f13.net

Double fine was hoping to raise $400,000 in 33 days to fund a new Point-and-Click adventure game.

Well, they managed did. In a much shorter amount of time and for far more.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure

http://www.giantbomb.com/news/double-fine-raising-funds-for-new-adventure-game-updated/3973/

(Amusing side note, Minecreaft's Notch and Tim Schafer started talking (joking?) about funding a Psychonauts 2.)

I may have to throw them $20. 

Thanks for the link. 

Kickstarter is really the way to do it nowadays, but it's gotten a bit 'perverted' the past year or so.  What you're seeing now is literally companies (re)forming JUST to do kickstarters.  They have crowdsourcing down to a science and pretty much dwarf any TRULY independent developer.  So yah, you may have a great idea and even a great kstarter page but good luck competing with the new 'corporate crowdsourcers' that have gotten way popular.  And the Kickstarter devs LOOOOVE them some corporate crowdsourcers, so good luck bumping them from the "projects we like" page.

DoubleFine is a prime example.  They've got like what?  50+ people on their staff?  ummm yah, if you cant find funding with a company already pushing revenue and profits in the many millions then someone needs to fire your CFO.

It sickens me.  Yippee horray??  Double-Fine breaks records.  Wow nice.   :oh_i_see:   It's really nothing more than a glorified pre-order process now.  They need to get off kickstarter and make room for the smaller guys.

Even better, fund their own projects maybe?   :oh_i_see:

@Nebu, dont give them a goddamned penny

Privy to Double Fine's revenue statements, are you?

I like the idea of them making an in-depth documentary of the process as well. I don't think the gaming industry has one of those yet.

You really must not know an awful lot about Double Fine.

Kickstarter is helping out a metric shit ton of small creators get stuff off the ground, so I'm not sure how Double Fine is "in the way".

Here's the "staff picks" section: http://www.kickstarter.com/discover/recommended?ref=more#p1

It's still pretty crazy that they raised that much money that quickly for a point-and-click, a genre that was all but dead a few years ago. Hell, what publisher is going to publish a Pont-and-Click? Why not just do it yourself.

Uhh no, but I pay attention.  Do you honestly think they're broke enough to need a kickstarter project and suck up nearly $1mill in crowdsourcing?  Srsly, you DO know which games are theirs right?  I'll wait whilst you go research.

Forgive me if I seem rantish, but the fact is there's no room in that relatively small marketplace for medium-sized businesses that proclaim to be 'small' or 'independent.'  You just can't compete.  Maybe we need another crowdsourcing site or to cap the size of biz asking for money, i dunno.  I'm just saying it's gotten too crowded in the crowdsourcing world these days, if that's even possible.   :awesome_for_real:

All double-fine had to do was put up a traditional pre-order page via its usual tools, not take a lot of money from one relatively small site that could've got to people with creative projects that REALLY needed it.


Care to qualify?  I admit, I dont.  But I'd like to know more.  Please to be telling me why doublefine is hurting for project monies.

No, you are the who claimed they have profits in the many millions. It is for you to prove your claim is correct not for us to prove you are wrong.

You mean Ghambit's rattling off random shit with no proof?

Shocked!  :grin:

http://www.kickstarter.com/discover/categories/games?ref=sidebar

That's a lot of over 100% funded games on Kickstarter.

Because all those people who donated money because they want a new Shaefer/Gilbert adventure game would have otherwise said 'screw it, I'm donating to this guy who wants to start a webcomic!'

Apparently, they might have! http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-the-stick-reprint-drive?ref=spotlight

Also, seriously, a lot of people get a lot of funding for projects through Kickstarter. This statement that somehow Double Fine is KEEPING THEM DOWN is... rubbish.

Double Fine makes largely niche products, like Psychonauts, Stacking, Costume Quest, and so on. These are projects that your usual suspects as far as publishers would usually never touch as far as funding and publishing go. Their last major published title, Brutal Legend, was fraught with publishing politics (Activision trying to force Double Fine into integrating it with Guitar Hero and then later dumping the game, EA picking it back up, Activision suing EA over it, etc.) and they've since turned to doing independent stuff for places like XBLA. They make great games and aren't hurting, but they're not rolling in cash either and can't really afford to go after every project they'd like to.

