Adventure Game Studio

I'm starting to wonder what's happening with the DFA.  There have been no real updates for months and the last couple of videos were pretty depressing.  They had managed to go overbudget!  I must admit, I didnt see that happenning, considering they got 8 times as much as their target amount.  I think maybe the fact that they had literally not even started designing the game might have proven to be a bad idea, because they then started embarking upon a 3+million dollar project when we had in fact backed a 400,000 dollar project.  Obviously with that much extra money, you would have thought they could make a bigger and better game than planned, but of course they didn't have a game planned in the first place... so what should have been a lovely financial cushion, has just been a bigger budget nightmare.

Also, I'm not sure what I was expecting, but I'm a tad disappointed that Ron Gilbert has not appeared to have had any creative input on the DFA at all.  Obviously he has been busy working on The Cave, which I haven't played yet, but looks great.  But I think many people in the early days of the DFA Kickstarter campaign had been fantasizing about a Schafer/Gilbert adventure.  That's partly why I pledged (though I'm sure I would have anyway).  It was only at the KS countdown party, when Gilbert literally poked his head into the room, put a shoe on his head and then left the party to go back to working on The Cave, that I started to wonder what his involvement in DFA would be.  Once The Cave's release (and all the PR that comes with it) has blown over, Gilbert might actually join the DFA team.  I really hope so.

The lesson from this is that you should spend your game's budget on making the game, rather than on making a TV series about making the game...

Well, to be fair, the budgets for the documentary and the game are supposed to be separate, and filming of the development was an important part of the original pitch. And the game itself wasn't supposed to be that big a deal - just a short lovely exercise in nostalgia. Obviously, getting all that sweet cash changed the situation quite drastically, and we can't really be too upset about the fact that they've decided to spend all the money on the game instead of writing off everything above 400K as profit. They've been overbudget many times before, so I'm sure they'll manage somehow. :)

Quote from: AGA on Thu 28/02/2013 15:57:37
The lesson from this is that you should spend your game's budget on making the game, rather than on making a TV series about making the game...

Agreed- I just hope they get their stuff together and make a game instead of swimming in money and disappointed donators.

In all fairness, though, The Cave is wicked cool.

I went to the DF Cave livestream, and it seemed that Ron Gilbert wanted to rest for a bit after The Cave. There's an archive of the stream up on the DF Game Club page. (http://www.twitch.tv/dfgameclub/videos). The lack of updates can seem frustrating, but we wanted to see real game development and this is what it's like.

Hehe, I tweeted Tim and some others asking if they had any news/clues.  And got a response from the man himself.
Not a very useful response, mind you, but who care's! Tim Schafer replied to me (https://twitter.com/StuartForbes/status/307230983218946048). That'll do. :)

I think they ported Brutal Legends to the PC to make some extra cash, I think it's selling well, it was top seller on Steam for a while so that's good news.

Quote from: Stupot+ on Thu 28/02/2013 22:05:06
Hehe, I tweeted Tim and some others asking if they had any news/clues.  And got a response from the man himself.
Not a very useful response, mind you, but who care's! Tim Schafer replied to me (https://twitter.com/StuartForbes/status/307230983218946048). That'll do. :)

I know that probably a lot of people have been asking him about DFA, but there has been a lack of updates, so the impression I get from these replies makes him sound like a bit of a douche.
Not to mention how two of his minions joined in on what I can assume is immature mocking.  :undecided:

Which two minions, Anian? I can only see Anna's and Tim's responses.
Anna kindly informing me that we will be able to click on things.  Thanks for that.

I sometimes have a hard time knowing whether or not people are taking the piss out of me, especially online, so I try to assume they're not, and just being playful.  But it does make me wonder if they actually do have anything new worth telling us about.  Anything would do: 'we have implemented 5 new rooms', 'we have designed the title screen', just give us an idea that you've actually been working on it.

Also, notice how Tim seems to be subtley blaming 2PP (the team making the documentary) for the lack of updates.  He says 'Look 2PP, you're literally killing this guy'.  Well, Tim, I actually don't care too much about the documentary.  I mainly wanted an update from someone on the actual project.

Oh well, if they have been working on porting Brutal Legend to the PC in order to help fund the DFA, then I guess you can't argue with that.

Quote from: Stupot+ on Fri 01/03/2013 11:25:16
Which two minions, Anian? I can only see Anna's and Tim's responses.
Anna kindly informing me that we will be able to click on things.  Thanks for that.

Ah sorry, noticed Greg Ricey (DF programmer) there as well. Maybe that's actually Tim poking a DFA assigned producer to work quicker. :grin: This is an interview from a year ago http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YAaEA6XOz0 (they planned on making it in 6 months, of course it'll be bigger than that since they got a lot more money, but still shows how much time they planned) so if there's still nothing made, it seems weird.
But in any case the tweet is oddly written and draging in 2PP just makes it confusing.

And yes they've been busy porting Brutal legend, but I seriously doubt they need that money for DFA, I'd rather think it was the other way around.

Quote from: Stupot+ on Fri 01/03/2013 11:25:16
Well, Tim, I actually don't care too much about the documentary.  I mainly wanted an update from someone on the actual project.
Anything would do: 'we have implemented 5 new rooms', 'we have designed the title screen', just give us an idea that you've actually been working on it.

why not tweet this?!

Stu I don't think they were making fun of you I think they were just being playful. Pretty good you got a reply, even if it's not the one you were looking for.

Quote from: selmiak on Fri 01/03/2013 12:31:22

Quote from: Stupot+ on Fri 01/03/2013 11:25:16
Well, Tim, I actually don't care too much about the documentary.  I mainly wanted an update from someone on the actual project.
Anything would do: 'we have implemented 5 new rooms', 'we have designed the title screen', just give us an idea that you've actually been working on it.

why not tweet this?!

I imagine Tim wouldn't want this sort of info out there on Twitter. It should be restricted to the DFA backers-only forum I guess.

DF haven't hid from the fact that this game could completely flop. So having the documentary is actually a great idea. If it does fail, heaven forbid, we'll be sure to have an interesting and insightful film witnessing the whole thing.

Of course like everybody else, I want it to succeed and to have a great adventure game to play. I trust Tim, he's a proven game writer and he looks to have a good business head on him. I'm sure he'll deliver.

To be honest I purchased DFA mostly to be able to watch that production documentary and I feel like I got my money's worth already.

I really loved listening to Tim's insights about the designs of DOTT, Full Throttle and Grim Fandango, as well as seeing how the ex-Lucasarts/Double-Fine artists live and work. The production and planning problems that the project suffered through so far were also incredibly interesting. For example, the way they didn't anticipate how making a game of such and such size and such and such budget will suffer from having one very particular lead artist (Beagel).

The docs are excellently made and have great humor to boot. The game itself might end up being super fun as well, but it's difficult to desire something that wasn't even a concept back when the kickstarter campaign started.

I couldn't pledge in that project, but after getting interested in the subject, I've read a few forums and it looks like they really aren't over budget.

It looks like in one of the videos, Tim Schafer made a projection and concluded that their current design document had too many things, and implementing all of them could cause them to get over budget before the game could be finished. So, he cut off some features, and mentioned he was going to look for other sources of funding to keep the cuts at minimum. So, there is no reason to worry here. :smiley:

Quote from: Stupot+ on Fri 01/03/2013 11:25:16
Well, Tim, I actually don't care too much about the documentary.  I mainly wanted an update from someone on the actual project.

Isn't that partly what the documentaries are for? Giving the constant updates so that the actual dev team can concentrate on development? They seem to be giving updates in those regularly enough- until the last month, when they mentioned beforehand that that month's documentary would be skipped out because they were all working on Amnesia Fortnight, and now a new episodes is expected soon. From the documentary episodes themselves, I think I have a vague picture of how things were (in terms of like you said, "this many rooms, this many areas completed") at least up until January this year.

The individual team members were also giving specific updates on stuff they were working on, which has somewhat slowed now (last one in November?), I guess that means they're too busy working on it to write about it?

Like Ascovel, I feel like I've almost made my money back with the documentary episodes alone :D.

One of the chaps from 2PP has just posted this in the Double Fine forums

QuoteHey guys, I don't have the ability to update the official Doc Status post from this account, but I just wanted to address something about episode 8 real quick:

First, sorry to have missed the initial release projection. It's a fluid process and we needed to wait for a certain event to take place before we could tie up the episode in a meaningful way. We just wrapped shooting a little over two weeks ago and the episode has been cut. It's currently being color corrected and having its audio mixed this weekend. Typically, these are the last two things we do just before an episode airs so an update should be coming very soon. For what it's worth, this installment is nearly 40 minutes long and covers a lot of ground. We think it will have been worth the wait. Thanks for understanding. Back to color correcting I go.

That's good to know, and it sounds like it might be worth the wait. I'll shut up about it for now, but I do think the occasional briefest of hellos once in a while wouldn't hurt, regardless of the status of the documentary.

Feel better now?

Quote from: Snarky on Fri 08/03/2013 00:15:10
Feel better now?

Much :D
Just finished watching the new episode. It does seem that they've managed to get a fair bit of game-making done during the silent period. Consider the gagging thing cured (for now).

I do still hope we get more in the way of art/technical posts from the dev team, though. They have been really fascinating. Although, it's possible they won't do any more, seeing as they were mostly about the 'lumberjack' test game, which I guess they're no longer wasting time on at this stage.

Well, Gilbert has left Double Fine now. Looks like he was only really there to make The Cave, now he's off to pursue other avenues to create games. I guess it looks unlikely he'll be involved with the DFA project now, but you never know.

http://grumpygamer.com/2304836

Wow, so they really had no intention of having him involved in DFA whatsoever.  That was a little bit sneaky of them, was it not?

