Jump to content
user750

More funding

Recommended Posts

A) From that fact, this thread is just attracting unnecessary attention. (Developer attention that could be used on other sections in this forum, like actual suggestions or bug reports that has yet to be viewed)
B) As a supporter I don't have to worry about those things; developers put their titles up on Early Access, I show support by investing money into the product. The developers are then responsible for delivering said product without further investments from me.

I believe it is pure stupidity to invest more than once when you get the same amount of product back in the end.
But each to their own, as always.

However this upcoming generation is well known for opening their wallets more than they should.
Back in the day, games were actually required to be finished to receive revenue.
This new era of Early Access is proof that developers lack confidence in their products which is a shame.
Because if they actually believed in their product wholeheartedly, they would take the risk of going bankrupt.

I actually despise the concept and use of Early Access and DLC, yet here I am.
My brain didn't support this game, my heart did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, zeeb said:

A) From that fact, this thread is just attracting unnecessary attention. (Developer attention that could be used on other sections in this forum, like actual suggestions or bug reports that has yet to be viewed)
B) As a supporter I don't have to worry about those things; developers put their titles up on Early Access, I show support by investing money into the product. The developers are then responsible for delivering said product without further investments from me.

I believe it is pure stupidity to invest more than once when you get the same amount of product back in the end.
But each to their own, as always.

However this upcoming generation is well known for opening their wallets more than they should.
Back in the day, games were actually required to be finished to receive revenue.
This new era of Early Access is proof that developers lack confidence in their products which is a shame.
Because if they actually believed in their product wholeheartedly, they would take the risk of going bankrupt.

I actually despise the concept and use of Early Access and DLC, yet here I am.
My brain didn't support this game, my heart did.

A) Developers will do as developers do. There's no point trying to dismiss this thread just because you feel it's a waste of their time or trying to play "I'm the boss."

B) I don't get what's hard to understand about this concept: Indie devs make a product;  people like that product and want to help support it financially, both to reward its creators and give them greater resources to make the game better.

 

It's only stupid if you think the devs are just pocketing the money, don't need additional resources, or . . .  . whatever that starving artist crap about bankruptcy is. No one's begging here or asking you to personally try and "save" them.

 

There'll be no  DLC for PZ. If PZ is sucessful, I'm  hopeful this'll be the first and last EA title they do, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EnigmaGrey said:

There'll be no  DLC for PZ. If PZ is sucessful, I'm  hopeful this'll be the first and last EA title they do, as well.

2

 

I hate DLC in most games, and can count the DLC packs I've purchased for any game after release on one hand. However, I wouldn't mind supporting TIS by buying DLC for the game after release. It's my favorite game. If they made, say, a whole new map based on another real-life city, but more densely packed, I would buy it. I will say that DLC does hurt the image of a game with a lot of people, myself included. 

 

And yeah, Enigma, I would bet my left arm that after all they went through with this game in EA, they will never do it again haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, zeeb said:


This new era of Early Access is proof that developers lack confidence in their products which is a shame.
Because if they actually believed in their product wholeheartedly, they would take the risk of going bankrupt.

 

I wasn't going to reply to this, but these two lines are honestly just stuck in my brain.

 

What on earth are you actually talking about? If developers believed in their product they wouldn't take the risk of going bankrupt so they wouldn't do EA? How on earth does that make sense? Do you even understand how a business works, much less the game dev industry? You can't make a game without initial investment. You have to pay people- the people working for a company need to eat, have somewhere to live, have transportation, maybe even be able to buy christmas presents for their kids. Then there's business expenses- computers, software licenses, lawyer fees, etc. And of course constant overhead, like office space and supplies. None of that can be paid for by believing in one's product.

 

Most people don't have the capital sitting around to just start a small business, pay a bunch of salaries, and go for a few years without making any money. Thus, businesses need investment. They have a few options. First, to find a publisher. That's what AAA games have done, and many larger "indie" companies. However, if you don't have an established track record, this is essentially impossible. PZ is the first game by TIS as a studio. They could not have gotten a publisher. Second, you can go to a bank and ask for a loan. This is... possible, but requires putting personal assets on the line as collateral. As an individual, that's okay I guess? But as a company with no assets other than personnel, it would be insane to ask one member to put their house or other personal assets on the line for the company. Finally, we have the third option. For most other business, this doesn't exist, but for game companies, you have Early Access. It's a way to pay people's salaries while the game gets built. There are a lot of valid criticisms of EA, and I myself am not a huge fan (to date have purchased or backed 3 EA projects including this one, so far all three have been successes).

 

PZ wouldn't exist without Early Access. Not because the devs don't believe in it, but because that's how businesses work. For someone who throws around a lot of "in this generation" and "back in the day," you have a rather startling lack of understanding of basic business fundamentals. I'm not really trying to be an ass here, I just hate seeing stuff like this from people. Ten other people will see that and without thinking it through at all will leave this thread with the idea that EA exists because devs don't believe in their games, and that's frankly nonsense.

