Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

No, it's not required. But if you want real punitive damages assessed, you're going to have to prove malice on some level. Either that he knowingly made false statements or made said statements with a reckless disregard for the harm they would cause.

And again, incompetence != fraud. If he had prototype that he dicked around with for 2 hours and assumed was good, made the Kickstarter with that statement, then in the first preview discovered that after 4 hours the simulation locked up and the AI shit itself, that's not fraud either.

edit: also, it's important to note that it's not up to us to prove what he was thinking at the time.

You seem to be the legal expert here, but I'm pretty sure the burden of proof lies with the plantiff, not the defendant. If you accuse him of something, the burden of proof is not him to exonerate himself.

[birdy51]

Someone might be able to say something if they noticed it, but for the most part he didn't take any actions this time around that concretely said to me 'Ok. Yeah. That changed something.' . Rather, Josh explained a lot more of the base examples and explaining how the interactions work. For instance, how to tip events into your corner by shoving heroes and units into a box or how the God he was using had options to influence events by tweaking them in minute ways; for instance, turning a mineral rush into an earthquake, or sending that boon to a town where you might have stronger influence.

So, while he explained the numbers and showed off some of the actions one can take; he didn't do anything with them yet, partially because a turn never progressed and another part because that was his goal. Which, take that as you will. It seemed to me that he simply wanted explain the base features first through a pretty scripted... Script. While I doubt it was one take, he certainly moved along in a pretty procerdural manner as he examined and showed off each of the yet immoving parts of the game.

Anyways. It is confusing as hell. On the surface it looks ok, but there are a lot of things that give me questions. Like, why are some numbers green and others red? Up in the top-right corner shows the location whenever the mouse moves on the map. Oh no. Why? Why doesn't it just fixate on the current location like something sane would? There is also a bit of name glut going on; lots of names and people, but not really a whole lot to make them distinct. That's probably my own problem, since I can hardly keep track of my dwarves, but still. That's a lot of randos to keep track of. And on that note, what separates them from heroes? Are these city constrained people, or do they get to move around as refugees/attackers/slaves? Do they die? Can we kill the random people arbitrarily? What really is madness, and how do I get the humans to blow up their city in a desperate attempt to get rid of me?

I don't know whether I can expect an answer to these questions, but I kind of hope they get answered in resolute way one way or another if he decides to throw another video at us.

---

On the whole debate thing, I can agree with ndkid's last point. We do agree on the basic terms. Something went wrong in this game's development. There's a problem. Josh is trying to fix it; whether one way or another.

I don't really want to believe in the fraud aspect... But that's mostly because I still want to hold out hope that something cool gets produced. It's purely emotional, and I am a sort of stupid optimist whom facts struggle to reach on the best days, let alone my worst. I want to hope something notable gets produced because that would be the best result; Josh would be able to redeem himself after an incredibly trying development and the Kickstarters finally get a damn game after all the bullshit they've been pulled through.

Until we see the end result, we are simply reopening old, embarrassing wounds from a particularly nasty experience from which there has been no conclusion. When one is put through a hellish experience like this one, I don't think I can blame anyone for wanting this all to disappear. Discord without finality is deafening, and even a bad ending is better than none. Finality is it's own reward, since once something is done, it's done. We can look it at it. There's no more mystery or unspoken words left to prod or poke. So, hopefully, if nothing else, something does happen that puts an end to things.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

GRAAAH. This is getting hard to type. Sorry. I'm really not good at this whole thing...

[ZeroGravitas]

No, it's not required. But if you want real punitive damages assessed, you're going to have to prove malice on some level. Either that he knowingly made false statements or made said statements with a reckless disregard for the harm they would cause.

nobody has brought up punitive damages, because you're right about that. but nobody cares about assessing punitive damages. actual damages would be fine here. maybe attorneys' fees if we're being extravagant.

And again, incompetence != fraud. If he had prototype that he dicked around with for 2 hours and assumed was good, made the Kickstarter with that statement, then in the first preview discovered that after 4 hours the simulation locked up and the AI shit itself, that's not fraud either.

edit: also, it's important to note that it's not up to us to prove what he was thinking at the time.

