DiscoJer
Member
Well, I'm personally hoping that portraits for things (NPCs, Monsters, etc) will be used in WL2, like the original.
Ideally like this:
(Okay, maybe not exactly like that. But something like that.)
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wasteland 2 Kickstarter project by inXile entertainment [Ended, $3 Million Funded]
- Thread starter duckroll
- Start date
Well, I'm personally hoping that portraits for things (NPCs, Monsters, etc) will be used in WL2, like the original.
Ideally like this:
(Okay, maybe not exactly like that. But something like that.)
MightyHedgehog
Member
I think that's guaranteed, DiscoJer. From the last video, it seems that they'll also expose enough to mod makers for custom UIs or just a lot of control over ratios of viewports and what data is contained in them. I'm hoping for the former since the community is awesome at picking out the best ways to refine the default offering.
That's a really disappointing and harmful decision by Kickstarter. Kneejerk reactions to a couple complainers never results in good policy. It encourages participation in their own website for christs sake. Their e-mail reads like they just don't want to do their job and they're buckling under the pressure of people who can't be bothered to read and understand what the program is.
I don't follow? They can't present us with a working example until they finish their project?
Wallpaper sized
amazing
It's good of them to enforce this and look like the bad guy so the people trying to fund their projects don't have to put up with the bullshit.
It also gives extra visibility not only to Kicking It Forward but also to the smaller Kickstarter projects that are a part of that initiative. People would see the KIF badge, find out what that's about, and notice the other projects that are involved as they are all listed on the KIF site. Ah wells.
5% of the profits really isn't all that much. The argument that many devs "invested their life savings in the venture" is a pretty poor one in my opinion, since profits don't start until the budget -- and with that also the invested live savings -- have been recouped by the released game.
I don't know, being actively against it rubs me the wrong way. If you don't want to give the community something back, you shouldn't ask the community in the first place. It's okay not to participate, obviously, but being actively against it is another matter altogether.
I don't know, being actively against it rubs me the wrong way. If you don't want to give the community something back, you shouldn't ask the community in the first place. It's okay not to participate, obviously, but being actively against it is another matter altogether.
How does restricting the ability to display the badge, not the ability to run the initiative completely, stop projects having to 'put up with the bullshit'?
I find it hard to believe projects are getting inundated with requests to join KIF anyway. A few messages in the comments section is probably the extent of it. The people requesting it are, I assume, backers of the project and isn't it their right to provide whatever sort of feedback and requests they want after they've contributed their money?
I don't like the thought of people coercing projects to get onboard with KIF, but in my mind, that tiny hassle is outweighed by the positives of the initiative. Projects choosing not to get involved in it should just deal with it.
Anyway, their company, their call.
This is what Fargo said on that AMA about the look of the game itself, to go back to what Alextended was saying on the previous page:
Reason you aren't seeing any in-game art yet is because they haven't fully nailed down the look. Samples are coming but that likely won't be till after funding is finished; could be they already have some prepared but I imagine they don't want to evoke any potential knee-jerk backlash just yet from the examples they throw out.
Brian Fargo said:
Reason you aren't seeing any in-game art yet is because they haven't fully nailed down the look. Samples are coming but that likely won't be till after funding is finished; could be they already have some prepared but I imagine they don't want to evoke any potential knee-jerk backlash just yet from the examples they throw out.
I should be doing hw
Member
They can't kick anything forward until they get profits, no. Just saying that it's still an idea, and therefore not 'working', until they are able to act upon it with money. I figure they should be the ones responsible setting the example first having come up with the concept. It's a little presumptuous to expect anyone else to participate until the creators are able to physically do it.
You make it sound conceptually difficult to manage, a large administrative burden or a PR struggle. It's really not. If you don't make a profit, you don't donate anything. You donate 5% of your profits to another Kickstarter campaign, it's pretty easy to manage and I trust people can figure it out.
I should be doing hw
Member
It's got nothing to do with management at all. I'm just talking about why KS are justified in not wanting to be associated with KIF, at least as of now.
