Oddworld Forums

Oddworld Forums (http://www.oddworldforums.net/index.php)
-   Non-Oddworld Gaming (http://www.oddworldforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Broken Age (http://www.oddworldforums.net/showthread.php?t=21279)

Nate 03-28-2013 02:17 AM

Broken Age
 
It's the Doublefine Adventure, now in trailer form!




Now in very early trailer form, I hope. It's all too vague and undetailed to form an opinion.

Official website here.

Phylum 03-28-2013 02:32 AM

This looks really interesting and has potential to be really exciting.

I can't wait for it to get released so that it can get reviewed so that I can decide if I want to buy it.

Dynamithix 03-28-2013 03:10 AM

I like that art style.

Nate 03-28-2013 03:29 AM

:

()
I like that art style.

It's what's known in the industry as the Bagel Filter.

Dynamithix 03-28-2013 03:41 AM

So am I not supposed to like it or what?

Mr. Bungle 03-28-2013 04:09 AM

Looks like Doublefine alright.

OANST 03-28-2013 04:54 AM

Just a teaser trailer right now, but it still looks fucking gorgeous.

Nate 03-29-2013 03:46 AM

:

()
So am I not supposed to like it or what?

That's entirely your choice. I was just stating a fact.

Strike Witch 03-29-2013 06:49 AM

It doesn't really interest me. Maybe gameplay will help.

Steamer_KING 03-29-2013 07:02 AM

DAT MOVIE FEEL. I like it. And bagels too. Am I popular now?


OT: A pac game from Double Fine? It seems interesting and mysterious. Count me in.

Nate 03-29-2013 03:41 PM

:

()
It doesn't really interest me. Maybe gameplay will help.

Gameplay is point and click. It's not going to look much different from what's in that video.

Jbot123 03-30-2013 08:14 AM

The game seems too slow and faded, y'know what I'm saying? Psychonauts and Brutal Legend were more fast paced, clear and solid. This seems boring, pastelly, and soft. The art style is too glarey and chalky, it looks like something off a poorly-made wedding cake. I wouldn't be able to play a whole game like this.

Manco 03-30-2013 10:04 AM

It’s an adventure game though. Both of the games you mentioned are action games.

Strike Witch 03-30-2013 04:53 PM

:

()
Gameplay is point and click. It's not going to look much different from what's in that video.

Oh.

Well I've got no interest then!

Bullet Magnet 03-30-2013 05:30 PM

Looks like there might be two protagonists.

Nate 03-30-2013 10:32 PM

:

()
Oh.

Well I've got no interest then!

This reminds me of the time I said that I was unsurprised that you didn't like Psychonauts. And I meant it as an insult.

Jbot123 03-31-2013 03:06 AM

:

()
It’s an adventure game though. Both of the games you mentioned are action games.

I still enjoy point and click games, as long as they don't look like vomit and the pink sawdust they put on it.

OANST 04-01-2013 12:12 PM

:

()
This reminds me of the time I said that I was unsurprised that you didn't like Psychonauts. And I meant it as an insult.

Can you at least open it up so I can posrep you, and you alone, as many times as I want? Second time today I haven't been able to.

I'm a fake mod, too. I should be able to posrep whoever I want as many times as I want.

Wings of Fire 04-01-2013 12:36 PM

Actually that's an admin privilege, otherwise Gishy would have like, ten red thingies by now.

OANST 04-01-2013 12:52 PM

Now I have to become a fake admin? Fucking shit.

Steamer_KING 04-01-2013 12:59 PM

Talk to STM, some say he's a great pimp.

Varrok 07-03-2013 04:43 AM

Yay, thanks!

Pure comedy already.

OANST 07-03-2013 06:45 AM

They're making a bigger game than expected, and exploring options on how to do that without getting a publisher. They are pouring all of the profits from their other games into this one. Thing is about this game, is that it is going to define who they are as a studio. They don't want to let anyone down, and they also want the game to be a financial success because whether or not it succeeds is going to determine their business model for the future. If the game is a real success, they will be able to forgo the publisher model completely. To just laugh at good people trying to make their company viable is kind of stupid, don't you think? Especially in an industry that sees clever, brilliant companies going out of business left and right, along with huge companies. It's a tough business.

Varrok 07-03-2013 06:52 AM

I'm not saying that the method of solving the problem is funny. It's funny that they couldn't properly calculate the costs and so they made the problem.

