Shroud Of The Avatar - Shit Went Persistent

dechire

dechire

Bronze Knight of the Realm
323
74
Another guy that used to work with him. I believe Stephen was doing Dungeon Runners which for what it was originally (abandoned assets of a game called Exarch) wasn't the worst thing ever. It was terribly marketed for adults when it should have been a kids game IMHO.http://www.codingwisdom.com/codingwi...l-of-shit.html

And now for the dude himself
Richard Garriott de Cayeux
Friends and Colleagues,

I want to clarify my words, taken out of context, during a recent interview. However, this is an undertaking that will require more words then a mere status update will afford. Please find my complete statement here:http://bit.ly/ZfA27m

Thank you, in advance, for taking the time to review it.

Richard ?Lord British? Garriott

Nice non-apology. Lawls.

rrr_img_18333.jpg


rrr_img_18333.jpg
 
Grim1

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,864
6,821
Caliane_sl said:
Would be nice to see come quality in that case.
But really just affirms, its better to talk a good game then actually have one.

Its very disappointing, his fans gave him 400k for him to keep not working.
That is his only job. he quit his "real" job something like 2 years ago.

A page of the caliber he does should take about 3 days tops(his complete lack of understanding of panel and page construction leads him to make 2-3pages, into 1, aka his 1 is really 2 to 3 pages). He should be doing a good 90 pages a year, considering time for paperwork, marketing, and research. Ask yourself, what the fuck hes doing with his time, when he only creates 1 page every 3 months.

It is very disappointing anyone would support this hack.
Click to expand...
I just can't get worked up about his success. We tend to reward creative and talented people who do things that entertain us. Look at how much athletes make, or the fact that bands like Pink Floyd are still making bank selling albums (they didn't even have cds back then) they made 40 years ago. There isn't any rhyme or reason to how much we give talented people who create original work and there shouldn't be.

There are a ton of kickstarter projects that are junk, but his isn't one of them imo.
 
Caliane

Caliane

Avatar of War Slayer
14,551
10,040
hes taking advantage of you, and you are thanking him for it. I can not even fathom what is going on in your mind.

He can't control how much you input into the kickstarter, that is true. But he can control what he sets the rewards at. And when hes offering rewards that account for less then 10% of the funds, how can you account for that? He has ALREADY been paid for the creation of all those works, via advertising. the kickstarter accounts purely for the physical production and shipping. The bill for the materials that $400k will come out to under 30k.
Dude is pocketing 380k.

If you want to justify it by him doing things to entertain you. then DEMAND he do that. Because he hasn't. 8 pages a year. You gave him money, and he is NOT producing anything new. And you are defending him. that is nuts. you gave him 380k so he can sit around playing video games and talk shit on twitter.
I am disappointed in you. I am furious at him for taking advantage of you.

If I were in his shoes? I would thank everyone for their generosity, and offer to either use that money to fund and produce 10 additional webcomics a year. $30k each. Or promise to author this or another project myself for the next 10.


here is a list of comics better then his.
http://www.rerolled.org/showthread.p...bcomics-thread
 
Grim1

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,864
6,821
Lol, goods are worth whatever the buyer will pay for it. I just don't understand why you care so much. If people are willing to give him a bunch of money for very little work then let them. It's their money. I didn't give him any cash but I don't have any problem with somebody else doing so.

If him being successful is really that aggravating to you, then I can't imagine the fit you must have thrown over that old chinese bowl that just sold for 2.2 million (and they paid 3 bucks for it at a yard sale or something). It's just a bowl ya know. Or old Star Wars toys, and other worthless memorabilia.

A cd costs 10 cents to make and yet Pink Floyd charges 15 bucks for it. Does that bother you? They did the work 40 years ago....
 
Tmac

Tmac

Adventurer
<Gold Donor>
9,321
15,836
Caliane_sl said:
When PA started a crowd funded project, it washttp://www.childsplaycharity.org/Any money PA makes they deserve, and they turn most of their profits right around into PAX, helping others such as strip search.
Click to expand...
Right because they make zero dollars from PAX...lulz. Their Twitch stream alone had 3.5m people streaming at $10 a pop, yesterday at 3pm EST.

Obviously your argument is based on who you feel "deserves" the money people give them.Emotionalarguments ftw.
 
Tmac

Tmac

Adventurer
<Gold Donor>
9,321
15,836
Grim1_sl said:
Lol, goods are worth whatever the buyer will pay for it. I just don't understand why you care so much. If people are willing to give him a bunch of money for very little work then let them. It's their money. I didn't give him any cash but I don't have any problem with somebody else doing so.