So, umm, now they can afford to go after other projects.

THE HORROR!

I contributed because I REALLY want a Shaefer/Gilbert adventure game and I actually think the documentary filming the whole process will be as good, if not better, than the game.

I started following this yesterday when Notch sorta/kinda offered to fund Psychonaughts 2 - but it's actually pretty cool to watch a company pitch an idea and see the response it gets.The fact that they will probably break a million dollars in less than 2 days is incredible.

At the rate it's going, it's looking like it'll break a million bucks in less than one day. Up to $937,000 as of this post.

Ooh. I hadn't heard about the documentary aspect. That alone is worth the kickstart money, IMO.

 :facepalm:

 :cry2:

This sums it up a bit better for me.
-Random blogger

Double-Fine is a major games studio, independent or not.  And there is NOT an unlimited share of capital on sites like kickstarter.  So when they swoop in with these big projects they think they cant get normal funding for (or want to fund themselves) they're essentially cannibalizing funding from say 100 projects (the average kstarter is $10k) and sinking it into one "popularized" one.  In the end, creativity is stifled... not helped.  It's like fuckin Valentino using Etsy to make his next dress.   :oh_i_see:

So talk like this has been creeping up of late regarding sites like Kickstarter, I'm not some special snowflake with this.  It's something that's gonna have to be addressed soon.  I mean for christ's sake we're talking about a studio that got in bed with EA to do "Brutal Legend."  Let us not forget this.

Note: I'm all for killing the publisher though, but just not eating the small cap crowdsource market to do it.

99% of the people giving money to Doublefine would have never been on Kickstarter to begin with if it weren't for this. If anything this is going to expose more Kickstarter projects to potential donors, not less.

So.... they're jerks for using a publisher like EA, but also jerks for using a thing like Kickstarter. Okay.

Creativity is not stifled. The content that say, a company like Double Fine, or, Valentino I guess, would be producing would be creative. Competition, MAYBE. But, as we see, there are plenty of higher profile projects that get funded, and yet, smaller and more intimate projects get funded just fine as well, so that's really not even a fair point at this juncture.

BTW, here's the link you could have provided, http://transmythology.com/2012/02/09/kickstarter-double-fine-a-seismic-shift/

Really his comments don't come off as doom and gloom as you seem to infer. It's an interesting question, for sure, but I'm not sure Tim Schaffer and Ron Gilbert are demons in this situation.

If we were to assume that large funded projects are cannibalizing the other ones, there would be a lot fewer projects at 100% funding already. HOLY SHIT, THOSE JERKS AT ORDER OF THE STICK ARE RUINING EVERYTHING.

Yah, expose more kickstarter usage to big companies you mean.   :oh_i_see:    So your percentage is a wash, if not skewed away from your logic in the end.

I once suggested Schild use the site for his TCG, but if he's got to consistently compete with DoubleFine-like entities I seriously doubt he'll ever get his game off the ground.  And said game will never see the light of day, even though you may be likely to play it a lot more than "Double-Fine Adventure."

I mean, it's getting to the point we're seeing guys PROXY for funding.  You'll have a developer grabbing funding for something who once you peel back the layers is already backed by a large pubbie, devhouse, equity firm, whatever.  All it ends up doing is lowering the exposure for the company they REALLY represent and the fatcats go away with a smile.  At minimum it bleeds cash to test the market for bigger production.

I dunno man, it just doesn't feel right to me.

edit: I'm not demonizing 'Double-Fine' I'm just bringing up something that I believe NEEDS to be discussed.  Go ahead and donate if that's what you wanna do, but dont be naive in thinking this isnt worth discussing.  A lot of people making way more than me/us are asking the same questions and bringing up the same points.

This. I've largely ignored Kickstarter up until now, but this project made me both hand over some cash _and_ start having a better look at all the other cool projects that exist on that site.

That arguments presents a false choice and hinges on the author's view of what Kickstarter is about that the actual owners of the site don't appear to share.

"Kickstarter is the world's largest funding platform for creative projects."

nothing more, nothing less.

And it just topped $1 million, still under the 24-hour mark as far as I can tell.