I don't think they ever claimed that there would be a lot of involvement from Ron. Even the main kickstarter video hinted at that when Tim went to talk to him and Ron shut the door on him. They did have him involved in a video that was shot before the kickstarter started. They may have gotten input from him here and there, but nothing they've shown publicly beyond that. Again I think they made it clear that Ron's involvement would be minimal (because of his work on The Cave).

I'm sad to see Ron leaving Double Fine, but I'm guessing his work on The Cave may have been contract work for him from the start. Also I don't think his leaving is going to cause a problem for the game, as the game design is done and his involvement would have been (and has been somewhat) in the design phase.

I'm also glad to see some progress being made.  The last update gave me some hope that the project is moving along.  Behind schedule and projected to be slightly over budget (like most games), but nothing that makes me "extremely worried". I know this project is extremely important to them (as it's highly visible and their reputation is on the line), so they are going to do all they can to make it happen.

I really hoped we'd get more story stuff, they're too afraid to 'spoil' anything. Show us like, some gameplay, like the test footage with hispter lumberjack.

Modify is broke for some reason... Anyways Ron left??? I never expected him to work on DFA but leaving Double Fine? He seems like a hard person to work with considering all the crap that went on at Hothead games.

It's now called Broken... :O

http://brokenagegame.com

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/69ck29/double-fine-adventure-double-fine-adventure--part-1

Quote from: Ascovel on Sun 24/03/2013 19:23:23
It's now called Broken... :O

http://brokenagegame.com

So they went for that one, then?  It was either that, Worlds Apart or The Divide, none of which seemed overly inspired.  It's great that things are clearly moving forward though, since the winter lull.

I kind of like "Broken Age". I think that one could grow on me. It is nice to see they are moving forward. Did they ever mention what the new release date was now? Originally it was going to be in April, but I remember them saying it would go past that.

Look's like they are still trying to get more pre-orders for the game on the new game site (http://brokenagegame.com (http://brokenagegame.com)). I'm guessing they hope this will makeup for the projected shortfall on the budget.

The official website is now showing the game's trailer.

And the trailer for Jane Jensen's kickstarted Mobius also debuted at GDC:
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/a4cum2/jane-jensen-s-moebius-exclusive-trailer

The only thing I don't like about the trailer is the music, it seems like it's imitating Braid, and it's so close to that sound Braid has but they drop it before the notes get there. Also that last cut with the train is really bad and doesn't cut right with the music and blow animation.

My own impressions are very good, but one thing that bothers me is that the music creates an air of mystery and tension, while the scenes that are presented seem rather straightforward and innocent. The closest to "creepy" that the scenes went was the girl feeling uncomfortable with her happy family and the fairly creepy faces of the toys in the train.

From the development point of view I like that the trailer is just an intriguing teaser and DF didn't bother with spending production time on some extravaganza, but are already back to working on the game itself. The behind the scenes documentary probably steals a lot of their time anyway.

I quite like the trailer. And it somehow makes me feel more comfortable with the name, which I didn't really like at first.

[I'd actually forgotten about Jane Jensen's project.  That whole weird time-share-scheme-sounding Kickstarter was a (successful) mess]

I've been quite disappointed in how the art style for Broken Age is being received by adventure game fans.* Lots of "Too childish!!" and "Why doesn't it look like Monkey Island?!!!!"

Bagel's art isn't my favorite style in the world, but I had hoped people would be a bit more open-minded. Comments on mainstream sites seem much more positive.


* I'm mainly talking about Adventure Gamers here, and to a much lesser extent Adventure Treff. Most of the other forums I checked were either dead (Adventure Lantern, Adventure Island), or didn't seem to have any discussions about DFA (e.g. Mix'n'Mojo, AdventureClassicGaming). I also checked the forums for a bunch of adventure game companies, but didn't find anything relevant.

I must admit, I was kind of disappointed by the art as well. Not because it does pull a bit much to a child's picture book, but mostly because the whole thing was kind of a huge shift of what I was thinking about this project. Naively I too thought 3 million dollars is rather a lot of money for this type of game, but DF is a studio full of full-time professionals and those people need to be paid regularly and they have to be kept busy along with all the costs of having a work space with all the tools they need...that kind of means they have rather little time to make this game and we really don't know how big this game will be in the end.
Also what I gathered from the videos, Schaffer has so much things on his back managing the company, even though he is kind of "living the dream", I really don't envy him that much.

What was kind of weird was hearing some "issues" that animators and others say they have to face and then seeing what the product looks like in the end (the small amount of gameplay they showed), which apparently means I really don't know anything, because some of those things I think a pro with experience and in that technique can do rather fast. Not only that, but they're working in an engine they customized and have previously worked in.

Now in general I like the style they went for, only thing is that anybody who, at any point, saw posters or sketches connected to DF products (Psychonauts, Brutal, Costume Q, Stacking) will see that it's the same style over and over again. And it is kind of a fairy tale illustration type of style, which I generally like, but this is now not a stylized sketch/illustration but the final look.
When they did the remake of MI, they did a similar thing with the character animation and while it looked ok, it certainly was missing some flow and details of hand animated work.

I do like the fact that the old Grim fandango maestro is on the job as well.

Sorry Anian. I'm having trouble decoding what you're actually saying about the art. You think it... looks cheap? Unfinished, more like concept art than the finished look?

Personally, it's that latter point I particularly like. I usually think concept art looks much more interesting than the final product (particularly when it's reduced to 3D polygons), and it seems like tools and tech are now at a point where more of that texture can be captured in the final game.

I do agree that some of the production problems they've mentioned surprised me. Particularly some of the crashes that cropped up in their internal playtesting, which sounded to me like engine (rather than scripting) bugs. Aren't their tools more robust?

I like the style, but it kind of lacks impression of quality when animated.

I quite liked the fact that Schafer chose an artist whose art he likes and decided the whole game should be in that style. Bagels art is lovely.  Is it what I would call 'game art'? Not really. But who am I to decide that?  I think the art does somewhat reflect the (little) info we have on the floaty, spacey atmosphere of the game.  So hopefully it will work well.  A small thing I have noted though is that it doesn't look like a funny game.  Not that I particularly want, or expect a funny game.  It's just that Schafer and others have always said that there are jokes and that it is funny, but to me the art doesn't really reflect that in the same way that Grim Fandango, for example, did.

I also don't think the character animation is anything to write home about, but I do very much like the kind of parralax effect they have got going.  It works really well.

I might be wrong, but I got the impression from the documentaries they originally hired Peter Chan to come up with initial concepts, asked Bagel to recreate them in his style, and then he very politely suggested that he would rather be coming up with concepts rather than colouring in somebody else's work.  So I'm not sure how many of Chan's concepts remain in the final product and I'm scared to know how much Kickstarter money went into paying for him, haha.

Are you kidding me?

It's exactly how I thought/hoped a 2D adventure game by Double Fine would look. What, did people expect low res or something? I really don't get how anybody is surprised at how it looks.

Me neither.

I actually wondered if it could be just one guy posting surprised comments under different nicks.

I like the art style. The animation is kind of off, though-- too tweeny.

http://davidoreilly.com/post/44683359919/timing
http://davidoreilly.com/post/44808009355/this-is-a-simple-motion-diagram-thing-i-made-when

Here's a couple neat links that illustrate how much of a difference frame timing makes in animation.

I quite like the graphics even if it's not embracing me fully, so to speak.

The issues they are having on the tech side sounds like normal professional game development. I've worked with a few proprietary in-house engines and what most people don't realize is they are usually not as polished and nice to use as AGS or Unity. Usually they are in some kind of half-broken state throughout development patched together with band-aid until the last couple of months or so when someone finally realizes the game has to be released at some point. Also, there's quite often not documentation available, and if there is it's going to be dated and incorrect.

The impression I get from watching the videos is that their hearts aren't completely in it, but that is just the regular fatigue and burn out that's kicked in. Still, looking forward to playing the game! I'm sure it's going to be fun.

Just saw this at RPS and I can't believe it.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/07/03/broken-age-needs-more-money-tries-steam-early-access/

I did not contribute to that campaign, but If I had I would be really pissed!

I don't understand the backlash. The game's not getting significantly cut down, nobody has to double-pay, it's just getting Kill Bill'd. Backers will get both parts for what they've already paid. The release of Part 1 will attract sales from new people who were never backers, hopefully enough to fund Part 2 to its completion.

What I don't understand is the assumption that it's going to be an preview-release of an unfinished game. Wouldn't it make more sense to release it as the PART ONE OF A THRILLING ADVENTURE to attract as many new sales as possible? Isn't this model already established in other episodic games, not to mention comic books, films and books?

Side note: Despite the troublesome stuff, this was one of the most thrilling updates so far, for me. See, up until now I was worried that the game was going to be a bit small...

Spoiler

They've only focused on two environments (cloud town and the spaceship) so the game felt a little bit limited. But in this update, there's a bit where they talk about other locales: sandcastle town, forest, pyramid...

[close]

The budget and scope issues they're having seem to indicate that this is going to be a full length, proper adventure. Like the old days.

To anyone who's reading this thread but didn't back the Kickstarter:
I wanna stress that the documentary is wonderful, and very honest and fascinating. I always drop what I'm doing when a new episode comes out. You can still get in on it (and the game itself, of course) for $30, and it's worth every penny: http://www.doublefine.com/dfapay

Quote from: Mati256 on Wed 03/07/2013 01:15:34
Just saw this at RPS and I can't believe it.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/07/03/broken-age-needs-more-money-tries-steam-early-access/

I did not contribute to that campaign, but If I had I would be really pissed!

