Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter • Hacker News Board

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#71

Post by speeder » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:02 PM UTC

papsosouid wrote: post #52

autarch wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or ... this is a good way for him to see if there's actual interest in the product. And given his track record of actually finishing stuff, it seems like this is relatively low risk as far as Kickstarter projects go.

Neither of your points address the concern I raised. This is a guy who paid $30M to go in to space for fun. A guy who lives in a castle. If he wants to make a game, he can. He doesn't need kickstarter at all. He is simply using it to make a game for free, rather than investing in it personally. The idea behind kickstarter was to allow people who couldn't get funding through traditional channels an opportunity to appe…

Note: He did not go to space for fun. He is major shareholder in a couple of space-related business, and he do active science work in space and ice caps.

Also he wanted to follow his father footsteps (his father is a astronaut that actually went to space).

But yes, he could have paid the game himself...

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#72

Post by papsosouid » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:04 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #62

papsosouid wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except VCs get equity, they get a return on their investment. Not a copy of the product. Do you think ycombinator should have funded dropbox in exchange for a free dropbox account? Like I said in the post you replied to, he has access to VC funding. He chose not to take it because he can abuse kickstarter to get the same funds without giving up anything in return. It is nothing like saying they should fund it persona…

How is it an abuse? Because you don't like it? How about treating the backers like adults who can make their own decisions? Your position comes across as very patronizing.

Because it is contrary to the stated purpose of kickstarter. I am treating the backers like adults. Why do you think that "hey, that's really not what kickstarter is for" is patronizing?

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#73

Post by NoPiece » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:07 PM UTC

papsosouid wrote: post #52

autarch wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or ... this is a good way for him to see if there's actual interest in the product. And given his track record of actually finishing stuff, it seems like this is relatively low risk as far as Kickstarter projects go.

Neither of your points address the concern I raised. This is a guy who paid $30M to go in to space for fun. A guy who lives in a castle. If he wants to make a game, he can. He doesn't need kickstarter at all. He is simply using it to make a game for free, rather than investing in it personally. The idea behind kickstarter was to allow people who couldn't get funding through traditional channels an opportunity to appe…

You have a more narrow view of what Kickstarter is than most, and more narrow than Kickstarter itself. All they say about themselves is, "Kickstarter is a funding platform for creative projects." If you don't like it don't fund it, but if it is any consolation, big projects like this bring a lot more eyeballs and money to Kickstater, and will end up helping smaller projects get funded. I had never funded anything until Doublefine Adventure, but now I found at least one thing a month.

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#74

Post by columbo » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:12 PM UTC

wodow wrote: post #38

simonsarris wrote: post #28

I'm glad that "Meaningful PvP" was singled out. PvP is important to me and its one of the things that Ultima Online got right that vast swaths of MMOs since have floundered with (in my opinion). In parts of the world (Felucca[1]), UO was a rare RPG where anyone could kill anyone, for any reason, but with the repercussion that they would be branded a "Bad person" (visible with a gray or red name instead of blue). Stea…

Vote yes to permanent death [1] in MMOs! Richard Bartle: "[without permanent death] Newbies (and not-so-newbies) feel they can never catch up. The people in front will always be in front, and there's no way to overtake them. The horizon advances at the speed you approach it." [2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_death [2] Designing Virtual Worlds, 2003

Agreed. I'd much rather play a MMO that included permanent death but the balance needs to be there. It can be a much more rewarding experience, especially the types of conflict that you can create (actually pkilling someone from a league and having that league come after you)

If the entry point is too high (say several weeks of grinding to get even a mid-level player) people will be less likely to venture out and play the game. The reward is very low for the risk. If the entry point is too low then it'll just be a FPS. Striking that balance is really tough.

In my opinion, a permanent death MMO it should take about 20 hours of grinding to reach the top 2%, 60 hours of grind to reach the top 1%, and 400 hours to reach the top %0.01 (and so on).

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#75

Post by pearle » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:13 PM UTC

Semaphor wrote: post #68

gebe wrote: post #30

Might as well chime in with another Kickstarter in progress for a spiritual successor of another famous RPG: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inxile/torment-tides-of-... Kickstarter has been really great so far for people, like myself, who were and are very fond of the "old school" type of RPGs.

Kinda happy this seems as bad as it does, prevents me from backing yet another project so shortly after Torment.

