7 ms·

Kickstarter game project raises $10k, made using a DIY Platformer tutorial.

94 points by GabeN 14y ago

nullflux 14y ago
Have these types of things happened on Kickstarter before (or has anyone attempted to just completely game the system?) What types of recourse do investors have? Any?
- andypants 14y ago
  They are not investing, they are buying. There is no guarantee that any kickstarter project will ever get finished. It's up to the backers to decide if they think the project owner is capable of finishing the project.
  - Palomides 14y ago
    it isn't investing /or/ buying; you're literally just giving money
- Rinum 14y ago
  There is a kickstarter for a game (Echos of Eternia) where the creators are making the game using RPG Maker (a free tool anyone can use). They raised over $26k. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1465600975/echoes-of-eternia-a-modern-take-on-a-classic-desig http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1465600975/echoes-of-ete...
  - Fargren 14y ago
    A lot of great games have been made on RPG Maker. To The Moon is the most recent example I can think of. You wouldn't say that a program is worth less because it's written in c, a free language anyone can use.
  - zarify 14y ago
    Where do you draw the line about where you believe people shouldn't raise funds? Are they allowed to use a toolkit like RPG Maker or GameMaker? Are they allowed to use game engines? The point of making successful games isn't about doing everything from scratch, it's about making something that people want to play. Even with the OP if (perhaps because of head trauma) people feel they want to play the Ron Paul platformer, they should be free to throw money at it. If the project delivers what it promised and it's not actually infringing on others work, then where's the problem?
  - shpoonj 14y ago
    I don't mind them using RPG Maker... but I don't understand how they have any investors considering how cliche the project sounds and how terrible their presentation skills are. Possibly the worst pitch I've seen.
  - nknight 14y ago
    > a free tool anyone can use So, no more gcc, clang, Eclipse, Blender, nasm, or GIMP. Anything built with free tools is not worth supporting. Do you want to let the entire Fortune 500 know they need to close up shop now, or should I?
- glimcat 14y ago
  Here's some snake oil for $270,000: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1047510073/remee-the-rem-enhancing-lucid-dreaming-mask?ref=category http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1047510073/remee-the-rem... Kickstarter isn't particularly thorough about vetting technical projects.
  - andypants 14y ago
    Yeah, kickstarter just says it's up to the backers to do their own research into the project owners.
  - SatvikBeri 14y ago
    There are a lot of lucid dreaming devices, and people report varying degrees of success with them, but I've never heard that any of them are completely worthless. Is there any particular reason why Remee wouldn't work?
    - mbell 14y ago
      > Is there any particular reason why Remee wouldn't work? There is no reason it wouldn't work in the same way that there is no reason that there couldn't be a giant teacup orbiting the Earth.
      - dcosson 14y ago
        Ok so you're a realist, fine. But I'm curious, do you not think lucid dreaming is real? Or do you just not think it can be triggered with flashing lights?
        mbell 14y ago
        I've had many lucid dreams, non of them involved flashing lights in my face. More importantly of all the methods to induce lucid dreams, flashing lights in your eyes isn't among the practices normally used in scientific studies. If it were actually reliably effective, it is highly likely it would be used in studies as a reliable method of initiating lucid dreams.
- yrral 14y ago
  Here's one funded almost 2 years ago: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/schuyler/lockpicks-by-open-locksport?ref=live http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/schuyler/lockpicks-by-op...
- mattchew 14y ago
  I've heard of non-delivered projects. So far, I don't know of any big money high profile ones, but I'm sure there will be one sooner or later. Like the other guy said, you're not investing, you're buying. Or maybe donating. I don't think there's any recourse for a failed project, and I don't think there should be one. If you're thinking about contributing to a Kickstarter project, understand that there are no guarantees and moderate your contribution accordingly.
