Being A Backer

What I like to see being the backer I am comes later in to the game as what things actually look like and do.

1. art, lighting, motion.

2. if i place a building it will build and be cool while it builds.

3. effects that come from guns that feel like a strong solid hit. rather than some laser shooting at the model but not making contact but still doing damage.

I like to be drowned with awesome in my games and feel like i get so sucked in that it makes me say "wow" and "awesome" I've played RTS games from way before TA and all of them up to this point. some are "wow" and some are "lame/uhgg thats dumb"

art from games has defiantly improved over the years. I want this to be top notch and ready to crush the fans with a giant wave of awesome that pusles from the screen like a super nova.

discussions about other topics are nice for me but i feel like this is where I want the game to end at. :? ... ... ... :shock: ...

also I want to know if my feedback does get heard. one of the things that makes me want to put more feedback in to the game is if I am being heard.

Post what being a backer means to you below

This post sounds belligerent and like you are demanding something for being a backer. They're already giving you the game for ~50% off!

Oh man, you got 50% off the cosmic unlimited edition? That's so much savings!

Uh interesting thoughts OP.....

Being a backer to me means I liked the concept of PA.

You'll see those things when they're ready.

Before you put explosions and effects into a game, you must first make the game itself.

You can't invent the Internet unless you have first invented the computer.

Be patient.

Being a backer to me means having the privilege to participate in the creation and having the earliest possible access to the greatest modern RTS game. Possibly even have a thing or two that I suggest in the game and have the ability to test for bugs and help perfect the game.

You don't have to be a genius to realize that the game will be epic (if you want something like TA 2) since most developers are experienced game creators in this field of work so backing up the game before it even began development doesn't mean you should get anything special for it.
You should feel grateful you were given the opportunity to get a lot of content for a small amount of money and that Uber decided to share everything about the game with us.
They didn't have to do anything, they got the money and they could have simply said "Ok, we got the money lets make the game" and not bother with livestreams or the forum.

So Uber is awesome and being a backer is a privilege :mrgreen:

I drowned in awesome just seeing those cratered planets on the map gen on Uber's live stream the other day

Being a backer to me means, throwing more money at uber then the final game would have cost me. To help get a project started that i really like, Not as the like 15thousand AAA titles coming out since years and being uterly sh**.

I'm still stuck on this.

To me, being a backer means that I participate in and support the subversion and, eventually, complete abolishment of outdated modes of product distribution and project financing, and help cut out the capitalist middle-men, the publishers, by giving my money directly to the people who will make the game I will no doubt end up loving.

Kickstarter is applied anarchism.

Actually, your talking about "socialist" middlemen.

"Anarchism is often defined as a political philosophy which holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful."

Game publishing has very little to do with Government.... But:

"Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of capital goods and the means of production, with the creation of goods and services for profit."

So really, you're funding "capitalism" and cutting out the "socialist" restrictions that the government imposes upon companies, thus requiring extra finances to comply with regulations and drive the companies focus to revenue... :?


To me, being a backer is the opportunity to fund a game that you suppose to be something worth buying in the future. Granted, if I didn't get a little extra something, I would have just spent the money on other stuff, and bought the game when it came out!

But it is really cool to see developers go back to the customer centered product that business used to be... It was a breather of fresh air to see Mojang and Minecraft do so well with its focus on the customer.

I expect PA to be just as big a hit, especially if they are as active in the community... Like Minecraft, PA will be suppored from the get-go by moders, which will really make a major impact on how well it does.

There are fewer gamers as dedicated as Modders!

Not to mention that TA, a game from 1997 still has an active community of modders and players on GameRanger and WarZone. FA also has a community driven multiplayer lobby with a lot of mods and modders.

PA must live forever!

I'm sorry if that came across weird. I'll quickly elaborate, if I may.

First off, allow me to correct you on anarchism. Wikipedia won't get you very far in this case Anarchism is indeed a political philosophy, but though it is often defined with a focus on the negatives ("no state", "no government", etc), it is also founded on the central assumption that the people alone (and not any institution legitimized by force) can and should be responsible for their own actions, and on voluntary cooperation based on mutual benefit. Which applies very well: crowdfunding is essentially a form of economic voluntary cooperation. The developer has the means and desire to produce the game, the backers have the means to financially enable that production, and get to play the game. Mutual benefit.