Actually, you've been pretty much demonizing Double Fine the entire time and demonizing people who would want to donate to the project. You're making them analogous to something like EA or Nike, or even fucking Valentino. You're being a tad hyperbolic. Valentino is a billionaire. Tim Schafer is not.

It's an interesting question, possibly, but none of it seems to pan out so far. I still do not see a single thing wrong with Double Fine using this to fund a project. They weren't going to get a publisher to sign off a new Point and Click, so why not go to the crowd that's going to buy it... or in this case... have already bought it.

So far all that has happened is you've made unsubstantiated claims and referred to "people talking about it" without even giving any links to relevant conversations. I'm for one interested in community driven efforts like this, and if there is some concern, it would be interesting to read about. So, link it!

In exchange, I offer this.

Wasn't Doublefine on the verge of dying a horrible death, and barely saved themselves by making some pretty amusing stuff via an odd "everyone do your own thing" design method? This isn't Blizzard asking us to donate so they can make Diablo 4, or Relic wanting donations for Homeworld 2.. this is a pretty loved but commercially unimpressive company asking for some cash because they really fucking need it.

Yes, they called it their "Amnesia Fortnight" (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29450/Develop_Double_Fines_Schafer_On_Amnesia_Fortnights_And_The_Pitfalls_Of_AAA.php), a two-week break from the current project where they would split into four teams to protoype new game ideas. Costume Quest was one result.

This Kickstarter campaign reminds me most of the pre-release funding of Minecraft, a model we are seeing more and more. Bypassing publishers. Somewhat like shareware back in olden tymes. In this case Double Fine could substitute reputation for a work-in-progress, but the effect is the same: your moolah funds a game like this.

At least it's not gonna be a first person shooter, right?

Pretty much my opinion on the matter as well.

I guess my question about them using kickstart inapproprately is.

What publisher would have funded this game?

Oh that's right...none.

Most established publishers would have ignored a $400k project, certainly.

Not to mention an adventure game.

I don't know, I'm not a big fan of an established corporation using Kickstarter and profiting from name recognition. Seems almost opposite in spirit to what Kickstarter is for.

I'd much rather them ask for money on a website they set up and leave Kickstarter as a place focused on discovery and funding new people with fresh ideas. I could see this starting a trend where Kickstarter completely ceases to be about unknowns convincing you they need money for a cool idea and could do great things with it and turning into a site where companies with some name recognition but low fortunes try to bolster revenue.

So, exactly at which point would you draw the line of "no, you are too recognizable, gtfo"? (the line which Kickstarter itself doesn't draw anywhere)

Should Rich Burlew (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-the-stick-reprint-drive) for example also spend his time re-coding the Kickstarter functionality making his own web page to beg for money, because his presence on Kickstarter clearly siphons too much from less established people, as apparently believed by some in this thread? Or does he get a pass because he's not a "company"? If it's the latter, would it be okay for Ron Gilbert to personally ask for money on his new adventure game, rather than do it as part of Double Fine? Or is he too famous even then? If it's the former (or if the answer to last question is yes) ... again, where do you draw the line?

This is like arguing that celebrities shouldn't be on twitter because they are sucking up all the followers.

Umm no, it's not.

Pretty much this.  This entire argument is ass stupid.   Should established established boardgame designers be banned? (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1892930431/farmageddon-the-frenetic-farming-game?ref=category)  How about semi-famous cash poor kid bands (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1384545463/got-a-minute?ref=city)?  Or a  local professionally run newsblog (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/fernshen/baltimore-brew-a-news-website-for-the-city?ref=live) looking to expand its coverage and needing non traditional funding?  Seriously, is the entire argument that if you're not living in a basement on ramen, you don't get to crowd-fund? 

Kickstarter is a level playing field - double fine's little icon doesn't take up any more space than any other icon on the video game project page.  It sits right next to some indie project or 14 yr old trying to pass off his game design as the biggest thing since M:TG.  And as a lot of people have already stated, this is most likely bringing a lot of people to Kickstarter that otherwise never would have signed up.  It's probable that some small percentage will continue to poke their head around, discover additional projects, and fund those as well.