- jasonlotito 14y ago
  > Have these types of things happened on Kickstarter before What exactly do you mean "these types of things"? People using free tools to create something other people find valuable?
andypants 14y ago
Don't forget, he'll also spend $3000 to produce and send all the t-shirts and posters promised to the backers.
- shimsham 14y ago
  Has he produced and sent t-shirts before?
ghostfish 14y ago
At first I thought that failed Kickstarters were a small minority of projects, but I've come to think that failed projects (or at least greatly delayed) are the norm, rather than the exception. Of 4 projects I've funded 1 was delivered as promised and on time, 1 is currently on pace to be delivered only slightly late (~1 month), one is 5 months late and still being designed, and one is mostly content complete but over a year late for physical delivery. People really, really don't seem to realize what they're getting themselves into with these, and drastically underestimate time to completion.
- pablasso 14y ago
  That's why it's important to know that you're founding an idea, not buying a pre-release product.
- cheebla 14y ago
  does Kickstarter post stats on these kind of things? Like what percentage of funded projects are delivered? if not, why not?
  - angryasian 14y ago
    probably because its not beneficial for them to publish these stats, but I would love to see these statistics.
    - taude 14y ago
      Actually, found the blog article: it's 46% in 2011 (43% in 2010), but whatever: http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/2011-the-stats http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/2011-the-stats
      - waterlesscloud 14y ago
        That's actually just the percentage of projects that hit their funding goal. There is no indication of what percentage delivered. I suspect someone could figure this out. To my knowledge, all funded projects still have accessible pages. You could go through them all and see which have updates that indicate shipping...
twelvechairs 14y ago
Pick on it because its a poor game, not because of how it is written. It shouldn't matter to the backers if the guy was learning to program (how many experienced programmers would be happy with $10k-expenses for 2 months work?), or what tools he used to get the job done, as long as it does what it says on the proverbial tin.
- dhbanes 14y ago
  Is it a poor game?
- ajross 14y ago
  Actually, don't even pick on it because it's a poor game (and granted, it looks like one whopper of a poor game and I'm as shocked as anyone that this got funded). The magic of crowd funding is that decisions as to quality belong to the backers. They felt it was worthwhile, it's their money, so it's none of our business. If it's fraud, then sure: Kickstarter would be on the hook for abetting it. If he promised something he didn't deliver, there's a problem. But this doesn't qualify. It's just a dud project. Projects fail regularly, that's why they can't easily raise money from investors.
  - starwed 14y ago
    >If it's fraud, then sure: Kickstarter would be on the hook for abetting it. I'm not even sure that's the case, is it? They provide a platform, and take a cut, but I'd be a little surprised if that's enough to make them legally liable.
    - ajross 14y ago
      Surely they'd have some level of liability. Safe harbor rules from laws like the DCMA certainly wouldn't cover deliberate fraud. There would be enough to file a case, anyway. And if it was filed and not tossed out, they'd probably settle rather than risk all the bad press.
      - 14y ago
lonnyk 14y ago
I really feel this is getting blown out of proportion. The game wasn't even built yet and all of the assumptions the article makes are based on what they found in open directories on the server.
- eps 14y ago
  It might actually be worth blowing this out of proportion to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. I don't really want to support "I am going to paint second Mona Lisa" and end up supporting guy's quest for learning how to squeeze paint from a tube. This is not only misleading, but also damages KicStarter's reputation in general.
  - lonnyk 14y ago