You seem to be the legal expert here, but I'm pretty sure the burden of proof lies with the plantiff, not the defendant. If you accuse him of something, the burden of proof is not him to exonerate himself.

again, this is exactly why i didn't bring this up before, because explaining this requires people to actually read the explanations to understand, as oppose to reading for the purpose of arguing.

yes, the "burden of proof" lies with the plaintiff. but what does that mean?

yes, it means that the plaintiff has to prove the basic facts of what happened. here, that just means the representations made, when and where, and that they were relied on in backing. motive and state of mind don't have to proven specifically. the trier of fact can make reasonable inferences from the evidence, even if the defendant generally denies them. the defendant has to produce affirmative evidence to controvert the evidence produced by the plaintiff. it would absolutely be up to josh/KDG to produce evidence of the state of the game in september 2014 (or soon enough after to reasonably infer that he had something early on). if he can't show anything, then, again, the trier of fact can draw the reasonable inference that nothing was produced as evidence because nothing exists.

[IronyOwl]

I did actually finally sit down and watch the video, which was kind of cool except... Do grand strategy type games usually have this much depth to them? The amount of numbers and seemingly arbitrary values is honestly more terrifying than any eldritch god.

In terms of the sheer quantity of fiddly numbers? Nope. The archetypal grand strategy games are Paradox's titles, and they don't have that much. In terms of diverse game mechanics, they're up there, especially after getting a dozen expansions, but there's a lot fewer numbers that you have any reason to look at, and generally they're divided into semi-discrete subsystems, so you rarely are considering more than a few numbers at a time. This might be the case for TWS too, but so far it's looked overwhelming to me too. I think it could be better if UI elements (and some extent of the map) are obscured at the beginning and only slowly revealed as you progress, at least when playing the "easy" characters. It kind of sounds like while there's an intent to make certain old ones easier to play, there's nothing that drastic or tutorialy, but we haven't heard anything about that kind of stuff in years.

How are you defining "diverse game mechanics?" Being familiar with ck2 and Stellaris, I can't really think of anything to keep pace with all that.

So, as someone who's watched this for years but isn't a backer:

Can anyone describe to me in concrete detail how a single function of this ... we'll call it a project... actually works in gameplay? With sample numbers and a way to use it to your advantage?

I don't mean fanfic LARP terms, I mean actual proven on-camera gameplay specifics.

Somewhere in the first video (of the two recently posted) he mentions that shutting down coastal trade networks can drop a city's income from 40ish (I think?) to 5-10ish, so you might want to disrupt trade.

This was not displayed in actual gameplay.

[Xgamer4]

I did actually finally sit down and watch the video, which was kind of cool except... Do grand strategy type games usually have this much depth to them? The amount of numbers and seemingly arbitrary values is honestly more terrifying than any eldritch god.

In terms of the sheer quantity of fiddly numbers? Nope. The archetypal grand strategy games are Paradox's titles, and they don't have that much. In terms of diverse game mechanics, they're up there, especially after getting a dozen expansions, but there's a lot fewer numbers that you have any reason to look at, and generally they're divided into semi-discrete subsystems, so you rarely are considering more than a few numbers at a time. This might be the case for TWS too, but so far it's looked overwhelming to me too.

Hmm... We might have different UI preferences. As shown, TWS looks incredibly dense, and it's not even remotely obvious that clicking on each little icon brings up details and management, but I think the overall idea makes it much easier to avoid things you don't want to deal with while getting an overall view (just don't click the summary stats), while still keeping track of what you do want to work with. It helps keep separate systems, well, separate. Whereas with Paradox games, it always felt like half the initial learning curve was figuring out how to navigate the menus to get to stuff you needed to work with while avoiding the stuff you don't need to care about.

EDIT:

Ok, after rewatching parts of the first video... there's a lot more going on than I remember. I do think the overall idea is better, and once you know what everything means I think the abilty to get everything at-a-glance would be really nice, but wow.

[Frumple]

nobody has brought up punitive damages, because you're right about that. but nobody cares about assessing punitive damages. actual damages would be fine here. maybe attorneys' fees if we're being extravagant.

What kind of nutjobbery is involving an attorney in a sub-hundred dollar refund claim? Your actual damages, assuming the court ruled in your favor to begin with (note I'd probably be pretty damn hesitant assuming that stateside, if you're trying it over here -- there's not much protection for getting burned by something like KS if you're of sound mind, last I paid attention), would be whatever you backed at most. For most people that's small claims court junk, and bringing a lawyer into that is how you lose an order of magnitude more money than you were suing for.

I guess you could try for some kind of class action thing? I'unno, bringing something like this before a judge in general, particularly just for the cost of the "damages" a backer incurred, sounds more pants on head than still wanting to give more money to the project at this point in time.