 

Edit: Also, Early Access devs still risk bankruptcy. I don't know what possesses you to think otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys developers! You are truly holy!!!

Because only the holy developer of games refuses extra money!

It's such a rare thing!

You know the price of your work and you take this price!

Know when you release the game and if you release additional content, I'll buy everything!

 

(In contrast to the greedy Ubisoft, Electronics art and others fucking developers games) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2017 at 11:34 PM, Rathlord said:

 

I wasn't going to reply to this, but these two lines are honestly just stuck in my brain.

 

What on earth are you actually talking about? If developers believed in their product they wouldn't take the risk of going bankrupt so they wouldn't do EA? How on earth does that make sense? Do you even understand how a business works, much less the game dev industry? You can't make a game without initial investment. You have to pay people- the people working for a company need to eat, have somewhere to live, have transportation, maybe even be able to buy christmas presents for their kids. Then there's business expenses- computers, software licenses, lawyer fees, etc. And of course constant overhead, like office space and supplies. None of that can be paid for by believing in one's product.

 

Most people don't have the capital sitting around to just start a small business, pay a bunch of salaries, and go for a few years without making any money. Thus, businesses need investment. They have a few options. First, to find a publisher. That's what AAA games have done, and many larger "indie" companies. However, if you don't have an established track record, this is essentially impossible. PZ is the first game by TIS as a studio. They could not have gotten a publisher. Second, you can go to a bank and ask for a loan. This is... possible, but requires putting personal assets on the line as collateral. As an individual, that's okay I guess? But as a company with no assets other than personnel, it would be insane to ask one member to put their house or other personal assets on the line for the company. Finally, we have the third option. For most other business, this doesn't exist, but for game companies, you have Early Access. It's a way to pay people's salaries while the game gets built. There are a lot of valid criticisms of EA, and I myself am not a huge fan (to date have purchased or backed 3 EA projects including this one, so far all three have been successes).

 

PZ wouldn't exist without Early Access. Not because the devs don't believe in it, but because that's how businesses work. For someone who throws around a lot of "in this generation" and "back in the day," you have a rather startling lack of understanding of basic business fundamentals. I'm not really trying to be an ass here, I just hate seeing stuff like this from people. Ten other people will see that and without thinking it through at all will leave this thread with the idea that EA exists because devs don't believe in their games, and that's frankly nonsense.

 

Edit: Also, Early Access devs still risk bankruptcy. I don't know what possesses you to think otherwise.

That is why you take loans to support your product, like many other businesses in life.
I didn't bother to read all you wrote because I grasped the general attitude behind your reply, shows you're one of those that support bad features.
By the sound of it I believe you think I'm bashing the developers and the game, which is just plain ignorant and wrong.
I'm bashing the existence of this pointless thread.

Some people will always be stupid, putting up a wall of text won't make you seem any smarter, I'm telling you this because you haven't figured it out yet.
This thread is attracting attention by the number of views and replies, attention needed elsewhere as stated in my post. (Bug reports ex.)
People don't need a SUGGESTION thread to know they're allowed to buy more copies.

PZ never did need EA, because of the concept and because the Survival hype won't die down for a few years.
PZ would exist without EA, just not at this point. Obviously because it needs to be released first..
EA makes game developing slower, shown by numerous titles suffering from this, due to decrease in income over time which in turn decreases work efficiency.
It's the same with people that take advance payment when fixing houses, when they've gotten paid they show up once a week.
When they're paid afterwards they show up everyday until it is finished. Do you actually understand the difference?
EA and DLC's is the cancer of gaming, it never existed in the 80-90s. It started to exist when bigger corporations smelled the scent of money around it.

I don't trust any game company today; not EA, not Paradox, not this one.
Why would I when they won't even trust themselves enough to finish a product and then release it?
While they're at it, they're cutting already implemented features and pack it into a DLC, features that already exists in the game, locked behind a paywall.


I guess you're a 00+er, the new generation that never got to witness the golden age of gaming, in that case I understand you don't know how things used to work.
Your generation is different; more Justin Bieber, less brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, zeeb said:

That is why you take loans to support your product, like many other businesses in life.
 

Or you find investors.  With this miraculous thing called the Internet...people have figured out they can skip the banks or losing a % of their company/future profits by getting thousands of investors to invest small amounts in their product.  

I'm quite sure in the "Golden Age" of video gaming I paid more for a games and got less hours out of it.  And I'm old enough to have started out as a kid on a Colecovison and a Commodore 64.

Maybe you should try less video games, and more getting outside. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zeeb said:

That is why you take loans to support your product, like many other businesses in life.
I didn't bother to read all you wrote because I grasped the general attitude behind your reply, shows you're one of those that support bad features.
By the sound of it I believe you think I'm bashing the developers and the game, which is just plain ignorant and wrong.
I'm bashing the existence of this pointless thread.

