drdrslashvohaul

Agree with both of you. It really is pretty much irrelevant whether Paul Trowe and/or his group are "really" "guilty" of the things their accused of. What's most important is that the Two Guys get their project funded. Getting the SQ IP is irrelevant too. Without a company to do anything with it, it seems rather pointless. And if it doesn't go to the Two Guys (or at least the Two Guys aren't employed to create the new game) there's more than enough people who will make damn sure everyone knows that it's not really SQ. Basically, it will backfire majorly on Paul if these rumours have substance - and it will be pointless for Paul to acquire the SQ IP unless he enters sincere dialogue with the Crowemurphyists.

Oh, absolutely, but things change. I get the feeling they added a lot more than they were originally intending to #2, resulting in a slightly less revolutionary #3. That and all the whining over Chrome forced them to show they could quickly port to other browsers in #3 too. (Although you could argue that this was revolutionary in itself.)

At the risk of causing some people to explode, do we think that we'll actually get a Prototype #4, or at least a Prototype #4 that's much of a revision of #2 and #3? There's only 4 days to go, and 500k looks like it's going to follow quickly on the tail of 400k (well, it will have to otherwise the KS will fail...). Will they leave most of the major changes until after the end of the Kickstarter? I'm not saying there wont be a #4 - nor am I saying it won't come quickly - but I wonder what we'll actually get (unless, of course, they've been hard at work on it putting bells and whistles on to use as a big draw for the final day or two).

We do, but it's called 8 incarnations of Sir Patrick Stewart. That was a lie. I lied just then.

Hey, no possession intended or implied. I just like the idea of living alone with someone. :)

You live on your own with a wife? :) (Yes, I have clearly picked up on the main take-home message from that presentation...)

Scott hates the fans enough already. There's no need to get others to jump on the bandwagon.

Oh well. In which case you're a topic fascist. *fumbles around for the unlike button*

Conspiracy upon conspiracy, eh? I'm not going to - nor am I interested in - drawing conclusions at this point. This is, after all, gossip fuelled by, at best, circumstantial evidence. It would be remiss not to bring it up, however, given that it is clearly a live topic. It was not my intention to sour the Kickstarter thread by posting that someone had posted about someone posting about a rumour that someone had posted about. But if it's going on it's better to discuss it rather than allow rumour and counter rumour to brew under the surface, chock full of healthy innuendo goodness. Whoever it was who split the topic did the right thing. But providing the discussion doesn't get libellous, I do hope it remains an open topic for discussion. I'm a "warts and all" kinda guy. I don't see negative issues as detrimental to any campaign, providing they're dealt with and explained in a mature manner. Indeed, this has been one of the most refreshing thing about the Crowemurphyist machine so far. They have been open about past disagreements, issues with people and the confusion caused by certain mistakes made early in the campaign process. If the world had more people like that we'd have much better and much more trusted products, services and elected representatives.

You know, I was thinking about this HTML5 thing the other day. It reminds me a bit about the late 80s/early 90s with Sierra. What made Sierra's games great (apart from the actual quality of the stories, the graphics, the gameplay, etc.) was that they were pushing the boundaries of the systems they coded. The graphics they managed to get out of SQ1 and SQ2 were truly remarkable given the quality of monitors and the processing power of the machines at that time. People say that HTML5 is limiting, cannot do this, cannot do that. But I wonder whether people have a) lost that pioneering spirit and B) forgotten the point of coding. In the late 90s we, for the first time, had hardware that outpaced software. Rather than trying to tidy things up and make it efficient on machines, coders just got something that "worked" and slapped it into the games. No need to save space when you're writing 30MB games on a disk that holds 700MB. No need to optimise code when it will run on a 500MHz machine and a large section of the target audience has 1.2GHz processors. No need to optimise memory usage if the game is using 500MB of RAM when most machines hold 2GB. Games companies had to make games quickly and get them to market without really sitting down and making the machine do something beyond the ordinary. Current games makers aren't constrained by their hardware (at least not to the same extent) and the limits of games really are the imaginations of the conglomerates which fund them. I have no doubt that with a pioneering spirit (which we know the games makers of the 80s had), they can do some wonderful things with HTML5, pushing it places even the designers didn't know it could go to. Assuming, of course, that they use it.

As Mr. Olsen just tweeted: Of course, this is all circumstantial. But when he gets... tired and emotional... we know that Mr Trowe has previous. I'm sure this is another classic example of a misunderstanding.