It's a little upsetting. There's Shadowrun Returns that's coming out this month, had a Kickstart the same time and they got a million less, the game has more art and a lot more written dialogue it seems. And the studio looks smaller...

So there's one thing I'm not getting. They say that following the original design, the first half would be done by July 2014, and the whole thing some time in 2015. Then they make "some modest cuts" to get the first half ready by January 2014. OK... but then they say the second half "would come in a free update a few months down the road, closer to April-May." Are they still talking 2014? How will they manage to cut the development time of the second half by that much? (At least 50%)

I'm a patient guy, so I don't care too much about delays, and I'm happy that DoubleFine is finding ways to raise the money they need while honoring the original Kickstarter commitments they made. (As a backer, I really have no idea why I would be angry about this.) But I hope the plan is actually realistic, and they'll be able to execute the vision and game design in a satisfactory way on the schedule and budget they now have.

I should go watch the latest video update...

They probably figure they're gonna run out of money early next year and have to work less hours, or with fewer people, thus taking longer. Revenue from Part One would let the full team work full time and finish Part Two.

Still don't get why they're releasing Part One as a "pre-release beta" on some Steam offshoot, or whatever it is. Is that going to make enough dough?

QuoteI don't understand the backlash.

Because this is bad news for crowd funding in general. When the fourth most successful video gaming kickstarter in history, the most well known, the one that launched the trend, announces that it ran out of money after they got eight time more than they originally asked, it casts a looming shadow of doubt and failure over every other kickstarters, whether they're funded or to be announced. And it's especially worse in this context of kickstarter fatigue where people want to see some actual results after an entire year of backing projects.

And it's a point and click adventure game we're talking about here, it can't be this costly to produce an adventure game, if an adventure game fails with three million in funding, what about all of these non linear, open world roleplaying games that harken back to the glory days of Baldur's Gates, Fallout 2, Planescape: Torment and Jagged Alliance 2 that were funded with kickstarter, games with more epic scope, games that requires much more testing, coding, branching conversation trees and animations? A simple point and click adventure game failing with three millions is bad news for everyone who backed all of these roleplaying games. Double Fine are lucky the linear nature of adventure games allow them to save face by cutting the game in half because I know plenty of projects that won't have this luxury should they fail this bad.

At least this sends a big "Don't screw this up like they did" message to every other projects out there and we have Leisure Suit Larry and Shadowrun Returns later this month to cushion the impact of this bad news. But yes, this is bad.

I understand that the immediate impression from the outside isn't favorable: "They raised 8 times as much money as they asked for, and now they're saying it's only enough to finish a quarter/half the game?" But really that's not fair. They didn't have a design in place when they started the campaign, they came up with something once they saw how much money they had. In principle, they would have had every right to make the $400,000 game (less Kickstarter fees, rewards and documentary costs) they promised and just pocket the rest of the money, but instead they decided to put every cent (and then some, as it turns out) into development.

OK, going $6 million or whatever over budget on a $3 million game is still not that impressive, but I take that to mean they've been really ambitious and tried to make the game as great as possible. (And ultimately, that means backers are going to get a better game for the money they pledged.) Blame Tim Schafer's imagination and inability to constrain himself if you want, but I don't see any evidence that Double Fine has irresponsibly or incompetently wasted much of the money, which would justify a backlash. Sure, they screwed up on some things, but that's to be expected on any project.

The important point is that the project hasn't failed, and they're still promising that backers will get the full game. Hopefully they'll actually be able to raise enough money by this scheme to deliver on that.

And if this is a wakeup call for some people about the risks, difficulties and resources it takes to make a professional computer game, and that some campaigns may be unrealistic, I see that as a good thing.

I keep seeing crazy numbers thrown around. Do they actually clearly state in the video what the total budget they need is? I thought it was 6 million total.

This doesn't really bother me. The thing that worries me is the idea that a lot of people might be unwilling to trust Tim Schafer on further projects after this. It's silly, yet admirable that he wants to make this giant game... Ohhhh man...

In hindsight, I think they really ought to have had a game written and started before launching. Of course that would have been  less exciting and might not have caused the hype or raised the money that it did, but at least they would have actually had a clue from the start. As a backer I'm just looking forward to the game whenever and however it comes, but this situation is quite an embarrassment for all concerned. :-/

I'd definitely prefer a nice full not-cut game to be released rather than something with a ton missing, so I don't really mind waiting a little longer. I've waited this long, and I've had the documentary episodes to keep me company (I wonder how they will be funding this, though :D). They keep throwing around "Steam", but I hope their "first part" release won't be exclusive to that.

Trouble is with saying they should have designed it all first is that they'd have to pay for the designers somehow, even Tim Schafer will get paid and that money has to come from somewhere. Staff will be assigned to a project and their wages will get allocated from that project's funds, otherwise publisher X will want to know why the staff they pay for aren't working on their game.

It takes money to make money. And when you own a business and want it to thrive, you don't count the hours you invest in it. I don't think they should have planned every details, but they should have made a plan.

I'm gonna stop talking about it because it boggles my mind, and I'd rather not taint my enjoyment of the game with stories like this.

This really sounds insane to me. 3M dollars isn't enough to make a point&click adventure game?
Who's getting his pockets full?

Daedalic made nearly all if not all their games under a 3M budget combined. Double Fine, y u do dis.

Grim Fandango was 4 million, adjusted for inflation. Keep in mind that after Kickstarter's cut, the documentary budget, taxes, and reward fulfillment, that $3M is probably closer to $2M (which, for a full-length game made by a full team, isn't much these days.)

They spent half the money on Rubick's Cubes, judging by the videos.

And his car repairs.

Man, people are really forgiving when it comes to Schafer. The money people at Double Fine (Justin and the other lady, can't remember their names) should've been running this from the get go. What seemed to be little 'kinks' early on in the 2PP docos are clearly crystalizing into big blunders.

I can imagine a lot of the shortfall comes from poor management and poor planning. From episodes on art eyebrows were raised over the fact they had four concept artists and only one animator. Furthermore, the entire game was meant to be in the 'style' of one particular artist. Yet he was not art director for the project and quickly got moved off of doing actual background art to colourise scenes by other artists to maintain his 'brushwork' and keep the style. Even though this was all done digitally and, wait for it, using software he had no experience with!

As has been said, look at the work coming from Project Eternity and Shadowrun Returns. It's... it's like it's in another stratosphere. Those guys look like they know what they're doing.

For 3 milion dollars me and Gribbler, could build a studio and make point and click adventure games for the rest of our lives. Things like that make me angry.

I don't think we can say the money has been wasted or frittered away. Yes, there have been kinks, but it's not at all clear that they're the cause of the current problems (for example, I'm pretty sure Bagel got moved to a more meaningful art position within a month or two, after the initial arrangement didn't work out). The issue seems to be almost entirely that the game design is too big for them to complete in the time (=budget) available. That they didn't fully realize this sooner shows some poor management, yes, and if I was a shareholder in Double Fine I would definitely be angry, because having to spend that much more on development is going to make it harder to turn a profit. But as a backer and prospective player, I just want the game to be the best possible, and if Double Fine want to pour more resources into it to make that happen, great!

I remember calculations at the time of the Kickstarter showed the funds covering about one year of development, so if they were looking at three years (and cut it down to two), the budget overruns seem pretty much in line with what you might expect. The question is really whether the time they're taking makes sense given what they're making, and we really have no way to tell before we see the final outcome. And even then, reasonable people could disagree on whether e.g. the resources spent on concept art were worth it. (Given that the striking design is one of the strongest and most memorable elements of classic Schafer games, I'd probably be inclined to defend that decision. The rimlight system they put so much work and pride into, OTOH... maybe not.)

I also don't think comparisons to other projects are all that meaningful, particularly ones in completely different genres and art styles (from just a quick look at screenshots, the two you mentioned don't blow me away, but of course stills don't tell the full story). You also have to consider how far along they were in development when they did their Kickstarter campaigns, to what extent they're drawing on outside funding, and what the stated goals of the campaign were. As many people have pointed out many times, the Double Fine Adventure Kickstarter was in part about creating a behind-the-scenes documentary series, and that part is already being delivered to very high quality.

Quote from: Snarkythe Double Fine Adventure Kickstarter was in part about creating a behind-the-scenes documentary series

Wait. So the backers paid to watch some videos about making a game? How expensive can it be to shoot a short video in the office?

Yes. See the original pitch:

QuoteOver a six-to-eight month period, a small team under Tim Schafer's supervision will develop Double Fine's next game, a classic point-and-click adventure.  Where it goes from there will unfold in real time for all the backers to see.

2 Player Productions will be documenting the creative process and releasing monthly video updates exclusively to the Kickstarter backers. This documentary series will strive to make the viewer as much a part of the process as possible by showing a game grow from start to finish, with all the passion, humor, and heartbreak that happens along the way.  Double Fine is committed to total transparency with this project, ensuring it is one of the most honest depictions of game development ever conceived.
[...]
For anyone interested in the inner workings of the game industry, either professionally or as a fan, this project will be a landmark in exploring the art of development.  For people that just love great games, this is an opportunity to help bring one to fruition.

(Once the campaign raised so much more money than they targeted, they explained that they would expand the project and it wouldn't be done by the original timeline.)

The "some videos" are a professionally shot and edited documentary series, filmed in multiple locations with interviewers, sound and camera crew over a period of (as it turns out) several years. So far it consists of ten full-length episodes (ranging in length from about 30 minutes to almost an hour), plus a number of "special focus" features called "Side Quest" that delve more deeply into particular team members or aspects of the production. I don't know exactly how much it's costing to make, but it's clearly not free.

