Do we have a thread yet for Massive Chalice? Seems like something that would already be on Qt3, but I didn’t see anything. Perhaps these are to be relegated to the Kickstarter thread now, if so my apologies.
Some snippets from the Kickstarter:
If turn-based tactics and feudal fantasy had a lovechild, and that offspring founded a mighty century-spanning dynasty, it would be MASSIVE CHALICE.
…
We’re inspired by classic tactical strategy games like X-COM, Final Fantasy Tactics, and Fire Emblem, as well as Game of Thrones’ array of noble families. With these influences in mind we’re creating an epic, replayable turn-based tactics game where you train generations of heroes to repel a demonic invasion.
…
Permadeath is inevitable: your heroes will grow, age, and eventually die. You’ll have to choose between keeping your favorite heroes on the battlefield or retiring them from combat to foster a new generation of warriors.
If I weren’t already backing it due to the game concept I’d almost have to just for the Kickstarter video.
I mentioned in the kickstarter thread, but also thought about posting its own since its likely to be funded and be worth discussing on its own.
Anyway, I think it looks pretty good. Double Fine isn’t exactly a tactical powerhouse, but the RTS in Brutal Legend was pretty well done IMO. I never played Iron Brigade, but hear it was also good (albeit a little shallow)
I thought the RTS in Brutal Legend was terrible. Which is why I’m not excited about a Double Fine project that doesn’t feature Tim Schafer’s writing.
EDIT: After watching the pitch video, I’m even less interested. They spent a lot of time setting up jokes, and very little actually talking about the game. When they did, it was a few sketches with a few small new ideas (i.e. breeding heroes). It’s amazing how little they actually have compared to most game kickstarters. If they didn’t have the Double Fine name, and were going just on the merits of the pitch alone, they’d probably raise $57.
Yeah, I’m a bit torn. Turn-based tactics and roguelikes are two of my favorite genres, and melding them sounds great, but also very easy to get wrong. There’s not a lot to go on in terms of mechanics to get a sense of whether they’re on the right track or not, especially since only 1/4 of the video was actually about the game. Still, I’ll be watching the campaign and seeing how it shapes up as they reveal more details.
Watched the video and backed. I trust Double Fine to come through with their promises, and $20 is about the most that I’d blindly throw at a Kickstarter game. (Sorry, Jon.)
I still have yet to chip in to anything on Kickstarter (I have a massive backlog of existing games that I haven’t played yet to get around to) but this may have been the closest to swaying me. The concept sounds fantastic. I’ll await eagerly until its released (funding seems an inevitability) and may actually watch the dev videos as they come out.
I don’t agree that it’s “moved away from the original premise.” Whether you’re approaching an Angel Investor or the public, you need to convince people that it’s worth putting in the money. If you’re asking for, say, $50k, a convincing pitch of ideas is probably enough. They’re asking for $750k. If you’re asking for that much money, you need to have more than a vague description and some whiteboard sketches.
They don’t need to code anything, or put $100k into a pitch. They do need to do more than list a few bullet points. They did put a lot of effort into the pitch, but 90% of the effort was into jokes that had nothing to do with the game. If they’re misplacing that much energy, I’m guessing it’s because they don’t have much of an idea to pitch.
Having watched the Double Fine adventure documentary episodes so far, I’d have to disagree with this completely. After they’re funded, they’re going to choose some more core team members, then they’re going to go to a bar in San Francisco and get drunk and name the game after the bar. And then they’ll have a jam session where they flesh out the game ideas and so on and so forth. It’s a Double Fine process, and it works for them, and I loved the games that have come out of the process so far.
Wait, you said you disagreed, and then you said they won’t actually flesh out the design beyond the basics until they have the money. How is that disagreeing?
The thing is, these vague “let’s do a tactical turn-based game where your children grow up to crawl dungeons” ideas are a dime a dozen. Everybody has them. In fact, that outline could apply to Infinity Blade, so it’s been done. The real work in game design is the fleshing out of the game from a bare outline to a real design document. That’s where games succeed or fail. Lots of games have copied basic outlines of prior games and failed miserably because the designer sucked at understanding what was crucial. Dungeon Siege missed 90% of what was vital to Diablo, for example.
If you want to bet on “I trust these guys,” go ahead. But that doesn’t change how weak the actual pitch was.
I’m disagreeing with the notion that this is a poor pitch or a pitch not worth investing in. The basic idea is a good one. The developer has a history of good games, and a good process that I’ve seen in documentary episodes, a process I’m comfortable trusting them with. And therefore I disagree with your premise that the idea has to be further flushed out already before they pitch it.
I don’t know, I guess I just view Kickstarter differently than you. I’m interested in being a patron for interesting ideas and concepts and am happy to chip in a few bucks to see the attempt made. This is from an established studio with a history of finishing and shipping games, so it’s a bit different than if some guy came up to me off the street and asked for a few bucks for his game idea.
If a local musician who’s work I enjoyed came up with a great sounding concept and wanted to raise some funds to make the project a reality, I wouldn’t expect he have it halfway completed before contributing to his Kickstarter. Saying “If the album is good I’ll buy it when it’s out” is perfectly valid, but I don’t see anything wrong with funding an idea either. To me that’s what Kickstarter was always about.
I’m as big a Double Fine/Tim Schafer fanboi as anyone, but I do wish they’d delivered Broken Age before starting this. Broken age is 7 months late now, which is sort of understandable in the world of Kickstarted indie games, but these guys are professionals and should have known better. I’m still excited to get and play Broken Age, but for Massive Chalice I’ll probably just wait for retail (assuming the Kickstarter will succeed, which seems inevitable).
And just to be clear, I’m not saying I think Massive Chalice will make Broken Age later. I’m just saying the optics of saying “Yeah, we haven’t delivered the last thing you gave us money for yet, but give us money for another thing” aren’t great. I’d be much a happier with “See, this other thing you gave us money for turned out awesome! NOW give us money for another thing”.
Yeah, I also see a lot of potential in this. I had a lot of fun with Iron Brigade, so I’m fairly confident they can bang out a fun turn based tactical game. Add a layer on top of that of CK2-esque empire management with a more manageable interface and that will be a really sweet game.
