Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by brianpurkiss, September 12, 2014.
it's getting to where you have to shower after reading a few pages of posts...
I think we can add that up and make a budget out of it. The game is not even finished.
That makes no sense though, the money came over time, it's not like they got all their money at one time and have spent it. They got money over time, it's different.
Our team has been roughly twice as big, and our game is a lot more ambitious than the first part of a point and click adventure game.
You are my favorite dev. <3
I am so using this next time I see this argument used against PA on Steam.
Sorry, what are you saying? That you're RTS is more ambitious than an Point and click game? Okay well done, what RTS isn't more ambitious than an Point and click. Sorry but I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve here? I wouldn't know where to start with comparing the genres. RTS's are near always more complex/more feature driven and more fleshed out than any point and click, because they focus solely on different things. Where an RTS can be about a good narrative/story (certainly not in PA's case,) it's mainly about gameplay and strategy and tactics, tools need to be made to en-power the player. A good point and click will usually only focus on narrative and story telling, and a good amount of cheap puzzles.
Not trying to be rude.
There was something wrong with the GTA Online launch.
That is where we stand right now. PA can have pretty harsh attackers just because of the politics behind it. GTA can have no audiable attackers because of the overwhelming mainstream cushion around it. If the same organized mob attacked GTA5, it would be a bunch of downvoted posts that are pretty much created already on the 12th page. And Rockstar would moderate it out of anything they have access too, they can do it and get away with it, they honestly aknowledge any constructive ideas but they also are well aware that they can mute the voice of discontent and get away with it without any public attention for it. They do it literally all the time.
how ambitious is that point and click to other point and clicks compared to how ambitious this rts is to other rts's ...
sure the focuses are different
that point and click may focus on a much more complex and deeper narative than others before it ... pa focuses on a never before seen scale in rts ... i know not something you realy should compare but just to show the relation ...
Still does a good job of showing making games is pricey.
especialy when you have to focus on quality than ammount of content .. and both together? have fun spending money and putting a ton at stake ...
I see no relation.
Sounds more like a measuring contest to me..
Schafer does I suppose.. And who said making games was cheap?
Some people just don't understand.
The Uber Kickstarter told us they could make a multi planet revolutionary rts for 800k.
1: it was 900k... 2 that was only the base game, no stretch goals (so no single player, no metal, lava, water or gas giants, no orchestral score... Basically the game at beta achieved that and could have been done with a much smaller team.
2: at no point did it say 'this is all the money we need'... Early access is par for the course with these things. That money was sufficient to start the project instead of an up front investment from a publisher.
3: they have delivered the game, the way people are going on you'd think they took the money and went on holiday never to return. Uber have delivered the majority of what was promised. They're tidying up the rest.
4: with the exception of offline support, the missing features are actually things people assumed should be in the game. Now I understand the assumption, however at the same time they aren't obliged to deliver anything not stated in the ks campaign. The fact is they *are* working on these things anyway
So you say, you got a team roughly twice as big which means a budget of about 7 million dollars over two years.
But still you call Planetary Annihilation an Indie Game?
Anyway compairing yourself to another kickstarter project that couldnt manage their finance is not a good move...
You must not get it. The point is that a game smaller, and with a smaller dev team still had such high costs. Now think of PA with it'd larger group of devs and being so much larger... on a 2 million dollar budget? Of course that's wasn't all that was required to fund the game, never was meant to be. It was to kickstart the game, begin development, development couldn't continue without additional funds.
All I can say is I reviewed PA on steam and corrected some misinformation.
This is a common misconception. "Indie" means independent, ie. not backed by a publisher; self-funded. This mostly covers smaller studios making simpler games, simply because the costs involved in anything else are normally prohibitive. But Kickstarter has somewhat leveled the playing field there, allowing Uber to make PA while still being "Indie".
Nintendo is also self-funded. And Platinum Games and id Software call themselves "independent game developers" on their respective websites. This is "the myth of independence", which I have written about:
Separate names with a comma.