I agree. Gribbler is seriously underestimating the amount of time that goes into documentary making.

Documentaries are really intensive, even beyond shooting. They produce masses of material. All of that material has to be watched, annotated, possibly transcribed, then sequenced. That takes time and money.

Is anyone angry about the fact that Tim Schafer went overbudget on pretty much every game he's ever worked on? I somewhat doubt that, because when the soulless publisher's money get "wasted" - it's clearly a matter of realizing artistic vision or at least fixing the leaks. And in the end, despite the cuts, we probably ended up with richer, better games than we would've had if they were perfectly on schedule/budget. How is this different? So, Tim's pretty bad at time-management and scaling his concepts, big news, that's not why we love him, is it? :)

And as hard as it is for us to understand how would one spend over 5 million on a point-n-click adventure, remember that everyone at Double Fine is a high-level professional with a solid salary, who work in a nice office with good equipment. And from what I can tell from the documentary (which is wonderful and is alone worth the admission price and then some) - we haven't yet seen a 2D point-n-click adventure of that level of quality, at least in the presentation department.

Double Fine's problem(although problem is not exactly the right word here :)) is that with the unexpected success of the Kickstarter and the hype that it brought with it, this has become their flagship project on which their reputation will hang. That means they need to deliver the best and the biggest game they possibly can, which is exactly what they're trying to do. And that seems like a good thing for us, players. :)
So, don't get angry at them wasting money just because you know the exact numbers. Many games spend more on their marketing. ;)

Quote from: Gribbler on Thu 04/07/2013 11:19:12

Quote from: Snarkythe Double Fine Adventure Kickstarter was in part about creating a behind-the-scenes documentary series

Wait. So the backers paid to watch some videos about making a game? How expensive can it be to shoot a short video in the office?

Change "shoot a short video in the office" to "Shoot hours upon hours of high-quality footage in the course of all 2 years of the development and cut it into a comprehensible and interesting narrative" and you get the picture. :) I think the documentary is around 5 hours long at this point, and all of it is very well made and edited.

If it was clearly stated in the Kickstarter campaign that backers pay for behind-the-scenes videos it's allright I guess. But personally, I still think they had better spend more of that money on actual game making than "professional" video shooting.
"Hey let's make a video of our artist drawing a room. We gotta hire sound designer, sound director, all high-salary professionals of course, with years of experience. We had to buy HD cameras, hire experienced cameramen, maybe few grips to hold the mikes (top quality, obviously) and such. Oh, and we have gotta pay for the studio to edit all this. Phew, we are ready, finally. Now the artist can draw his location. What? There's no money left for the artist? Bummer!"

You know, maybe I should try and raise couple million kickstarter project which I will thoroughly document in the Caribbean... From a yacht.  :smiley:

Oh, right! I can't. I'm not a famous game designer from the 90s.

Grips don't hold mics.

My bad. Add professional mike holders to the list :smiley: But still, couple grips would sure come in handy on a documentary set, right? (laugh)

Well, although I still think that 5M (or 3M) is more than enough to make several quality point & click games,
if what we are getting here is the top professionals of the trade gathering to make THE point&click game, then yeah, it's going to cost money.

I'm just trying to make a point that somebody's screwed up budget priorities on this project. Badly.

Well, I guess we will have to wait and see if actual people making this game were as professional as the ones filming them while doing so.

Quote from: Gribbler on Thu 04/07/2013 12:59:56
My bad. Add professional mike holders to the list :smiley: But still, couple grips would sure come in handy on a documentary set, right? (laugh)

Oh yeah, stuff always needs gripping! But the costs for the documentary were very clearly set out in the original pitch. In fact it was a key selling point which might even have paid for itself in terms of the extra pledges it brought in.

I agree with Ilyich. With creative people like Tim Shafer we're always asking 'why won't the publishers/producers just throw money at them and then leave them alone to do their stuff?' I think we should try here and see if it works.

2 million a year to keep a decent sized team employed isn't that crazy. Especially if they're talented-- they have to be paid decently or some other company will lure them away.

It's easy for a bunch of AGSers to say we could stretch that money out forever. But we're used to making half-hour games for free. And not having health insurance.

Quote from: Ilyichremember that everyone at Double Fine is a high-level professional with a solid salary, who work in a nice office with good equipment.

Quote from: Trapezoid2 million a year to keep a decent sized team employed isn't that crazy. Especially if they're talented-- they have to be paid decently or some other company will lure them away.

Perhaps I was naive when I jumped on the bandwagon and backed the DFA, but the high salaries of expensive artists and designers wasn't really what I envisaged my money going on.  I backed as a fan of Tim Schafer and the fact that I wanted to see a new adventure from him.*  The Double Finers, cool as they may be, aren't really people who need a 'kickstart' to be honest.

That said, the documentaries have been amazing (despite only having two episodes so far this year), and there's no denying that the problems encountered by schafer and co have made for some intense drama :)

^{(and had hoped Gilbert was going to be more involved, as we have discussed)}

Quote from: Trapezoid on Thu 04/07/2013 18:38:36
But we're used to making half-hour games for free. And not having health insurance.

Man, are we tough!

Good to know someone like Schafer is watching out for the much more delicate DF-type guys out there.

Schafer just screw the budget, and now theres the possibility that the game might never be released. And we know about this only after their second Kickstarter finished. That's another budget they can screw up, and theres also the Indie Fund, so it should be a fun year for Double Fine! Maybe Gilbert did the right thing when he got out of there.

This is why I didn't back it. Because I would prefer him, or Ron, or whoever is the "name" we are paying for, to hire three other guys, an artist, animator and programmer, and make a game (with AGS). THAT would get my money. But then, I'm not Xbox generation. I actually look for reasons. ;)

QuoteBut we're used to making half-hour games for free. And not having health insurance.

Kudos. And they would do the same if game making really mattered to them. Seriously, when I ask for a mil, please by god cut me down and tell me I should just make a game because I love doing it. Because if it isn't mostly just for that, I'm doing it for all the wrong reasons.

That said, I hope it works out! It's still all certainly very interesting to follow :)

Quote from: Mods on Fri 05/07/2013 00:05:22
Kudos. And they would do the same if game making really mattered to them. Seriously, when I ask for a mil, please by god cut me down and tell me I should just make a game because I love doing it. Because if it isn't mostly just for that, I'm doing it for all the wrong reasons.

That said, I hope it works out! It's still all certainly very interesting to follow :)

To be fair, they have much larger expenses.

In any case, I didn't actually support this, not only because I had no money, but also the sell of "a game" instead of a planned out project is really immature and kind of unfair to other projects which actually have some work behind them before asking for money.

Hehe they do! But IMO they have larger expenses because they created them. They didn't have to. The same way Ron G has "um" and "er"'d about using AGS for 10 years. He could do it, he just favors the commercial vibe over the actual "just make a game" one, IMO. And that's kind of the AGS motto. Just make a game.

Knife, fork - eat your dinner.

"No, I need a golden fork first."

Right.  (wtf)

But then, it's personal preference too no doubt. I am stoked for the 15k Nelly 2 and have almost zero interest in "the DFA", despite loving Grim Fandango and such. People with less usually do more. At least, in my experience they do :/

Yahtzee, for example, earns a lot, has a lot of worldwide attention, yet he'll still go back to a freeware engine just to make a freeware game because that's what he enjoys and knows his players do too. A favorable mentality in my books, that earns in my books the title of "game developer". What Tim Schafer is...well, to me, not a game developer these days. A businessman, with certain motivations and intentions. If he'd have wanted to just "make a game" he'd have picked up RPG maker like the rest of us and gotten on with it.

I realize there is a business behind DFA and it requires more than your usual fare. I do hope it works out, and everyone feels positive and not ripped off at the end of it. But come on, to dick around with 3 mil. That's stupid. Doesn't matter what medium it is, book, tv, film, game, whore house - 3 mil is a stupid lot of money and if you can't make something with it, the hell are you up to, seriously? ESPECIALLY veteran game makers who have seen and been foiled and embraced by budgets for over 20 years, and must by now have nothing short of an expert understanding of them... It's very odd IMO!

Anyway, yeah I can't really interject cos I didn't contribute to this project. But those are my 2 cents as an outsider..!

Gathering millions of dollars to accommodate top but expensive professionals, Tim Shafer and Ron Gilbert to produce a fantastic adventure game is something that we could all be excited for. We would expect the best game ever.
Something is wrong or went wrong in the process because there's this "feeling" in the air that the money was misused somehow.

In movies you pay Brad Pitt 30M because he'll grant 100M just by being there. With Broken Age, Shafer takes Pitt's role. It's all very commercial and like Mods said, it looks like it became a business priority first and a top quality game after.
Like someone said before, if Shafer was trying to do the best game he could ever do and publishers/producers where the "bad" guys, we'd be supporting Shafer like he was our family. Who cares about money when a fantastic game is on the making? Right?

Quote from: Mati256 on Thu 04/07/2013 22:23:24
Schafer just screw the budget, and now theres the possibility that the game might never be released. And we know about this only after their second Kickstarter finished. That's another budget they can screw up, and theres also the Indie Fund, so it should be a fun year for Double Fine! Maybe Gilbert did the right thing when he got out of there.

