Dear Uber - IF you need more money for PA, maybe just explain why and ask?

I don't know if this is or is not the case, so perhaps this post is worthless if there is no problem. I have no idea how many new sales you are getting for PA these days or if the game's revenue is able to finance the dev team.

But if the game is no longer financially viable to keep working on, and you need another cash infusion, maybe just explain the financial situation openly and honestly, with $ figures, and ask for more funding (via another Kickstarter or addon perhaps).

People who like PA certainly should realize that
1) RTS games are not as popular as they used to be and
2) RTS games in the genre of 'massive scale' like TA / Supcom / Supcom2 / PA have *always* been a small minority of the RTS market compared to games that focus on smaller scale combat like CnC and *Craft games.

Since PA has a smaller audience, members of that audience are individually going to have a larger financial burden to ensure the game's existence and continued development. The more custom a product is, the more it costs per user, it's just simple economics.

The tech in PA is amazing. There probably aren't a lot of developers who are even qualified to work on it, and those who are are certainly qualified to do many other things that can bring in a good salary.

So regardless of what was "promised" and not yet delivered, if there isn't enough money for the team to be paid then development cannot continue. People who want the game to continue to be developed are going to have to collectively fund that development or either enjoy the game as-is or play something else.

Why do you assume that PA even needs more money than Uber are currently receiving?

My very first sentence says "I don't know if this is or is not the case, so perhaps this post is worthless if there is no problem."

So I do not understand what makes you think I am assuming this the case. I'm just saying "if" and I thought of it because of a thread on whether or not people would donate for PA again.

Because without that assumption, the thread is pointless. You made the thread, therefore at some point you must have entertained the notion that Uber may be struggling financially.

You can post all the disclaimers you want, you still posted the thread

I wanted to know your reasoning, that was all. For example, if you assumed the HR Kickstarter was predicated on a lack of financial stability, my rebuttal would be "HR being funded by itself doesn't mean PA needs more funds for itself".

As it stands, your current post can be rebutted by "Uber know the state of their finances far better than anyone on the forums do, and they have no obligation to share what is extremely private information". I mean, I understand your concern, but is this really something forumgoers should be worrying about?

RTS games have never been "popular", outside of that one example people seem to like trotting out. RTS games have always been a niche genre compared to the giants of FPS, RPG and heck even the MMO segment. PA is a niche within a niche - correct - but Uber always knew that. They took a gamble on the game being Kickstarted in the first place (and yet it was, with overwhelming success).

The tech in PA is amazing. I've loved reading the staff posts on the subject, varrak's optimisation posts, blog posts from the devs, talking about how the planets handle additive/subtractive brushes wrt. mesh generation, the data curves used in simulating game logic that makes it easier on both server performance and the required bandwidth to host a game.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean developers are therefore unqualified to develop it!

I don't know the status quo for all companies, but you can't expect a new hire to automatically know everything about a piece of technology or project. They have to be brought up to speed, they have to be exposed to the internal workflow and the processes used (if any ). I joined my job knowing not much about web development (in fact, when I finished uni, I swore I'd never touch the damned subject again), my expertise was primarily software development. I'm now pretty damn knowledgeable about web development, and am extremely comfortable with the web technology we've developed internally to further our product.

As long as a developer has the required experience for a job role, they can be a successful applicant. The specifics can be learned afterwards, presuming they have the knowledgebase required (for example an engine programmer may require strong experience with C++ - instead of Java or C# - because malloc is an incredibly specific construct that you need to be really good at to utilise well. A project manager may require you to have X projects shipped. And so on, and so forth).

Uber will manage their hires with the money they have. They just took jables on board - that should be evidence they have money to finance new hires. That's a company's responsibility. If Uber were anywhere near close to sinking, they'd be the ones to know it.

Not us

Ah, I understand. Yes I considered that funding could be an issue at this stage because sales throughput is probably not what it used to be. Reviews like the one IGN posted (which was utter crap) certainly do not help in that area either.

The announcement of Human Resources was a surprise to many including myself and from what I have read at least a few people were pulled from PA to work on that. So I was thinking that perhaps PA's ongoing revenue does not support the full team required to meet their goals (and fan expectations) for PA.

But I hope that's not the case!

Yeah, it's an understandable concern to have.

However, to spin it around, would Uber really go and ask for money for a separate, new project, if their existing project wasn't going well? Seems like a rather risky endeavour to base the financial security of your studio around!

I have had various discussions about how the game should be, and my opinions about how the development process should be done. I've generally not been writing about it from a business perspective for Uber, but people have been talking about how Uber has been running out of money, or at least there has been some lack of freedom in making a release schedule that is purely about releasing a polished game.

