to pledge some money towards a specific type of game you have to have played different genres of games by the same company to be worthy of pledging?
Well, I guess I'm not allowed to put my money towards this. I'm sure Tim Schafer is real glad about that.
Steam - Minty D. Vision!
Origin/BF3 - MintyDVision
$815,096 pledged of $400,000 goal
33 days to go
How long until $1mil?
Isn't it like, lunchtime in the US?
I love both games, but you'd be surprisd to hear Double Fine gets more support from their onlin shop than the actual purchase of their games.
But everyone should experience the Stacking demo
Just saying that it's pretty hypocritical that folks come out of their corners crying about how adventure games aren't being made anymore, when they haven't even played the ones that companies like Double Fine have been putting out already (thereas proving that it's a worthwhile genre).
Stacking in particular is quite a gem for adventure gamers and I doubt that more then a small fracture of people putting down their 15+ dollars have even had a glance at it.
Isn't it a little insane that people are willing to pay that money for something that doesn't even exist yet, while they can't even be arsed to invest a few hours of their time to try out a game that was specifically made for them already?
___
NNID: carmofin
3DS: 2852 6971 9745
Throw me a PM if you add me
It's only hypocritical once you've invented thousands of imaginary people who:
1. Cry about a lack of adventure games.
2. Haven't bought Stacking.
3. Donated to this.
Even if those people exist maybe there are extenuating circumstances, like for example these imaginary people only play games on their PCs and therefore can't possibly play Stacking.
I, too, hate all of those hypocrites who routinely break into Double Fine's offices and urinate on Tim Schafer because he refuses to make Grim Fandango 2. Those bastards!
Steam: MightyPotatoKing
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Maybe if you were a real fan, Ron Gilbert wouldn't have died of AIDS!
Here is the letter (spoiled)
First, I would like to applaud Double Fine's vision of producing a game free of forced outside interference that comes from traditional financial backers in the gaming industry. I think the drive to produce a creatively pure product is admirable and, in most circumstances, will produce higher quality and more innovative games.
However, I have a few misgivings about the capital contribution of Double Fine as well as the proposed rewards structure. In short, I am worried about the lack of any required responsibility on Double Fine's part to its donors, as well as the potential huge financial windfall for Double Fine games based on this funding model.
As to my first point, while I believe that Double Fine has great management and is a responsible business, I feel that with no recourse to the people who have donated to fund this game, Double Fine could either advance its self interest at the cost of the proposed project or worse yet, never deliver the game at all. Since there is no contract between the donors and Double Fine governing how the donations are spent, Double Fine could siphon money away from the project to fund another project, or abandon the project entirely without providing recourse to the donors. With a traditional pre-order model, if the game is never delivered, the consumer can have its pre-order money refunded, or in the extreme sue the game developer and/or producer for its money back. With this funding model, that is impossible.
Even if Double Fine did produce a game, it could be totally different than advertised (though unlikely). What assurances can Double Fine give to the people funding the proposal that Double Fine will not misappropriate funds or produce something other than described? From your bold proposal it seems that Double Fine will monitor community feedback, but Double Fine is under no obligation to incorporate this feedback or listen to its funding community.
To assuage this fear of misappropriation, I would find it helpful if Double Fine would state how much of its own capital it will invest in the project. Its implied in the project description that even small independent games, like the proposed project, could have costs of production in the millions. But the project proposal never clearly states what the project’s total cost will be or if Double Fine will be investing any of its own money in the project. If Double Fine could estimate the project’s cost as well as state what percentage of money it will invest in the proposed game, I think Double Fine could alleviate some of the fears of the project never reaching completion or delivery of a low quality project. I realize that because of the structure of this funding, these fears can never be completely dismissed.