If him being successful is really that aggravating to you, then I can't imagine the fit you must have thrown over that old chinese bowl that just sold for 2.2 million (and they paid 3 bucks for it at a yard sale or something). It's just a bowl ya know. Or old Star Wars toys, and other worthless memorabilia.

A cd costs 10 cents to make and yet Pink Floyd charges 15 bucks for it. Does that bother you? They did the work 40 years ago....
Click to expand...
Caliane'sbiasis the foundation his argument stands on. Which I think we would all agree is...weak.
 
Cantatus

Cantatus

Lord Nagafen Raider
1,437
79
Draegan_sl said:
Response:
http://www.portalarium.com/images/do...%20Context.pdf
Click to expand...
I think the douchie thing isn't what he said, but the fact that he posted his explanation in a .pdf. WTF?

In regards to what he says, I think part of the problem is it's really hard to teach game development. Unlike art and programming which have very broad practical applications, game development has a very narrow focus and therefore has very few people who can adequately teach it and most of them are out there developing games.

Caliane_sl said:
Goes to kickstarter to get people to pay for production on a hard cover version of his webcomic. not NEW work. previously created work. Wanted 30k for about 5k worth of printing/mailing. Which ok... whatever.
Gets 400k, so far. And has to add stretch goals. Which brings up the first problem with kickstarter. people over funding shit that really doesn't need it. Instead of giving 10 webcomics 40k, this ONE retard has 400k.
He set stretch goals. originally he had his 800k goal as "I will update my comic bi-weekly for 1 year".
I shit you fucking not. Adding up the production costs of all previous tiers would result in 50-90k worth, being generous. Meaning, he was asking for 700k for 26 pages of his comic for 1 year. $27,000 per page, for 1 year.
that is fucking FRAUD. everyone flipped out, and he changed it.
700k is now every week for 1 year. which is STILL 12,000 a page.
Click to expand...
I tend to wonder if Kickstarter should allow people to cap what they can get (if that doesn't already exist). I've seen so many Kickstarters that ask for a relatively small amount of money, get ten times what they need, and then suddenly have to scramble to come up with a bunch of bullshit "stretch goals" to justify all that additional money they had no plans for. For video games, it's probably not as big of a deal since a lot of the indie developers are always going to be able to find a way to put that money to use, but when someone asks for$6000 to do a web series and literally gets more than 26 times that?

It just sort of seems like Kickstarter might be sitting on a bubble that's going to burst eventually, because when this much money is being thrown at people who don't know what to do with it, it's likely to result in a lot of projects that didn't put all that money to good use, making people more reluctant to fund projects in the future. I mean, Kickstarter might be riding high at the moment, but they should be mindful of people's continued trust in the system they've devised.
 
Erronius

Erronius

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
16,461
42,372
Grim1_sl said:
Lol, goods are worth whatever the buyer will pay for it.
Click to expand...
The only time you hear this outside of a classroom is when A) someone is trying to defend themselves after ripping someone off, or B) someone got ripped off and rather than admit that they got ripped off, they say something like this.

People can quote Publilius Syrus until they are blue in the face, but the fact remains that worth isn't really tied to what some idiot(s) will pay, and even then, in regards to Kickstarter you oftenare not buying a good to begin with.

As someone mentioned earlier, with some things (like tabletop miniatures) you can pay in and be sure to receive something. But a lot of the time, you aren't buying with Kickstarter, you're investing, and with investing value or worth means jack and shit. In that case you are really gambling that someone isn't going to squander it all or piddle it away, or that the final product isn't shit. And the issue usually isn't anything to do with their original goal - there is some weak terms in this regard on Kickstarter's part, but once they fulfill that original goal, that's it. If people overpay and there isn't something set for further funding goals, it is up to the people running the kickstarting project to decide what to do with the excess.