It's not worth it for most larger companies who would fund stuff on their own to do this, and even then, so what. If the product is something people are interested in, and it gets funded, awesome. There is plenty of evidence with the explosive growth of Kickstarter and Indiegogo is not stifling smaller ventures, and in fact seems to be benefiting them. Again, there are a crazy amount of well-over 100% funded things on KS, including a webcomic generating over 500k!

Larger companies want complete control of the item and sell the final packaged good to you. There are so many corporate interests when it comes to them, it's not worth their time or hassle.

This really stinks of "I liked them better when they were underground."

Very much so.

I didn't go to Kickstarter because I had some money burning a hole in my pocket and felt like playing a point and click adventure game, I went because I want a Tim Schaeffer/Ron Gilbert adventure game and am really interested in the documentary behind it all. It's not like some other homegrown adventure game is missing out on my cash.

Honestly, to bring this back on point  a bit, I'm wondering if Double Fine is going to fall into the trap of having too much budget for the game.  At 300K, they were going to have to focus on making a very tight focused product,  multiplying the the amount of money to play with by at least 400%, you have to be concerned that they may end up with more than a little feature bloat.

That particular thing I have wondered about. With 32 days to go, we are already at $1M over their deadline. We could be looking at a ridiculous amount of money at the end of the 32 days. The thing that would be interesting to see if this starts a series of games, or a section of Double Fine purely for point-and-clicks.... or maybe they'll just buy Tell Tale.

I can sum that up even better:

I'm also flagging that crap as trolling.

Moar established devs possibly coming to shut up and take all the money...

Chris Avellone asks people for suggestions what game would they like to potentially get kickstarted (http://forums.obsidian.net/blog/1/entry-158-if-obsidian-kickstarter/)

(the volume of responses made the obsidian forums keel over. Might take a while to get them working again)

Ron Gilbert actually gave some figures (http://grumpygamer.com/4904226) of what he expected the budget for a modern 2D adventure game would be back in 2004. I'm not certain how accurate they'd be nowadays, or how liberal he was with his estimates, but I don't think Double Fine's going to have any problem finding things to spend the cash on.

I basically already kickstarted Alpha Protocol when I preordered it and then it got delayed by a year.  :oh_i_see:

I would be happy with a Black Isle Kickstarter to make more Planescape Torment... or just an HD remake.

Somebody make a game like Rome Total War, but add in more political and economic stuff like EU, and whenever you go into a spy mission, you got into little mini-game like Pirates! where you try to avoid guards. Same for assassinations.

(http://i.imgur.com/LFspv.jpg)

I'm a fan of point and click adventure games, but it's been years since anything really scratched the itch. TellTale's stuff is alright, but most of their stuff is like a lot of SCUMM games where you just can't lose ever.

I mean, the whole "whoops you forgot to pick up this thing 30 hours ago you lose forever" thing of old point and clickers was retarded, but half the fun of the space quest series was all of the pretty hilarious ways to fail and die as Roger.

I wasn't so much a fan of point click because some of them were rubbish, I was a fan of the humour. 2D is a better vehicle for humour because of our relationship with cartoon strips/comics, it's economical.

For me personally not dying was a good idea, there is better ways to hinder progression like devious puzzles.

All different ways they'd use to toy with those potentially dealy situations from other games were part of the humour for me. The acid bath scene in Monkey Island 2 was probably the single funniest moment of it, that i remember to this day.

Another important Kickstarter project

(http://i.imgur.com/udNZy.jpg) (http://imgur.com/udNZy)

No, they're really not. I know of Shaefer and Doublefine If I were a huge fan of their work (instead of a bit indifferent), I'd definitely be interested in giving them some money. Probably $20-50. Now, if you for some reason think that $20-50 I have in my wallet is earmarked for "interesting kickstarter project" then you're a little bit special in your reasoning.

This all boils down to two people who have built their own personal brands over the years. It's like bitching about Gary Vaynerchuk ruining social media by advocating building a personal brand.

Anyone who takes the time to build a relevant, personal brand will likely find funding on Kickstarter. FFS, the entire concept of Kickstarter is leveraging social media to fund a personal brand.

Then again, this whole divergent train has been engineered by Ghambit and then had the fire stoked by Margalis. So there's that.