    I think the outrage should come after people actually see the finished product and _not_ just from some random files that someone pulled off a public server. The project isn't even fully funded. Also, the outrage should be directed at Kickstarter and _not_ the person doing the project. Directing the outrage to Kickstarter will encourage them to do better vetting. Directing it to the person doing the project will only make other people question if they should do a project.
pablasso 14y ago
I'd be interesting if you could actually invest in Kickstarter projects and not just give away money.
- jes5199 14y ago
  I thought so, at first, but I don't believe that anymore. I think it's plausable that small projects with shareholders who want a profit may actually be less stable than projects by independent groups who have funding without oversight. I'm happy to give money to projects I believe in. I spend a lot of money on Kickstarter, and I'm happy to see projects succeed. Yeah, I hope I get a cool wristwatch out of that one project, but mostly it's about living vicerally through the experience of artists and designers and engineers being given the opportunity to really realize their own vision. That's worth a lot to me, and I'm willing to spend money on it, with no guarantee that I'll get mailed a toy at the end.
JVIDEL 14y ago
Don't know about this project, but the problem with kickstarter is that once you back a project is no longer your money, and there's nothing you can do about it. It's right there on their TOS: they are not responsible for the project, nor to provide ways to keep the project's creators from running away with the backers' money. This "give money and something MAY happen, eventually" model is going to collapse on itself.
- jes5199 14y ago
  I actually think that this is Kickstarter's saving grace: if I give money to somebody, I know it's a gamble. I'm not a venture capitalist looking for a guaranteed return, I'm not going to pressure anyone to have a "exit strategy", and I'm not a shopper who can demand my money back. I'm taking a risk with a small, disposable amount my money - usually less than the cost of going out to dinner at a nice restaurant, and I get to help give someone the gift of working on a project they believe in, that I think the world would be better off having. And sometimes - usually, even! - they give me a gift in return. I find this to be way more optimistic and healthy than the traditional investment model, where the VC are pushing you to sell your baby for parts so they can get even richer.
  - JVIDEL 14y ago
    Since when is getting what you were promised the same than a VC ROI model? VCs expect as much as possible, they want to hit jackpot. I give $100 for a watch so I expect said watch, not a Rolex! And getting jack shit is the exact opposite of what kickstarter says it does, you could just press the donate button of any harebrained scheme on the internet and get jack shit, you don't need kickstarter for that.
- shimsham 14y ago
  Does this sound like groupon for the funded-but-sometimes-a-bit-crazy-yet-awesome-business? if I were in risk assessment I'd assess the risks before gambling.
- merijnv 14y ago
  > This "give money and something MAY happen, eventually" model is going to collapse on itself. I'm not so sure, crowdfunding is certainly very attractive for people that have a track record of delivering but a consumer base that is to small for traditional publishing/production processes. Think Double Fine [1], Harebrained Schemes [2], Order of the Stick [3]. The people behind these projects have a clear, public track record of delivery and the projects wouldn't have happened without Kickstarter's crowdfunding. There is, of course, also Kickstarter original/official goal which is funding art, but here the same principles apply. With the exception that maybe art backers are a little more accepting of late/disappointing rewards at the end. The only real question is, is there a sufficient number of such proven projects to make Kickstarter sustainable? I'm not sure, but given the size of the internet and the available talent I would suspect so? [1] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adv... [2] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-ret... [3] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-the-stick-reprint-drive http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-t...
eykanal 14y ago