Pachterballs
Banned
The KIF scheme+Badge aren't KS intiatives; it talks about giving profits away - in the interest of pulling in support for the game - its also honor system and cant be policed. There's nothing stopping say "company A" from badgin KIF, and when the game makes a profit; maybe a lot - then decide; fuck it, I'd rather keep the money.
eg. in the case of wasteland2, BF's KIF can't happen til way after 2013, after the game is made, and if it generates a profit. Its so far off too. Lots of time for BF to change his mind. But this KIF if allowed to remain on KS will however be around for close to 2 years if unchallenged. Not sure if that's a good thing.
Its probably for the best that badge is pulled.
back to wasteland
eg. in the case of wasteland2, BF's KIF can't happen til way after 2013, after the game is made, and if it generates a profit. Its so far off too. Lots of time for BF to change his mind. But this KIF if allowed to remain on KS will however be around for close to 2 years if unchallenged. Not sure if that's a good thing.
Its probably for the best that badge is pulled.
back to wasteland
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
This is exactly what's wrong with the KIF initiative. People are acting like there's no excuse not to sign on and like rejecting the program makes you the bad guy. Take this mentality to its logical conclusion and everyone has to sign on or else.
I think the people who are asked to donate money to a project are perfectly entitled to demand that said project joins the KIF initiative or else they won't donate. Keep in mind, we're still talking 5% of profits, NOT 5% of the money donated.
Any argument of 'people going hungry' is also complete bullshit, seeing as how the kickstarter money will be used to pay the developers salary during the development, and all of the profit is basically 'free money' that the development team is going to earn once the game is finished, the devs are free to go unemployed and attempt to live off of their profits if they want, but how the hell does that serve the kickstarter users? There is literally no reason as a kickstarter user NOT to demand that a token amount of a kickstarted game's profit is reinvested into the kickstarter movement, which will hopefully over the years help to continually raise the budgets of these games.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
And it's people like you that have been harassing and spamming and thus did the cause a disservice by getting the graphic yanked. Continue with your crusade if you like. Keep it up and you might just get the whole thing banned altogether.
"Suggest" not "Demand." The former is fine, the latter is getting to be a bit of a dick. I don't think it's out of line to want successful Kickstarters to give back to other Kickstarters but I'd want them to do it because of projects that interest them, not because "well, we had to give 5% or else." Forcing them to give back to the community kind of ignores the reason behind why they should be giving back.
I haven't even posted a single comment on kickstarter and I'm not going to do so any time soon. Legally speaking I'm pretty sure kickstarter can't do shit about KIF in the first place, apart from not allowing its graphics on its own site.
Don't try to equate my approval of a message with an approval of the way it is delivered. NOT donating in the first place is a more powerful message than donating money and THEN starting to make demands (as far as I know you have to donate to comment on a project).
Pachterballs
Banned
bullshit post
people have no rights to make any demand of any dev on KS about giving away their profits. The percentage does not matter.
SOME-MIST
Member
well.. I was on the fence ever since the project was announced. I never played the original wasteland, but if I'm going to play the 2nd installment I might as well get it for $15 and back the project rather than a higher price later on.
plus $15 isn't really to risky anyways - even if I don't enjoy the 2nd game.
plus $15 isn't really to risky anyways - even if I don't enjoy the 2nd game.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
They can require that no mention of the program be posted on their site, and when that happens then the whole thing dies. I'm also pretty sure that Brian Fargo would scrap the site upon request; do you really think he's inclined to tussle with Kickstarter? I'm not even going to bother trying to dissuade you from your present thinking because the more widespread it gets, the more likely it becomes that KIF will be shut down.
They'd have to be complete assholes to make such a request, given the charity involved in the KIF initiative and the fact that Wasteland 2 has brought immeasurable publicity to their site along with Double Fine.
Strange point to make considering Kickstarter itself can't be policed. The whole thing is an honour system. There's nothing stopping say "company A" from splashing its page with an assortment of bullshit, and when the time comes to deliver, then decide; 'fuck it, I'd rather keep the money'.
I don't see how anything you've said there amounts to your conclusion that it is 'best that the badge is pulled'. If people don't understand that the KIF initiative is an honour system and not something that can be literally enforced by Kickstarter, that's their own stupid fault. If you have enough faith that the company you are supporting will deliver the product that are promising, I don't see any reason to question the legitimacy of their pledge to the KIF initiative.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
I see it as the opposite of being an asshole. They'd be ending an initiative that is basically intended to mandate that they get more more money, and they'd be doing it to ensure that Kickstarters aren't harassed for e-protection money. It's as selfless as you can get.
