Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Tim Schafer

Important question to backers about the DFA doc

Recommended Posts

Bad idea. I backed for the exclusive experience. Not an experience that was time bound and therefore accessible to all = not exclusive. Thumbs down disappointing. Feels like a money grab.

They're thinking of doing it free - not a money grab.

REALLY??? They want to use exclusive content that we paid for as 'free' marketing material to promote the game. No, don't use the exclusive material that we paid for and was promised to the backers. Find an alternative solution. The experience has been interesting up until this announcement. If the exclusive content is no longer exclusive then I will not return to KickStarter for another experience like this. When a person gives their word, it used to mean something. My feedback to the announcement is to keep your word. You got my attention - this is my first posting to the forums.

I can't believe all the sheep in this forum. BAAAAAA!!!!!!!

what do you actually gain from it being exclusive? apart from a special feeling

I'm not aware of the special feeling you suggest. I purchased exclusivity and now the plan being floated is to take away exclusivity. So, I, you, and many others would be losing exclusivity. My credit card purchase signed a contract. My feedback via this forum is to not take away the exclusivity we purchased. Don't break the contract. This will add fuel to the fire, both for DF and KickStarter. I'm glad there are at least a few people that want to abide by the original contract. BAAAA!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't view it as "purchasing exclusivity".

I view it as funding the production of said documentary, and always expected it to be widely released sooner or later.

Maybe think of it as a timed exclusive, those are hot in video games these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I`m all for it!

Someone will eventually (unfortunately) down the road leak it to youtube, torrent etc. So keeping control over your content and releasing it yourself is a good thing.

By that logic, I suppose they should just go ahead and release the game for free too?

I'm not one of those guys who gave them a bunch of grief about the game being "late." Or about all that nonsense about stealing backer's money - or whatever people got so worked up about... But it does bother me that Double Fine seems to consistently "amend" some of their Kickstarter promises - whenever they think it will profit them to do so...

And I think they know this is kind of a lame thing to do... Otherwise they wouldn't be asking for "permission" to do it.

So anyway. I enjoyed Broken Age, and I'm excited to play the 2nd part. I'm just going to focus on that.

I`m sorry, i think you may have misunderstood me.

They do have control over the game content since they are actually selling it.

In my view it would be a shame if one of the greatest and most in-depth documentary series from the inside of a game company would only be seen by 90.000 people.

However, i was always under the impression that the documentary would be released along with the game (or just the documentary if the game "spectacularly failed"). And that the exclusivity was that we got it in "real time". Thus, some confusion i had with the actual question being asked about it being released or not. But since there are people who dont want it released i guess i just assumed so. I will have to check the original kickstarter page to see if the documentary was meant to be backer exclucive forever.

Still, i really do think people should get a chance to see it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal views are that I support putting the documentary out there.

I also think that anyone that spent money on this should be happy that more people get to see it. I have payed for it to be made, not just getting to see it.

I wonder if it could be distributed on other channels as well. It would be really cool if it were available on streaming services like Netflix or something, however I don't know how much needs to be done in order to get it there.

I think that the most important thing about choosing wether to release the doc publicly or not is that it should be beneficial. Will 2PP or Double Fine earn anything after releasing it the way that is planned? When I backed the project some of the things I wanted to happen included Double Fine having more income later, so they would continue develop games, not just preordering a game and documentary...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not aware of the special feeling you suggest. I purchased exclusivity and now the plan being floated is to take away exclusivity. So, I, you, and many others would be losing exclusivity.

But... why is that so important to you? What good is it for you that you can see the doc, but your neighbor who didn't back the project, can't see it? Without you and everyone else here we wouldn't have this brilliant game and we wouldn't have this great documentary. I say we had it "live", why don't make it accessible to the public now? In my opinion, the effect of positive publicity would only be good for DF, and what's good for that company which only will lead to more great games you can play one day. And more people who can enjoy the documentary that exists because you made it possible. IMHO there's nothing that speaks against releasing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people are getting angry of loosing the exclusive documentary access maybe they should be compensated by double with a another gift maybe a game to cool them off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea. I've enjoyed watching the documentary unfold - it became something really special. It's worth sharing as widely as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If people are getting angry of loosing the exclusive documentary access maybe they should be compensated by double with a another gift maybe a game to cool them off