My second point, on an ethical level, is far more troubling. Double Fine is asking for people to donate money with no strings attached to fund a game, but promises them nothing if the game does incredibly well. In fact, Double Fine games provides little actual value to donors, aside from the donors’ free copy of the game. At a basic level, Double Fine is asking for free capital, something that it does not have to pay interest on or repay. If the game does incredibly well, as the enthusiasm for the project suggests it will, Double Fine stands to make a considerable amount of money. Since Double Fine doesn’t have to repay any of its capital, every dollar of realized revenue form a sale is straight profit for Double Fine. In addition, Double Fine will retain the copyright to the game’s code as well as copyright protection for the story, etc. With a successful game, the potential value of this intellectual property could be quite large. So Double Fine will take donations from people to produce a game free of outside influences, but with the potential to earn Double Fine tremendous profits without any payment to the people who funded the project. I wholeheartedly support the first part, but I take objection to the second part. I think on a very basic level its a redistribution of wealth. Why doesn’t Double Fine offer some profit sharing with its donors? If Double Fine is contributing a large amount of capital, why doesn’t Double Fine structure the profit sharing such that it is repaid in full first before any money goes out, but then reward donors? What will become of this surplus of wealth if the game is incredibly popular? Will it go towards funding future games? Will it discount the price of the game? Will it simply line the pockets of the shareholders of Double Fine, Inc. and increase their relative wealth?
I know that the typical response to these fears is simply, “if you don’t like it, don’t donate.” However, Kickstarter is a platform that can be used to fund truly “unprofitable” projects that only have aesthetic or cultural value. The potential for abuse here, especially from a corporation, is incredibly high. If a corporation did abuse that trust, then I fear that there would be backlash against not only the corporation, but also Kickstarter and other funding initiative like Kickstarter. This would hurt future projects and undermine what Kickstarter and its ilk are trying to accomplish.
I am also incredibly suspicious of a corporation, a profit seeking entity, to ask for “donations” as opposed to raising capital through a more traditional funding method. I realize that the goal is to disable outside control of the project, but I think this could be accomplished through a bank loan or a series of microloans as opposed to straight free capital. If that is truly impossible, please elaborate on why.
As a final note to my second point, why is this game being created under Double Fine’s corporate umbrella? All of the above questions would could be easily dealt with, if the proposed game was created under a newly formed non-profit entity, which, would be governed by strong laws dealing with the use of donations as well as required transparency.
I hope the best for Double Fine and, as an avid video game player with fond memories of Day of the Tentacle, I hope that the game is of the quality the gaming community associates with Tim Schafer. However, I think that there are large ramifications of creating the game through community donations and ask that Double Fine provide stronger guarantees to donors, better disclosure of its financial funding of the project, as well as revenue sharing with donors once sales eclipse a certain threshold.
I think that a corporation asking for donations to make a product that they will sell is wrong. Please see my letter for a deeper discussion of why. Mostly, I think if they really wanted to do this properly, Double Fine should have formed a non-profit to create the game and accept donations, so it doesn't become a way to milk people for free money and then turn around and line their pockets. I realize some things that they will do such as translations or translations to different platforms were beyond the original scope of their proposal, but seriously, at the end of the day this just increases Double Fine's sales and revenue. I don't feel good about the application of this.
I want a Kickstarter for....Schmalpha Protocol
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Really? Can you?
I'm being serious. How can an adventure game cost $3m?
Unless you're contracting Vin Diesel as voice talent, you're not going to have the same budget in a game like this I wouldn't think. I think $400k is a highball estimate for the game itself.
So what?
This isn't some random dude on the internet collecting money. If DoubleFine doesn't deliver a game, that company is done. You are only as good as your reputation in this industry and fleecing their most loyal fans would ruin them.
I guess you could say DoubleFine's collateral in this is their reputation, and it's worth a whole lot more than a few million bucks.
I feel like their crime in this scenario for you is that they're doing too well with the donations and aren't struggling enough.
And you maybe have an overestimation of how big and financially successful DoubleFine is.
Yeah that's why I gave them my money. Also because at the end of it I'm going to get a product worth at least $30 to me.
I feel super ripped off!
...I am far more excited about this. You have the gods of adventure games making another point-and-click adventure. Tim fucking Schafer and Ron [expletive] Gilbert. :shock: Without publisher pressure!
I'm sorry, Psychonauts, but Maniac Mansion, Monkey Islands 1 & 2, Full Throttle, Grim Fandango, Day of the Tentacle... these games all have a far more significant place in my heart.
This kickstarter allows them to make their case to players directly, rather than a publishers. Instead of telling a publisher "hey, this game could make you rich," they are going directly to fans and gaming communities and going "hey, does this look like fun? We can make if for you cheap!"
The only point and click I've played is the Myst franchise and Monkey Island SE so I will donate this evening.
Bad analogy, considering publishers share in the profits. They're selling pre-orders for this game far, far in advance. That's all.