Money is often a constraint in business. I don't think that you are right either about Uber having no obligation to share financial details, as PA was funded with Kickstarter and the backers reasonably expect to be kept in the loop. Because the financial situation is so relevant to the production of the game, there would be a better informed discussion. Uber have an opportunity to share more information.

There is a lot of enthusiasm for the game amongst some players who are also very disappointed in some aspects as well. Further transparency about finances would help potential investors understand what their $200 would be used towards. It may also provide input about how some expenses could be cut, in ways that the community approve of, that would help get things moving more efficiently. Such discussions may be uncomfortable for some people currently working at Uber, or owner(s) of it, but would be the kind of discussion that could enable a much more substantial amount of funds to be put towards PA.

I am right in that Uber have no obligation (which is quite a strong term). You can believe that you deserve it, but that's simply a belief. There is at least one degree of separation between "being kept in the loop" and "being given private financial data about a company".

I support the notion that a developer knows, first and foremost, what is best for itself more than any outside influence considers. You may (and probably do) disagree. I've seen enough games ruined by communities constantly berating devs to make them listen to them more.

You don't know more than them. To assume so is arrogance. To presume that our limited input can somehow improve their financial state is absurd. A community can help balance a game, as community members invariably play a game for more hours a day than most developers can in a week. A community can help strengthen design elements of a game. A community can help create and maintain a thriving modding community that feeds back into the client in the way of actual game features. And even then, all of those aspects can lead to arrogance, to the assumption that someone leveraging the existing base game as a platform for improvement somehow makes them better than the creators of that platform. I've seen it happen before.

If Uber needed actual financial advice, they would solicit it. If it's your job, you would never do it for free - hence your already-stated idea of "obligation" (noblesse oblige need not apply ).

I agree about no specific obligation to share financial data. However, not sharing financial data could mean that they break a different obligation about keeping people in the loop, which is also a serious matter. The financial advisor may not care about that side of things, as it could be out of their remit.

If members of the community were actually going to invest in this, which is a possible way to get more funding, then more transparency would help such investment take place.

Why do you presume that keeping people in the loop means they're obligated to provide financial data? You say you agree to there being no specific obligation, but you then attempt to posit the notion that it's included under the umbrella of "keeping people in the loop".

What does "keeping people in the loop" entail? As far as I'm concerned, simply providing notes of what changes in patches is keeping people in the loop. That's more than a lot of developers do, even these days. Providing details of upcoming features? Even better! Working directly with community members to make sure community-made tools aren't eclipsed by internal projects the developers are working on? Beyond fantastic!

Uber are doing all of this. At no point have I ever considered that "keeping people in the loop" means "providing private company-specific information to members of the public". I want to know why you think this is the case.

And we're still working from the (already-rebutted) notion that Uber somehow need financial help. Which is odd.

Being in financial difficulty is a different matter to not having a lot more funds to put into PA. I don't know the financial details of Uber, so I don't know that they have the funds to do it. I'm hopeful they do. If not having the funds would mean they were unable to carry out what they are planning, then being kept in the loop involves being told about it. If it's not a problem then people would not need to be told about it in order to be kept in the loop.

Even without Uber being in financial difficulties, more funding from an external source going into PA is just one possibility, I'm not advocating it, but saying that it would have some advantages in terms of providing extra funding for the game. I'm also suggesting that Uber take on more disclosure obligations to attain such funding, if such a course of action were to be taken. Needs != would benefit from. And I don't think the does not need extra funding to survive and thrive has not been completely rebutted - to do so would probably involve sharing financial information which is not such common practise.

But this entire discussion is predicated on . . . absolutely nothing. The game is being updated. Uber are actioning the plans they have revealed to us and we're seeing the efforts of that as the days and weeks pass (Offline Mode has already arrived, Ranked Play is in the works, and so forth).

The only way this discussion takes off is if you stop trying to shuffle around the statement you've made which is the assumption that additional financing is required. Otherwise it's a completely dead topic and I'm not sure what you're trying to debate!

That's the beauty of the 'if' statement - it means we can talk about things in the hypothetical.

The hypothetical assumes you've taken a stance, instead of repeatedly denying (or deflecting from the notion that) said stance was ever taken. If we presume Uber are in financial difficulties, then the rebuttals already posted already apply.

Hypothetically, we could discuss what life would be like if our brains were inside our chest cavity. But that doesn't mean it's a realistic subject for debate.

