Be Right Back, Uninstalling

http://kotaku.com/5318368/valve-let-fans...evelopment

Could work but not on that idea alone.  If the fan financiers got regular updates of content, access to playable demo's and beta's and had a feedback channel back to the developer.  And if it was attractive to them, as in they get the game at least for $50 and a portion of the profits for over $50.  And if they aren't counting on this to finance 100% of the project, then it could probably work well.

(07-20-2009, 02:03 PM)Surf314 link Wrote: [ -> ]http://kotaku.com/5318368/valve-let-fans...evelopment

Could work but not on that idea alone.  If the fan financiers got regular updates of content, access to playable demo's and beta's and had a feedback channel back to the developer.  And if it was attractive to them, as in they get the game at least for $50 and a portion of the profits for over $50.  And if they aren't counting on this to finance 100% of the project, then it could probably work well.

Isn't this more-or-less exactly what's happening with Natural Selection 2?

probably wouldnt work

cant think of a good reason why not right now

ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm because people aren't gonna shell out 20 bucks or more to fund a game that might not work

"It seems that under the right circumstances, one could actually make more money with a flop than you could with a hit."

Mount and Blade did this where you got to play early versions of the game and paid less for it the earlier you bought it.  That worked out pretty well and was quite cool I thought.  Probably doesn't work for a lot of linear story based games, but should work great for a lot of really "PC" centric style games that focus on generated content and worlds, or multiplayer heavy games.

(07-20-2009, 07:03 PM)Ianki link Wrote: [ -> ]"It seems that under the right circumstances, one could actually make more money with a flop than you could with a hit."

3rd post in and someone has already made a post so win the thread might as well be over.

(07-20-2009, 06:47 PM)beep beep digleet link Wrote: [ -> ]ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm because people aren't gonna shell out 20 bucks or more to fund a game that might not work

Yeah, the system we have now where we shell out $50 to buy a game that might not work is much better.

(07-20-2009, 08:31 PM)ZargonX link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=beep beep digleet link=topic=3316.msg99432#msg99432 date=1248133620]


ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm because people aren't gonna shell out 20 bucks or more to fund a game that might not work

Yeah, the system we have now where we shell out $50 to buy a game that might not work is much better.
[/quote]

This.  I'd pay $50 for a game I was excited for if they gave me updates and playable betas.  It'd be like adopting one of those african kids but with videogames.  For only dollars a day this lil videogame can be given life.  Call now to receive your monthly updates on how your game is doing.

(07-20-2009, 08:31 PM)ZargonX link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=beep beep digleet link=topic=3316.msg99432#msg99432 date=1248133620]


ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm because people aren't gonna shell out 20 bucks or more to fund a game that might not work

Yeah, the system we have now where we shell out $50 to buy a game that might not work is much better.
[/quote]

i havent paid 50 bucks for a game in years, steam sales and pirating lololol

For some reason this doesn't sit right with me

it's cuz the system is already in place, only if they want money to fund a huge project, their older titles are the ones that have to sell well. if their previous products don't sell well or are not up to consumers' standard, there's no reason for consumers to continue investing money in them (a little similar to why L4D2 is already running into trouble)

Welcome to the world of financing....I wonder how this would go down with the SEC and if it would be legal or not....theres a lot to consider...


1) Can I sell my ownership stake to someone else

2) Would that price change based on whether the game looks like a bust/hit

3) What kind of return can we expect (would that affect initial price)

4) Do we have voting rights for what is in the game like we would owning stock with a normal company


That's just a small sample, but there's a -fuck ton- of issues to consider, especially if they kick back profits over a certain point.

(07-21-2009, 07:18 AM)Caffeine link Wrote: [ -> ]Welcome to the world of financing....I wonder how this would go down with the SEC and if it would be legal or not....theres a lot to consider...


1) Can I sell my ownership stake to someone else

2) Would that price change based on whether the game looks like a bust/hit

3) What kind of return can we expect (would that affect initial price)

4) Do we have voting rights for what is in the game like we would owning stock with a normal company


That's just a small sample, but there's a -fuck ton- of issues to consider, especially if they kick back profits over a certain point.

