Author bring crowdfunding of Divinity: Original Sin as a reason of Larian success, but truth is that ~$1,000,000 they collected is nowhere enough to make game like that. Though having this kind of investment from 20,000 fans can be enough of proof to secure 2-5x of extra funding to actually build game you promised.
Author also forgets what it takes to build fanbase of a size to even have this crowdfunding compaign. Larian was founded in 1996 and they did kickstarter for D:OS in 2013. Majority of game studios rarely live for 10 years even if they manage to release successful title.
I wont even start on the fact there been very short timeframe of Kickstarter hype. Today studio without a big name can barely get $100,000 and with current interest rate attracting extra investments is even harder because to make even very small game you need at least $200,000.
I talking from experience since I (with co-founders ofc) also trying to build game studio making original hardcore buy-to-play games. We already have not-so-indie team of 15 people, but our burnrate is laughtable compared to any VC startup.
Yet making games is extremely difficult business: you need a lot of highly skilled and motivated talent; budgets and deadlines are always insufficient; and even then making deals with publishers is hard and deal negotiation can easily take months while cash gap can easily kill you.
Building community big enough for successful crowdfunding will takes years and keeping people who give you money happy is almost impossible. Majority of developers from Kickstarter hype times failed miserably here. It's simply impossible goal to most game developers with tons of loyal fans, let alone some random SaaS startup.
> Like a lot of people, I’m deeply excited about what the lovely folks at Larian accomplished with Baldur’s Gate 3, but I want to gently, pre-emptively push back against players taking that excitement and using it to apply criticism or a “raised standard” to RPGs going forward."
This might be one of the most childish takes I have ever witnessed in the wild.
"hey, now don't expect quality, it's not like we can deliver it"
I'm not sure if this is rosey-colored nostalgia glasses, or just being jaded by the garbage that AAA studios have been putting out, but is BG3 actually raising the bar or is it returning to a bar long-forgotten?
Either way, the AAA take on Larian's success is extremely telling - especially some of the mocking/hostile takes. They aren't going to learn a damned thing.
It's a return, that's the most galling part. It's a great game, but it's not revolutionary or genre defining. The best part about bg3 is the things it's missing:
- no rmt
- doesn't require online connection
- no missing content loaded as dlc
- no apologies from the devs for pushing out an unfinished game...
After the many AAA trainwrecks this/last year, everyone should understand game development is hard and most games will likely suck. That's fair. But most games these days suck because they're actively made with anti-consumer practices as their foundation. That's not fair to consumers, and devs need to learn this lesson, because their corporate bosses won't.
Like it or not, but Star Citizen delivered exactly what majority of whales who donated millions into it wanted: spaceship garage simulator. Some people were happy to pay for their space ship "NFTs".
Ha! I very much doubt it delivered what they wanted, but they're prepared to pretend it's what they wanted because the alternative is to cry over how much money they wasted.
You could of course argue that the "unfair advantage" is the lack of shareholders who expect the studio to squeeze every last bit of profit out of the player base, but that's neither here nor there.
Problem is that you can't align work of art with "customer expectation" unless you funding book 9 of 10 in some series or someting like that. Your overall fantasy fans won't be able to explain what their expectations are and gamers are much much harder to satisfy...
Baldur’s Gate 3 is a truly great game. It’s interesting to discuss how that may or may not be replicated. Still, we’ve been going through years of mediocre cash grab after mediocre cash grab. So many beloved franchises have been basically ruined by monetization, and developers that either don’t care, or don’t have the freedom to care.
Knowing what gamers want isn’t hard. They want games that don’t suck. You might try to build something great, and only end up with something good. But if your only real passion is making money, then the games you make will never be “good” no matter how much money they make.
Larian's "unfair advantage" is that they have spent decades creating roleplaying games while avoiding falling into many video game industry "fads". And having a market which is full of potential customers, but almost empty of competition.
Readit News
Author also forgets what it takes to build fanbase of a size to even have this crowdfunding compaign. Larian was founded in 1996 and they did kickstarter for D:OS in 2013. Majority of game studios rarely live for 10 years even if they manage to release successful title.
I wont even start on the fact there been very short timeframe of Kickstarter hype. Today studio without a big name can barely get $100,000 and with current interest rate attracting extra investments is even harder because to make even very small game you need at least $200,000.
I talking from experience since I (with co-founders ofc) also trying to build game studio making original hardcore buy-to-play games. We already have not-so-indie team of 15 people, but our burnrate is laughtable compared to any VC startup.
Yet making games is extremely difficult business: you need a lot of highly skilled and motivated talent; budgets and deadlines are always insufficient; and even then making deals with publishers is hard and deal negotiation can easily take months while cash gap can easily kill you.
Building community big enough for successful crowdfunding will takes years and keeping people who give you money happy is almost impossible. Majority of developers from Kickstarter hype times failed miserably here. It's simply impossible goal to most game developers with tons of loyal fans, let alone some random SaaS startup.
This might be one of the most childish takes I have ever witnessed in the wild.
"hey, now don't expect quality, it's not like we can deliver it"
Either way, the AAA take on Larian's success is extremely telling - especially some of the mocking/hostile takes. They aren't going to learn a damned thing.
After the many AAA trainwrecks this/last year, everyone should understand game development is hard and most games will likely suck. That's fair. But most games these days suck because they're actively made with anti-consumer practices as their foundation. That's not fair to consumers, and devs need to learn this lesson, because their corporate bosses won't.
Then of course there's Star Citizen...
Brandon Sanderson was not lucky, he worked hard.
Companies should align product with customer expectation, the problem is when the product is shares of stock instead of the consumer product.
Knowing what gamers want isn’t hard. They want games that don’t suck. You might try to build something great, and only end up with something good. But if your only real passion is making money, then the games you make will never be “good” no matter how much money they make.
Oh wait…