You clearly didn't read the sentence you responded to very well. He said the right to demand they be a part of KIF or "else they won't donate their money". People absolutely have the right to make that demand, it's not a stance I'd ever personally think of taking, but people are completely entitled to do so. Just as the developers are completely entitled to tell those people to nick off.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Maybe there should be a new thread for the KIF talk, eh? Personally, all KS should have done is to request that inXile make it clear, on the logo itself and on the site, that it is not endorsed or monitored for enforcement by KS themselves.
That just makes it idiotic on top of being worthy of scorn. KIF is purposefully intended to help whoever the creators choose to give a boost to, and it could end up even being the difference between an otherwise fledgling Kickstarter being funded or not. To pull the plug on an initiative like that because of a few bad apples in the comments sections would be reprehensible.
It's ultimately no different than people making other requests as far as what should be done with the money; creators can simply choose to listen to or ignore them at their leisure. If people are choosing not to fund some projects because they aren't involved in KIF, so be it. There are vastly more of those than not, so those backers are only limiting themselves, and quite significantly at that. It's the same as them going to the KIF page and deciding to intentionally fund projects that are involved in it.
I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. People are completely allowed to say "I'm not giving you my money free of charge if you don't guarantee me that you do X with the money that you eventually earn based on my donation". The people making a kickstarter project are then completely allowed to tell these people to fuck off.
How is this is this a problem again?
I guess the issue depends largely on how you see people reacting to it. I think KIF would become a de facto standard and I don't quite like that idea since it kind of defeats the purpose of Kickstarter and people funding projects they want to succeed. If it becomes a mechanical process, it just becomes a necessary cost of doing business via Kickstarter and it'll just be factored into the projects from the onset.
Beyond that, I imagine people would complain about it not funding the "right" projects. The complaining would just shift. I'd rather just check out what other projects they have funded and use that to determine how much I want to support them. Ultimately the same thing, I suppose, but I don't think that mandating a pledge is the right way to get to the desired goal.
Beyond that, I imagine people would complain about it not funding the "right" projects. The complaining would just shift. I'd rather just check out what other projects they have funded and use that to determine how much I want to support them. Ultimately the same thing, I suppose, but I don't think that mandating a pledge is the right way to get to the desired goal.
The process is entirely voluntary and the 5% is taken out of profit, not the Kickstarter money. And it's entirely in the spirit of Kickstarter as those involved in KIF are choosing who they want to support with that 5%.
It's not written in stone and there will be nobody breathing down their necks about it. It's an honor system and if they ultimately choose to ignore it, nobody will even know. People are able to see which projects you've backed, but not how much money you gave them. It's entirely up to the KIF participants whether or not they ultimately choose to actually go through with it.
KIF comes from and is named after the "pay it forward" principle; they know that they couldn't have gotten where they are without others pledging to their cause, so they in turn promise to do the same. In many cases they have already backed other projects, but this makes it more of a communal thing. It's a healthy, reciprocal initiative.
I... uh... wtf. How can anyone even argue against KIF? Just read the whole argument here and... wow. Its VOLUNTARY, what in the fuck do people not understand about that.
Edit:
And is there a dedicated thread for it? Because there totally should be one.
Edit:
And is there a dedicated thread for it? Because there totally should be one.
Ignis Fatuus
Banned
The distinction I draw is that this is not Kickstarter money, it's money from sales after the whole business is concluded. I believe that backers have every right to input about what their funding is used for in the project. After the game is out, though? You have no right to control their books. Contributing to a Kickstarter doesn't mean you own the company into perpetuity. That's simply none of your business. It's not your money and it's got nothing to do with you.
You didn't read it very well then. People are arguing that Kickstarters should essentially be bullied into participation and that there's no excuse not to take part. At that point it is no longer voluntary.
I was very well taking that into consideration. People shouldnt bully those Kickstarters that dont want to participate, but I dont think its news to anyone that the internet is full of stupid people! Moderate the comments instead of axing a good initiative because of a few idiots. They should get more than enough money to have a support team working on comments. If all forums worked like that, all would be closed because we potentially have idiots writing in them. So do it like everyone else and have some moderators that get into action when comments have been reported.