What is the point of this article? The guy said he'd make a video game, and people pledged money. He's pretty upfront about what he's making on the Kickstarter page. The article author is upset because the fellow is using a tutorial? Who the hell cares? So long as the supporters get their "sidescrolling platformer action/adventure game, reminiscent of console classics like Super Mario Brothers and Sonic the Hedgehog", like he promised them, what's it your business anyway? They paid for a game, and he's developing a game. What's the problem?
- reitzensteinm 14y ago
  Two reasons: 1) If the guy's following a tutorial, the game will suck. I made games for years before I made one that didn't suck enough that people paid money for it, and even then, it sucked. It's equivilant to hiring a guy to make a non trivial Rails app, and he goes out and buys a copy of Ruby for Dummies. 2) This is a great indication that Kickstarter game funding is a bubble right now, and there's going to be a crash. All the projects that people are funding take months or years to make, so the funders don't get disappointed right away. But all of the fluff projects being funded right now that won't go anywhere will come back to bite Kickstarter. Look, if the guy was upfront that he was learning game development, no problem. But if he can code, it's equivilant to someone following a Fruity Loops tutorial, saying they're going to make you a song. If he's creative and talented, maybe he's got a chance, after a learning curve. If he can't, it's like someone learning to play chords on a guitar promising the same. No chance.
  - kamaal 14y ago
    People who need to decide whether something is good or bad are his users. And users don't open up code bases and do code review before buying something. Just like how you and I, don't tear down washing machines to just check the wiring inside it.
    - reitzensteinm 14y ago
      I completely disagree. You're talking as if the game is already done, it's fun, but is held together with duct tape. I'm questioning whether the game will ever come out at all. He's painting a picture about what the game will be like; his users aren't savvy enough to know whether he's going to be able to make it a reality. If something stands out as a red flag, bringing into question whether he's got the ability to produce the project he is taking money for, it's absolutely appropriate to point it out. I've been in the indie development scene ten years; projects like this are a dime a dozen, and a single digit percentage of them ever get finished.
jimgardener 14y ago
http://nibruki.com/games/rp2012/core/screens/TitleScreen.js http://nibruki.com/games/rp2012/core/screens/TitleScreen.js now is forbidden!
starwed 14y ago
Does this author not understand how prototyping games works? You'd never spend the time drawing the assets and then code up the platformer... first you just grab a bunch of temporary placeholder art, so that you can work on the actual gameplay. This is incredibly common in any project like this. This particular game might well end up being completely terrible, but the whole post shows a crazy misunderstanding of game development.
djt 14y ago
Considering what it costs to produce a new title, is it any surprise?
deniszgonjanin 14y ago
Fake it 'til you make it, kid
anthemcg 14y ago
This is the second article I have seen in similar form criticizing a funded project for being simple/theoretically easy to make or relying on prefab tech. Every person on KickStarter has a chance to vet projects and decide for themselves. Most of these people are not professionals promising a slick top of the line product. They are just people who want to make something. Sometimes its a team of well qualified professionals but a lot of the times it is people who just have the desire to do it. Why are people bashing them? Sure, the guy didn't throw it out there that he was not experienced but most people wouldn't. He will probably deliver what he promised. In my early days, I did more than a few tutorials to complete clients objectives.I refined it and refined it before they ever saw it.But at the end of the day, I learned it and made it my own. I think tech-savvy people tend to judge here but a lot of these backers have no clue how to even begin thinking about how to make a game. To them, it may not matter. Besides who knows, I bet the backers are just aching for a Ron Paul platformer and thats all they heard when they watched the video.