... actually, quick glance at legal action involving the amounts that would be in question here suggests that anything that's not class action or punitive would be basically bloody stupid. Weeks to months of court effort for a refund probably lower than the cost to file the claim, that you might not even get at the end of it all. You'd need a good pile of spite and a lot of time on your hands to go through with it. Hell, if you actually are trying to stiff the dev with the attorney fees I doubt you could even call it justice or some shite given how much more money that'd pretty certainly involve than the amount generally backed.

Dunno if I even have much of a point here, other than to note this talk of legal repercussions sounds like lunacy when for most folks they're out like, what, 30 bucks or some junk? Maybe a BBB or consumer protection complaint or somethin'. Simple money voting, for what good it'd do at this point. There's not much room for a courtroom to get involved with this situation without someone having gone kinda' loco.

[nenjin]

the defendant has to produce affirmative evidence to controvert the evidence produced by the plaintiff. it would absolutely be up to josh/KDG to produce evidence of the state of the game in september 2014 (or soon enough after to reasonably infer that he had something early on). if he can't show anything, then, again, the trier of fact can draw the reasonable inference that nothing was produced as evidence because nothing exists.

He could already produce the map editor and the rough scenario creator. Between that and his existing footage, I sort of doubt the demand for trotting out the work product of 2014 would be necessary to win the judgment. If the plaintiff is asserting there was nothing, he's already has something to controvert that. May not be the "full prototype" (whatever that means), but it's something more than nothing. I'm not sure he would even be required to produce that much, especially when the speculative nature of Kickstarter is brought to bear, and the fact his work is ostensibly ongoing.

[ZeroGravitas]

nobody has brought up punitive damages, because you're right about that. but nobody cares about assessing punitive damages. actual damages would be fine here. maybe attorneys' fees if we're being extravagant.

What kind of nutjobbery is involving an attorney in a sub-hundred dollar refund claim? ...

yeah, as was discussed earlier, it would only work as a class action.

the defendant has to produce affirmative evidence to controvert the evidence produced by the plaintiff. it would absolutely be up to josh/KDG to produce evidence of the state of the game in september 2014 (or soon enough after to reasonably infer that he had something early on). if he can't show anything, then, again, the trier of fact can draw the reasonable inference that nothing was produced as evidence because nothing exists.

He could already produce the map editor and the rough scenario creator. Between that and his existing footage, I sort of doubt the demand for trotting out the work product of 2014 would be necessary to win the judgment. If the plaintiff is asserting there was nothing, he's already has something to controvert that. May not be the "full prototype" (whatever that means), but it's something more than nothing. I'm not sure he would even be required to produce that much, especially when the speculative nature of Kickstarter is brought to bear, and the fact his work is ostensibly ongoing.

none of those are a "working game" or a prototype or whatever you want to call he said he had in september 2014. i could trawl back through the posts he made when he stilled posted during the campaign, and the numerous promises that the beta would be out "next week" or whatever.

also, it doesn't matter if after september 2014 he produced a few crappy pieces of software or videos, like the so-called "scenario editor" (nothing more than an asset viewer). what matters is what he had when the made the claims to support the kickstarter. hell, the videos could be real NOW, and it'd still be fraud, because he was misrepresenting the state of progress in 9/2014 to get support for the ks.

[SangerZonvolt]

nobody has brought up punitive damages, because you're right about that. but nobody cares about assessing punitive damages. actual damages would be fine here. maybe attorneys' fees if we're being extravagant.

What kind of nutjobbery is involving an attorney in a sub-hundred dollar refund claim? Your actual damages, assuming the court ruled in your favor to begin with (note I'd probably be pretty damn hesitant assuming that stateside, if you're trying it over here -- there's not much protection for getting burned by something like KS if you're of sound mind, last I paid attention), would be whatever you backed at most. For most people that's small claims court junk, and bringing a lawyer into that is how you lose an order of magnitude more money than you were suing for.

Well some people (not me) have invested four digit sums into this "game", so they may be willing to do that.

