Part of me likes this approach because it helps keep the game from being developed in a vacuum, potentially... Another part of me thinks this is exploitative.... Another part of me thinks this is dangerous with a weak-willed developer. It also didn't prevent some of the more obvious bad design choices, like the unruly randomization of loot and huge fluctuations in vendor inventory.Larian mounted one of its largest-ever quality assurance testing phases on Original Sin, but much of that work was done voluntarily by Kickstarter backers and Early Access players. This side benefit of public development was what made it possible for Larian to ship Original Sin, though they made a few mistakes along the way.
For example, Larian initially required Kickstarter backers to pay more for the privilege of accessing alpha or beta versions of Original Sin -- a common crowdfunding tactic -- then instantly regretted it when it came time to start checking for bugs.
"After we finished the Kickstarter and started working we realized that was the most stupid thing weve ever done," says Vincke. "We had like 20,000 people who were willing to play this game and would probably give us the feedback we needed to test all the various gameplay permutations."
Larian wound up giving alpha and beta keys to everyone who backed the game on Kickstarter, offering refunds to any backers who paid for the privilege.
"It was a huge QA operation -- almost 70,000 testers -- but we didnt have to spend as much money as we would have had to do otherwise, say if we had a traditional business arrangement with a publisher," says Vincke.
It is a stark contrast with AAA development where money - even in spite of customer rapport - is king.