Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Sandwich on August 17, 2012, 07:58:52 am
-
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/659943965/planetary-annihilation-a-next-generation-rts
OMG.
/me was a big Total Annihilation fanboi
-
Already did my part. :yes:
-
Supported within 12 hours of them going live :>
-
**** **** TA scaled up to modern PCs. will most certainly be backing this **** in a few of days when has money to do so!!!!!
-
Asteroid bombardment.
**** JUST GOT REAL.
-
Looks cool
But until kickstarter allows for donations through means other than creditcard...
Edit: I see they provided their own paypal donation link though
-
Saw Nerd3 post a video of it yesterday, donated immediately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN3o0nqz1Jw
-
One hopes that the guys that worked on the network code for C&CG:ZH aren't the same guys working on the network code for this.
-
no single player campaign.
meh.
-
They said that a single player campaign will definitely be a stretch goal. Meaning they will implement it if they beat their initial goal by a fair share of money. Judging by the speed at which the funds are rising I'm hoping that several stretch goals will be met.
-
This looks really awesome, but I'm hoping for it to be moddable too. Hopefully that's a stretch goal. Just read the FAQ. Good stuff!
-
i don't pay for things because they say "oh we'd LIKE to do this." i buy them when it's actually been done and i can see for myself it's something i want.
-
I don't have any money for them, but here's hoping they meet their goals!
-
Hah, some of those very high end donations have really cool rewards:
Get your own commander designed, a unit named after you etc etc.
-
I'm doing my part! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO0xspHN0Vw)
-
Get your own commander designed, a unit named after you etc etc.
What began as a conflict over the transfer of consciousness from flesh to machines escalated into a war which has decimated a million worlds. The Core and the Dekker have all but exhausted the resources of a galaxy in their struggle for domination. Both sides now crippled beyond repair, the remnants of their armies continue to battle on ravaged planets, their hatred fueled by over four thousand years of total lack of poon. This is a fight to the death. For each side, the only acceptable outcome is the complete elimination of the other..........Except for hot women.
-
John Patrick Lowrie. That man's voice was one of the things that shaped my love of all things robot and explody.
-
Done. Beta access!
-
Alpha access is life now. It's - as expected - a very very early and very unfinished version of the game. More like a playable engine demo.
They do have a ton of work to do still... but the potential it shows is staggering :)
-
And its $90 to get alpha access. No thanks.
-
90$? It sounds "a bit" more than some recent high bugdet game. I hope the end product will be cheaper.
-
On their site you have other options which include $60 for access to the Beta and Final release and $40 for just the Final.
-
It will. Alpha access now is the same that KS backers paid to get it. Beta, when it's ready, will cost the same that backers paid to get it. Final version will be the regular price, $40 or whatever it was going to be, though I think backers who only backed for the final version get it cheaper than retail.
Dang, ninja'd
-
Frankly, I find it rather weird that some people think they would be "paying 90$ for alpha access." That's simply nonsense.
One look at the page makes it pretty clear that you are pre-ordering a deluxe/collectors edition for your money ... and 90$ for a is definitely NOT uncommon for such an edition these days.
Heck, some of the games with first day DLC that were released recently may be just as if not more expensive if you want the definite edition.
More important however, at least as far as I am concerned, I also like to think that my contribution helps make a game that simply would not be made if it was not for the fans funding it up front.
The alpha access is just a bonus.
-
Oh yeah. That'll show me for answering questions without doing research.
-
$90 for alpha access sounds pretty reasonable for me; Introversion went for similar pricing on Prison Architect to encourage the alpha testers to actually participate in testing and development, rather than just going down the "sell the alpha on the cheap to fund the release" model that Minecraft popularised.
-
The human capacity for entitlement never ceases to amaze me. Early access to the development of a game is a rare privilege and something quite special to watch, so you should by default pay less for it, right? :banghead:
-
"Watching" the devlopment of a game could be interesting...or boring.
It's not like you have any menaingfull impact on game creation anyway. Acress to early builds? You get to play a buggy game again and again, never getting to finish it because of crashes and whatnot, and by the time a finished product rolls out, you're tired of it and never play it.
-
The human capacity for entitlement never ceases to amaze me. Early access to the development of a game is a rare privilege and something quite special to watch, so you should by default pay less for it, right? :banghead:
It's not an issue of entitlement, but one of communication, and the shifting meaning of the terms "Alpha" and "Beta" access.
-
Well I agree it's a shift in terms of Alpha and Beta, but as Hoover mentioned, gamers now automatically think in Minecraft pricing terms. Thanks to its wild success, a lot of people now believe that Alpha automatically = cheap. I wouldn't have such a problem if people actually took a second to think about the situation.