If youread some of the stuff Kickstarter has said, it becomes clear that they want to promise as little as possible while shielding themselves from any responsibility on their part. But people should keep in mind that Kickstarter makes a % cut of what projects make, so they have an interest in NOT limiting how much money you can give a project. And to drive home the idiocy of some of this, here isanother tidbitfrom Kickstarter:

Kickstarter Is Not a Store

It's hard to know how many people feel like they're shopping at a store when they're backing projects on Kickstarter, but we want to make sure that it's no one. Today we're introducing a number of changes to reinforce that Kickstarter isn't a store - it's a new way for creators and audiences to work together to make things.
Click to expand...
So bear in mind that Kickstarter wants to get away from the notion that you're buying something; they just aren't courageous enough to come right out and tell people that they are actually investing, especially when it comes to things like video games. Which brings me to Garriot: I can't imagine INVESTING in his project when we've seen so little and the entire house of cards seems to be predicated on his name power alone. Further, I think it's a bit telling that AFAIK he isn't opening his own pocketbook to fund this. And even if you want to cling to the idea that you are BUYING and not INVESTING, for a lot of this stuff you don't even know what you will end up with in the end. If for example I throw in to a project to have some kind of artistic vinyl anime/manga character model made, I can't be sure that I won't end up getting some $1 made in china piece of shit. And Kickstarter talks about this - it is on you to judge the creators and the project on whether or not they'll make good use of your funds. Which really isn't purchasing, sorry, and that's why people should do due diligence like they ARE investing, and the idea that people can get bent over is entirely plausible.

The other question that no one is asking, is why can't projects simply choose to refuse or return funds once they pass a certain point? I don't think I've heard of any project giving back or refusing excess funding, which would address some of the criticisms. Kickstarter puts the onus on the individual projects when the question of refunds comes into play, but that is only in a"nothing was delivered"scenario. Especially if/when we're talking about stretch goals that are stupid to the point of obviously just being the thinnest of justifications for NOT sending any excess funds back. I suppose if those involved with a project can come up with some decent additional uses that's fine, but some of the stuff associated with some projects makes it seem almost criminal. I imagine it's a combination of the subjectivity of judging what is 'worth' the additional extra funding, and Kickstarter being a for-profit company that would probably prefer the use of additional goals rather than refunds or payment refusals after a set point.
 
OneofOne

OneofOne

Silver Baronet of the Realm
6,609
8,051
As far as I'm concerned the onus is on the people donating* to projects to not get ripped off. If a project is asking for $6k and they get $200k, well, that's on people for being stupid and continuing to donate past the $6k point. I would have zero issue pocketing the excess and saying "thanks!" It absolutely blows my mind how much some of these projects pull in, but, fuck, people are either stupid or have fucked up financial priorities, or maybe both. Either way it's their money to blow.

For that reason I think Caliane is coming off looking really jealous. Dude, it's in bright big numbers how much he's asking for, if people continue to give past that, why notblame the people donating? Seriously, start your own KS project and milk the masses - hell if I could think of a good project I would!

*I say donating for 2 reasons. 1) Until and unless the project completes and has something to show, well, you got nothing to show for your cash and 2) So many projects don't end with you owning something, or you must donate past a certain point to "get" something. Like the gal making the trope videos that will be available to the public, yay free download? Or the dude making the webcomics, yay free funnies? The ones I DO think are ripoffs are shit like the Veronica Mars movie, or Garriot's game. You are giving someone money, which they will take and make a profit. Normally you'd be called an investor. Here though? You ain't getting jack and shit back. THAT is a scam. Sure you can donate at the appropriately high level for a copy of the movie/game, but you are paying much more than retail, so whatever the difference is, is simply you donating to them making money. And even beyond THAT you have the company that owns Veronica Mars that can do *nothing* and take *no* risks, who's going to end up making a profit. In a way I'm hoping that movie fails, because if it succeeds...

The difference between the former and the latter is, $6k dude actually does need the money to do what he says. Universal Studios (or whoever owns VM) and Garriot HAVE the money, but they'd rather you pay to make the product, then pay AGAIN to buy it. Not a precedent that needs making.
 
Caliane

Caliane

Avatar of War Slayer
14,551
10,040
OneofOne_sl said:
For that reason I think Caliane is coming off looking really jealous. Dude, it's in bright big numbers how much he's asking for, if people continue to give past that, why notblame the people donating? Seriously, start your own KS project and milk the masses - hell if I could think of a good project I would!
Click to expand...
I can't blame fans for wanting some thing. or liking something. This is why its not their fault. Anyone that starts blaming the fans, in any entertainment field is a fool. (in any topic, likes, dislikes, piracy, etc.) Its your job to attend to them, and build trust and relationships. not their job to come to you.

you say, they should have stopped after 6k. But what if you want the higher teir reward, after the min was made?

Lets say I want to make a kickstarter of one of my books publishing.
And I have an expected goal of 30k.
$10 is softcover, I set that at 2000.
$20 is hardocver, I set that at unlimited.

But i was obviously only expecting 500 people to want the hardcover.

