It is kind of like an Evil God simulator but with a more subtle approach where you play an awakening elder evil who has to manipulate the mortal nations to war with each other and otherwise undermine them as you regain your power.
The trailer is awesome.
Note I am not associated with the game or its authors but I have bought into the Kickstarter and hope others will so the achieve all their stretch goals.
That Which Sleeps is a fantastic idea whose Kickstarter I support mostly because its goal (well, one of them, better graphics) will really improve my theoretical experience with it.
I don’t at all mind “bad” graphics in the form of old graphics or even something text-based, but I do mind poorly assembled, poorly laid out, or poorly designed graphics. Mario 64 still looks great; Superman 64 does not. TWS right now has these very cheap-looking, flat, poorly matched, non-cohesive images–some of which are okay on their own, but which do not together make a great sum-of-parts–that, if replaced by something united by a great design vision, will make for a much better game.
I’ve been passing this around to friends for a couple of days already; the concept is just frickin’ great :-D
This game was mentioned earlier in the Little Indie Games Worth Knowing About thread some months ago. I paid attention, because it has many of the similar vibes as Dominions and some others, except here you must be a puppetmaster behind the throne rather than stomping openly in the world.
I know people have strong feelings about crowdsourcing games.
Personally, I don’t understand the invective. When you pledge money through Kickstarter or wherever, you know (or ought to) that this is not a business investment. It’s a donation that, if all pans out, will hopefully lead to a product that you could have bought later on for roughly the same price. Thus, you need to think it through and pledge only an amount of money that it wouldn’t kill you to lose.
The end product might be terrible. Heck, it might never happen at all. But I give because I often like games that wouldn’t be considered good profit-making bets by a wise publishing company, and this is a way for me to support such games being made… but my support is always within the limits of what I could easily let go, if the whole thing crashes.
I cannot support looking at the transaction through Vordak’s lens of this as a legal contract.
We live in a world saturated with commercial messages making absurd claims how some products will solve all our problems, make us us popular, virile, loved, and all-around amazing. Even the explicit, verbal claims are absurd. We venerate the biggest hucksters in our society. Sorry, but in my mind, it is a survival skill to take all commercial claims with a huge dose of salt.
And, even if we get to adulthoood without internalizing this truth, it seems to me that Kickstarter projects are simply a crazy place to take a stand. When it comes to misrepresentations in our society, this is small potatoes.
As to That Which Sleeps… I donated a modest amount, I hope their running slow is not a bad sign, and I am still optimistic. But I kept my donation to a size whereby I have no regrets in any case.
For those who don’t feel that way, wouldn’t the logical response be to keep your donations to zero, rather than rail against the process?
I know a lot of people feel the same way as you regarding Kickstarter, which is fine. According to Kickstarter’s terms, it is not a gift that you hope pans out. According to the terms:
Kickstarter is not a part of this contract — the contract is a direct legal agreement between creators and their backers. Here are the terms that govern that agreement:
When a project is successfully funded, the creator must complete the project and fulfill each reward. Once a creator has done so, they’ve satisfied their obligation to their backers.
Throughout the process, creators owe their backers a high standard of effort, honest communication, and a dedication to bringing the project to life. At the same time, backers must understand that when they back a project, they’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. There may be changes or delays, and there’s a chance something could happen that prevents the creator from being able to finish the project as promised.
If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement. To right this, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers. A creator in this position has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if:
they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;
they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;
they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;
they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and
they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.
The creator is solely responsible for fulfilling the promises made in their project. If they’re unable to satisfy the terms of this agreement, they may be subject to legal action by backers.
I had backed a handful of projects a while ago and decided I’m no longer comfortable with trusting people to follow through, so I stopped.
So far, I’ve backed four kickstarters. Two have delivered (Wasteland 2 and Order of the Stick–although it’s not complete yet) and two are on track for delivery (Torment and Pillars of Eternity). I’m very picky and only support teams I’m certain will come through on their promises. This one tempted me, but I’m glad I decided to wait for a finished product.
This. Robc04 is dead right. I have had a number of fanbois posting about how awful I am for complaining that the developers keep missing their own deadlines and claiming that Kickstarter representations are mere aspirations. Clearly they are not.
A couple of weeks ago the lead developer posted this in a Kickstarter update -
“The Map Builder is complete and will be in the hands of Beta Backers this weekend”
I checked my emails with eager anticipation all weekend. And waited. And waited. We are still waiting. Clearly, those of us protesting about this are the unreasonable ones.
In my opinion, this talk about the contract leaves out a very important part of any contract – enforceability.
I did a fair amount of negotiating of contracts during my professional life, and this is drilled deep into me. No term of a contract is to be taken seriously if there is no means of enforcing those terms. Without a means of enforcement, all you have is a lot of “ought to” which is the same thing as no contract.
I think robc04 makes perfect sense when he says, he is “no longer comfortable with trusting people to follow through, so I stopped.” I think I make perfect sense when I say I contribute to some games, knowing that they might or might not come through.
But in my view, anyone who contributes to a Kickstarter and believes the existence of a contract will ensure a game on time (or at all) is being very unwise.
Seems to me that they are just a bit late, which is annoying, yes, but no reason to flame them just yet. Especially not after supporting them first, donating on Kickstarter and all. It’s useless too, because if they are indeed fucking it up, a blog like that wont solve it, whereas if they are just having some minor problems, they wont feel very inclined to try harder after a post like that.
But perhaps I’m totally underestimating the world-wide coverage of the Witchfinder and all it’s influence, and perhaps Dinosaurs developers are now trembling in their boots, trying their best to please mr. Hopkins. Who knows…
Yeah, in any case, I remain very optimistic about this game. If I am piecing things together correctly, they already have a very good, fun game, but underestimated how much was needed in order to upgrade graphics and variety of maps.
Their stretch goals also got them to the point of moving to a more modular map approach (where originally it seemed it was to be more static). Then the first thing they did was reach out for opinion on art style/tiling/blending. Those things have obviously slowed down the first stage releases.