OANST 07-03-2013 06:57 AM

They could have shortened the length of the game considerably. They chose to make the best game they possibly could, and find ways to make that happen. This is what happens in all, and I mean all, game development. It's just that we don't normally get to see the inside shit.

MeechMunchie 07-03-2013 08:37 AM

I've got no objection to them making a better game with more money. However, if they claimed they could make a good game with x amount, recieved several times x amount, and now claim that the game they can make with that money isn't good enough, it won't exactly fill their backers with confidence.

It seems like the sensible thing to do would be to tell everyone what they've paid for so far and what specifically they need the money for now.

OANST 07-03-2013 08:57 AM

:

()
I've got no objection to them making a better game with more money. However, if they claimed they could make a good game with x amount, recieved several times x amount, and now claim that the game they can make with that money isn't good enough, it won't exactly fill their backers with confidence.

It seems like the sensible thing to do would be to tell everyone what they've paid for so far and what specifically they need the money for now.

If you were a backer you would already have that information. I know exactly what is done, and what is still needed to do.

Edit: Also, the game that they claimed that they could make with x amount was going to be an extremely short flash game. The additional funds made them look to make something far superior to that, and they overshot the mark. They are doing what they can to deliver the best game they can, and are doing it in an open, and honest way, without begging, or going back on any promises besides time frame. What could possibly be bad about that?

Varrok 07-03-2013 08:59 AM

OANST knows how can be done.

OANST 07-03-2013 09:12 AM

I just get tired of the culture of jaded cynicism. Especially when dealing with people who always convey a kind of wide eyed optimism and joy. Did things work out exactly as planned? No. Did anyone get screwed? Are they being deceitful? Are they even acting arrogant about it? Nope. So, why bitch? Just to bitch? Just to be able to point a finger? Kind of shitty.

MeechMunchie 07-03-2013 09:50 AM

I think, given how difficult it is for most projects to get funding, asking for more gives the impression of being ungrateful. This is an industry that is saturated by greed, and not everyone has the blind faith in Double Fine that you do.

:

()
If you were a backer you would already have that information. I know exactly what is done, and what is still needed to do.

But they're planning to use Steam to try and get more people to fund their game. Those people haven't been given that information (yet). It just looks like they're being somewhat nonchalant about the news that the millions of dollars that they claimed would make Broken Age as good as it could possibly be suddenly isn't enough to do that. Nonchalance may be part of their character, but you can't be surprised if it upsets some people.

Yes, the game hasn't become any worse. Yes, all the money donated is still being used as intended. But there's such a thing as diminishing returns, and people are going to be more stingy about giving money to a project that already has earned more money than most people in their lifetime.

Just for the record, I quite like Double Fine, but am fairly indifferent about Broken Age. I hope it doesn't turn into too much of a car crash, and I hope that DF and all their backers are happy with what gets made, but I've got no emotional or monetary investment in it.

OANST 07-03-2013 09:53 AM

They aren't using it any time soon. They're looking at a January release, and I'm sure by then they will have given that information to people who may buy it.

MeechMunchie 07-03-2013 10:16 AM

Yeah, I was still finishing that post when you posted.

:

Hello, Backers of Adventure!

Those of you who have been following along in the documentary know about the design vs. money tension we’ve had on this project since the early days. Even though we received much more money from our Kickstarter than we, or anybody anticipated, that didn’t stop me from getting excited and designing a game so big that it would need even more money.

I think I just have an idea in my head about how big an adventure game should be, so it’s hard for me to design one that’s much smaller than Grim Fandango or Full Throttle. There’s just a certain amount of scope needed to create a complex puzzle space and to develop a real story. At least with my brain, there is.

So we have been looking for ways to improve our project’s efficiency while reducing scope where we could along the way. All while looking for additional funds from bundle revenue, ports, etc. But when we finished the final in-depth schedule recently it was clear that these opportunistic methods weren’t going to be enough.

We looked into what it would take to finish just first half of our game—Act 1. And the numbers showed it coming in July of next year. Not this July, but July 2014. For just the first half. The full game was looking like 2015! My jaw hit the floor.

This was a huge wake-up call for all of us. If this were true, we weren’t going to have to cut the game in half, we were going to have to cut it down by 75%! What would be left? How would we even cut it down that far? Just polish up the rooms we had and ship those? Reboot the art style with a dramatically simpler look? Remove the Boy or Girl from the story? Yikes! Sad faces all around.