I backed Torment and Project Eternity but I'm also backing this. I spent a good chunk of the 90s immersed in games by Origin and I'm now interested in seeing what Garriott can do without the shackles of a publisher (EA, back in the day).

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#76

Post by mercurial » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:14 PM UTC

gebe wrote: post #30

Might as well chime in with another Kickstarter in progress for a spiritual successor of another famous RPG: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inxile/torment-tides-of-... Kickstarter has been really great so far for people, like myself, who were and are very fond of the "old school" type of RPGs.

I have backed it (and did link it on HN), but let's see how this and Wasteland 2 turn out before rejoicing.

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#77

Post by tsumnia » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:14 PM UTC

glurgh wrote: post #70

wodow wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vote yes to permanent death [1] in MMOs! Richard Bartle: "[without permanent death] Newbies (and not-so-newbies) feel they can never catch up. The people in front will always be in front, and there's no way to overtake them. The horizon advances at the speed you approach it." [2] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_death [2] Designing Virtual Worlds, 2003

Really, permanent death? PvP corpse looting? These are profoundly user-hating mechanics and their removal is likely among the factors that made WoW successful. There are other ways to allow newbies to catch up and to incentivize or disincentivize players that don't rely on 'ruining your month of gameplay'.

I think its not so much user-hated as difference of taste. I love the perma-death aspect of a lot of the games I've played because I get to appreciate all I've earned. That being said, to balance it our, you remove the idea of 'epic loot' (things that take months to earn). Now, the hit of death isn't game-ending.

Games like Realm of the Mad God, DayZ, and Minecraft (its survival based multiplayer) make this perma-death a part of the game (though Minecraft, you keep the character). You feel defeated, but not dissuaded towards playing.

The way to keep newbies is to make the gear they can earn secondary to the gameplay.

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#78

Post by NoPiece » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:14 PM UTC

papsosouid wrote: post #72

icebraining wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it an abuse? Because you don't like it? How about treating the backers like adults who can make their own decisions? Your position comes across as very patronizing.

Because it is contrary to the stated purpose of kickstarter. I am treating the backers like adults. Why do you think that "hey, that's really not what kickstarter is for" is patronizing?

You say it is contrary to the stated purpose of Kickstarter. Can you link or quote something to back that up? All I've ever seen them say is that it is a platform to fund creative projects. This is a creative project.

For game developers, even millionaire game developers, Kickstarter offers some level of freedom from real big bilion dollar game publishing corporations. So even if Richard Gariott has a lot of money, maybe you can at least appreciate he is a little guy in the context of the game publishing business.

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#79

Post by rschmitty » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:14 PM UTC

For something different, here is a soon to be launched kickstarter. From someone not as successful as Mr Garriot but if you played Dark Age of Camelot you might be in love already

http://citystateentertainment.com/camelotunchained/

Here is a long interview describing the goals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&...

View on what is wrong with MMOs @ 4:16

No more hand holding @ 7:00

Class System - Rock Paper Scissors @ 11:46

Race/Sex Considerations - Choices Matter @ 13:40

Crafting - First class crafting @ 18:18

Random Critical Hits - You will laugh and cry @ 25:17

Randomness for Crafting - Sometimes stuff will go horribly wrong/perfectly right @ 31:11

Leveling - No PvE, unclear on soft vs hard caps at this stage @ 34:07

Kickstarter - Pick your rewards! @ 40:19

Re: Lord British launches “Shroud of the Avatar” on Kickstarter

#80

Post by icebraining » Fri, Mar 08, 2013, 6:16 PM UTC

papsosouid wrote: post #72

icebraining wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it an abuse? Because you don't like it? How about treating the backers like adults who can make their own decisions? Your position comes across as very patronizing.

Because it is contrary to the stated purpose of kickstarter. I am treating the backers like adults. Why do you think that "hey, that's really not what kickstarter is for" is patronizing?

Where exactly is that stated? As far as I know, and according to the FAQ and project guidelines of Kickstarter, there's no rule or implicit understanding that only creators who can't fund their own projects should apply. In fact, they specifically mention that KS is about more than money.

And I find it patronizing because your complaint is about the poor backers who get nothing for their money. Why exactly do you feel qualified to judge that on their behalf? It's up to them to know what they get in return, and if that should or not be important in their decision to back the project.