OK, I will take a stance, and be clear about it, and that's to say Uber should put more money into developing this game. I don't think it's at all a controversial stance, and Uber agree with me on it anyway.

I'm not presuming Uber are in financial difficulties, but I'm not presuming they are not.

The point of this hypothetical situation is that you need to presume one or the other. Either they're (supposedly, hypothetically, figuratively speaking) in difficulties, or they aren't. There isn't a middle-ground for this hypothetical scenario you seem to want to explore.

Putting more money into the game is a completely different subject from the premise outlined in the OP (which I sympathise with) and opens up a lot more worms in that you presume they're not spending enough, which requires reasoning to back those assertions up (as well as basic knowledge of both project management and software development. You can't just add staff and expect things to move quicker).

I am 100% with the OP, and I think Gorbles doesn't understand where he's coming from.

There is a considerable group of people who want to throw more money at Uber to keep developing the game with MAJOR updates, not just minor system editor updates or balance fixes and bug hunting, but they don't know how to get the money to Uber or how Uber could respond to them and address their concerns.

At one point I thought about sending a check to their offices. At other points I've considered buying all commanders in the armory, even though I don't want them.

The communication that's coming through now is reassuring to a degree, but at the same time a little disappointing too, since there are no longer any "big rock" features that are confirmed. Maybe they're planning on springing those on us as a surprise, but until that surprise comes, people like me will naturally tend to be pessimistic. Developers who see a bright future ahead of them tend to talk about that future a lot, and in very enthusiastic terms, and that's what Uber was doing for years, pretty much... until release. And then POOF, communication dropped to zero, and they began to prepare the Human Resources KS.

In a way, although I ended up loving the HR pitch, and was saddened that it failed, I am glad that PA is back to being their number 1 priority. It will be great to see the name of the game again at the number 1 spot in the forum list, for example, because however good HR might have been, PA would still have been better. There's just no way to compete with this game without completely copying it and adding to it more stuff, which latter is exactly what jvickers and I, and people like us want to see: more stuff, and SUBSTANTIAL stuff. Big stuff. Like more units more tech tiers, etc. We understand that Uber cannot keep adding all that without the CURRENT players throwing more money at them, and we want to find a way to give Uber that money, with some reassurance that it will go towards developing that new stuff.

Let's hope Uber is listening.

Well said. This is exactly my sentiment. I put $90 into the original KS and then also bought two more copies of PA later for friends. I feel I have more than gotten my money's worth of enjoyment out of this game. I would love for it to continue being developed with new MAJOR features, on an ongoing basis. I would be open to paying for PA as an annual subscription even. If there is another Kickstarter campaign for PA I'll kick in another $100 gladly.

There's nothing else like PA right now. I recognize that my interest in this particular type of game from this particular genre is not shared by millions and millions of gamers and so the sharing of development costs for this game is between relatively few people - so we're all going to pay more. And I'm okay with that.

1. There is a considerable group of a few people on a web forum. This is not a considerable group in terms of representing anything significant within the overall playerbase.

2. Uber are currently updating the game with major updates. Your hypothesis is predicated on Uber no longer doing this, which doesn't make sense in the current climate. The OP's hypothesis was predicated on the worry of them having no money. Your hypothesis is different (throw more money at it to make it happen faster/more often/subject to clarification), so if anything you're the one who doesn't understand where the OP is coming from.

3. Ranked gameplay isn't big? Offline Play isn't big? What do you define as "big" (or big rock, as per your usage of a term Uber used in an update once and you've quoted ever since)? How do you define this in an objective manner (the trick is you can't).

4. The rest of your post is horrendously off-topic and is basically speculation combined with a misrepresentation of the timeline. jables was hired prior to the HR Kickstarter failed, ergo, jables was on-board for Planetary Annihilation before HR was known to be a success or not.

Additionally, you have no idea if PA is still the would-be HR team's main focus. You're simply guessing that just because one project didn't work out, Uber are therefore working on nothing else. Developers work on multiple projects all the time, and not just at Valve.

5. You might want additional tech tiers. You'd find plenty of people opposed to such a notion. You might want additional units. You'd find plenty of people opposed to such a notion.

I also countered the idea that throwing money at a company magically makes more things happen (and faster), but you were too keen to dismiss my posts as a lack of understanding I guess you didn't read them thoroughly!

It's true, I skimmed them. All I see you posting is, "no no no no no" and it's tiresome.

But like I said, there is a considerable group of people who want major updates, and we are prepared to pay a considerable amount of money per person to see it happen. Hopefully Uber will realize this at some point. Your negativity isn't helping, of course, but it's easy enough to ignore, like all the bad reviews.