Because everything beyond the actual gameplay was so so so sooo awesome!
… Yeah you’re right. I should buy a new Steam Tank instead. Oh hell, or a new printer, I just realised. Guess that settles it. Might not need a printer much these days, but it does happen & our current one leaves grey streaks across everything.
Yes well between our need for a new printer that I’d happily repressed, and the Burning Wheel Kickstarter that my much better half will no doubt throw money at, I no longer seem to need to talk myself in or out of anything here. But the help was appreciated :)
I don’t know if it has been pointed out here or elsewhere, but the investment statement for Psychoauts 2 or whatever the hell they decide to call it is misleading to say the least IMO. The biggest issue is with the estimated price of total unit sold figure for Psychoauts. It is misleading because most if not all the unit sold are NOT sold at the average wholesale price, which is a ridiculous $21 by default. Some are sold at steam sale at rock bottom price, some sold in humble bundle “pay what you want”, bundled with other games. So if Psychoauts 2 has a similar trajectory as Psychoants 1, then the the figure quoted by Doublefine is very misleading. So IMO they overestimate the break-even point by a pretty big margin.
I understand this kind of investments are targeted at enthusiasts, and enthusiasts are never going to care about rate of return, they just want the game made and that’s it. Still I wonder what SEC in US will say about this, because I think there is something fishy going on here.
That would depend on whether “average” is the average of all wholesale prices of all units, be they electronic (on steam/steam sales/humble bundles/gog), or just retailer wholesale prices for the retail versions.
I know I paid more than that for my original xbox copy…
Regardless of GamersGate and “misinformation”, the legal documents show that Fig is some pretty shady shit; as in Fig’s spelled-out legalese of “we can legally fuck you and you get nothing” versus Kickstarter’s “well, we’re kind of morally bound to deliver something.”
It’s as if Tim and Co. wanted an absolutely foolproof way to get funding without having any “pressure” on them at all to deliver a game.
Nice work, if you can get it; sure beats having to live up to the expectations of VCs and publishers.
Wait, what? Plenty of Kickstarters have gone tits up and produced nothing at all, just shrug their shoulders and say “well, we tried.” I have a hard time believing anybody at this point doesn’t understand that they are assuming total risk of their financial involvement in these things. I understand if you have an axe to grind based on how DF handled Broken Age and DF9, but there’s nothing inherently shady about this setup.
Yeah sometimes when I see a Doublefine news story, I then seee hundreds of people show up in the comments linking to all sorts of youtube manifestos, just hours and hours of them, and huge infographics about how evil Tim Schafer is. This is apparently a hobby for thousands.
OK, there’s two strawman attacks, so piss off to you both.
Admittedly, I loathe Schafer because of the business choices he’s made – essentially playing very fast and loose with money that has literally been given to him – but I’m also not sitting in my closet at nights burning Schafer effigies. I’ve just chosen never to buy anything associated with him again.
However, reading that Fig fine print is something else entirely. It’s filled with the kind of responsibility-free, evil-lawyer-speak that drives me, screaming, up the drapes. It also contains bald statements of unfitness – like about how Fig’s own accountants think that the business is headed for the shitter – that cause an enormous question mark to spring, Athena-like, from my forehead. I mean, do people really want Psychonauts 2 enough to trust an already-unreliable dev with your money?
I agree, in so far that investing in Psychoauts 2 via FIG is as risky as crowdfunding Psychoauts 2. Or as risky as any crowdfunding project in general. Traditional sources like banks, publishers or VCs won’t even touch the typical crowdfunding project, because it is quite obvious it is very risky, and the return is pathetic. Venture capitalism itself is risky, but because VCs invest in a large enough portfolio of risky projects, just one success will cover the cost of all other failures.
As I said earlier in this thread, I think the profit projection of Psychoauts 2 is all wrong, so that is something to think about IN ADDITION to its risky nature.