94 points by GabeN 14y ago

Have these types of things happened on Kickstarter before (or has anyone attempted to just completely game the system?) What types of recourse do investors have? Any?

andypants 14y ago
They are not investing, they are buying. There is no guarantee that any kickstarter project will ever get finished. It's up to the backers to decide if they think the project owner is capable of finishing the project.
- Palomides 14y ago
  it isn't investing /or/ buying; you're literally just giving money
Rinum 14y ago
There is a kickstarter for a game (Echos of Eternia) where the creators are making the game using RPG Maker (a free tool anyone can use). They raised over $26k. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1465600975/echoes-of-eternia-a-modern-take-on-a-classic-desig http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1465600975/echoes-of-ete...
- Fargren 14y ago
  A lot of great games have been made on RPG Maker. To The Moon is the most recent example I can think of. You wouldn't say that a program is worth less because it's written in c, a free language anyone can use.
- zarify 14y ago
  Where do you draw the line about where you believe people shouldn't raise funds? Are they allowed to use a toolkit like RPG Maker or GameMaker? Are they allowed to use game engines? The point of making successful games isn't about doing everything from scratch, it's about making something that people want to play. Even with the OP if (perhaps because of head trauma) people feel they want to play the Ron Paul platformer, they should be free to throw money at it. If the project delivers what it promised and it's not actually infringing on others work, then where's the problem?
- shpoonj 14y ago
  I don't mind them using RPG Maker... but I don't understand how they have any investors considering how cliche the project sounds and how terrible their presentation skills are. Possibly the worst pitch I've seen.
- nknight 14y ago
  > a free tool anyone can use So, no more gcc, clang, Eclipse, Blender, nasm, or GIMP. Anything built with free tools is not worth supporting. Do you want to let the entire Fortune 500 know they need to close up shop now, or should I?
glimcat 14y ago
Here's some snake oil for $270,000: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1047510073/remee-the-rem-enhancing-lucid-dreaming-mask?ref=category http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1047510073/remee-the-rem... Kickstarter isn't particularly thorough about vetting technical projects.
- andypants 14y ago
  Yeah, kickstarter just says it's up to the backers to do their own research into the project owners.
- SatvikBeri 14y ago
  There are a lot of lucid dreaming devices, and people report varying degrees of success with them, but I've never heard that any of them are completely worthless. Is there any particular reason why Remee wouldn't work?
  - mbell 14y ago
    > Is there any particular reason why Remee wouldn't work? There is no reason it wouldn't work in the same way that there is no reason that there couldn't be a giant teacup orbiting the Earth.
    - dcosson 14y ago
      Ok so you're a realist, fine. But I'm curious, do you not think lucid dreaming is real? Or do you just not think it can be triggered with flashing lights?
      - mbell 14y ago
        I've had many lucid dreams, non of them involved flashing lights in my face. More importantly of all the methods to induce lucid dreams, flashing lights in your eyes isn't among the practices normally used in scientific studies. If it were actually reliably effective, it is highly likely it would be used in studies as a reliable method of initiating lucid dreams.
yrral 14y ago
Here's one funded almost 2 years ago: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/schuyler/lockpicks-by-open-locksport?ref=live http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/schuyler/lockpicks-by-op...
mattchew 14y ago
I've heard of non-delivered projects. So far, I don't know of any big money high profile ones, but I'm sure there will be one sooner or later. Like the other guy said, you're not investing, you're buying. Or maybe donating. I don't think there's any recourse for a failed project, and I don't think there should be one. If you're thinking about contributing to a Kickstarter project, understand that there are no guarantees and moderate your contribution accordingly.
jasonlotito 14y ago
> Have these types of things happened on Kickstarter before What exactly do you mean "these types of things"? People using free tools to create something other people find valuable?

andypants 14y ago

Don't forget, he'll also spend $3000 to produce and send all the t-shirts and posters promised to the backers.

shimsham 14y ago
Has he produced and sent t-shirts before?

ghostfish 14y ago

At first I thought that failed Kickstarters were a small minority of projects, but I've come to think that failed projects (or at least greatly delayed) are the norm, rather than the exception. Of 4 projects I've funded 1 was delivered as promised and on time, 1 is currently on pace to be delivered only slightly late (~1 month), one is 5 months late and still being designed, and one is mostly content complete but over a year late for physical delivery. People really, really don't seem to realize what they're getting themselves into with these, and drastically underestimate time to completion.

pablasso 14y ago
That's why it's important to know that you're founding an idea, not buying a pre-release product.
cheebla 14y ago
does Kickstarter post stats on these kind of things? Like what percentage of funded projects are delivered? if not, why not?
- angryasian 14y ago
  probably because its not beneficial for them to publish these stats, but I would love to see these statistics.
  - taude 14y ago
    Actually, found the blog article: it's 46% in 2011 (43% in 2010), but whatever: http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/2011-the-stats http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/2011-the-stats
    - waterlesscloud 14y ago
      That's actually just the percentage of projects that hit their funding goal. There is no indication of what percentage delivered. I suspect someone could figure this out. To my knowledge, all funded projects still have accessible pages. You could go through them all and see which have updates that indicate shipping...

twelvechairs 14y ago

Pick on it because its a poor game, not because of how it is written. It shouldn't matter to the backers if the guy was learning to program (how many experienced programmers would be happy with $10k-expenses for 2 months work?), or what tools he used to get the job done, as long as it does what it says on the proverbial tin.