And as for watching game development, I find its more of a personal decision as to whether its your cup of tea or not. If you want the complete game, sure just wait, I can appreciate that. However, I personally rather enjoy the process. Take Kerbal Space Program for example; I have been positively delighted watching the game grow over time. Whether or not you have an impact on game creation is down to the developer, and that should factor into your choice when you spend your money. Don't feel you have a say, don't spend it.
-
Frankly, the only people I can see getting mad at this would be the ones who don't realize that this is a collectors edition (Galactic Edition) pre-order and the Alpha is just one (minor) feature of that edition.
I.e. people who refuse to read or understand what is plainly written all over the Steam Store page as well as the Uberent website.
If they had actually charged less on Steam and those people would have gotten it, they would probably right now be flaming that "the game sucks/TA/Supcom were better...." ... simply because of the audacity of releasing an "Alpha" that isn't feature complete and perfectly polished. ;)
And for that reason I also disagree that this isn't an issue of entitlement mentality. It is. There are enough people on the Internet who will raise a s***storm for no other reason than an Alpha or Beta release not being exactly like the full game except for "cheap".
I believe the PA guys choose wisely to not give a **** about those people and to instead use the same price-point they used for their early kickstarter backers... i.e. their actual fans and supporters.
In the end... all publicity is good publicity... especially if any negativity attached reveals itself as nothing else but stupidity for anyone who cares to read up on the issue. ;)
P.S.: If you want to name an ingame planet and have your name show up in the credits (for further supporting the making of the game) you can also get the 200$ Cosmic edition. ;) If they had put that on Steam heads would probably have exploded. :)
P.P.S.: For people in Europe the Galactic Edition is actually 83 € on Steam.... but buying it for 90$ on the Uberent webpage- I only ended up with a 67 € charge on my card. - and they will even convert keys to Steam later on as well. So if anyone wants to get this: Get it on the webpage.
-
I completely understand why people might get upset at a developer charging a lot of money for the privilege of testing their unfinished game (I can't say I'd be entirely comfortable with it as an industry standard practice myself), but I think it works out pretty well for everyone when it's indie devs pursuing interesting new ideas doing it.
-
As if anyone's forcing people to get the alpha release. I mean, it's the most ridiculous thing ever.
And then people complaint that the current games are silly and stupid, etc. Of course they are! Just look at the IQ of the people they are marketed to.
-
I saw this, but the price-tag put me off. I don't mind paying that kind of money for a collection or a finished Collectors Edition, but when the game is still in development I'm not really prepared to pay that kind of money. The idea that it is, in some way, a privilege to give them a load of money and help test their game seems somewhat erroneous to me. I like something a little less nebulous for that kind of lay-out.
Maybe when the game is finished I'll look at it again, it does look like a good game, but too expensive at the moment for what there is of it.
With regards to Minecraft, I don't think there ever was a 'plot' any more than Dwarf-Fortress, Gnomoria or any other rogue-based game, part of the fun aspect of the game is the complete lack of 'paths' that you need to follow.
-
Why is there less conversation about Planetary Annihilation in here?
I'd have liked to have seen, for the $90 Steam "backers" price the option for -something- a little closer to equivalent. At $90 on Kickstarter, you at least got a Commander, so either the Steam Alpha could have bet $80 and sans a Commander and probably been a little better off for it, or something else.
That said, if anybody comes across planetary body HLP-Z4-CAM, you're welcome. Use it wisely.
-
Yup, I can see where the price is coming from with something as ambitious as this, but I guess it's a fine line between making sure you get funding enough to make an awesome game, making sure you get a fan-base and not irritating the fan-base that already exists by playing around with the price too much later on in development.
The annoying bit is, I know I will be buying this game. I'll make excuses not to for a few months, and then, one day, I'll crack ;)
-
Yup, I can see where the price is coming from with something as ambitious as this, but I guess it's a fine line between making sure you get funding enough to make an awesome game, making sure you get a fan-base and not irritating the fan-base that already exists by playing around with the price too much later on in development.
The annoying bit is, I know I will be buying this game. I'll make excuses not to for a few months, and then, one day, I'll crack ;)
pretty much this. if the AI in spring was worth a damn i'd be reccomending it to people, but... its ****. and playing multi online is mostly suicidal.
-
It's interesting because you are paying for promise, not product, at least not yet, so it becomes a question of trust. The more the outlay, the higher the level of trust required, and the more demanding the expectations on the company, so those factors all have to be balanced.
-
I really envision a future where you have kickstarter projects of entirely open sourced games, so people stop complaining about this particular issue. As in, "If you all give me 2 million bucks, I'll be making this amazing game that I'm previewing right here, and then it will be free for everyone to play coz it's open source!"