This is ridiculous. Am I the only person who thinks Tim knew they might run into this trouble down the line while he was designing, but knew that there would be options and deemed it worth the potential for compromises? I think he knew what he was doing when he over-designed the game, and never would have if it were truly a no-win scenario.
They haven't run out of money. They're planning ahead to make sure they don't. These were their options: 1. Cut the game down, which will make it feel rushed and disappointing. 2. Stretch out the money they have by cutting down the team, taking much longer to finish the game. Or 3. Figure out ways to subsidize it. Be creative.

Under a publisher, 3 wouldn't even be considered as an option. This project is about what can be done under an unconventional model. It's an experiment. And its their own money.

Grim Fandango wasn't exactly an indie. It was a multi-million dollar project. It was delayed. It still had content cut. 2001: A Space Odyssey was 4 million over budget and over a year behind schedule. If it's good, no one will remember or care about the budget and schedule.

Also, 3 million is NOT a huge amount for a game. It's a huge amount for a Kickstarter. It's low for a game at this level. Psychonauts was $12 million. This is multi-platform, voice-acted, globally shipped content.

Sorry, comparisons to AGS are silly. I love AGS, but it doesn't even work correctly on modern monitors.

QuoteIf it's good, no one will remember or care about the budget and schedule.

Uh-huh, but kind of different - the budgets for 2001 and GF were not created by 10,000 eager backers. So if its bad or good, I think people will still clearly remember it coming out of their pay packet to begin with ;) If it's good, they'll be glad they paid, if it isn't, they won't. When the studio takes a hit, no-one gives a damn, and why should they? John Smythe did not work an 18 hour shift down a coal mine to chip into it prior to being made.

So what they've also given themselves is mass accountability. And that is why I am still wary of KS/Indiegogo projects (this includes my own) because the accountability rises ten fold. Pissing off a studio is one thing, pissing off 10,000 loyal fans who PAID you to make it happen...another level in my books. But as you say, time will tell - cannot argue with that :)

QuoteSorry, comparisons to AGS are silly. I love AGS, but it doesn't even work correctly on modern monitors.

LOL, sure, the monitors, but other than that... How? How is THEM making a game different to you or me making one? Writing a strategy game doesn't make you any less incompetent (or more) than writing an adventure game, the same way as making a game under a business or doing it for love...they are the same. If they're not, can you explain how to me please, I'd like to learn :) How Tim Schafer's awesome games are different to ben304's awesome games. There are no comparisons to AGS if we're talking about budgets, and if it's budgets that "make the difference." Because other than that all games are the same, with the same potential and promise as the rest.

I think it's terrible for the backers to act like investors or publishers. For one thing, they're not going to be hit up for the extra money. It's going to come from non-backer sales of the game, which DF was always going to get (hopefully!)

As for AGS, most of us do it because it's a dream to make a game. We'll do it by ourselves, unpaid. Expecting DF, a professional team of career game-designers, to work unpaid is not quite unethical. AGS is wonderful, but it's sort of like an 8mm film camera. There's nothing invalid about the art it creates. It just wouldn't translate well to a major theatrical release.

Double Fine saw an opportunity to expand their small project into something on a grander scale-- with a bigger audience, and they're taking it. I don't think they've ever canceled a game. Nothing's going to be lost here.

Mm..no reason for it not to be win win regardless of extra funding, design changes etc. They dont all suuddenly own bugatti veyrons so i guess the issues are fairly trivial...

Quote from: Mods on Fri 05/07/2013 01:21:48
LOL, sure, the monitors, but other than that... How?

You'd have to be absolutely batty if you were to create a high budget commercial game with AGS. Wadjet Eye is acceptable; it's smallish budget, not overly overly popular. But even in that case, I'd still be looking at other means to create my Adventure games.

AGS surely makes the road less arduous with the Editor side UI (Views, GUIs, Sprites, etc) but it isn't exactly professional grade. Just ask Dave how many emails he gets on a regular basis of his games not running properly on certain systems. Now imagine that times 30 or more.

Not many things in this underdevelopment Double Fine adventure would be possible in AGS. The majority of animations look like texture rotation and combining for limbs/torso (I only saw the quick trailer, so I couldn't be sure on the separate layers). Zooming of the viewport. Shaders. Etc. If it were made in AGS, they'd have to rewrite the majority of the engine.

And don't get me started on how much fun the scripters would have with AGS script.

Also yes, I still believe $3 million is a massively generous budget for that style of game. But I'm not exactly a studio with dozens of employees.

Yup. My (unclear) point was that a game made in AGS can be as loved as one made for 3 mil. Not that ags is a wise commercial move if you intend a huge audience. But even then..if ags games could reach xbox etc I Think some may be in for a surprise to their popularity. But this is another discussion :)

Ps. Sorry, my android phone and this input box dont get on very well.

Questions to consider:

1. Does, for example, Dave at WadjetEye, pay a living wage to his employees? Healthcare? Benefits? I'm sure these are expectations of DoubleFine employees.

2. How much of the three million raised from Kickstarter made up the budget of the game itself? I know there's a 10 percent off the top that goes to KS and Amazon, plus shipping expenses on whatever items they're shipping, plus around 3-5% of backer contributions usually don't come through for whatever reason, plus the cost of the documentary.

3. If I'm reading correctly, cuts were going to be made primarily because of deadlines. How many AGS games come in on time, meeting their creators' self-appointed deadlines?

I honestly don't know the answers to any of these questions, but I do think these are factors to consider. The difference between making a game as a business versus making one out of love is that, in the former instance, if you fail, bills are not paid, people are unemployed, children of your employees starve, etc.

1. I don't mind waiting (even much) longer for the game to be ready.

2. I already feel like I got my money's worth because of the cool documentaries.

3. I can understand it's difficult for Tim to downsize at this point in his career.

But...

4. Schafer still comes across as incompetent because of underestimating (overestimating?) the budget to such degrees. The studio would be already out of money if not for the 2nd KS, the humble bundles and the Indie Fund (All that income came from marketing, PR and business negotiations and almost zero real new content production).

5. Also, I'm not sure making one single game should be this expensive, unless it's REALLY huge and offering incredibly complex interactions and system-based processes. Otherwise it feels like a waste of money.

6. I feel they actually didn't separate the money for the game from the rest of their expenses. Partially it was sunk into additional marketing. Which is a bit of unfair to their backers.

All of this has been written in the sand since that first Humble Bundle. Scratch that, since they introduced the slacker backer thing after two months.

Quote from: Ascovel on Fri 05/07/2013 05:54:494. Schafer still comes across as incompetent because of overestimating the budget to such degrees. The studio would be already out of money if not the additional KS, the humble bundles and the Indie Fund (All focused on marketing, PR and business negotiations and almost zero real new content).

5. I'm not sure making one single game should be this expensive, unless it's REALLY huge and offering incredibly complex interactions and system-based processes. Otherwise it feels like a waste of money.

6. I feel they actually didn't divide the money for the game from the rest of their expenses. Partially it was sunk into additional marketing. Which is a bit of unfair to their backers.

That's the thing, all the backlash comes from a very intangible place. It "comes off" as incompetent, it "feels like" a waste of money, it seems "a bit unfair." But is it actually anything that will matter once the game's out? Or does it all just amount to people "feeling weird" about there being a hitch in the production?

I see this as an interesting, possibly good thing. Double Fine are going over budget with this game. But that's not necessarily bad. They're in a unique position where they can go over budget, with the freedom to solve it using their own resources. It's no skin off anyone's back but their own, and if they weren't willing to make those compromises, Tim wouldn't have over-designed the game. This didn't blindside them! They just didn't want to make this call until they were sure they had to.

If this was their plan all along you'd have thought Tim never would have put out a release date for September this year. Likewise, if he had no idea how long the development would have taken that he wouldn't have thrown that figure out there. To state the obvious, there wouldn't be controversy over the delay if there was no delay. If they had said "We can't promise a release date at this stage, we need to work out the scope of this project, bear with us" I imagine that wouldn't have been massively popular but it would have made all this 'bringing it forward from June 2015' easier to swallow.

Quote from: Trapezoid on Fri 05/07/2013 08:14:07That's the thing, all the backlash comes from a very intangible place. It "comes off" as incompetent, it "feels like" a waste of money, it seems "a bit unfair."

I think that owes more to people being polite because they, like me, have a lot of respect for Schafer and his work so it still doesn't feel 'right' on some level to criticise him harshly, even when he, yes, seems to be screwing the pooch like you wouldn't believe. People who are unhappy with Schafer's handling of this know what their issues are and will have solid basis. Stuff like

*Clearly holding this announcement back until the Massive Chalice Kickstarter has closed
*Promising a certainty of Part 2, funded off the back of part one, when your studio has a history of financial disasters
*Appointing a buddy as producer who obstinately refuses to actually acknowledge the reality of the schedule
*Appointing another producer to cover for the fact that the first guy isn't really doing his job
*Set out to make a 2D adventure game with one animator on the team, then give most of the hard work to [what appears to be] an unpaid intern
*Hiring a team of artists with specific tasks in mind but not actually assigning them to these tasks

True, we're seeing all this through the prism 2PP is giving us and possibly they're making it look more chaotic than it is for the sake of creating drama. But there has been a hell of a lot that smacks of plain old incompetence and none of it has been made up.

The argument of "Hey, we'll get a better game, what's the problem?" is fine. To a point. What about the industry? If this game flops Double Fine will tank. The ideals that have come with the Kickstarter wave about wresting control from the publishers will take a battering. They are, after all, trying to put themselves on the map as a now totally independent studio but it's looking like an unattainable dream - every time they find a new revenue stream they sink it all into this game.

Really.. it even feels like a little bit of hubris. Ultimately Tim Schafer has taken the 'make exactly the game I want to make' notion to heart to an extent none of the other Kickstarters so far appear to have. All the others have involved a lot of compromise. Hear the burden of extra money just gets shouldered by the rest of the studio..