Speaking as a developer that has been pursuing a plan for about 4 months that involves eventually going on Kickstarter and raising funds, I think this is a great thing.  Until now, there has been no precedent for trying to raise cash on Kickstarter for a videogame of any significant size.  Most of the pitches in the videogame category have been student projects, where it was being used as a channel for funds from friends and family of the classes working on them.

There are a lot of genres and sub-genres that have fallen off the map of the publishers because they're not big enough niches to justify 8 figure budgets, they're not interested in anything smaller and since they own the retail channel those games simply no longer get made.  Point-and-click was one of the first to go, back in the 90's (at one point, Myst was the biggest game in history by every metric) but there's been an ongoing community for them.  There are some others that simply died out for similar reasons.  Business models are dictating game design, a trend that was always present but now has gotten completely out of control.

With all the attention this has gotten, a lot of people who had never heard of Kickstarter have.  Double Fine has "primed the pump", gotten enough video gamers onto Kickstarter that other projects have a much higher chance of success.

--Dave

Nothing prevents them from putting the money into general payroll and such.

That's another problem with something like this. Double Fine is a corporate entity with a payroll, other revenue and expenditures, etc. If they use a lot of the money on general engine improvements that help them make the game better in theory is that ok?

If they give an artist X amount of money out of the kickstarter fund and that artist spends half their time on Sesame Street 2 is that ok?

I find it very hard to believe that a small company where most people work on most things and has multiple projects going at once is going to effectively silo off X dollars for a specific project.

It's probably easiest to view Double Fine's Kickstarter payments as a very, very early pre-order.

So far they've got 42k preorders and the game will cost in the realm of $15 at launch for those who didn't preorder it. Now they've got to deliver that game.

That's considerably cheaper than a photo of Ron Gilbert smiling.

Look's like we'll be seeing an Obsidian kickstarter for a turn based RPG here pretty soon.

I'd hit it.

Obsidian? I don't know, man. As much as I like their writing and world-building, I'm just not sure about their ability to finish in a timely manner without publisher pressure. As it is, they appear to be taking as long time as every other studio but yet release all their games in the half-assed state. If they were to manage themselves, we might be looking at half a decade to get returns on the investment.

I don't want the game, not my thing, but I want to pay for the documentary.

Did you skip New Vegas? I can count the crashes/noticeable bugs I had in it on one hand, and I did just about everything.

I thought New Vegas was super buggy when it came out?   Obsidian making a good game is just random luck at this point.   I'll gladly put down 50 bucks on an isometric style turn based RPG though.   Just on the off chance that it will encourage more developers to follow suit.

I played the shit out of FO:NV. It was fine and enormous fun, but then again it used tried and tested technology (FO3's). Even so, it felt very unfishished, with many plotlines underdeveloped. I probably had a bug of some kind in virtually every major questline. Several times I wasn't sure if I had missed something or if the quest had bugged on me (again). Sure, most could be fixed by fast travelling, entering a console command or restarting the quest but it was a far cry from a smooth ride.

That's without even bringing up game balance.

NV was fun despite its technical issues. That's why I might consider funding an Obsidian game at all. If it wouldn't have had such engaging writing, I might aswell set my money on fire.

NV was hilariously buggy; it just had quest/physics/scripting bugs and crashed at least once literally every play session I put into it. It was still awesome and I loved the game enough to buy ALL of the DLC (when I hate DLC), but it was as typical of an Obsidian title as you can get, ignoring the fact it actually had an ending.

Almost all of their projects are using someone else's tech, so their time estimates are shortened, but way too much for what they're trying to produce.  Obsidian having the funds to allow them enough time to add an ending and iron out the bugs is really all we could ever ask for.

I continue to scratch my head. I had literally almost no problems at all with it. On the same machine I couldn't run Fallout 3 for more than an hour without a crash or graphical freakout.

