Player numbers dropped?

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Ah, so it was the interest, not the money that was vital. Wish I'd know that at the time, my backing could have been considerably cheaper.

Hmm, so some say the money is vital, some say it is not! I wonder who is right?

If you'll pardon the cynicism, it was an exercise to shift the burden of risk from those who had control over the product (the developer) to those who had none (the KickStarter backer).

Does frontier strike you as the kind of company that would have spent whatever they did prototyping only to completely defer the go / no go decision to chance of random internet? Or would have canceled elite if the kickstarter didn't do well? I highly doubt it.

DB one referred to the kickstarter thing in 2016 i think as a marketing exercise. This sounds about right. Also note on the kickerstarter page, there's a whole chris roberts on there, so a friendly call between ceos.... Or before star citizen did its thing what you imagine db was thinking?

Leaving out the huge elephant.. as grey as i want to remain im inclined to give them a pass though because the backing rewards looked pretty damn good for the price. All 80+ people were granted free leppers too so that was nice.

From the first time i though about the question i never once imaged braben canceling elite if the kicktstarter failed.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

What 'risk'? It's not like you were entering into a 30 year loan agreement with your property as collateral.

He's actually correct. As someone that works in investment risk, I can tell you that this discription is apt.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

He's actually correct. As someone that works in investment risk, I can tell you that this discription is apt.

How so? You stumped up some cash to help further development of a product that did, in fact, get developed.

 

[Stigbob]

I think it's shameful conduct for a private company to ask for donations to build a product. Frontier weren't a start up with a new innovative product. They're a game developer looking for funding for a game to re-launch the business. The appropriate conduct would be a share issue. Instead you donated your money for them to grow their business and shareholders received the benefits of capital and dividend growth. It's not quite a ponzi scheme, but it's in that ballpark.

People had the opportunity to buy FDEV shares, back the game early or wait and buy in once development had progressed to the point the outcome was more concrete.

I'm in the third category and very happy with what I got, with hindsight I should have jumped on the first as well.

The angry types seem to be exclusively in the second.

Realistic expectations.

 

[Viajero]

I think it's shameful conduct for a private company to ask for donations to build a product. Frontier weren't a start up with a new innovative product. They're a game developer looking for funding for a game to re-launch the business. The appropriate conduct would be a share issue. Instead you donated your money for them to grow their business and shareholders received the benefits of capital and dividend growth. It's not quite a ponzi scheme, but it's in that ballpark.

While that logic is correct it is also worth mentioning that FDEV did both the crowdfund and the new share issue at the time. The new share finance I believe, and if I am not mistaken, was much larger than the Kickstarter amount. The crowdfund main objective was really to prove to investors that the market and demand for the game actually existed.

 

[amigacooke]

What 'risk'? It's not like you were entering into a 30 year loan agreement with your property as collateral.

It's not a big financial risk, but any KickStarter is a risk (as I found out a couple of times).

A KickStarter could be thought of as a form of blackmail, give us the money with virtually no strings attached or you won't even have a chance of getting this wonderful product.

Turf Accountants must love you, as by your definition of 'risk' betting holds no risks at all

 

[GreyAreaUK]

A KickStarter could be thought of as a form of blackmail

No. No it really, really couldn't except by twisting the definition beyond its breaking point.

 

[DeletedUser191218]

How so? You stumped up some cash to help further development of a product that did, in fact, get developed.

Backers didn't know it would be developed at the time. The risk was that they donated money and the development failed. If shareholders had absorbed all that risk it would have been an idiosyncratic risk to share price. Instead they expected unknowing people to take the risk instead. The fact the risk didn't crystallize doesn't mean it never existed.

 

[amigacooke]

You are forgetting some of the kickstarters think they are the Board of FD, with all voting and veto rights

Whereas, they are giving money with virtually no strings attached and no legal recourse. I don't reckon many financial advisers would have that down as a good risk

 

[GreyAreaUK]

The risk was that they donated money and the development failed.

So, a fairly normal Kickstarter deal then?

And aren't Kickstarter owners obliged to refund the money if they can't create the product?

 

[amigacooke]

No. No it really, really couldn't except by twisting the definition beyond its breaking point.

That's probably why I removed it from the original post as a distraction from the main point.

 

[M00ka]

Whereas, they are giving money with virtually no strings attached and no legal recourse. I don't reckon many financial advisers would have that down as a good risk

The only risk was a self imposed risk by the ones who donated the money. No one forced them, no outlandish offers were made, each and every one of those who donated knew exactly what they were getting into. If they didn't know, then the only entity they can blame is themselves.

As for the reaction of financial advisers, unless there were terrible at their job (or crooks), their advice would have been not to get involved with any kickstarter program, whether it was for a new computer game or the latest perpetual motion engine. There are no guarantees with a kickstarter, just look at that other game that can't be mentioned, they will never stop asking for money and will never finalise the game because if they do, their gravy train dries up.

 

[babelfisch]

Frontier misled from the off. They gave the impression the money was vital, but it appears it was not.

If the Kickstarter failed they probably would not have developed the game because it's clear there is no interest in it. The money also certainly helped development. That doesn't mean that the game is sponsored by Kickstarter though.

Ah, so it was the interest, not the money that was vital. Wish I'd know that at the time, my backing could have been considerably cheaper.

Hmm, so some say the money is vital, some say it is not! I wonder who is right?

If you'll pardon the cynicism, it was an exercise to shift the burden of risk from those who had control over the product (the developer) to those who had none (the KickStarter backer).

The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, which coincidentally is what I am saying.

Didn't the KickStarter shift the burden of risk, at the very least partially, to those who had no means of mitigating that risk? i.e. You and me?