Geez.
charlequin
Banned
If you guys want to have this silly argument about KIF, move it to a new thread, it's not on topic here.
http://kickingitforward.org/ said:
Notice how on the site 5% of profits isn't even clearly defined. Is it profits after the first week of sales? Month? Year? If the kickstarters wanted to they could even reinvest the money into their own next kickstarter. You sound like the KIF initiative is taken from the pages of the old testament. It is not in any way shape or form a 'hard rule', it is nothing but a 'promise' that the devs will help out in the kickstarter environment, and quite frankly if they don't want to they don't even have to do so until several years into the future, because nobody but themselves is going to enforce this promise.
Edit: Nvm, people want the discussion taken elsewhere.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Well, I'm personally hoping that portraits for things (NPCs, Monsters, etc) will be used in WL2, like the original.
Ideally like this:
(Okay, maybe not exactly like that. But something like that.)
I'm not quite sure how I feel about that if it were indeed the UI.
I'd double my pledged amount if that were the UI (or an option).
This sounds interesting. So it's like Icewind Dale but with recruitable members? In the first game, did the NPCs stay throughout the whole story or just for their section? Did you have any control over their skills during level up? I'm wondering if you'll have any interaction with them that's pretty standard in modern squard based RPGs.
I could get behind some more dark humour. I enjoyed some of the zaniness found in Fallout but it's not something I think would transition well without that weird visual aesthetic. I really hope the squad based combat is really good - we haven't had any decent tactic party rpgs for a long time. I'm possibly even more excited for the game now.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Just popped up on Facebook:
We will be having a live streaming closing party to celebrate our last day coming this Monday from 10pm-12am EST. Look for Nolan Bushnell and a few other surprise guests to attend. Only 63 hours remain before our Kickstarter site closes.
We will be having a live streaming closing party to celebrate our last day coming this Monday from 10pm-12am EST. Look for Nolan Bushnell and a few other surprise guests to attend. Only 63 hours remain before our Kickstarter site closes.
Pachterballs
Banned
brian just asked on twitter. I'm thinking.
B_Rik_Schitthaus
Banned
My guess, normal play isometric playfield with bar at bottom of screen with abilities, heath, held items and text on area or enemy.
Press 'ESC' and get a nicer looking version of the old WS interface.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I guess I should not be so worried, since he already told us what it would look like. He just needs to SHOW us now.
Pachterballs
Banned
The rather odd thing about potraits + UI; was in that latest videos; BF kept saying all that was wholely user adjustable and I kept thinking; um, shouldn't it be like 1 thing so its not hodgepogey. Sounded peculiar to have UI that you can change to suit; also sounded like he had no idea.
That won't be the UI because they said that they were running with 2 camera views - one zoomed out for world travel, one zoomed in for combat; no transition screens as they felt it took the gamer out of immersion with the game. so it won't be a screen like that. It'd be more falloutesque (IMO).
OT// re: videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLjCglq2bAg&feature=player_embedded
oh wow at the shadowrun update video. Look at that. It looks great, filmed better too; and the guy has this earnesty that BF didn't. He sounds so enthusiastic and happy. His thanks made me feel great. I should folllow that KS more. I'm more invested in WL2 right now though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r192hVs02G8&feature=player_embedded
and this other one with the staff is EXACTLY what I said BF+INXILE should have done!! WTF! Dropped the ball.
That won't be the UI because they said that they were running with 2 camera views - one zoomed out for world travel, one zoomed in for combat; no transition screens as they felt it took the gamer out of immersion with the game. so it won't be a screen like that. It'd be more falloutesque (IMO).
OT// re: videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLjCglq2bAg&feature=player_embedded
oh wow at the shadowrun update video. Look at that. It looks great, filmed better too; and the guy has this earnesty that BF didn't. He sounds so enthusiastic and happy. His thanks made me feel great. I should folllow that KS more. I'm more invested in WL2 right now though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r192hVs02G8&feature=player_embedded
and this other one with the staff is EXACTLY what I said BF+INXILE should have done!! WTF! Dropped the ball.