Let us pledge AGAINST a stretch-goal

Nothing wrong with subitting ideas.
This one i didn't like though.

 

It's fine that they want to generate more revenue, but they should do that by attracting more backers, not trying to milk existing backers even more. The system was much more honest and transparent when stretch goals were tied to overall pledge revenue. As I've been saying since the beginning of this whole thing, most people will back the game to their desired tier before considering either Addon Store purchases or Stretch Goal Store purchases. I'd even hazard the guess that most backers will prioritize Addon Store purchases over Stretch Goal Store purchases simply because the Addon Store is a familiar model business model and because of the nature of goods sold in each store.

This all means, of course, that, barring some phenomenal growth in the backer base, not one of those stretch goals have any chance whatsoever of passing. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work this out. Perhaps the more troubling part is precisely that--that this is easy to predict. That part of it coupled with the fact that we can't melt down or receive a refund on Stretch Goal Store purchases has me concerned about the ethical integrity of this store. If Portalarium knew going into this that none of these would pass...

That last part of course is speculation, but it worries me. I hope Portalarium acts here. Something needs to be done to make Stretch Goal Store purchases feel like a real contribution toward an attainable stretch goal, and the system needs to be revised either to protect purchasers in the event the stretch goal is not realized or to increase the value of the rewards to justify the risk.

 

Tamino...we're not in a kickstarter any longer. Episode I and Stretch Goals are two completely different animals. If you don't want to fund a stretch goal, then you don't. They don't have devs putting down their Episode I hats so they can work on Stretch Goals.

Even the pledges that are going on now are NOT part of the Kickstarter. That's a ship that sailed a long time ago. The initial 2 million was for Episode I. No one ever said they weren't going to get more money to fund ongoing development of the game for additional episodes.

I think the crowd funding is working exactly as it's supposed to. The only way they could make it work "more" the way your suggesting is if they made the best game they could for just 2 million dollars and it "technically" resembled what they talked about in the Kickstarter campaign. If you're interested in seeing what that looks like, try searching around on "Clang".

 

Oh I agree with this completely. If Portalarium knows that they're just taking people's money with no intention of the goal actually being made, that would be highly unethical. But for the sake of argument, let's assume for a moment that's not what they intend. I'm comfortable with that assumption.

Look, what really rubs people the wrong way is two fold...
1) There's a lot of STUFF to buy and not much game is finished yet. It never ends and it's probably never going to end. If you're like me, you've already paid out a huge sum of money. Really if you're just about anyone following this game as a pledger, you've already paid out a huge sum of money. So when someone keeps coming back to you each week saying "but wait there's more!" That's a tough pill to swallow. But it's also a business, and regardless of it being a crowd sourced business or not, businesses make money (at least, successful one's do).

2) There are a lot of people that don't have the means to contribute, but don't want to miss out on anything. So they want the pledge dollars to count towards the stretch goal because at least that way they're in no worse shape than they were before. But that's just completely silly logic and wishful thinking that completely defeats the purpose of the stretch goals entirely. The fact of the matter is, if all pledge dollars counted towards stretch goals, the devs would be on the hook for another 2.5 million in stretch goals right now. Nice try.

 

It has nothing to do with whether this project's Kickstarter campaign is still active or not. It has to do with the concept of crowdfunding and the standards and ethics therein. I mentioned Kickstarter because it is the most popular platform for crowdfunding and the platform upon which this crowdfunding campaign was launched. This is still a crowdfunding campaign raising funds for the development of an unreleased product. So I am not sure what your point there is exactly. We're all aware the Kickstarter has concluded. That doesn't change the ethics or standards of crowdfunding. And I am personally aware of the concept of voting with my wallet. That's why I said am not giving them another dime.

 

My point is that for 2 million the devs "agreed" to make a product that includes everything discussed during the Kickstarter. They also made it clear that they would be seeking additional money, as almost all Kickstarters do. Unlike during the Kickstarter, they are now a business and while they're still obligated to create the product they talked about in the Kickstarter, they don't have to run their business under the Kickstarter bylaws for the rest of their lives.

It's two separate things you're talking about, and as long as you just want thing 1 - the Kickstarter game, then that's all you need to focus on and eventually they'll either deliver that or not. I think you'd have MORE room to be concerned with the Star Citizen model where you didn't originally buy into the 500 extra stretch goals and you just want a game to be made and playable. Where as SOTA is actually carving out development and money for specific stretch goals that will not delay the core game in any way.

Honestly, it seems to me like you're biting the hand that feeds you on this.

I totally support that.

 

Yep, and that's exactly why the Stretch Goal Store is working as intended. Eventually the goal will be met if there's enough interest in it, but it's not going to negatively affect development of the existing game. If anything, since they get the money now, it will help it.

 

I agree with you that profit should come after Portalarium has become successful. I think, however, if I am to speculate, the money raised will likely not be treated as profit, but as revenue that is used to continue to grow the company, and further the game along. If this is the case, I don't have any problem with the Stretch Goal price being higher than the cost to develop the feature.

I do take exception that once money exchanges hands, there is no promise of the Stretch Goal being completed, and no intermediate functional rewards leading up to the almost outrageous sticker price. All of the risk is put to the user. Its bad business. I strongly suspect its done this way to protect Portalarium from potential legal concerns. Which is a bit ironic given the frequent mantra being thrown around by DarkStarr -- "Don't lawyer me bro."