Every Obsidian game I have ever played was a buggy half-baked mess. I loved Fallout 3, but I didn't even bite on New Vegas for $5 during the last steam sale because of my past experiences with Obsidian. KOTOR 2, NWN2, and Alpha Protocol were all full of bugs, poor production values (voice acting, cinematics), or poor design choices (NWN2 camera/UI, Alpha Protocol shooting mechanics, etc.). This is the Obsidian legacy:

    Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (2004)
    Neverwinter Nights 2 (2006)
    Alpha Protocol (2010)
    Fallout: New Vegas (2010)
    Dungeon Siege III (2011)

Doublefine games are at their best when they are allowed to tell a story and make you laugh without having (not always great) gameplay get in the way. It's no Psychonauts 2, but I'm confident they'll be able to make a really great game as a result of this kickstarter.

You're missing out badly with New Vegas.

This is pretty much what happened with me as well, and I got New Vegas maybe two weeks after it launched. Even now, 300 some odd hours later, I still haven't really run into major issues with it.

Hell, I haven't run into many technical problems with pretty much any Obsidian game, and I own 'em all aside from DS3.

Back to Kickstarter, Cliff "Cliffski" Harris of Positech has an opinion (http://positech.co.uk/cliffsblog/2012/02/10/the-kickstarter-reality/).

The kickstarter reality
Filed under: business cliffski 3:01 pm February 10, 2012

It’s great to see a game get made that could not be made because a publisher would not fund it, made real because actual real gamers, who are the whole reason for everything, stepped up and pledged the money. It’s great news.
 
But this is not *the* new publishing model, far from it. RPS noted that the developers ‘don’t have a publisher breathing down their necks’. Really? Maybe they have 10,000 publishers now, impatient, possibly wanting contradictory stuff (almost definitely…in fact), and not restrained by the politeness of scheduled milestone meetings behind closed doors. I hope it goes well, but it could get messy.
 
Plus the developer is boxed into a corner, they know exactly what they have to do with that money. This is not always a good thing. I ship maybe half the games I start. Gratuitous Tank Battles was not the game I intended to make. I intended to make a life-sim game, then abandoned it to make an RTS, then it morphed into GTB.
 
What if kickstarter had funded subversion? the game that introversion admit ‘didn’t work’ when they actually got half way through development. Would they have had to plough ahead, and ship a game they fundamentally knew was broken? Not a good position to be in.
 
Yeah I know… I’m mr doom and gloom

Funny, people said the same thing about NWN2 :p

Actually don't bother trying it, I'm pretty sure you'd be bound and determined to find it shitty at this point.

It's not WoW, so of course he would. ;D

Well, New Vegas doesn't have playable pandas, so there is that.  :awesome_for_real:


Beyond my negative experiences with Obsidian games, my bigger problem is with NV is that it's just more Fallout 3. I already had my fill of that universe for the next 4-5 years between Fallout 3 and all of the DLC. So you're right that there isn't really any way I'd enjoy the game.

Obsidian is making the South Park RPG which is something I'm actually pretty interested in. That said, there is a monumental difference in fan good-will that Obsidian and Double Fine would generate. I'd be seriously surprised to see an Obsidian Kickstart project pull in anywhere near the numbers Double Fine has.

They just have to call it a Chris Avellone, Maker of Planescape: Torment Kickstart project instead.

How much money would people kick in for any of these projects? US$2 - $3m? Because that isn't a lot in game development terms.

And then are they willing to wait more than a year, and possibly contribute more money if the studio spends the Kickstarter pledges but the game still isn't finished?

Now, you personally might be willing to kick in $10k and wait 5 years for the next Planescape: Torment, but you'd be in the minority.

The minority playing an awesome game.

Message from Tim Schafer founder of Doublefine
Double Fine Adventure! // Update #1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFKwplDBmgg&feature=player_embedded

This guy is a the next great meme, ahem, I mean game developer.

He seems lovely

Write script then read. :why_so_serious:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-02-16-brian-fargo-using-kickstarter-for-wasteland-sequel

All aboard the bandwagon!

(http://db.tt/8DaKnAtq)

Mmm, Wasteland.  The second PC game I played after Bard's Tale I, and the beginning of the end of any hope of accomplishing anything worthwhile in high school.

God I hope these games don't end up sucking.  Because I'm throwing all my disposable income at them.  (which isn't much but whatever shut up)

Feeling a lot more lukewarm about this one, I kinda feel like Wasteland already had its sequel(s).