Quote1. Does, for example, Dave at WadjetEye, pay a living wage to his employees? Healthcare? Benefits? I'm sure these are expectations of DoubleFine employees.

Comparing Tim Schafer/Double Fine to Me/Wadjet Eye is like comparing Spielberg to a kid with a camcorder. :)

This is SO typical of the industry. When I was working with PlayFirst on Emerald City Confidential, they gave me $200k to play with. That seemed like infinity, and I designed a massive massive game. A massive game that, once we broke it down and analyzed the costs, was impossible to make. So we cut it. By a lot. If you play the game, it's kind of painfully obvious where the cuts were made. It killed me that we had to do that.

As for Broken Age, I'm so torn about it. On the one hand, Schafer is doing everything right in order to mitigate what happened. He's being upfront and honest, and people are a LOT more forgiving when you are upfront and honest about things. Lord knows when I've made a mistake or colossal lapses in judgement, admitting what I've done is always more effective than putting a PR spin on things when crap happens. And crap HAPPENS OFTEN. (http://nygamedev.blogspot.com/2011/12/ocean-marketing-and-dont-do-this-101.html)

But on the other hand... I can't help but feel that this is such a "newbie developer" mistake to make in the first place. "Oh no! We are running out of time and money! Quick, release it in two parts! The first part will fund the second! Problem solved!" I see so many inexperienced developers do this, and it typically fails because nobody wants to get invested in something that might not be finished - an issue I continue to have with Blackwell but for other reasons.

But Double Fine is no newbie developer, so they can probably pull it off. At least, I hope so!

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
I think that owes more to people being polite because they, like me, have a lot of respect for Schafer and his work so it still doesn't feel 'right' on some level to criticise him harshly, even when he, yes, seems to be screwing the pooch like you wouldn't believe.

I think most commenters agree that Double Fine has screwed up from a business POV. They should never have ended up in this situation. What seems to separate the complainers from the "defenders" is the question of whether this is something we need to worry about. Unless you own shares in Double Fine, their inability to stick to their budget isn't necessarily our problem.

It only becomes our problem if it jeopardizes the completion of the game, or the future of the company. Personally, the latest news doesn't make me all that worried. I mean, I knew from the beginning that there was a risk, and I had some notion that Double Fine's finances weren't as strong as they could be. None of the updates have really changed that, but given the company's and Schafer's commitment to this game, it's still looking fairly safe, IMO. No point throwing blame around until they've actually failed.

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
People who are unhappy with Schafer's handling of this know what their issues are and will have solid basis. Stuff like

*Clearly holding this announcement back until the Massive Chalice Kickstarter has closed

I guess I don't really see the problem with this. Did they misinform or mislead the MC backers? Not as far as I can tell. Unless this development on Broken Age materially affects Massive Chalice, I don't see how they have any duty to disclose it. (Since, after all, they're still pledging to uphold their DFA commitments.) If you choose to back someone's second KS campaign before they've delivered on their first, not knowing how that project will ultimately turn out is an uncertainty built into the situation. It's the risk you take.

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
*Promising a certainty of Part 2, funded off the back of part one, when your studio has a history of financial disasters

Have any of these "financial disasters" ever left Double Fine unable to honor commitments they've made?

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
*Appointing a buddy as producer who obstinately refuses to actually acknowledge the reality of the schedule
*Appointing another producer to cover for the fact that the first guy isn't really doing his job

If I remember the early episodes correctly, Greg was made the producer of the game because he'd proven himself in his current job, and seemed ready to step up and take on more responsibility. Tim talks a fair bit about how running a company involves team development, making sure each person has new challenges and opportunities to grow... or fail. Reading between the lines, it does seem like he wasn't quite up to the task (which, to be fair, was probably more challenging and unfamiliar than they realized at first). So how is moving some of the responsibility off him a screw-up?

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
*Set out to make a 2D adventure game with one animator on the team, then give most of the hard work to [what appears to be] an unpaid intern

Aren't you talking about the period before they even had a design, when they were just building the tools, trying to decide on the art style and tech, making concept art and so on? Why would they need a ton of animators at that point of the process? If you think they only had one animator once production ramped up, I believe you've got the wrong impression.

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
*Hiring a team of artists with specific tasks in mind but not actually assigning them to these tasks

Could you be more specific? Are you still talking about Bagel's role? I don't think that's an accurate description at all. Tim wanted the graphics to be "Bagel-style," but there was some confusion about what that actually meant once it became clear that the expanded game was too big for one artist, and it took a little while to work out a division of labor that made sense and used their resources most effectively.

Quote from: Jared on Fri 05/07/2013 13:34:48
True, we're seeing all this through the prism 2PP is giving us and possibly they're making it look more chaotic than it is for the sake of creating drama. But there has been a hell of a lot that smacks of plain old incompetence and none of it has been made up.

On the contrary, I get the impression that they're usually trying to put a positive spin on things for the cameras, and that there may be more friction off-camera or behind closed doors. For example, they never straight out said "Greg can't hack it as the producer, we need to bring in someone else." If that's how they really felt, they found a nicer way to put it, and instead of going into a blame game or dwelling on mistakes, they talked about the ways the new arrangement could help. Similarly, there have been times when some team members have seemed frustrated with Tim, but they generally don't openly badmouth him on camera.

You could say that's a betrayal of the "transparency" they promised, but honestly, I think it would be a disaster if they took every conflict and confrontation public and recorded it for posterity. They'd never be able to keep working together. This isn't a reality show where people throw drinks in each other's faces for our amusement, and 2PP need to be sensitive so they don't ruin the development process they're there to document. (Maybe there are some behind-the-scenes clips of people speaking less diplomatically that are being held back until the end of production?)

At the same time, of course the documentaries focus on things that are interesting and where things happen. That naturally means that problems are going to get attention, while parts of the project that are proceeding without a hitch tend to get less screen time.

On any major project, there will be some things that go wrong. The trick isn't to avoid any mistakes, but to spot them and fix them. I really don't think the things you list or the other hiccups we've seen in the documentaries amount to "a hell of a lot that smacks of plain old incompetence." The only whopper of a mistake, IMO, is the enormous mismatch between the game design and the budget available, and the failure to realize just how big it was sooner.

I'm not saying DF didn't make a mistake, or that it was unavoidable. But it's definitely not the devastating mistake people are making it out to be. I'm seeing a lot of armchair accountants, going off based on misunderstandings of one-liners from the documentary.


When I see so many gamers scoffing at Tim's desire to make this as big and good a game as possible (and holding that as a higher priority than being utterly practical, business-wise) I think to myself, "This is why people don't see games as art."

Quote from: Trapezoid on Sat 06/07/2013 00:36:21
When I see so many gamers scoffing at Tim's desire to make this as big and good a game as possible (and holding that as a higher priority than being utterly practical, business-wise) I think to myself, "This is why people don't see games as art."

Every game designer wants to make his game as big and good as possible. And that is actually 100% practical business wise to do.

But creating art has nothing to do with spending money without moderation and solid planning.

Quote from: Snarky on Fri 05/07/2013 17:47:02
I think most commenters agree that Double Fine has screwed up from a business POV. They should never have ended up in this situation. What seems to separate the complainers from the "defenders" is the question of whether this is something we need to worry about. Unless you own shares in Double Fine, their inability to stick to their budget isn't necessarily our problem.

It only becomes our problem if it jeopardizes the completion of the game, or the future of the company.

It could also negatively affect all future games crowd-funding (particularly that of adventure games), and Schafer knows this.

Quote from: Ascovel on Sat 06/07/2013 11:02:52But creating art has nothing to do with spending money without moderation and solid planning.

Considering they identified the problem long before they would run out of money, and they have a plan in place that's pretty well founded (they've already, on two occasions, subsidized the game to the tune of about $1mil) I wouldn't exactly deem it THAT irresponsible. Yes, it's not the safest path to getting a game made, but a huge part of this project is not having a publisher breathing down their necks and forcing them to always take the safest path.

Quote from: Ascovel on Sat 06/07/2013 11:02:52It could also negatively affect all future games crowd-funding (particularly that of adventure games), and Schafer knows this.

Worrying about his own game is probably enough work for him. Why should that be his burden?

Quote from: Trapezoid on Sat 06/07/2013 19:57:19

Quote from: Ascovel on Sat 06/07/2013 11:02:52It could also negatively affect all future games crowd-funding (particularly that of adventure games), and Schafer knows this.

Worrying about his own game is probably enough work for him. Why should that be his burden?

It is his burden whether he likes or not - a consequence of his previous actions. He started something special - popularized a new way of funding creative works - but for now he's quickly proving that it's all been an utopia. That studios need a publisher/producer/etc. to manage/control what the creative guys are doing.

I mean - if Schafer had absolutely no idea how far off he was with his budget estimations (and after following the project we know he didn't), what about all the little indies - the 1,2 guys teams - asking us to help fund their games via KS. What chances is there they can manage a game project better than a man who's been in the industry for more than 20 years. That's how many potential backers of new KS projects will be thinking from now on.

When you're doing funding like this you need to exercise a lot of self control, it seems he didn't try to do that.

Crowdfunding? Or alternate revenue from other products' sales?

Quote from: Ascovel on Sat 06/07/2013 20:37:40
It is his burden whether he likes or not - a consequence of his previous actions. He started something special - popularized a new way of funding creative works - but for now he's quickly proving that it's all been an utopia. That studios need a publisher/producer/etc. to manage/control what the creative guys are doing.