And before you tell me this doesn't work, let me remind you that many documentaries and other stuff are already being done this way, so yeah I think it works! And for everyone who despises copyright and so on, it would be the perfect world: if the games are really something people really want, they will back the project up, and then it becomes part of our commons. If they don't want, they won't back it up.
I can dream...
-
What is this... this... communist BS, Luis? :p
-
I remember having an interesting conversation once about the difference between kick-starting and buying shares. The argument being that if you bought shares in a company, not only would you be funding the project, but you could also expect a financial reward if that project is a success. The person I was talking to argued that there was just as much risk involved with kick-starting, but not the same level of reward.
The counter-argument was the fact that, in order for this to be the case, the company would have to be in position where it could sell shares, which means relinquishing levels of centralization and control for profit, which can actually dilute the original creative intent of the game. We've all experienced the outcome of shareholder demand causing an early release of a game at some point.
-
Well the big difference is that in Kickstarter you are potentially talking to the wider world, the consumers themselves or at least a representative portion of them, directly, instead of some capitalists who don't care about games at all, they just care about profit. The investment you got out of such a Kickstarter that I'm alluding to would be more of the sort of how much would consumers really value something like an amazing game to be free forever (and forever moddable, used and further developed by everyone else, etc.).
I like schemes where middle men are cut off. Specially if they are of the capitalistic kind.
What is this... this... communist BS, Luis? :p
Thing is, yeah it's communistic ideologically, but it does not need any revolution at all, it does not mean people stealing present IPs, it's all voluntary and honest, using capitalistic tools (like Kickstarter) for a communistic goal.
Not that I don't think what all these game companies are doing is good. It is good. Or at least, better than the previous model of having this middle-man vetting ideas based on his small vision of the world.
-
Not to take this back off-topic, but I agree that the single-player campaign of Minecraft sucks. :p I don't find that a disappointment at all though, since the core essence of the game is creative/survival (both single-player and multi-player), not a story mode. The story element they did tack on - the endgame text wall - was definitely weaksauce, but that's because it was added to a game that had absolutely no storyline prior to that. It's like reading the last chapter of a book without there being anything else. No, actually, it's like reading the epilogue of a book. :p
Anyway, the only logic I see in PA's pricing is that that was a KickStarter price level. The only difference is that when you pay $90 in KickStarter, it's to help make a game happen, whereas paying $90 in Steam is "merely" to have early access to said in-dev game.
there was something about kickstarter (the company) actually dictating the price of the game on steam for them. might've been on their webpage, i'll toss a link when i'm not so sleepy.
-
there was something about kickstarter (the company) actually dictating the price of the game on steam for them. might've been on their webpage, i'll toss a link when i'm not so sleepy.
That...sounds kind of illegal to me. A third party setting prices between two unrelated parties that does not have any ownership rights to one of them?
-
there was something about kickstarter (the company) actually dictating the price of the game on steam for them. might've been on their webpage, i'll toss a link when i'm not so sleepy.
That...sounds kind of illegal to me. A third party setting prices between two unrelated parties that does not have any ownership rights to one of them?
http://steamcommunity.com/games/233250/announcements/detail/1658730021561594175
-
I think you've misread that statement a bit. They're talking about "our kickstarter", not kickstarter the company.
-
It's interesting because you are paying for promise, not product, at least not yet, so it becomes a question of trust. The more the outlay, the higher the level of trust required, and the more demanding the expectations on the company, so those factors all have to be balanced.
For what it's worth, I don't view Kickstarter projects as paying for anything. I see them as me (and others OFC) donating towards something we want to see become a reality. Sure, it's nice that we get to have the benefit of not needing to purchase the game in addition to our donation, and that certain tiers of donation come with even more benefits. But in the end, I see it as a donation towards something I believe in. TBH, I hate online multiplayer games where you fight other players - perhaps I don't see my skills as holding up to other people and am afraid of losing - so I don't know if I'll ever even play PA properly. I'll probably just stick to skirmish modes and hold out hope for an eventual campaign mode. That doesn't dilute my joy at having helped make the game a reality. :)
-
I think you've misread that statement a bit. They're talking about "our kickstarter", not kickstarter the company.
i was tired last night, so cut me some slack
-
This got lost in the split so:
Anyway. WRT Kickstarter, I think of it as paying for the service of making a game you'd like to play. Obviously there are rough edges in that way of looking at it, since the games are still usually sold afterwards; but I think it's an important development, because the general idiocy that is intellectual property law largely derives from creating a legal framework to protect a wrong-headed business model where non-scarce information is sold as a good by imposing an artificial scarcity of supply.