Some people will always be stupid, putting up a wall of text won't make you seem any smarter, I'm telling you this because you haven't figured it out yet.
This thread is attracting attention by the number of views and replies, attention needed elsewhere as stated in my post. (Bug reports ex.)
People don't need a SUGGESTION thread to know they're allowed to buy more copies.

PZ never did need EA, because of the concept and because the Survival hype won't die down for a few years.
PZ would exist without EA, just not at this point. Obviously because it needs to be released first..
EA makes game developing slower, shown by numerous titles suffering from this, due to decrease in income over time which in turn decreases work efficiency.
It's the same with people that take advance payment when fixing houses, when they've gotten paid they show up once a week.
When they're paid afterwards they show up everyday until it is finished. Do you actually understand the difference?
EA and DLC's is the cancer of gaming, it never existed in the 80-90s. It started to exist when bigger corporations smelled the scent of money around it.

I don't trust any game company today; not EA, not Paradox, not this one.
Why would I when they won't even trust themselves enough to finish a product and then release it?
While they're at it, they're cutting already implemented features and pack it into a DLC, features that already exists in the game, locked behind a paywall.


I guess you're a 00+er, the new generation that never got to witness the golden age of gaming, in that case I understand you don't know how things used to work.
Your generation is different; more Justin Bieber, less brain.

 

 

Game's there, playable, with a heaping cup of "please don't buy if you don't like the necessary way it's sold -- incomplete." Very few EA games today would have been viable to a publisher or large investor, as was necessary during the golden age, once games became larger than 1-3 man teams taking a few months to turn out a game.  There were a handful of exceptions with shareware in the early 90s, but that concept of delivery was effectively dead on arrival.

 

You do not know that they did not leverage whatever assets necessary, including loans, to create a game.

 

You're presumably an adult -- one that likes to bash anyone that disagrees with you as inferior, tell others what to do with their time, and complain pointlessly about a nice gesture a few people choose to do, but an adult none the less. You can read up and do your own due-diligence before purchasing a game from Early Access or choose to abstain from the product entirely. You don't have to trust them, or us, at all.

 

Some make it pretty easy for you by providing a game without DRM, a demo, several disclaimers, and a history easily accessible online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sort of surprised this thread has not been locked by now. 

 

If you do not like Early Access then do not participate. It is for people who want to invest both their money and their time/ideas into helping make a game. Wait for the 1.0 if you do not want to be a part of that or if the value of what you receive doesn't meet your expectations.

 

This conversation always seems to pop up on every EA games forums/discussion group. It's not a new concept and should be well understood by the gaming community by now. If you don't get it, you are probably a casual gamer that is better suited for 1.0 releases. Stomping your feet and crying about not having what you want, to me at least, is very much like my toddler.

 

For everyone else who wants to show additional support; word of mouth is probably the most helpful you can be. Tell your friends, leave some reviews, etc. No one is asking for more money from TIS, but if you bought an additional copy, I'm sure they won't argue and will appreciate your continued support.

 

As of right now PZ has cost me about $0.02/hr of entertainment. You won't hear me complain! Many of my suggestions and ideas have been incorporated into the game, I have helped test and develop new features, and I have witnessed TIS hire dedicated testers/modders to permanently work with them to finish their game. This game is literally being built by the community, and that to me is awesome! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, zeeb said:

That is why you take loans to support your product, like many other businesses in life.
I didn't bother to read all you wrote because I grasped the general attitude behind your reply, shows you're one of those that support bad features.
By the sound of it I believe you think I'm bashing the developers and the game, which is just plain ignorant and wrong.
I'm bashing the existence of this pointless thread.

Some people will always be stupid, putting up a wall of text won't make you seem any smarter, I'm telling you this because you haven't figured it out yet.

I guess you're a 00+er, the new generation that never got to witness the golden age of gaming, in that case I understand you don't know how things used to work.
Your generation is different; more Justin Bieber, less brain.

 

Next time maybe read my post before insulting me, especially given all of your arguments I'd already replied to in my post, but you didn't bother to read it. I've been around since Pong was the best thing out there. I played Myst on release, the game that inspired the entire adventure genre and arguably most of the video game industry in general. My first console game was the Super Mario Brothers/Duck Hunt cartridge.

 

Some people will always be stupid, putting up a wall of text won't make you seem any smarter

 

You're right, some people always will be stupid. But you know what doesn't make you seem any smarter? Trying to discredit me with personal slurs rather than answer my points. If you actually think I'm wrong, read my post and argue the actual points instead of insulting me based on nothing. Mayhaps you lack the basic reading comprehension for that, but I suggest you start trying. If I see you post a post like this to any member of this forum other than myself, you will find yourself banned. Understand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-3-20 at 10:11 AM, Batsphinx said:

At this point we have enough funds to complete the game, please don't think of ways to give us extra money beyond the simple act of recommending the game to your friends if it's in a state that's to your liking :)

 

Can't help but feel that this thread has gone waaaaay off-piste since I gave an official response back in March. As CaptKaspar has already pointed out a lock is probably a bit overdue.

 

If peeps want a (civil) Early Access chat then please open up a new thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...