It's USUALLY just the East Coat time add 5 for the UK. As I said - plenty of time working out when NFL games are on. :)

I don't think anyone's seriously expecting you to add five figures to your pledge. :)

20:00EST is 01:00 in London, correct? Ah, it's like watching NFL over here. Late nights a necessity. Will probably not be awake at that time. But am there in spirit. Just make some sarcastic comments in an English accent for me. :y:

It's a fair question to ask, in my opinion. It may never come to it, but it would be interesting to know if the possibility has been considered. Consider everything. I doubt we'll get an answer until after the kickstarter has finished anyway. It would be ridiculous to even entertain the idea in public until they know one way or the other whether the campaign has been successful. HOWEVER, the fear that it might not be successful should be a spur to get others to up their pledges and/or try and spread the word. It's a long weekend here in England, so hopefully I'll be able to do SOMETHING (even if it is minor in the grand scheme of things).

The prototypes have usually come out within 72h of hitting the target, but I don't know how far they are in development, so it's difficult to say with certainty. But if we assume Mondayish, prototype three could be out Wednesday-Thursdayish. I don't think it's possible to be accurate even to within 24h. I suppose the thing to do is to sit tight and be patient. Difficult, I know. :)

While I sort of agree that this could be seen as disingenuous, I think the point of such a webpage is to try and convert those who believe in the power of HTML but are frustrated at it's low take up. I think this is a great idea - but I also think that the target audience is reasonably small. Hopefully large enough to bring in another 5 figures, though.

I have to say, Frede, I completely agree with your final line. I loved Cabin in the Woods because it was a big "fuck you" to the audience. Every comment I heard coming out of the cinema was about how the ending sucked, yet it was a work of genius. Granted, Joss Wheddon could just sit on a wooden chair and flip the bird for 90 minutes and I'd pay £10 to go and see it. In fact, this may be a better way for Scott Murphy to raise money.

Also - the comments on the video suggest that quite a few people don't understand irony. As Jess's sister might say, "IT'S LIKE RAY-EE-AIN-ah ON YOUR WEDDING DAY..."

Hmm. I might be slow to the party, but Glans Handerson is a masturbation joke, right?

I would disagree. I think constructive criticism should always be made. Personally I think that discussion about issues is always the way to go. However (and I think your post was very good, by the way), this is precisely the forum (literally) for making those constructive comments - the Kickstarter comments page probably isn't. And it's good that many people on there are defending the defensible and putting into context other legitimate gripes. I agree. Kickstarter isn't logical, so we shouldn't expect potential customers to be logical either. This isn't a disability charity - we're not degrading anyone by trying to tug the heart strings. This is a nostalgia trip, a comedy adventure, or whatever else it wants to be. Unless the connection is made with the irrational people out there (i.e. human beings), the project won't kick on and get its target funding. This buys into the "irrationality" issues too. People like shiny things. People like videos. We're already sold - we don't need to be sold to again (though, obviously, it would be good if they could convince us to part with a few extra quid). The mass of people in the target audience need to be convinced. That's comedy fans and people who like a good sci-fi story. Well. I'm sure the Pope of Crowemurphyism knows better than me the metrics of what the target audience is and should be. They need to be engaged. They are asinine and "ridiculous" to the educated fans of Space Quest - but again, we have information and emotional bonds which other people don't and see no reason to educate themselves about it. These are PRECISELY the people who need to be re-engaged with the process. The overall point throughout all of this has been that we cannot appeal to rational human beings because we do not have the time or the resources to sit down one-on-one with people and convince them that this is the best thing ever. We need to figure out what "they" want - and we need to get it to them. As I've said throughout - Kickstarter is not rational. There is nothing rational about pledging $100 over market value for a product that may not even get made. We need to stop thinking like fans and start thinking like potential fans. Or, more pressingly, the Crowemurphyists need to. I have faith that they can and will. But time is a factor.

It's not "anecdotal". It's just too small and to selective a sample size to have validity.

Hmm, I think we know what it means. Any chance they have to sue, they'll take it. And if the game does well they'll try and make SQ7 on the cheap and without the Two Guys. Allegedly.

Saw this and had to laugh: Ultimately, what I care about most is that this game gets made. I'm sure whatever hurdles have been come up against are not insurmountable. Failing this Kickstarter might not necessarily be the end of the project. But we should do all we can to ensure that it doesn't come to that.

It was neither said nor implied. :) This particular man, however... :)