Print

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

[Malenfant]

Here is Gabe Newell (boss of Valve, makers of Half Life and Steam among others) talking about game funding:
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/07/valve-predicts-fan-funded-game-development-future/

So this is different to the donations that currently support Dwarf Fortress and more similar to the way Indie films are made. An example of this kind of system would be that Toady puts forward a business plan that would say something like:

"Dwarf Fortress 1.0 will have features X through Y and be released after Z years development. It will require a staff of X fulltime developers/other for a total cost of $xxxx. I will split this cost into 1000 shares to be sold at $xxx per share, once all are sold the project will commence".

If DF makes money you get a cut, if not you're out of pocket but you can put your nose in the air a call yourself a "Patron of the arts"

[Aqizzar]

There's...  There's nothing notable in this.  He's describing publicly funded small business.  That's all.

You present a business plan to public perusal, hope you attract some investment capital but retain all responsibility and control as owner, and are contractually bound to deliver a dividend if you turn a profit.  Business 101.

[Malenfant]

You're right, it's not a "new type of business", it's as you say, Business 101. Newell isn't pointing out anything ground breaking, rather he's pointing out something that just isn't really been done much in the computer game industry. It works for film, works for theater, no reason fan sourced investment wouldn't work for games.

Anthony Burch on Destructoid has just had a little rant that briefly covers Newells comments.
http://www.destructoid.com/rev-rant-donate-141041.phtml
As Burch rightly points out people are saying it wouldn't work but aren't saying why.

[Granite26]

no reason fan sourced investment wouldn't work for games.

It's an immature industry whose primary consumers have more free time than disposable income, and unlike a film, you can't judge the quality beforehand.

To expound:  A film requires a script, which is about half of the creative (variable) content in a film.  Programming a game requires a lot longer than filming, and is more likely to fail due to feature bloat or bad programmers.

[Normandy]

A design document substitutes for a script.

[LordNagash]

To expound:  A film requires a script, which is about half of the creative (variable) content in a film.  Programming a game requires a lot longer than filming, and is more likely to fail due to feature bloat or bad programmers.

So does a game. You don't just sit down and go 'okay well I guess we should get started' and start programming the game with no idea where it's going.

[Hippoman]

This sounds like a plan to buy out Dwarf Fortress.

[Skorpion]

This was how Mount&blade got funded and made. That worked pretty well.

[Granite26]

A design document substitutes for a script.

So does a game. You don't just sit down and go 'okay well I guess we should get started' and start programming the game with no idea where it's going.

I don't think it does...  Or rather, a design document of sufficient level doesn't get written for 99.9% of all games written.  It is my opinion that you can judge the quality of a movie by it's script better than you can judge a game by the quality of the design documents that get written.

[umiman]

As much as I would love DF going in this direction, where I would buy 51% of the stock, Toady won't really do this.

[Hippoman]

As much as I would love DF going in this direction, where I would buy 51% of the stock, Toady won't really do this.

This is why i said it seems like a plan to buy out DF.

[sneakey pete]

This was how Mount&blade got funded and made. That worked pretty well.

No, it isn't. It was a part time project that was offered for sale before it was complete. Not a public funded company.

[Zironic]

Here is Gabe Newell (boss of Valve, makers of Half Life and Steam among others) talking about game funding:
http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/07/valve-predicts-fan-funded-game-development-future/

So this is different to the donations that currently support Dwarf Fortress and more similar to the way Indie films are made. An example of this kind of system would be that Toady puts forward a business plan that would say something like:

"Dwarf Fortress 1.0 will have features X through Y and be released after Z years development. It will require a staff of X fulltime developers/other for a total cost of $xxxx. I will split this cost into 1000 shares to be sold at $xxx per share, once all are sold the project will commence".

If DF makes money you get a cut, if not you're out of pocket but you can put your nose in the air a call yourself a "Patron of the arts"

How about I just donate money and leave development to the actual professionals like Toady, who know how to make games and know what is reasonable.

[Shima]

Looking at Valve's track record the way I see it, it sounds like an attempt to just buy out other games (As has been suggested before).

Not to mention that, as mentioned in the comments in the source link, the idea is pretty much stolen from existing developers and parroted by everyone's favorite fat man so he can gain the reputation for it.

[Im_Sparks]

Toady has a roughly 15-20k/yr deal coming in. Sometimes more, even.


Why does this have to change? Does it have to change?

Yes, I know that mainstream gaming sucks the nuts right about now, but adding more unproven, untested concepts in there will either slightly improve it, or completely destroy it.