dhbanes 14y ago
Is it a poor game?
ajross 14y ago
Actually, don't even pick on it because it's a poor game (and granted, it looks like one whopper of a poor game and I'm as shocked as anyone that this got funded). The magic of crowd funding is that decisions as to quality belong to the backers. They felt it was worthwhile, it's their money, so it's none of our business. If it's fraud, then sure: Kickstarter would be on the hook for abetting it. If he promised something he didn't deliver, there's a problem. But this doesn't qualify. It's just a dud project. Projects fail regularly, that's why they can't easily raise money from investors.
- starwed 14y ago
  >If it's fraud, then sure: Kickstarter would be on the hook for abetting it. I'm not even sure that's the case, is it? They provide a platform, and take a cut, but I'd be a little surprised if that's enough to make them legally liable.
  - ajross 14y ago
    Surely they'd have some level of liability. Safe harbor rules from laws like the DCMA certainly wouldn't cover deliberate fraud. There would be enough to file a case, anyway. And if it was filed and not tossed out, they'd probably settle rather than risk all the bad press.
    - 14y ago

lonnyk 14y ago

I really feel this is getting blown out of proportion. The game wasn't even built yet and all of the assumptions the article makes are based on what they found in open directories on the server.

eps 14y ago
It might actually be worth blowing this out of proportion to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. I don't really want to support "I am going to paint second Mona Lisa" and end up supporting guy's quest for learning how to squeeze paint from a tube. This is not only misleading, but also damages KicStarter's reputation in general.
- lonnyk 14y ago
  I think the outrage should come after people actually see the finished product and _not_ just from some random files that someone pulled off a public server. The project isn't even fully funded. Also, the outrage should be directed at Kickstarter and _not_ the person doing the project. Directing the outrage to Kickstarter will encourage them to do better vetting. Directing it to the person doing the project will only make other people question if they should do a project.

pablasso 14y ago

I'd be interesting if you could actually invest in Kickstarter projects and not just give away money.

jes5199 14y ago
I thought so, at first, but I don't believe that anymore. I think it's plausable that small projects with shareholders who want a profit may actually be less stable than projects by independent groups who have funding without oversight. I'm happy to give money to projects I believe in. I spend a lot of money on Kickstarter, and I'm happy to see projects succeed. Yeah, I hope I get a cool wristwatch out of that one project, but mostly it's about living vicerally through the experience of artists and designers and engineers being given the opportunity to really realize their own vision. That's worth a lot to me, and I'm willing to spend money on it, with no guarantee that I'll get mailed a toy at the end.

JVIDEL 14y ago

Don't know about this project, but the problem with kickstarter is that once you back a project is no longer your money, and there's nothing you can do about it. It's right there on their TOS: they are not responsible for the project, nor to provide ways to keep the project's creators from running away with the backers' money. This "give money and something MAY happen, eventually" model is going to collapse on itself.

jes5199 14y ago
I actually think that this is Kickstarter's saving grace: if I give money to somebody, I know it's a gamble. I'm not a venture capitalist looking for a guaranteed return, I'm not going to pressure anyone to have a "exit strategy", and I'm not a shopper who can demand my money back. I'm taking a risk with a small, disposable amount my money - usually less than the cost of going out to dinner at a nice restaurant, and I get to help give someone the gift of working on a project they believe in, that I think the world would be better off having. And sometimes - usually, even! - they give me a gift in return. I find this to be way more optimistic and healthy than the traditional investment model, where the VC are pushing you to sell your baby for parts so they can get even richer.
- JVIDEL 14y ago
  Since when is getting what you were promised the same than a VC ROI model? VCs expect as much as possible, they want to hit jackpot. I give $100 for a watch so I expect said watch, not a Rolex! And getting jack shit is the exact opposite of what kickstarter says it does, you could just press the donate button of any harebrained scheme on the internet and get jack shit, you don't need kickstarter for that.
shimsham 14y ago
Does this sound like groupon for the funded-but-sometimes-a-bit-crazy-yet-awesome-business? if I were in risk assessment I'd assess the risks before gambling.
merijnv 14y ago
> This "give money and something MAY happen, eventually" model is going to collapse on itself. I'm not so sure, crowdfunding is certainly very attractive for people that have a track record of delivering but a consumer base that is to small for traditional publishing/production processes. Think Double Fine [1], Harebrained Schemes [2], Order of the Stick [3]. The people behind these projects have a clear, public track record of delivery and the projects wouldn't have happened without Kickstarter's crowdfunding. There is, of course, also Kickstarter original/official goal which is funding art, but here the same principles apply. With the exception that maybe art backers are a little more accepting of late/disappointing rewards at the end. The only real question is, is there a sufficient number of such proven projects to make Kickstarter sustainable? I'm not sure, but given the size of the internet and the available talent I would suspect so? [1] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adv... [2] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-ret... [3] - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-the-stick-reprint-drive http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/599092525/the-order-of-t...