I mean - if Schafer had absolutely no idea how far off he was with his budget estimations (and after following the project we know he didn't), what about all the little indies - the 1,2 guys teams - asking us to help fund their games via KS. What chances is there they can manage a game project better than a man who's been in the industry for more than 20 years. That's how many potential backers of new KS projects will be thinking from now on.

Again, it sounds like you're starting from the assumption that this is a disaster and the project has already failed. It hasn't. For now, he's not "proving that it's all been an utopia," because we don't know yet whether it will be a success or a failure!

It's not a disaster (and I sure hope it won't be), but it's already a considerable disappointment in terms of how the production is managed.

I'd also say it has already become a serious argument for the ineffectiveness of KS-funding, since the project will need to use lots of extra money to get completed - far beyond what was given in the campaign. A luxury money reserve most KS-funded developers wouldn't be able to rely on.

But it's only the financial aspect of the project (and its management) that leaves a somewhat negative impression. Other than that, I hope the game will truly turn out better thanks to the extra time and money and wish the team the best.

I think people just wanted a new adventure game from the guy who made some of the best adventure games. If anyone's interested in Kickstarter as a revolutionary new model for indie game development, maybe they shouldn't be looking towards a company whose previous budgets have been multiples of what was raised.

Double Fine has worked under larger budgets. I'm sure they've had to negotiate larger budgets. This is just negotiating with themselves.

I find it morally reprehensible that Double Fine should make anything other than the $400k game they pitched in the first place.

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 14:59:57
I find it morally reprehensible that Double Fine should make anything other than the $400k game they pitched in the first place.

They asked for $400k, they got $3.4million. How do you suggest they spend that extra $3million without making a bigger game?

Quote from: veryweirdguy on Mon 08/07/2013 15:23:05

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 14:59:57
I find it morally reprehensible that Double Fine should make anything other than the $400k game they pitched in the first place.

They asked for $400k, they got $3.4million. How do you suggest they spend that extra $3million without making a bigger game?

Profit?

  Haha, seriously?  Wouldn't it be more reprehensible if they pocketed (or taken as profit) the extra 3 million?

OK fair enough, but if you set out to make a game for $400k, you should be able to accomplish that goal as long as you get the $400k.

It's fair to expand upon their original concept.  But expanding beyond the scope of your budget (which is 833% of what you said you would need) is ludicrous.

I'm inclined to agree with dactylopus, in part.

If you ask for a sum of money and then are given ten times that sum and then say you need more because you've run out then something is very wrong somewhere.
While I'm sure that there was no ill-intent, it does strike me as incredibly naive for someone with as much experience in the industry.

They didn't have an original concept except "let's make an adventure game with Bagel's art." The $400k number is irrelevant, since as soon as the campaign went so much higher, they decided to make something much bigger that they'd never have attempted on a smaller budget. I think most backers expected and appreciated this; certainly there weren't that many complaints when they announced it after the campaign.

So just forget about the original target and focus on the actual budget they had vs. the expectations and ambitions the game had to live up to. It's not surprising they went over budget, although the scale of the overrun is excessive. But now Double Fine is pumping its own money (raised by selling other games, bundles, pre-orders and early access to Broken Age) into the project. They're not begging or demanding more from the backers, so how on earth is that "morally reprehensible"?

It's kind of like if I asked you for $8 to go get some dinner (thinking I'll just go to MacDonald's) and you give me a $50 and tell me to keep the change. So I say, well in that case I'll go to a proper restaurant instead and order a nice meal. Sure, it'll take a bit longer, but it's going to be worth it. But when I'm there it turns out I miscalculated (maybe I read the prices wrong on the menu, or didn't think to include the bottle of wine we're having, or at the last moment I decide we should get some dessert as well) and the $50 won't remotely cover it, so I have to run to the ATM and get some of my own cash to make up the shortfall.

In this scenario, you'd then be saying "You bastard! You said you could get dinner for $8, and now $50 isn't enough? It's ludicrous, you should be ashamed of yourself!"  (roll)

On one hand, I see your point, and I am happy that they are pledging to provide their own money rather than ask for more.

My main point is that they should have been able to make their game without needing the extra money.  I just can't see why (short of poor judgement and shoddy budgeting) they wouldn't be able to make their game for the amount of money they received.

Edit: If you had your own money, you shouldn't need to ask me for $8 (unless you only went a couple of bucks over budget).  And if I gave you $50, you should have been able to eat at least 5 meals.

I actually agree with your last statement about being ashamed.

Quote from: Snarky on Mon 08/07/2013 16:22:21
It's kind of like if I asked you for $8 to go get some dinner (thinking I'll just go to MacDonald's) and you give me a $50 and tell me to keep the change. So I say, well in that case I'll go to a proper restaurant instead and order a nice meal. Sure, it'll take a bit longer, but it's going to be worth it. But when I'm there it turns out I miscalculated (maybe I read the prices wrong on the menu, or didn't think to include the bottle of wine we're having, or at the last moment I decide we should get some dessert as well) and the $50 won't remotely cover it, so I have to run to the ATM and get some of my own cash to make up the shortfall.

Okay, I'm not that invested in this project (neither financially nor emotionally) but I would like to question this analogy.

Wouldn't it be more like:
We: Hey Snarky, we need to eat, can you make us all some dinner if we give you money?
Snarky: Sure, give me 20 bucks and I'll make a pie.
We: That sounds like a deal. Take this 60 bucks instead - some more guys wanted in. We trust you to cook a tasty pie, and we're hungry.
Snarky: Okay!
Snarky: Hey guys, I decided to make an extremely complicated dish instead, so I'm gonna need more time and money. Just sit tight for an undefinite amount of time, will ya.
We: Alright, but we would have settled for something quicker and less complicated. You could have saved the rest of the money for dinner tomorrow instead.

After that analogy I don't know about the Doublefine adventure, but I am a bit hungry.

mmmm... pie...

$400k wasn't their budget. It was their minimum.

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:26:38
$400k wasn't their budget. It was their minimum.

They asked for $400k, insinuating that it would be possible for them to make a game at that budget (which is quite possible).

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 16:28:30
Edit: If you had your own money, you shouldn't need to ask me for $8 (unless you only went a couple of bucks over budget).  And if I gave you $50, you should have been able to eat at least 5 meals.

I feel like you didn't understand my analogy. The food was for you, not me (presumably I'm paying for my own food separately; it doesn't enter into it).

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 16:28:30
My main point is that they should have been able to make their game without needing the extra money.  I just can't see why (short of poor judgement and shoddy budgeting) they wouldn't be able to make their game for the amount of money they received.

And my point is that that's really their problem, not ours. Unless they actually fail to finish the game as planned (and I think it's way premature to assume they will), the only people who have cause for complaint are shareholders in Double Fine.

I agree that it's a screwup. Different people can have different opinions on how big of a screwup it is (some have pointed out that the money they had left for the game actually wasn't that much, by historical standards, for a full-length adventure game â€" e.g. only about half the size, in real terms, of what Grim Fandango cost â€" that they may have had sound reasons to deliberately invest more money into the development, and that game development projects routinely run over budget because of the uncertainties inherent in the creative process), but the size of the budget overruns, and the fact that it's forced them into a course of action that has led to negative publicity and may affect sales (or the price they're able to charge for the game), clearly shows something has gone wrong.

But again, for now at least it's really only hurting themselves. So what's there to get mad about?

Quote from: Andail on Mon 08/07/2013 16:49:05
Okay, I'm not that invested in this project (neither financially nor emotionally) but I would like to question this analogy.

Wouldn't it be more like:
We: Hey Snarky, we need to eat, can you make us all some dinner if we give you money?
Snarky: Sure, give me 20 bucks and I'll make a pie.
We: That sounds like a deal. Take this 60 bucks instead - some more guys wanted in. We trust you to cook a tasty pie, and we're hungry.
Snarky: Okay!

This is the step I think you go wrong. The success of the Kickstarter campaign created certain expectations, and I think the vast majority of backers fully expected Double Fine to take all the money they'd raised and put it into making a great game. So it's more like:

You: Hey Snarky, we need to eat, can you make us all some dinner if we give you money?
Snarky: Sure, give me 20 bucks and I'll make a pie in half an hour.
You: Great! But some more guys wanted in, so what if we give you like $150 bucks instead? Then you'd be able to put together a real feast, right?
Snarky: Wow, OK. It's gonna take a little longer though... More like a couple of hours.
You: That's fine, because we know it's gonna be THE BEST FEAST EVER!
[later]
Snarky: Turns out the feast is a bit more complicated than I thought it'd be. It cost a bit more than $150, too; I'll cover that, but between getting the money and trying to make the feast everything you expect, it's gonna be another hour before everything's done.
You: But you said 20 bucks for a pie in half an hour! You are a fraud and a lousy cook! You ripped us off!

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 17:29:43
They asked for $400k, insinuating that it would be possible for them to make a game at that budget (which is quite possible).

Yeah, but in the same way you might be able to get a burger for $5 or less, while at the same time it's easy to go above $50 for a full dinner. Because the $5 option exists, does that make any $50 meal illegitimate?

More like Double PIE adventure, amirite?

Anyway, getting back on track, any developer has a story like this. Lord knows I've done some crazy things to keep my company going and get games out the door.  Sadly, Tim Schafer is in the unenviable position of not only being the guy to "bring back the genre" (although some might take issue with that (http://www.wadjeteyegames.com)), but also being the poster child for Kickstartering games as a whole (whether he wanted it or not).  The spotlight is on him, along with everything that goes with it.

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 17:29:43

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:26:38
$400k wasn't their budget. It was their minimum.