In some respects, I agree with you that the "good will" value of Double Fine might be enough to offset the risk that they would misappropriate the funds. But, still without more transparency, who knows what Double Fine would do with the excess money raised. If the game comes in under 100k of the budget, do they take that money and do what with it? Pay their rent? Return it pro rata to donators? Produce an expansion? Reduce the price? I just worry that it gets lumped into a bucket with the rest of the Double Fine's funds. This defeats people's reasons for donating the money. They wanted to see a game get made, but now since their is so much, it is being used to fund something they didn't agree to or is just extra cash for Double Fine to invest in.
Second, I still don't understand why they need this money as a corporation. If it truly was a passion project, make a non-profit, take the donations, pay everyone's salary, after the game is made, take excess money make the game free and use the money to make sure everyone gets a copy. When the money runs out, produce at the marginal cost. Game gets made, all the programmers get paid, everyone gets a game, and the people who donated see their money put towards distributing making the game only. This has distinct legal oversight and rules. As opposed to give all this money to a corporation, the game still gets made and the programmers get paid, yes, but now all of a sudden there is a huge windfall. If its a for profit enterprise, pay your investors, don't ask them to fund it as a passion project and then keep all the profit of the sales for yourself.
Double Fine could go the non-profit route in the end, but still, there is a risk of the corporation making money possibility and I would just like to know what Double Fine thinks.
@akajaybay
I don't have a problem with them not struggling, I just don't like the possibility that excess money and future sales will just go towards the corporations bottom line. If a person out of their home did something like this, I would also be wary. I think all donors should be wary of donating money to a for profit company if its made up of 1 person or 10000 people. But, in case of a 1 person company, the amount of donations needed to make the game and pay their salary is easier to estimate and see. If you pay them 50k for a years worth of work, plus residuals from future sales (which may be quite small), I have an easier time accepting that result, then game studio with 30+ employees reaping windfall from over zealous donations.
especially one like Double Fine, who frequently speak out against most of the BS side of making games
Making games costs money.
I could find a way to spend $2m too, but it wouldn't be money well spent. This is an adventure game. Point-and-click, right? It's going to cost far, far less than many other genres to produce. I'm just saying it's not a game that's going to cost them that much.
I'm not saying they're going to be taking all this sweet, cold cash and run. I'm saying it's mostly going to just give them a bigger salary. Spending money for the sake of spending money, just because more people are donating, is silly.
And I'm perfectly fine with that being the case. This isn't a charity project. It's a business asking for money up-front for a product. They're going to deliver that product. If they take in more than that product costs to make, that's called profit. That's essentially the end goal of any business model.
You're not donating anything. You're buying a product up front. They have no obligation to return money to purchases any more than Blizzard has an obligation to return subscription fees to WOW players because they're raking in far more than the servers cost to keep up.
If this was to me, I'm not saying they'll deliver a shitty game. I'm saying it won't cost them $3m to deliver a great game. They can deliver a great game for far less than the $400k.
And again, I'm fine with that.
I am not trying to be combative, but this could be a problem. So you say, I donated 15 dollars for game that I would pay 30 dollars for. Thats great value for you. However, there is no guarantee that the game you donated 15 dollars for will be the game you get. What if during development they said, hmmmmm, lets make it a first person adventure game instead! OK, well now they changed the product, and while its similar to what they did, you are getting a different product from promised.
Double Fine has indicated that it wants to do right by the community etc, but thats just a promise. They can unilaterally change the game and anything they want and you have no way to get your money back. You have zero legal protection. I mean you are trusting this corporation to do right by you, but aside from goodwill, you have no recourse against them.
Or worse case scenario, suddenly the studio's other games flop. Its forced to declare bankruptcy. You can't even ask for a refund for your donation because its a donation, not a contract (like a pre-order is) to deliver you a game, so the company gets liquidated, you never get your game, and you are out 15 dollars. You might say, well Tim will just take the IP somewhere else and make the game. It can't the estate would hold onto that money and IP to pay its creditors.
These are all worst case senarios, but I think that its important to realize that this is not an optimal way to raise money to get a passion project made, especially for the fans.
Also don't forget that a chunk of the money is going to 2PP to finance the documentary work. If they maintain the ratio, that'd be a quarter of whatever's raised.