As one of the guys who thinks this is a bad move by Double Fine, I don't want any compensation for it. I have gotten more than I expected from every single dollar I spent already. The reason I still feel bad about it is that DF suddenly goes against what they said when I gave them my money. I spent some of my time defending them against the s***torm when they decided to cut Broken Age into two parts, because in my opinion they didn't deserve it and they had not gone against anything I was promised when I pledged. Hell, even if they had cancelled the development of the game completely, I would have been happy, because what I can remember they promised me was that even if the whole project completely fails, I'll get a documentary covering the development, exclusive for me and the other backers. So all I really felt I was paying for was the documentary series.

If they had given Broken Age away for free for all non-backers, that would actually have been a lot more OK with me. That's because when I pledged I was very aware of what I was paying for, and if a good adventure game could come out of this experiment, it would just be a bonus. Now I just think I have wasted my money buying an "exclusive documentary series" that they suddenly turned into a marketing tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now I just think I have wasted my money buying an "exclusive documentary series" that they suddenly turned into a marketing tool.

Life is what we make of it all.

Smiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do it! The reason I backed this is because I want it to succeed. If this helps the project succeed why be selfish about it? The more people see it, the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad idea. I backed for the exclusive experience. Not an experience that was time bound and therefore accessible to all = not exclusive. Thumbs down disappointing. Feels like a money grab.
I don't think we mentioned anywhere that the documentary would be exclusive forever. You can point me to that if i'm forgetting. On the Kickstarter page itself it says pledges get access to the documentary.

$15 and up

"The finished game in all of its awesome glory DRM free on PC, Mac, and Linux, or via Steam for PC and Mac, exclusive access to the Beta on Steam, access to the video series, and access the private discussion community."

(There's a "to" missing in there I only just noticed, that's embarrassing.)

It's my understanding that the primary reason for Kickstarter existing was to serve as a facilitator for products that would continue to exist in an open marketplace. There are probably a few projects that draw the line during the Kickstarter and say "This is it", but I can't think of any.

When you back a project, you're stepping up and putting your faith in a creator to make something cool. Something they couldn't have made otherwise. Something that lots of other people may eventually get to appreciate too. That's really great isn't it? You literally get to be a part of something you care about. It's a very generous action.

If a Kickstarter simple met it's pledge fulfillment and then shut down, that's not really much of a "Kickstart" to anything. Thats a full stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now I just think I have wasted my money buying an "exclusive documentary series" that they suddenly turned into a marketing tool.

Life is what we make of it all.

Agreed, at least for the most fortunate among us! I don't really see the relevance to my post, though. If you are trying to say what I think you are trying to say, I can only suggest a couple of years on a tight student budget. I think being a critical consumer is good for everyone, and completely compatible with having a good life. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad idea. I backed for the exclusive experience. Not an experience that was time bound and therefore accessible to all = not exclusive. Thumbs down disappointing. Feels like a money grab.
I don't think we mentioned anywhere that the documentary would be exclusive forever. You can point me to that if i'm forgetting. On the Kickstarter page itself it says pledges get access to the documentary.

I don't remember the details either, but this is just semantics. When you make something a pledge reward, everyone obviously assumes it will either be exclusive for the backers, or available to buy for other people later. Not available for free.

I think you've made an excellent documentary, it has been much better than I expected. I thank you for that and I honestly don't regret pledging, it has absolutely been worth it. But releasing it for free before it's even done is definitely breaking a promise in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agalinski seems to be following the flawed concept of others that Kickstarter constitutes a purchase, not a pledge. What a sheep! BAAAAA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure why not.

While you're at it, why not just release Act 1 for free to everyone so they can further see that you were not wasting time...

Then why not just give away Act 2...

My point: the naysayers will keep naysaying even if you do this, and in fact, a number of them will see the documentary free release as some sort of "desperate attempt to stay relevant while the project has yet to release after 3 years" or something like that.

All you would be doing is hurting yours and 2 Player's bottom line, and NOT really helping kickstarter, your company, or anyone's reputation at all.