I get 1000 people wanting the hardcover, 500 wanting the softcover. well thats my 30k goal.
If you are now a fan, and want the hardcover, you are going over the initial goal. you can't just say, well don't send it in. Because there is an actual product you want, and have to invest to get.
If it were possible to redistribute the tiers after hitting goals perhaps, to scale with the number of investments. While that would fix one problem, it would create others.

the responsibility of creating honest and ethical stretch goals lays with the creator. And as I said, I find many stretch goals to be unethical, fraudulent and as Erronius said, possibly criminal.
I think kickstarter needs some transparency. A business needs to produce quarterly reports for investors. Maybe kickstarter needs to as well. when that guy you just gave 380k to, reports he bought a house, and a few cars with your "investment". you might get a wakeup call.
That was not an investment, it was a donation, as you say. He has zero responsibility to do anything for you, with that money. he can retire, blow it on gambling, or whatever he wants with it. and that is pretty clearly not what kickstarter is for.
 
Grim1

Grim1

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
4,864
6,821
Erronius_sl said:
stuff..
Click to expand...
Hey don't get me wrong, I have issues with kickstarter and think many of the projects are little more than scams. But this particular one that Caliane is railing against isn't one of them. It's main purpose was to sell a hardcover print of pages that werealready created. It was wildly successful so he had to come up with more stretch goals, but the basic goal was just the printing of the book.

And if people are willing to give him money then what do you care? The worth of goods ARE what people will pay for them. That's the way the world works. Railing against that fact is foolish and never, ever, ever will come to anything but frustration on your part.

If you don't like kickstarter then don't give them money. It's as simple as that.
 
Soygen

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,325
43,163
The stretch goals are mostly irrelevant in my opinion. You are pledging an amount for a specific item 99.9% of the time. The stretch goals are simply bonuses above what you originally pledged for. I do not get the problem at all. Let's say they set it to stop taking donations at the point of reaching your goal. Assuming you still provide the product in the end, and all the additional people who want your product still order it, the end result is the same. The provider gets all that money above and beyond the goal. What is the issue here?
 
Pancreas

Pancreas

Vyemm Raider
1,124
3,818
I have funded exactly one kickstarter project so far. That is Project Eternity. When I donated they already had received double their initial goal. So why did I contribute? Because they had some very clearly defined stretch goals that made the project look even more appealing if it reached those levels. I was pleased to see that by the end they had met every stretch goal.

Now... I realize the entire project could in fact go tits up; Or more likely that not all of the stretch goals are met. But the emails and progress videos I keep getting as a result of my investment seem promising.

For projects that do not have well defined stretch goals and only promise an initial product or small range of extras, every donation past the initial asking level is essentially a pre-purchase, but without any of the consumer protection you might get from a traditional transaction. So if a developer "pockets" the excess funds, good, that is what they should be doing... provided they have completed the project successfully. If however there is still $10 of kickstarter money left and the project isn't done yet, they should be spending it to try and see it through.

That is the only issue I see. If an unscrupulous individual were to raise a large sum of money, fail to complete the project, and also fail to utilize all of the funds raised towards the project... they should be brought up on fraud charges. I don't know if kickstarter projects receive that kind of investor protection though. I wouldn't think it would be any different than other kinds of investment.

I know, I am a bad person. I put money towards something without fully understanding it. But the amount I gave was much less than what I am willing to lose.
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
This is just advertising, not some sort of contractual obligation. They're not even advertising products, they're advertising ideas.

The onus is on whoever is organizing the fundraising process to maintain confidence in the system, not the damn U.S. Attorney's office.
 
Mr Creed

Mr Creed

Too old for this shit
2,380
276
If I get this derail right it is about a physical product? Well if you get the book for contributing (dont care enough to check) there's a reason to do it regardless of any stretch goals.

I do agree that several kickstarters are blatant money grabs. I threw $25 at that game Roberts is making because it sounds very interesting, missed the ex-Black isle kickstarter for a decent old school rpg. But that's all really, havent seen any I would pay in advance (certainly not Garriot, he's like one step above Molyneux. After the recent interview attitude probably not even that anymore). When I look at the fun I had with a game like FTL that might not have finished without kickstarter, I'm happy the opportunity is out there, even if some people exploit it to lure in suckers.
 
G

Gecko_sl

shitlord
1,482
0
I wouldn't donate anything to Kickstarter since I disagree with the premise.

I respect the fact people *want* to support indy games and smaller companies. What I don't understand is contributing to multi millionaire gamer insiders like Chris Roberts, Garriott, or Mark Jacobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.