Take a look at the Double Fine thread if you want to read the debate. :) It was a lively one.

Actually now I'm annoyed about the possible me-to parade this has created that will end with pages upon pages of kickstarter press releases from legit game companies trying to show off how "indie" they are.

Yeah, went through this in the last thread. They're still going to be able to sell the game as pure profit to others since the development costs are essentially bought and paid for already. My feelings on this "good-will" investing (some call it donating, whatever) to companies probably isn't going to change. Those that "donate" get what they want out of it while the for-profit company gets to essentially make money at no real cost to themselves.

And then they will sell it through Steam which will have it for sale at some point for even less than what people paid through Kickstarter.

But, as long as they're getting a product in return, that's pretty much exactly what would happen anyway. Do you understand how a company works? You sell a product, get the money for that product from your customers, and use the profit to make and develop more product.

Now, if the contributors aren't getting anything in return, then sure, I'm not on board either, it's a business, not a charity. I'm not giving you $10 so you can make $100, unless I'm at least getting that $10 back.

I think the whole thing gets caught up on definitions. Kickstarter calls it "donations" because that's what they're legally allowed to call it and because it absolves all parties of liability for making sure projects follow through.

That's the only part I don't like. As long as people are paying money, and getting product commensurate with their payment, I don't mind at all. Where it gets fuzzy is in those projects and donation levels where it's not, and in the lack of guarantee that any of the promised product will actually be delivered.

What a horrible burden to bear. :)

In exchange for waiting months or years before getting to play the game, which is the same for traditionally funded titles.

The kind of people who are willing to donate to this project are the kind that probably don't want to wait for a sale price.

I recently played the game for the first time, and I am at the point where I need to do the final mission and that is it. The game at times can play absolutely beautifully. Run, gun, fight. It can play at amazingly well. I can churn through huge groups of enemies low end and big end and just keep going, for rooms on end. Then the next set of 'rooms' I die over and over and over in the same friggin room and the room will just be simple goblins.

I like the story, I like the game. It can just be incredibly frustrating at times.

There is a me-too aspect but that's driven by developers not being able to make what they want.

Look, they have some of the senior people from Troika.

You motherfuckers do a Vampire game, okay? Then you can shut up and take my money.

Yeah, but EVERY videogame goes on sale at some point if you wait long enough. The game also wouldn't EXIST if the kickstarter project fails.

I'm hoping that Obsidian does something small, and basically built to be satisfying for THEM and not giving a shit about market-appeal, sort of what Double Fine is doing as well.

We will see how of this shakes out - but Shaefer and co have a history of legendary games and current competence. I haven't given them any money primarily because point-and-click adventures were not my favorites; my nostagia goes to text adventures.

There are a lot of "past greats" out there who did really well 15 or so years ago that have not shown their competence in recent years. If they were working on a smaller "indie" canvas then the story might have been different. I am sure a whole lot of folks are going to jump on this bandwagon and try it for themselves, and some are going to be a big fail. I also would be suspecting that some big pubs or some former devs with money might try this and I hope that their requests gets roundly ignored by the community.

I remember some other indie trying something similar before - but the kicker was that you were not promised the game unless you gave a much larger chunk of change (if it ever came out that is). I don 't remember the game involved or the indie company. I do remember reading the website and thinking very ugly thoughts.

An open alternative to Kickstarter?: Crowdtilt.

Weren't people down on Brutal Legend?

Yes ... but some people liked it. I despised the demo. From what I read it was a weird hybrid, but it was complete and polished. But before that he did many legendary products and after that all of the double-fine smaller games seem to have turned out rather well.

One somewhat-problematic game does not erase years of high quality classics. Doublefine's games over the past 10 years may have been hit and miss, but Tim Schaefer and Ron Gilbert are industry celebrities for a reason.

Costume Quest was awesome.

Brutal Legend is in my top five of this generation. I understand I'm in the minority, but I absolutely love that game.

I loved the demo. Sold my 360 before playing the full version. If it came out on PC I'd pick it up.

The Kickstarter Train has another passenger: Brian Fargo, creator of Wasteland, the post-apocalyptic grand-daddy of Fallout.

Brian is hoping to create a new Wasteland game with an old-school vibe. He's looking to hit the million dollar mark from fan funding.

Despite Double Fine's phenomenal success, I think Fargo is reaching a bit too high. His reputation is not as high as Schafer and Gilbert's, and he's looking to make a game which fits into an even smaller niche than an old-school graphic adventure. Plus he doesn't have the novelty value that DF did for being the first big game company to try Kickstarter.

I wish them luck, but I think we'll already see the first big company to fail to meet their funding goal.

You know, I'm surprised Lorne Lanning hasn't been on here.