Giving away free stuff does not change haters.

Showing people a well put together documentary of a project that is constantly running late and running out of funds will only feed the trolls.

Back to my main answer: I have no objection to people throwing money away with little to none of the desired effect, so "sure, why not."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are some people (or sheep) getting so upset about DF sharing something for free (most likely) which we backers "payed for" while on the other hand they do not complain about DF selling the game (with profit) which we backers also "payed for"? Are they under the impression that whatever DF is creating with backer money belongs exclusively to the backers alone?

Maybe they should re-evaluate what the purpose of contributing to a Kickstarter campaign really is ...

*sigh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone's main motivation should be HIS own motivation, you wanting people's motivation to be the one you think is the most correct IS the problem you mentioned.

Of course everybody is entitled to have their own opinion, and I agree that my statement might sound dictorial. I just wanted to stress that crowdfunding is not the same as pre-ordering a product.

I backed this project because THE documentary was a big part of it, I'd even say it was 50% of the project itself, I personally payed to see the documentary, I'm a video professional and I love that kind of stuff, so why shouldn't my motivation be that? Now what I payed for (because it was exclusive) to backers is being offered for free, so what for did I pay? An early-access to the videos? That wasn't what was said in the kickstarter ...

Thats the essential question here: What for did you pay? Did you pay in order to enable 2player productions to make the documentary, or did you pay in order to get exclusive access to a finished product, like you would pay for a fancy car? Those are two entirely different principles and I believe that confusing them is the reason why so many people are frustrated with crowdfunding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most important will be how episode 2 will shape up.

If it will be great (substance, quality, fun, working, ...) then many people will be happy already, though, for those who went through a hard ride during dev, it also won't turn into a pure joy experience anymore but that's less relevant for those who don't know about these things. If it will be as bad as the first episode and released in a similar way, the videos won't matter this much. An positive influence of the videos is related to how well this release will be done.

DF could try to ... in order to attract less grief and anger.

understand what people and DF want.

make interesting games for less stupid people (or make it a two roads thing).

deliver what you were promising.

evolve communication skills (or shut down comm completely, making your own thing).

use resources wisely.

deliver more in time.

release working stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Double Fine does seem to be listening to fans and are going to be making the second act longer and harder (which is great, since the first part of adventure games are usually easier than the rest of the game). Since the second act is said to be twice as long as the first act, that means the first act is only going to be the first one third of the game, and there's certainly nothing wrong with the first third of an adventure game being easy and then ramping up in difficulty from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Episode 1 feels empty and shallow, directed at a different audience (let's call them protozoa). Partly this is done by intention but that doesn't a) turn it into a wiser decision, b) neither did it result into a satisfying experience for adventure gamers and c) didn't exactly fulfill the promises which were made.

I disagree with your point of view about act 1. I once posted a graph about what i (or clever devs generally) consider a more reasonable difficulty development. If DF added puzzles and content for the second part, this automatically increases the gaming length, like, then you would be able to click on stuff and think about possible solutions instead of just breezing through weirdly put together scenes. But apart from the lack of challenge there also was this lack of adventure/awesomeness/fun. The DFA isn't playing in a GF league yet. It's also not delivering for a very easy game.

In hindsight, trying to please the DF fans as well as adventure gamers, it could have been a good decision to offer two levels of difficulty (or just balance/design the whole thing as a real adventure right from scratch). GF biggest let downs might be the tank controls and the inventory. The inventory in the DFA isn't gerat either but is also has this lack of awesomeness and depth, being just too easy, feeling almost ashamed as coming around as a point and click adventure.

I would be interested in a remastered version of the DFA which fixes part 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
c) didn't exactly fulfill the promises which were made.
What promises were made that it didn't fulfill? The Double Fine Adventure kickstarter was very vaguely worded, and only said that it would be making a classic point and click adventure, and even with Act I they delivered. Simple puzzles and a simple interface don't automatically make a game not fitting into the classic adventure game mold. If that were the case, then Loom would not be considered a classic adventure game, and it certainly is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the proper implementation/usage of an inventory and its items, a certain level of depth in scenes as well as some complexity in puzzles certainly is part of what defines a point and click adventure, also from Schafer, the way it was advertised (and/or as i understood it) in the campaign.