Would we, instead, try to find more money? You guys have been been very generous in the tip jar (thanks!) but this is a larger sum of money we were talking about. Asking a publisher for the money was out of the question because it would violate the spirit of the Kickstarter, and also, publishers. Going back to Kickstarter for it seemed wrong. Clearly, any overages were going to have to be paid by Double Fine, with our own money from the sales of our other games. That actually makes a lot of sense and we feel good about it. We have been making more money since we began self-publishing our games, but unfortunately it still would not be enough.

Then we had a strange idea. What if we made some modest cuts in order to finish the first half of the game by January instead of July, and then released that finished, polished half of the game on Steam Early Access? Backers would still have the option of not looking at it, of course, but those who were sick of waiting wouldn’t have to wait any more. They could play the first half of the game in January!

We were always planning to release the beta on Steam, but in addition to that we now have Steam Early Access, which is a new opportunity that actually lets you charge money for pre-release content. That means we could actually sell this early access version of the game to the public at large, and use that money to fund the remaining game development. The second part of the game would come in a free update a few months down the road, closer to April-May.

So, everybody gets to play the game sooner, and we don’t have to cut the game down drastically. Backers still get the whole game this way—nobody has to pay again for the second half.

And whatever date we start selling the early release, backers still have exclusive beta access before that, as promised in the Kickstarter.

I want to point out that Broken Age’s schedule changes have nothing to do with the team working slowly. They have been kicking ass and the game looks, plays, and sounds amazing. It’s just taking a while because I designed too much game, as I pretty much always do. But we’re pulling it in, and the good news is that the game’s design is now 100% done, so most of the unknowns are now gone and it’s not going to get any bigger.

With this shipping solution I think we’re balancing the size of the game and the realities of funding it pretty well. We are still working out the details and exact dates, but we’d love to hear your thoughts. This project has always been something we go through together and the ultimate solution needs to be something we all feel good about.

In the meantime, I’m hoping you are enjoying the documentary and like the progress you’re seeing on Broken Age. I’m really exciting about how it’s coming together, I can’t wait for you to see more of it, and I feel good about finally having a solid plan on how to ship it!

Thanks for reading,

Tim

So yeah, they've made a start on their current backers. Let's see how well they do getting more people on board.

Wings of Fire 07-03-2013 10:17 AM

I do not particularly mind buying two long games with high production values instead of one long game with high production values.

OANST 07-03-2013 11:28 AM

Thankfully, that's not even what's happening here. If you buy the first half of the game on Steam, you get the second half when it's finished at no additional cost.

Talking about asking for more money isn't exactly right. They aren't, really. They are selling the game to people who aren't backers. If these people want in on it early, they can buy it, play the first half, and know that their money is going towards finishing the game, which they will then be allowed to play when it comes out.

Varrok 07-03-2013 11:41 AM

And if the first part didn't sell well enough, what then?

Wings of Fire 07-03-2013 11:50 AM

:

()
Thankfully, that's not even what's happening here. If you by the first half of the game on Steam, you get the second half when it's finished at no additional cost.

Oh, well then.

Doublefine are such nice guys huh.

OANST 07-03-2013 12:31 PM

:

()
And if the first part didn't sell well enough, what then?

Then they will need to reevaluate.

Nate 07-03-2013 06:15 PM

People should listen to OANST. He knows what he's talking about.

For one thing, this happens in many projects. It's fundamental to project management (which I studied a little bit in uni) that projects always have issues of scope, time and money. Compromises always need to be made.

This happens even more in games than for other projects as they rarely have the scope fully planned out before production begins. And things often need to be changed in the middle of the process after playtesting provides feedback. While lots of gamers are looking at Double Fine and sneering, I'll bet that most game devs out there are looking on sympathetically because they've been there.

I'm actually quite impressed by this. I signed up for DFA expecting a short (1-2 hour) game. Now it seems like I'm getting something on the level of Grim Fandango or Full Throttle. This makes me happy.

Also, this isn't a matter of splitting the game in two and begging for more money. They've simply turned it in to an episodic game and are allowing people to buy it early. Seems like a good plan to me.

AlexFili 07-04-2013 12:46 AM

I think we'll see the rise of episodic gaming as it becomes more popular. It worked well for The Walking Dead.