When I bought Elite and Frontier, there was no discernable risk, I parted with the cash and got the product. To get Elite Dangerous, I had to, apparently, risk the entirety of the cash, with virtually no guarantee. And that was because those best placed to judge the viability of the product wouldn't take that risk.

Perhaps I'm not the only one who has already made up their mind?

No, simply because the amount of risk is in different dimensions. Frontier risked going bankrupt, David Braben risked the work of his life. Kickstarters risked a few pounds. I know that some people spend ridiculous amounts of money, but there is nobody they can blame but themselves. IIRC that includes you. So thanks for supporting the game, it certainly helped!

 

[amigacooke]

The only risk was a self imposed risk by the ones who donated the money. No one forced them, no outlandish offers were made, each and every one of those who donated knew exactly what they were getting into. If they didn't know, then the only entity they can blame is themselves.

Have a look at the KickStarter and see if you can find anywhere where it indicates that this is just a marketing exercise. The point is that backers, as far as my memory can recall, truly believed that Frontier needed the cash to make it happen. Look at the comments and see how many people were increasing their pledges because they feared the KickStarter might not succeed and therefore, Elite IV would not happen.

No-one knew what they were getting into, they didn't have full possession of the facts.

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

Is anyone noticing a marked drop in players? Just noticed a convo in my player group's discord where the guy has tried a few groups and found people are quitting the game. My group is the same (I'm also on hiatus). I know we don't have official numbers but just wondered what others' anecdotal experience has been recently. I hope FDev haven't really misjudged this 2020 announcement.....

I think you should take a step back and think about what you are saying.

You sound like its the end of the world if people play other games. It will happen for EVERYONE to EVERY game. ED is not a second life, its a pleasure thing. Sometimes you feel like it and sometimes you dont. I haven't played ED for some time now... not because I hate the game or are angry that we have to wait for the next big update. I just dont feel like spaceships right now. But maybe tomorrow.

Oh, and the number of people that leaves communities because they dont get their will on forums are never that high.

 

[amigacooke]

How so? You stumped up some cash to help further development of a product that did, in fact, get developed.

Indeed, and then it got shut down (if you were a macOS user)

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Indeed, and then it got shut down (if you were a macOS user)

Ah, now there we're in agreement. The state (and future) of OpenGL on the Mac had been obvious for at least two major OS releases. Frontier could (and should, IMHO) have started re-tooling for Metal. They'd already coded (or were coding) for two different graphics libraries apart from OpenGL, so another one wouldn't have been impossible.

But that's a whole other sack of badgers.


[Edit: originally said three different graphics libraries, but Xbox is probably using something akin to DirectX, so basically the same as PC]

 

[Viajero]

Have a look at the KickStarter and see if you can find anywhere where it indicates that this is just a marketing exercise. The point is that backers, as far as my memory can recall, truly believed that Frontier needed the cash to make it happen. Look at the comments and see how many people were increasing their pledges because they feared the KickStarter might not succeed and therefore, Elite IV would not happen.

No-one knew what they were getting into, they didn't have full possession of the facts.

I don’t think anyone really had all the facts at hand, even if they were available so I may very well be wrong. But I do not think it would be too far fetched to imagine that the success of the Kickstarter was indeed as critical as you state.

No so much for the funds, if I am not mistaken most of the vanilla game dev costs were shouldered by FDEV’s funds not the Kickstarters’, but because in order to secure equity finance they needed that Kickstarter success to sell to investors that the market and demand existed in the first place.

 

[amigacooke]

No, simply because the amount of risk is in different dimensions. Frontier risked going bankrupt, David Braben risked the work of his life.

If Elite Dangerous was going to take Frontier down anyway, why get all the KickStarter backers to share this risk as well?

Plus how did companies establish interest in a game before KickStarter? Or did they all just take a punt?

 

[TheSynopticVision]

There are also people who "complain" because they like ED so much.
ED was my goto game, my number one game and although I'm burned out at the moment I still think it's the best spacegame out there.
It's just that I'm getting tired of Fdev's half baked ideas they put in the game, nothing is realy full fletched and this leads to frustration and fatigue.
I want ED to become better then ever but knowing Fdev most things don't get worked out properly before they introduce something new.
Now they're announcing the biggest thing ever, by now my expectations have sunk into an abys of unfinished ideas but they keep on hammering how exciting this new big thing is going to be,.....again.

Now they want me to wait eighteen months for another thing that will be the greatest since sliced bread but nope were not gonna tell you what it is, just wait it'll be great,..again.
ED might still be the best spacegame out there but it could've been so much better, being the best out there doesn't mean it can still be mediocre.

If it's gonna end this way, so be it, I had my share of fun with the game and well my money's worth but I'd rather be excited with fdev for what's coming and see ED become not only the best available but also the best imaginable.
Keeping players out of the loop is in my opinion not a good way to keep your customers excited.

This should be pinned at the beginning of every thread like this.

"If you don't like the game why don't you just leave" -- ask the WKs. Well, for this reason right here. Because being critical of the game, ideally, is meant to be a way to help the game (the developers) improve, and raise above the level of half-bakedness it dwells in. Of course, it might very well be that we're wasting our breath, and that nothing that gets said here has any impact whatsoever on development (and the experience with the "Focused Feedback" forums shows that very little is indeed taken onboard). Call us idealists, dreamers.

But the fact remains that to go "Thank you oh thank you Lord Braben this is flawless" every time a bug-ridden and half-thought addition to the game (or the latest god-awful paintpack) drops is not helping the game. It is helping Frontier's financial report, sure. But not helping the game.