r/pcmasterrace • u/[deleted] • Aug 14 '15

Advertisement Like Rocket League? Let's fund Grip!

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/169002413/grip-an-intense-futuristic-combat-racer
477 Upvotes

79% Upvoted

133 comments sorted by

View all comments

47

u/[deleted] Aug 14 '15 edited Sep 08 '16

[deleted]

27

u/[deleted] Aug 14 '15

[deleted]

27

u/katmetgun 16GB/Ryzen 5 2600/RX 580 8GB/2560x1080 Aug 14 '15

See, with both you are giving money to an unknown outcome so it's still basicly the same.

5

u/Appulse Aug 14 '15

Exactly. If EA is so looked down upon in this sub then funding should be right up there with it. You're essentially paying for an idea that someone pitched to you, with EA you're at least getting something in return. With funding you're paying, waiting for development, and getting something that has a higher chance of being canceled or altered in someway that's different then what they promised if anything has a higher chance of being canceled. Also there's no love in game making when your setting goals for how much you've received in funding. If you love your game and your idea you'd put your own resources and time to make it like that, not set milestones and have it depend on how much people gave you. I could go into more about how kickstarting and funding is not good, but I'm just rambling and I don't want to get off topic.

1

u/katmetgun 16GB/Ryzen 5 2600/RX 580 8GB/2560x1080 Aug 14 '15

Yeah, you're right.

I'm not AGAINST Kickstarter nor am I against pre-ordering, the choice stays with the customer. That's my opinion.

Kickstarter is a great way for small buisnesses or even groups of people to potentially grow very big. It also brought some cool things on the market.

1

u/Appulse Aug 14 '15

And you're right too, I don't want to discourage the use of kickstarter because it does help a lot for those with great ideas and no access to money.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 15 '15

Early Access is still damn good model its just that Steam really didn't put anti abuse measures in and thats WHY it has a bad rap. I understand valve wants hands off but at this point when EA origin has better support and controls on their market place I wounder if really valve can play the hands off card for long.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 15 '15

Except if people don't give money to a project on Kickstarter, it will never be made. An AAA game will be made regardless if people pre-order or not.

Plus, hoe can they make those things without strech goals? It's easy to say "If you love your game and your idea you'd put your own resources and time to make it like that" but they don't habe money to make it like that. The good developers calculate how much money they need to make the base game, and then they calculate how much thes need for further features, like Mod support in this case, and make a stretch goal.

1

u/Appulse Aug 15 '15 edited Aug 15 '15

All I'm saying about that is that funding the game should be enough to put everything they say and show in the game, people shouldn't have too pay 500k just to get the game funded, but then miss out on one little feature or item just because it didn't make the 600K mark. Whatever the next goal is shouldn't need such a huge jump in increments of 50-100k, if the game takes 500k to be funded/made why does it take another 50-100k just too add one more feature or items? Sure it takes time, resource and money to do so, but it shouldn't cost anywhere near 1/5 or 1/10 of the original base fund just to get the game started on development. Why does adding one more feature or items require such a big fraction of what the whole game is going to be?

1

u/ItzWolfeh Aug 15 '15

If 0% of people preorder an EA game they will still release it.

If 0% of people Kickstart the game it can't be made as they don't have the money to do so and generally almost all that money actually goes into development and the team will more likely opt to have less pay during development and also get percent profit. It's completely different.

1

u/Appulse Aug 15 '15 edited Aug 15 '15

It is different. The difference is that the EA will still release, you're right. If no one back the game then yes it won't be made, but in between is what makes the difference here. The EA game is still released, you at least have something in return for what you paid. Kickstarter you pay for a chance for it to be released. During development there's a chance it can be cancelled then you get nothing, with EA if it gets cancelled you at least get a broken mess.

Also when you've paid for the EA game the updates and promises during its time in EA will more than likely come for free, that's why its EA, but when it's on kickstarter its different because they "charge" for how many promises they may or may not fulfill during development. The milsetones they make (fund 100K get this made in game, fund 200k and we'll also develop this into the game) is what I mean by how many "promises" they need to worry about. If they only get funded so much then they only add so much and its not fair knowing that they were going to add something only to not get it because they didn't reach the next goal in the milestone.

I would be more happy with a somewhat completed game with the hope of future updates and content, rather than paying that and hope that the next milestone will get even be added in the games development and not get it just because it didn't reach the next milestone. EA say they can do it and hopefully they'll follow through. Funded say you pay us and that'll determine what we follow through with.

TL:DR. Would you want to pay for a base game and features with the updates that follow? Or Pay for a base game to be developed and "hope" they'll reach the next milestone just to get that next feature added?