They asked for $400k, insinuating that it would be possible for them to make a game at that budget (which is quite possible).

It is. But the Kickstarter let the public determine the (initial) budget, and the public chose a game larger in scope.


speaking of food and pie, this is the analogy I posted on the Double Fine forum:

Quote
Tim Schafer is throwing a small party. He asks some folks to chip in for beer.

87,142 people chip in $3,336,371 for beer.

“Oh shit,” thinks Tim. “I can't throw a tiny little party and just pocket the rest of the cash. I need to make this an amazing party.”

Tim plans out an amazing party. It has been a long, long time since there's been a party this amazing. Everyone wants a party like this. But in order to get really nice drinks and music and whatnot, it turns out it's going to cost even more than what's been chipped in.

“Fuck it,” Tim says. This party is already going to be crazy, why not go the extra mile? Tim decides to make it a full weekend. Everyone who's already on the guest list is welcome to attend. The party will be so rad that people who aren't on the guest list will want to show up. They're welcome tooâ€"but they have to throw in some cash, just like everyone else. That extra cash will pay for the tigers and fire-breathers.

Everyone is happy.

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:33:19
Everyone is happy.

Hah!  8-)

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 17:29:43

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:26:38
$400k wasn't their budget. It was their minimum.

They asked for $400k, insinuating that it would be possible for them to make a game at that budget (which is quite possible).

These days, most game projects have stretch goals that set expectations and define how they'll use money they raise above the minimum. I'm not sure, but I guess that hadn't yet become standard when DF did their campaign. In any case their main deliverable was so vaguely defined that it would have been hard to specify any stretch goals. But the tacit understanding was still: More Money = More Awesome.

Another point is that if they'd only raised $400k (giving them a net game budget of $200-something K), and they went over budget by a similar ratio, Double Fine would probably have been able to absorb that cost without making an issue out of it, hoping to make it back in sales of the game afterwards.

Well, except the kind of people who show up to a party, cross their arms and ask sourly, "Why did you buy so much booze?"

I'm picturing the entire dance floor being covered with industrial-sized pallets of beer kegs. :P

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:33:19

Quote from: dactylopus on Mon 08/07/2013 17:29:43

Quote from: Trapezoid on Mon 08/07/2013 17:26:38
$400k wasn't their budget. It was their minimum.

They asked for $400k, insinuating that it would be possible for them to make a game at that budget (which is quite possible).

It is. But the Kickstarter let the public determine the (initial) budget, and the public chose a game larger in scope.


speaking of food and pie, this is the analogy I posted on the Double Fine forum:

Quote
Tim Schafer is throwing a small party. He asks some folks to chip in for beer.

87,142 people chip in $3,336,371 for beer.

“Oh shit,” thinks Tim. “I can't throw a tiny little party and just pocket the rest of the cash. I need to make this an amazing party.”

Tim plans out an amazing party. It has been a long, long time since there's been a party this amazing. Everyone wants a party like this. But in order to get really nice drinks and music and whatnot, it turns out it's going to cost even more than what's been chipped in.

“Fuck it,” Tim says. This party is already going to be crazy, why not go the extra mile? Tim decides to make it a full weekend. Everyone who's already on the guest list is welcome to attend. The party will be so rad that people who aren't on the guest list will want to show up. They're welcome tooâ€"but they have to throw in some cash, just like everyone else. That extra cash will pay for the tigers and fire-breathers.

Everyone is happy.

Much better analogy.

I don't know why I cared, as I have nothing invested in the game.  I suppose I just thought the whole thing was dishonest in general, and worried about those who backed it.  I can understand that most of them would be supportive, as that is what backing is all about.  Kickstarter and crowd funding is a new model, so it requires a new way of thinking about the relationships between developers, fans, and finances.

I like the fact that he's being transparent about it, so there's that.

Analogies can be tricky in this situation. They will adapt to each one point of view. Personally I'm not happy about the way they handled their budget. But theres nothing I can do about it and as I said before, I'm not even a backer.

After three million people would be a little upset at a two hour long Flash game, no?

Are you saying we shouldn't try to Kickstart Emogame 3?

made me smile...thought I'd share: How to avoid being sad about kickstarter projects - A common sense guide to being a happy backer (http://www.destructoid.com/how-to-avoid-being-sad-about-kickstarter-projects-257598.phtml).

Quote from: Misj' on Fri 12/07/2013 10:24:40
made me smile...thought I'd share: How to avoid being sad about kickstarter projects - A common sense guide to being a happy backer (http://www.destructoid.com/how-to-avoid-being-sad-about-kickstarter-projects-257598.phtml).

That's actually a really good write-up.  Thanks for posting.

Interesting topic related read. I thought you might wanna check this out. Have you heard about this project?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/967459848/lioness

"We disagree with the idea that there's any direct correlation between quality and scope in a project like this. When you force a game or film past its own scope and design it just begins to cannibalize its own narrative and vision by stretching it until it breaks."

http://valleywag.gawker.com/kickstarter-project-canceled-after-dude-spends-all-the-912176282

I guess there's no "early access" for board games :smiley:

Those are both interesting reads.  It's fascinating to read about how other companies are handling things in the wake of this experience.

I was curious, so I started to read up on other Double Fine games.

Psychonauts cost $13 Million, and Brütal Legend cost at least $15 Million.  The budget of $400K seems unreasonable after that, and so does $3 Million.  Double Fine seems to have consistent issues meeting deadlines and satisfying their publishers.  In fact, they had asked for additional time and $7 Million more to finish Brütal Legend.

They always seem to make quality products, though.  Really, that's all that should matter in the end.  I believe that going to Kickstarter was a smart move for Double Fine, because the crowd that supported them there is more likely to be sympathetic than some big company like Activision Blizzard.  The backers are more concerned with the end product than they are with the production costs and delays, and that makes all the difference.

But they made Stacking for about $2 million. I assume if they'd raised $400K we'd have got something on the scale of Samorost, maybe.

The problem isn't that they can't make an adventure game for the budget they had, it's that the expectations and ambitions far outstripped what a net of $2.4 million dollars (or so) actually buys.

Quote from: Gribbler on Mon 15/07/2013 09:05:16
"We disagree with the idea that there's any direct correlation between quality and scope in a project like this. When you force a game or film past its own scope and design it just begins to cannibalize its own narrative and vision by stretching it until it breaks."

This would be more relevant to Broken Age if the game had had a design before they did the Kickstarter.

Might be a bit offtopic, but did someone hear something about The Big Sheep (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-big-sheep)? Also looks like Davy hasn't been visiting the forums for almost a year  ???

That's a good point, Snarky.  Stacking and Costume Quest each cost about $2 Million to make.  The low (for them) cost could be related to the process of development, as those 2 games began as projects in their Amnesia Fortnights.  There is no information (on Wikipedia, at least) on the budgets of any later releases.

And if they didn't have a design, then the question becomes: Why design a game that goes beyond the scope of your budget?

I'll reiterate the point, however, that they ultimately answer to the fans who helped back the game.  As long as the game is eventually released, and is a quality product, then the fans in this case are satisfied.  That's one of the benefits of crowd funding, especially for a well known developer like Double Fine.  I wonder if the crowd would be as forgiving with lesser known developers.  From what I've seen, backers on Kickstarter are generally much more forgiving than traditional publishers.

Quote from: cat on Fri 26/07/2013 12:00:56
Might be a bit offtopic, but did someone hear something about The Big Sheep (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-big-sheep)? Also looks like Davy hasn't been visiting the forums for almost a year  ???

Or Kinky Island which was supposed to be released months ago after it's funding campaign was a success.

Not good form.

Quote from: cat on Fri 26/07/2013 12:00:56
Might be a bit offtopic, but did someone hear something about The Big Sheep (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-big-sheep)? Also looks like Davy hasn't been visiting the forums for almost a year  ???

I get the feeling that The Big Sheep might be on hold for a while now.

Do you have more information? I didn't get any updates...

So, the project (well, part 1 anyway) is Alpha.*
I must say, despite any doubts earlier this year with all the hoohar about funding etc, I am REALLY excited about being able to play this game before too long.  And the art (which I wasn't 100% taken with at first) has really grown on me, especially now that we've seen quite a reasonable amount of in-game footage and animations.

I think, and I HOPE, that this game will kick ass, and all the drama about financing and splitting the game into parts will be justified, DF and Schafer will come out of this process with their heads held high, and probably win all kinds of awards.

I've got to say, I am really enjoying following this whole thing. I would have been on board with this one anyway, but the 2PP documentary is so worth the price of admission. The whole thing is a bit of a zoo I suppose, I think that's what you get when a studio like this is suddenly thrown into being expected to make the greatest adventure game ever with technology 15yrs ahead of the genre. I understand what people seem to be saying lately about keeping modern games short, but I really hope to be able to meander around the game world for many hours :)

So, anyone got some more backer/insider info on broken age? :)

Jack Black will be voicing a small part, if you haven't already heard. Along with some other people I don't recognise, but they tell me they are almost-famous.
*Edit: I know most will be busy listening to the new Blue Cup Tools Podcast, but there's a new video on Broken Age. 40min presentation on multi-platform programming stuff at the Europe GDC.. Going to go watch it now.

What!? Edits don't bump!!11!!!1 :)
Anyhow, the presentation is really cool. I think all the people on this forum who are smarter than me should watch the presentation by Oliver.. so that makes every AGS'er, right? Some pretty cool Android stuff some would find interesting (Monkey_90_91 are you out there?).

It's sort of terrifying how complicated it is to make sure the game runs in good performance on a fairly standard array of devices.

That's pretty standard with game making Snarky. Well it's standard when you make your own engine.