Ish a leeeeetle teeeeny stock market, if that's how it works.

(07-21-2009, 12:48 PM)peaches link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=Caffeine link=topic=3316.msg99547#msg99547 date=1248178698]
Welcome to the world of financing....I wonder how this would go down with the SEC and if it would be legal or not....theres a lot to consider...


1) Can I sell my ownership stake to someone else

2) Would that price change based on whether the game looks like a bust/hit

3) What kind of return can we expect (would that affect initial price)

4) Do we have voting rights for what is in the game like we would owning stock with a normal company


That's just a small sample, but there's a -fuck ton- of issues to consider, especially if they kick back profits over a certain point.

Ish a leeeeetle teeeeny stock market, if that's how it works.

[/quote]It's a whole lot easier to think about when you consider it a preorder, or a donation that will result in a free copy of the game when it comes out:
1) You can't sell it to someone else, it's a donation.
2) The price gets set based on expected retail, either lowered to incentivise buying early or raised to 'show your support' for the game. Once set it doesn't change.
3) None. Any return would be considered a bonus, but you shouldn't bet on it.
4) Not other than the normal community forum/feedback that developers currently use. They're looking to have less oversight (stingy investors) but in order to actually raise enough money to do development they'll have to follow community wishes: if the community is happy, you get more donations. They're basically trading conservative investors that are looking for a return on their cash for gamers who are more interested in the quality of the end product than in getting money.

Done, and, done. Seems like a smart idea to me.

(07-21-2009, 01:16 PM)at0m link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=peaches link=topic=3316.msg99648#msg99648 date=1248198527]
[quote author=Caffeine link=topic=3316.msg99547#msg99547 date=1248178698]
Welcome to the world of financing....I wonder how this would go down with the SEC and if it would be legal or not....theres a lot to consider...


1) Can I sell my ownership stake to someone else

2) Would that price change based on whether the game looks like a bust/hit

3) What kind of return can we expect (would that affect initial price)

4) Do we have voting rights for what is in the game like we would owning stock with a normal company


That's just a small sample, but there's a -fuck ton- of issues to consider, especially if they kick back profits over a certain point.

Ish a leeeeetle teeeeny stock market, if that's how it works.

[/quote]It's a whole lot easier to think about when you consider it a preorder, or a donation that will result in a free copy of the game when it comes out:
1) You can't sell it to someone else, it's a donation.
2) The price gets set based on expected retail, either lowered to incentivise buying early or raised to 'show your support' for the game. Once set it doesn't change.
3) None. Any return would be considered a bonus, but you shouldn't bet on it.
4) Not other than the normal community forum/feedback that developers currently use. They're looking to have less oversight (stingy investors) but in order to actually raise enough money to do development they'll have to follow community wishes: if the community is happy, you get more donations. They're basically trading conservative investors that are looking for a return on their cash for gamers who are more interested in the quality of the end product than in getting money.

Done, and, done. Seems like a smart idea to me.
[/quote]

Good summary. Makes a lot of sense to me, but the initial apprehension is strong.

Sounds like valve will keep investors happy and listen to their ideas.  I will donate every penny I have.  TF3 = Halo 4, confirmed.

(07-22-2009, 12:28 AM)Geoff link Wrote: [ -> ]Sounds like valve will keep investors happy and listen to their ideas.  I will donate every penny I have.  TF3 = Halo 4, confirmed.

Uhhh hi Valve? It's Geoff, I was thinking could you replace the Heavy with Master Chief?

God it would be so amazing if Halo4 was ever released

(07-22-2009, 05:00 AM)SUPER MACHO MAN link Wrote: [ -> ][quote author=Geoff link=topic=3316.msg99860#msg99860 date=1248240519]
Sounds like valve will keep investors happy and listen to their ideas.  I will donate every penny I have.  TF3 = Halo 4, confirmed.

Uhhh hi Valve? It's Geoff, I was thinking could you replace every class with Master Chief and dustbowl with blood gulch?
[/quote]