For the comparison to the mandate: That one went out rather quietly, and by now they have more or less admitted themself that the game will never come out as intented. So there is not much discussion there. In the case of TWS there is a small difference: Actual short term lies. Perspective from someone who joined the forums not too long before shit hit the fan: Josh was promising the game to be released within DAYS back then. He was keeping this claim for weeks. We were all hoping to someday lock in and be greeted by a download button. We were stung along like that for weeks, if not months, and kept additional lies. So there began to be a split between those that still believed Josh and those that demanded the damm release to finally happen. That created a lot of friction and agitation. And then Josh just left. We tried to keep in contact to him through the moderators and his buisnesspartner/then friend Fen. He gave us a few infos, including the one that there was no game at that point and the videos release where cripted mockups. So with that background, most of us just became nihilistic relating to this game. We kept the rest of the forum that wasn´t nuked alive (did I mention that at some point Josh or Fen just straight

[Xgamer4]

He [Fen/Joe] gave us a few infos, including the one that there was no game at that point and the videos release where cripted mockups. So with that background, most of us just became nihilistic relating to this game. We kept the rest of the forum that wasn´t nuked alive (did I mention that at some point Josh or Fen just straight

A while ago someone made the point that it'd probably be best to take what Joe was saying the last few days before he left with a grain of salt. The one and only time he'd said anything like the videos were a lie, he'd never seen a working copy, the playtesters don't exist, etc was right when he was getting ready to wash his hands of the whole project and never look back, and at that point he had an extremely vested interest in redirecting the community's anger away from him and onto Josh. He'd seen how the community turned on Josh, and likely wanted nothing to do with it.

Also, the Kickstarter was ran by King Dinosaur Games, not Josh personally. And Joe is the registered agent for King Dinosaur Games, meaning he'd be immediately aware of any lawsuits filed (being the one to receive service). This whole "Kickstarter campaign was formally and legally ran by King Dinosaur Games, LLC and not Josh personally" thing is something *literally everyone* seems to be overlooking when talking about suing Josh.

The question I'm interested in is if someone (it's been Joe, historically) files an Annual Report for King Dinosaur Games this year, because that'd be a real and obvious sign someone is trying to keep this alive (you don't spend $500 to keep your business running just because - and the only punishment Massachusetts seems to have for not filing is that failure to file for 2 years gets the company dissolved).

[Serenseven]

He gave us a few infos, including the one that there was no game at that point and the videos release where cripted mockups.

What was actually said was that one video - the "First Turns and New Maps" one - was scripted. Joe had a programmer friend look at an incomplete copy of the source code, and the friend found the script hard-coded into the function that normally would have handled the passing of turns. So that video does not actually show what it purports to show.

This is actually the only provable deception about That Which Sleeps. Provable because I was that friend, I found that script, I told Joe about it, and I still have that copy of the source code (with the script still inside it).

And before anyone asks: No, the incomplete copy of the source code I have does not compile into even a running executable, much less an actual game.

[Xgamer4]

He gave us a few infos, including the one that there was no game at that point and the videos release where cripted mockups.

What was actually said was that one video - the "First Turns and New Maps" one - was scripted. Joe had a programmer friend look at an incomplete copy of the source code, and the friend found the script hard-coded into the function that normally would have handled the passing of turns. So that video does not actually show what it purports to show.

This is actually the only provable deception about That Which Sleeps. Provable because I was that friend, I found that script, I told Joe about it, and I still have that copy of the source code (with the script still inside it).

And before anyone asks: No, the incomplete copy of the source code I have does not compile into even a running executable, much less an actual game.

Outta curiosity, does it look like there's any supporting structure for turn advancement at all? I'm curious if it was scripted just to make sure Josh knew exactly what would happen so he could explain everything best, vs it being the only way to get it work.

Not that I think it actually is to aid recording... I don't have anywhere near that much faith in Josh. But it is a benign explanation.

Then similarly, does it seem to fail to compile because you're missing dependencies, or because it's fundamentally incomplete, or.. It had to have compiled in some form to make the videos even with a script, so I'm just wondering if failure to compile  has a benign explanation as well.

[Urist McScoopbeard]

I vote we lock this shit up again, because it is consistently toxic!

[ZeroGravitas]

He gave us a few infos, including the one that there was no game at that point and the videos release where cripted mockups.

What was actually said was that one video - the "First Turns and New Maps" one - was scripted. Joe had a programmer friend look at an incomplete copy of the source code, and the friend found the script hard-coded into the function that normally would have handled the passing of turns. So that video does not actually show what it purports to show.

This is actually the only provable deception about That Which Sleeps. Provable because I was that friend, I found that script, I told Joe about it, and I still have that copy of the source code (with the script still inside it).

you know, after stuff like this comes out, it's almost like people haven't been paying attention or are just arguing for the sake of arguing. we KNOW at least one of the videos is fake. what kind of gullible do you need to be to think "oh, it was just the one video that was faked, the rest are probably real."

[Darkmere]

That was what I tried to get at with my question yesterday. The game's been "in development" for years and no one knows anything concrete about how it works. I'm all for optimism, I just don't get where people are coming from when they adamantly defend the game's existence at this point.