Clang game project has run out of money
kickstarter.com
kickstarter.com
Is this game really "apparently promising?" It's a highly technical fighting game that they admit, "is underwhelming in its current state." They're using a new control scheme that requires a special controller. It's also entirely possible that potential sources of funding are waiting for other games that focus on swordplay to release[0]. In addition, their team is a bit light on game veterans. The co-founders are both authors who don't appear to have business experience, much less game development experience. Their VP of game development is an industry veteran, but one who has mostly done art development. It seems like their most prominent backer is Valve's Gabe Newell.[1] I also can't find much on the actual development team, which makes me wonder where they're getting the assertion, "Our team punches above its weight."
It also seems odd that they're pitching this as, "people just won't give us money for some reason," rather than, "we're doing something really risky and so it's hard to get funding." I like the idea, but I think the team has gotten too deep into their own project.
[0] http://www.blade-symphony.com/ [1] http://www.subutai.mn/company.php
I'm obviously biased since much of the team are good friends of mine, but the quality work these guys are doing blows my mind.
Also, it seems odd that they talk about the problems they've had seeking other investors, as their kickstarter page didn't mention anything about needing more money. Rather, it implied that the $500k raised was all they needed to release the game. So at some point, they realised it wasn't enough and sought more investment, yet couldn't be arsed to post an update to kickstarter about the funding shortfall.
Very poor.
Kickstarter is amazing, but one of the hidden catches is that once you have taken a bunch of people's money to do a thing, you have to actually do that thing
You don't say.
>Kickstarter is amazing, but one of the hidden catches is that once you have taken a bunch of people's money to do a thing, you have to actually do that thing, and not some other thing that you thought up in the meantime.
His point being that Kickstarter funding makes it hard to pivot, as opposed to other types of funding.
[derp.... I forgot HN decapitalized titles. I was counting on that to differentiate it]
This is kind of a bizarre claim. Not because it isn't true but because it was just as true in June of 2012 as it is now. It has been many, many years since the big money in the gaming industry has been funneled into things that aren't Grand Theft of Duty Creed: Halo Edition.
What?
Actually, on a simple Robo Rally style set of instructions there may actually be a puzzle game in that.
I tend to judge these projects by funding level. When I first saw CLANG with the goal of $500,000 but no publisher lined up, I decided to pass. $500,000 is not enough to develop something like this on a full-time basis.
As hard as it is to do an indie game, people do it for way less than $200k... heck, many people do it for "free" on their own spare time. I don't see that happening on project aiming to build an SDK made for a specific game type that includes new hardware.
Donors have very little to rely on when making a decision about funding, and no recourse when things go south, which seems to be the norm. Donors are ill equipped to make sound decisions in the first place, lacking experience, expertise and access.
Kickstarter is a recipe ripe for failure and loss with little accountability.
Source?
> What kickstarter teaches us is that there is a reason why gatekeepers to bags of money exist.
You absolutely never see games from big publishers be repeatedly delayed, killed off mid-development, or released mid-development.
Fact is, game development is hard and fraught with risks. As far as I can tell, this part of Kickstarter is, in this regard, doing pretty well, and I'm certain that a game like the Torment remake would never have gotten funding without it. Now and then, some of them are going to tank, just like games from AAA publishers tend to do. Others will come out and be crap (though since so many of them include "pay more to get access to the alpha", I'd say it's much less likely that the released product will be out of line with backers' expectation). And though people do tend to treat as such, Kickstarter is not a pre-order system. There is a chance the product you fund will not make it (that's why there is a mandatory "Risks and challenges" at the bottom of each Kickstarter project page). I'd just rather risk some money for a potential product which appeals to me and would have no shot at seeing the light of the day otherwise, than preorder an outsourced-to-5-different-studios sequel to Aliens: Colonial Marines.
A very high chance, and the nature of that chance is not discernible to donors who have nothing to go buy other than the marketing materials on the Kickstarter page. People should not donate to Kickstarter, they should spend that money on existing games.
Again, what statistics do you have to back this statement? Several game have been successfully produced. Of high-profile failures, I know only of this one and Haunts. On the other hand, Chivalry, Shadowrun Returns, Leisure Suit Larry, to quote some of the big ones, all got released. It's definitely too early to tell how statistically risky for backers crowd-funding video-games is, but I don't think initial numbers support your argument.
Also 38 studios showed what happens when you let your ego fund a studio - not nice.
So while I don't doubt that he will be able to provide some funding, probably the sums needed are way too big for him to bridge.
I am a backer of the project - lets hope that if the project is doomed they will at least release the assets to the community that funded them.
Skimmed half the article trying to figure out how they expected to make a game out of clang/llvm in the first place, only to realize it has nothing to do with that project.
Making things realistic is not making things fun.
I've solved the hardware problem by using sticks of wood, by using sticks I get realistic physics for free, it even has realistic feedback which prevents you from swinging beyond your opponents sword. Also, anyone can make their own sword for approximately the cost of a broomstick.
I've solved the game problem by re-using the rules from fencing.
In the last 5 minutes I've successfully done what took CLANG $500,000 dollars to do. So in short if you want to play my sword fighting game download the rules of fencing, and buy a broomstick. If you're looking for other players I've developed a massively multiplayer offline game network called the SCA.
That said, your broomstick idea is actually really interesting: imagine an Oculus Rift + Kinect combo. You don't need any additional hardware other than a stick or rod of some kind, since the rod will constrain the motion of your hands and the Kinect could detect the rod anyway.
Only potential issue is a lack of haptic feedback, but we've had vibration motors in games console controllers for decades now so it should be feasible to make a pair of gloves that vibrate on impact fairly cheaply. Surely someone must've tried this..?
fleitz: If interesting new ways to interact with games/computers isn't your thing, that's fine. But telling us all to f'off and go learn to fence really doesn't accomplish much.
Lets take desktops, file and folders fucking suck but everyone wants to reimplement it, when the real advantage of computers is search.
Imagine someone came to you and said "I'm going to make an audiobook of the Mona Lisa", you'd look at them like they were a fucking idiot and rightly so.
But files and folders have their place: they're for collecting groups of disparate items which wouldn't be found by a single search query (or at least not one that isn't inordinately complicated), e.g. to manage a project. Tagging files is a viable alternative, but there's no guarantee you won't forget and end up with orphan files. You have to save a file somewhere after all, and with folders you can ensure you can find them again...
But be careful, sticks hurt. That's why there is nerf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icmm7-W3e3E but it often looks embarrassing. How can one solve the player skill problem? I don't think downloading a technique book will quite cut it, but maybe with well produced videos, coaching eye apps some progress can be made.
Why this got voted to the top on a site ostensibly for hackers, makers and tinkerers is beyond me.
Especially when serious projects are backed by real investors under the hood(that will make a profit if the project is successfull).
Kickstarter is basically free money. There is no such thing as free money or it is really just a scam.
I hear people say "It's not about the money" ,well, it is ONLY about the money.