 

All of the risk is indeed on the user, and that's true of nearly every crowd-funded project so there's nothing new here. The crowd has always been at risk since most likely didn't take the time to understand that core concept about crowdfunding before giving their money away.

And as far as bad business...well, Indiegogo allows campaigns that will keep the funds even if the goal is not met. So these stretch goals are like self-contained Indiegogo campaigns, except there's no time limit

 

There is a difference -- an important one. If the group crowdsourcing cannot meet their (monetary-based) goal, the project is not funded.

 

I don't have a problem with the six releases we've seen so far and release seven right around the corner. I don't have a problem with stretch goals for elves or pack animals at $100,000 or $1,000,000. Pledge tiers are closer to priced items than stretch goals but even they have little connection to any notion of market pricing in this or many other Kickstarter-like initiatives. They are typically more like badges of honor and thank you gifts for sharing in the creative process and helping turn vision into reality. And I prefer it that way -- I'd rather know that most funds go to the general fund of making a better product and lasting community. What does it even mean to deliver a playable elf if there is no forest to live in and no magic to cast and no stories to explore? If I was concerned about maximizing my value and eliminating any risk, I'd wait until a product had been out for awhile so I could read and watch the reviews before purchasing it. But that's not the only measure of value. Even spending time exchanging ideas on this forum is another form of value not easily captured in any pricing analysis of t-shirts or digital llamas.

As for profit, a quick visit to Portalarium's low-rent offices far outside Austin to see the ever-increasing team of dedicated people toiling away at folding tables to build this world would quickly dispel any concerns that our donations have been wasted.

The only thing I wonder about this playable elves stretch goal is, whatever happened to the Fuzzies?

 

For me the money I invested in this game is spent/gone. I made the choice to support the possibility of what this game could be. If money is spent that shouldn't have been spent on a risk and it is not comfortable for that person or causes regrets I understand the worry. Otherwise I am a grown-up to spend and take chances for this game to get made. If by chance it didn't happen then I would be disappointed but still realizing it was my choice. No spilt milk. I do wish for everyone to get the stretch goal they want but I am not liking the stretch goals process as it is set up now.

Edit: sorry and to comment on the op's idea. I don't agree that this would help in any way.

 

I believe that having a stretch goal to vote against other stretch goals seems counterproductive. It would also polarize the community, which to a small extent, it already is.
If you look at the stretch goals that are up right now, they saw pledges for the first week or two. After that, they leveled off and now hardly any movement at all. At this rate,
it will take at least a couple of years, if not longer to achieve them. Seeing this, I am reluctant to throw any money into these stretch goals. If I had the money, I would prefer to
put that into the next tier rather than gamble on one of those stretch goals that may not pan out.

Edit: The mounts are still moving, but I expect them to level off at some point as well.

 

@Alexander

Yeah, there's plenty of money out there to be had (maybe not so much from the people that have already pledged for this game) but there's an endless pool of money out there in the overall gaming community. The devs are not going to tap into that by creating stretch goals that take this long to fund, and offer very little benefit to the individual paying the money.

 

Agreed. They really need to rethink the way they are doing this if they want to attract new players to this game.

 

I think one of the allures of Star Citizen is that everyone has the opportunity to fly a spaceship. To every man a ship in a world that's one big ocean.

Where as in SOTA, the world is marketed much more broadly. Sure there's player housing, but that's static and your character is what's needed to explore and run around the world.

So when new players see see items for purchase in Star Citizen, they're really sizing up different ships that have different functionality. You might be someone that likes the idea of being a bounty hunter and capturing outlaws, so you get THAT ship. Or maybe you like the idea of being a space pirate so you get THAT ship.

In SOTA, you get a foal that might someday maybe turn into a ride-able mount and oh yeah everyone gets that same mount riding ability. Where as if you gave teachable skills like "horse breeding" or "horse racing", now you're giving players a choice that defines who they are and how they'll play. But by making it a teachable skill you're not creating a "pay to win" environment where you have to shell out big bucks to get the most useful stuff.

 

That's not wholly true, though. I expect there is a great deal of interest in many of the stretch goals for many of the members of this community. The problem is that a bunch of people who have already been asked to back the project are now being asked to back specific aspects of the project. Many of us can't because we've already given as much as we can afford to give to hit our respective pledge levels. This setup can never accurately gauge interest because every single potential "voter" faces a huge barrier in deciding to vote at all, which is the extra expense.

 

Not everyone has those problems. But I share your concern and think it's a good one. Many of the people that have contributed to date are tapped out.

When I originally envisioned this stretch goal system, I thought it would sell more valuable items and skills that players would see a need for. I didn't think it would just be a bunch of clothing and fluff. I thought new players would see this as a way to get in on the ground floor by putting their money towards things they cared about and avoiding paying for stuff they didn't care about.

Ships is a great example of this, because there are a ton of people out there that want to play pirates and traders. But there are probably a lot less that want to wear a sailor outfit that costs $20.

 

If you don't like the show you are watching, change the channel. Don't sink the TV station and deny the show to me.

If you start screwing things up for other people it's a safe bet you WILL be held accountable.

 

After thinking about the OP, my answer would be no.