I don't see the point in bringing up Loom because it came out many years ago and a.o. offered its own special feature (the magic notes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the proper implementation/usage of an inventory and its items, a certain level of depth in scenes as well as some complexity in puzzles certainly is part of what defines a point and click adventure the way it was advertised (and/or as i understood it) in the campaign.
There was nothing worded anywhere at all in the initial Kickstarter campaign about complexity. All they ever said was that they were going to make a classic point and click adventure game. As I said, Loom's puzzles were just as easy as Broken Age Act I (especially in Loom's first third of the game, since the puzzles on Loom Island were extremely simple), and that's considered a classic adventure. Even with Act I they delivered on the promise set forth in the campaign.

You're just projecting your personal desires onto the campaign, and then claiming that they somehow didn't live up to their promises because they didn't fit those desires. And considering they never said they'd meet the goals that you yourself set, claiming that they didn't live up to promises is not true at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, the campaign was definitely directed as an adventure gamers audience, just think of the interface teasing. This was never meant to be a TTG like interactive movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope, the campaign was definitely directed as an adventure gamers audience, just think of the interface teasing. This was never meant to be a TTG like interactive movie.
And, Broken Age Act I has puzzles and an inventory. They never claimed that the puzzles would be hard, just that they would be there (which is not the case for Telltale's recent games, so it's not even comparable).

Like I said, there is nothing at all stated about complexity. Just that it would be a classic point and click adventure game. And it is (just as Loom is, despite its easy puzzles and interface). They were very vague on what they were delivering, so they definitely ended up delivering what they promised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the proper implementation/usage of an inventory and its items, a certain level of depth in scenes as well as some complexity in puzzles certainly is part of what defines a point and click adventure the way it was advertised (and/or as i understood it) in the campaign.
There was nothing worded anywhere at all in the initial Kickstarter campaign about complexity. All they ever said was that they were going to make a classic point and click adventure game. As I said, Loom's puzzles were just as easy as Broken Age Act I (especially in Loom's first third of the game, since the puzzles on Loom Island were extremely simple), and that's considered a classic adventure. Even with Act I they delivered on the promise set forth in the campaign.

You're just projecting your personal desires onto the campaign, and then claiming that they somehow didn't live up to their promises because they didn't fit those desires. And considering they never said they'd meet the goals that you yourself set, claiming that they didn't live up to promises is not true at all.

How does this discussion relate to the thread? Maybe it should be taken elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jenni

It's probably common sense that when a point and click adventure dev legend who is asking for money for funding a point and click adventure game whilst also talking about and triggering those adventure memories (naming his track record, Grim Fandango, adventure games from Germany, the verbs interface, ...) that we're actually also talking about delivering an adventure game, also in terms of a certain level of depth and complexity which those games offer.

@Levering_2pp

It should be obvious how we came to the discussion if you follow the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the proper implementation/usage of an inventory and its items, a certain level of depth in scenes as well as some complexity in puzzles certainly is part of what defines a point and click adventure the way it was advertised (and/or as i understood it) in the campaign.
There was nothing worded anywhere at all in the initial Kickstarter campaign about complexity. All they ever said was that they were going to make a classic point and click adventure game. As I said, Loom's puzzles were just as easy as Broken Age Act I (especially in Loom's first third of the game, since the puzzles on Loom Island were extremely simple), and that's considered a classic adventure. Even with Act I they delivered on the promise set forth in the campaign.

You're just projecting your personal desires onto the campaign, and then claiming that they somehow didn't live up to their promises because they didn't fit those desires. And considering they never said they'd meet the goals that you yourself set, claiming that they didn't live up to promises is not true at all.

How does this discussion relate to the thread? Maybe it should be taken elsewhere.

You're right, and I'm sorry for my part in derailing the thread.

If you want to start a new thread about the kickstarter in general, feel free taumel, and I'll continue discussing it with you there. But I'm going to stop discussing it here since I agree that it's best to keep this on the topic of the documentary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...