eykanal 14y ago

What is the point of this article? The guy said he'd make a video game, and people pledged money. He's pretty upfront about what he's making on the Kickstarter page. The article author is upset because the fellow is using a tutorial? Who the hell cares? So long as the supporters get their "sidescrolling platformer action/adventure game, reminiscent of console classics like Super Mario Brothers and Sonic the Hedgehog", like he promised them, what's it your business anyway? They paid for a game, and he's developing a game. What's the problem?

reitzensteinm 14y ago
Two reasons: 1) If the guy's following a tutorial, the game will suck. I made games for years before I made one that didn't suck enough that people paid money for it, and even then, it sucked. It's equivilant to hiring a guy to make a non trivial Rails app, and he goes out and buys a copy of Ruby for Dummies. 2) This is a great indication that Kickstarter game funding is a bubble right now, and there's going to be a crash. All the projects that people are funding take months or years to make, so the funders don't get disappointed right away. But all of the fluff projects being funded right now that won't go anywhere will come back to bite Kickstarter. Look, if the guy was upfront that he was learning game development, no problem. But if he can code, it's equivilant to someone following a Fruity Loops tutorial, saying they're going to make you a song. If he's creative and talented, maybe he's got a chance, after a learning curve. If he can't, it's like someone learning to play chords on a guitar promising the same. No chance.
- kamaal 14y ago
  People who need to decide whether something is good or bad are his users. And users don't open up code bases and do code review before buying something. Just like how you and I, don't tear down washing machines to just check the wiring inside it.
  - reitzensteinm 14y ago
    I completely disagree. You're talking as if the game is already done, it's fun, but is held together with duct tape. I'm questioning whether the game will ever come out at all. He's painting a picture about what the game will be like; his users aren't savvy enough to know whether he's going to be able to make it a reality. If something stands out as a red flag, bringing into question whether he's got the ability to produce the project he is taking money for, it's absolutely appropriate to point it out. I've been in the indie development scene ten years; projects like this are a dime a dozen, and a single digit percentage of them ever get finished.

jimgardener 14y ago

http://nibruki.com/games/rp2012/core/screens/TitleScreen.js http://nibruki.com/games/rp2012/core/screens/TitleScreen.js now is forbidden!

starwed 14y ago

Does this author not understand how prototyping games works? You'd never spend the time drawing the assets and then code up the platformer... first you just grab a bunch of temporary placeholder art, so that you can work on the actual gameplay. This is incredibly common in any project like this. This particular game might well end up being completely terrible, but the whole post shows a crazy misunderstanding of game development.

djt 14y ago

Considering what it costs to produce a new title, is it any surprise?

deniszgonjanin 14y ago

Fake it 'til you make it, kid

anthemcg 14y ago

This is the second article I have seen in similar form criticizing a funded project for being simple/theoretically easy to make or relying on prefab tech. Every person on KickStarter has a chance to vet projects and decide for themselves. Most of these people are not professionals promising a slick top of the line product. They are just people who want to make something. Sometimes its a team of well qualified professionals but a lot of the times it is people who just have the desire to do it. Why are people bashing them? Sure, the guy didn't throw it out there that he was not experienced but most people wouldn't. He will probably deliver what he promised. In my early days, I did more than a few tutorials to complete clients objectives.I refined it and refined it before they ever saw it.But at the end of the day, I learned it and made it my own. I think tech-savvy people tend to judge here but a lot of these backers have no clue how to even begin thinking about how to make a game. To them, it may not matter. Besides who knows, I bet the backers are just aching for a Ron Paul platformer and thats all they heard when they watched the video.