The capitalist element I was referring to is the traditional publisher model. It originally evolved as a distributor of software, purely digital distribution still being a thing of the future. But over time, the publisher turned into hugely involved apparatus providing mostly secondary services (localization, quality assurance, testing), which nevertheless ended up with the total power to decide which games get made, and which don't get funding. This is evident, for example, in the fact that developers pitch their ideas to publishers, hoping to get funding. Don't you see the problem with that? The ones doing the actual creative work have to beg those who merely distribute it for money in order to do the work they want to do.

This is how capitalism works. Money rules. If you have capital, even if you make no other contribution, you get power over those who actually do the work. I for one think that this is ideologically wrong.

This is why I think crowdfunding is a direct attack on traditional market capitalist institutions, because it cuts out that middle-man who profits not from his own work but the work of others. That is what it means to me. I directly support the developers of a product that I think I will love, and money-grubbing capitalists (read: those who profit from the creativity of others) don't get a chance to dip their greasy fingers in.

Edit: Sorry, didn't see the bit above the quote, which explains why I was confused about your mention of socialism. No, I'm not talking about "socialist" middlemen. You may be influenced by the current American media's utter misuse of that word. Socialism, if you want to play the definition game, is a form of social organization based on equal distribution of all goods by the state. Publishers are not the state. Neither do they distribute goods equally. They operate by the ideal of profit maximization.

I know politics is a little off-topic, but that was a fantastic post.

of course the downside of crowd sourcing is that the risk is now on the customers. there have been several kick starters not to deliver their promises so far. But this is the same of any funding but theoretically the backers return is a game instead of a more traditional percentage. We buy a game we assume will be finished.

some like planetary annihilation are very safe bets.

I agree about the risks. I do think though that the fact that these pitches are public, and that failure to deliver will be seen and remembered by the entire internet and might ruin a studio's reputation for good, enforce good behaviour and realistic goals.

In traditionally funded development, games sometimes get canceled halfway through development without the public ever catching even a little glimpse of it. I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing. But in those cases, the publisher is the one who decides whether it's wise to invest more money and hope for a good outcome, or cut their losses and can the game, and the developer can go on to make new pitches to the same or different publishers, with the public none the wiser. For how many canceled games can you name why exactly they were canceled?

If such a thing were to happen in a crowdfunded project (and it hasn't happened yet as far as I'm aware), the developer wouldn't just have wasted their investors' money, but also all good will of their potential customers (== investors). They'd have gambled away their reputation.

I think most of the game developers using crowdfunding schemes are well aware of that fact, and take care not to oversell a bad idea. These projects are usually something that they are passionate about and don't want to make compromises on - and crowdfunding allows them to bypass the demands publishers might make - and it shows. We live in a time when we finally get new point and click adventures and cRPGs! Who could have imagined that?

Yes, as backers, we partake in the risk of development. But I'm pretty sure that the risks are rather low in comparison to traditional funding, due to the nature and dynamic of the crowdfunding process.

Being a backer simply means that you helped fund the game, I would have funded it, rewards or not. I don't need anything special for backing, but they're nice to have.

i think this article has a few projects that wasted peoples money.

It is the elephant in the room of crowd funding. All in all though i still believe crowd funding to be a positive thing, its just not as positive as a lot of the hype would like people to believe.

Just on the subject of Kickstarter, anarchism, being punk in the best way possible and epic, epic trolling, amusing electro-punk band Mindless Self Indulgence recently Kickstarted their latest record

For $5,000 one lucky person got this reward:



Note that for much less money you could get a vinyl copy of the record, or a bass guitar, or a microphone, or all manner of other cool things. The top tier just had the reward of having your name in the title of a song, not even a digital copy of the album thrown in.

And this is the result of MSI fan Mark Trezona getting trolled harder than I have ever seen anyone trolled in the history of ever:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovvhblkK4qw

A backer to me simply means I want to contribute my time and sweat in order to pay for the development of this game without Publishers coming and ruining the game.

I purchased the Cosmic edition in order to get Alpha and the kickass T-shirts and other goodies but more importantly its too help Uber make the best game they can achieve.

I just learned Digital Reality is making a new Imperium Galactica game so now I have two RTS to look forward too, but I feel more invested in this game because I payed $250 for a game thats not even finished.