An interesting point that a lot of people missed was Schafer's indication that Psychonauts 2 would need a budget of US$13m to be possible (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-02-16-notch-downplays-psychonauts-2-funding-offer). The focus of the story was "Notch says he'll fund it, then he says he's not sure", but that budget figure is very interesting when put next to the Kickstarter target.

And Psychonauts 2 is arguably still a niche title.

I don't know how it would be arguable. Mind you, a sequel would do a whole lot better than the first one did.

It doesn't especially surprise me that it would take a ton more money to make Psychonauts 2 vs. a point-and-click.

Psychonauts 2 would be better as just a point-and-click, imo.

Yes I hated the platforming and twitchy parts in Psychonauts. I got stuck on that level with the bull running around the loop and never finished.

Notch's new blog post on the topic: Hype! (http://notch.tumblr.com/post/17681692985/hype)

Ah, go into the hiding. AKA, The Gabe Newell manuever.

Yes, no one talks about Half Life 3 at all.

I think they're still waiting for even HL 2 Episode 3 or whatever.

You and I said the same thing.

At this point, there's no reason to not just have it be HL3. Waiting this long and calling it HL2, Episode 3 would be stupid.

Game and documentary funded. They managed to get $3,335,265 pledged through Kickstarter and another $110,000 in donations were made up of people contributing over the $10,000 Kickstarter maximum. Pretty impressive.

Now make a good game, dammit!

https://twitter.com/#!/grumpygamer/status/180049762123390976

On the topic of New Vegas/Obsidian:
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/03/15/obsidian-missed-fallout-new-vegas-metacritic-bonus-by-one-point/

My feelings exactly.

Do we have a kickstarter thread? Ah well.

I threw some money to project to basically make a new-old Rainbow Six style shooter. If you're wondering what I mean by that, I mean a full on actual tactical, scenario based shooter. For real wanna-be SWAT/ATF/PMC nerds where you plan full-on routes/timed assault to take out stuff like bunkered up hostage situations, terrorist hideouts, etc etc with aspergers-level detail. I kinda had fond memories of the original Rainbow Six titles and SWAT series.

The team has some industry vets in it from Monolith, Bungie, etc.

http://kck.st/zHvzBF

http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/blockbuster-effects


tl;dr: Doublefine backers have pledged a$875,000 to other projects, with 61,692 (71%) of them being first time backers.

That should be the final nail in the coffin for the whole "evul moneygrabbing pro developers are killing kickstarter"-discussion, then.  :awesome_for_real:

I never said it was evil, I just won't give money to something like that. There's nothing indie about it.

I'd like to see those numbers again without Wasteland 2 attached to them.

I don't see why something has to be indie to get crowd-funded? Maybe all games should be made like this. Modern version of the whole "patronage" system through which much classic art, music and entertainment was made. :P

I'd be fine with that. It's just not how I've decided to use Kickstarter. I'd love it if Valve set something up like this.

Because, just like the arts patrons of old funded, it was only paid by the super rich for their own edification. And they weren't expecting to make money off it further (in most cases, anyway), unlike game studios.

The crowd funded model has thus far delivered very small game development budgets to those studios who have gone for it - even Double Fine's collected amount isn't that large in the game budget scheme of things. It wouldn't get Diablo 3 funded, for instance.

But again, the major issue is delivery of the crowd sourced title. Patrons of classic art kept their artists on a tight leash to ensure they didn't skip out with the money, and even made death threats to artists who weren't delivering as expected (and probably saw quite a few dead artists as well). This crowd funding doesn't have that kind of "protection" - it's a long, interest-free loan that only requires a game delivered at the end of it to satisfy the deal. If players don't like the game, tough, the funders have already paid for it.

It's a lot like dealing with an eBay auction with someone with no rating is what I am hearing.

The best reason to get behind this comes from the interview linked earlier.


Yay for no compromises.  Interview for those 2 lazy to scroll back and find it.

http://www.ripten.com/2012/03/27/brian-fargo-talks-wasteland-2-abysmal-publisher-treatment-and-having-fun-again/2/

This is the kickstarter thread right?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1451923705/make-leisure-suit-larry-come-again?ref=live

Al Lowe wants Leisure Suit Larry back.

Why don't you play frozen synapse with me?!