Denis Dyack: Crowdsourcing Is The Future Of Game Development
In the third segment of our interview, Denis Dyack speaks about the most successful studio structure and the influence of Valve.
Maybe maybe. But it sure isn't the future of YOUR game development Dyack. By my reckoning that's THREE failed attempts at crowd-sourcing the SAME GAME.
I really don't think crowd funding will last all that long.
All its going to take is the American business place to see that they can get money from us by making grand claims, and next your going to see is crap crap and more crap.
Its the nature of capitalism to try and exploit those around you, and when americans see dollar signs the end is nigh. Its like blood in the water. Its just a matter of time till the sharks come circling.
I wonder if this system could be used to raise money to buy the source code for existing games and make it public. Think what could be done if B made the Gamebro(?) (Fallout 3, ect....) source code public!
There will be more crowdfunded projects, BUT in comparison to all of the in-house developed titles and Indie titles it barely even scratches the surface.
The problem with crowdfunded projects, is that it's a huge gamble. Not just on whether they'll deliver the game, but if the game is even worth it. I'd rather stick with companies that put out the project, then ask for money. It gives the developer more drive, more ambition to hit those sales numbers and receive the big money.
Though CoD is the exception to this, and manages to sell purely on brand name.
If any of you guys have watched of all these videos so far I hope you can at least acknowledge that this guy doesn't come across at all like a scammer, phony, or whatever negative stuff has been thrown his way.
The more of these videos I watch the more respect for and trust in the guy I have.
I really hope the rest of the community is seeing and feeling the same thing.
Lets not confuse crowdsourcing and crowdfunding. Crowdsourcing isn't using money from a kickstarter but instead its having the gaming community make content for the game. Making it kinda like a hybrid open-source game with some central control.
I personally feel uncomfortable with the idea. It can work for a few games but at large it wouldn't make much sense to have games being made by the gamers any more then it would make sense for movies to be made by the public.
Creative and talented developers don't need to outsource the work of making the game to the audience IMO.
If Kickstarter helps makes games like Broken Sword and Survival Horror titles again and maybe (hopefully) The long lost art of Ghost recon tactical FPS games (Granted ARMA 3, is there, but a few more would be nice), then im all for it. Because AAA titles like RE6 and Id Software's RAGE are SERIOUSLY going in the wrong direction and if massive companys don't have the balls to make a AAA title that's unique anymore that have nothing to do with COD or Battlefield or QTE events or Gears Of War. Then its these midrange companys we might be relying on in the future to create the truly unique great experiences again not the big AAA companys.
Dota 2 being free probably helps.
But yeah Valve rocks. best publisher on the planet and STEAM has the craziest deals. AAA titles for like $3.
Kickstarter and crowd-funding is still in its infancy - everyone still sees the potential, but has yet to really get burned by it.
In the build up to the launch of Too Human Dyack was doing interviews with everyone talking up the game, the potential it had, what the plans were for the future, expansions, sequels, the whole TH universe.
The it released, got bashed by the critics, and Dyack disappeared - you couldn't get a comment out of him or Silicon Knights, and ultimately TH was abandoned by them - getting no updates, no DLC, no expansions and no sequels.
Dyack proved to be someone that can talk up a game prior to launch, but when it fails to deliver doesn't want anything to do with it. The Kotaku article that criticised how SK was run - that it needed MORE control over how it made its games, is precisely the opposite of the freedom that uncontrolled crowd-funding provides.
and i agree.
__________________________________Borderlands 2 Classes
Take a look at the upcoming star citizen. Crowd funded game that is becoming so much more then what it was intended to be, purely because the community is funding it.
Denis Dyack lands publisher for next game.
Denis Dyack "f*** crowdsourcing, i've got a sugar daddy now".
Kickstarter will not be the future because people like Dyack will rip people off until no one trusts it anymore. I'll bet he wishes he could have used kickstarter on some of his failed projects in the past. Getting paid for empty promises is like a dream come true for this guy.
I love the idea of crowd funding when it comes to first or second time developers and encouraging the development of niche games. In this regards I consider it charity.
But I take issue with the fact that not everyone falls into these two categories. I am essentially paying for an unfinished product and I receive no additional incentives other than a promise that there will be some kind of finished product. If I am giving you money to develop a game doesn't that make me an investor, thus I should get some kind of return based on the sales/performance of that game?
@JoonKimDMD Bear in mind if you give Dyack money he might sue you when the game comes out and its terrible.
Come on dude, we can do better than that.
Let's just take a loan for 1 Mil, my credits too good not to ruin it you know?
@amaneuvering to tell the truth he was like that in the past but he did change a lot in the last few years, I'm backing the project I hope this game can make it
@WantYouBad What !?!!?!? Mcshea is not a lesbian?! Yeah right and the world is flat...pfft
@WantYouBad wrong website
@nyran125tk Yes there needs to be middleware (budget games). Otherwise no creativity, only franchise installments. Renderware help many devs turn a good profit (like 3 GTA games). EA bought Criterion and the engine or Burnout sequel was never seen again.
@Mr_BillGates People are retarded with money.
@Mr_BillGates I guess you are talking about Shadowrun. They exceeded their financial goal 5 times only to make mediocre, short and linear game. They haven´t enhanced initial concept or scope of the game one bit despite having incomparably larger budget.
@Avenger1324 Do you know the that there is a difference between crowdsourcing and crowdfunding?
@green_scorpion I'm pretty sure he sleeps like a baby at night.
@BlackaliciousX Perfect business models, for them. It's basically playing with the houses money.
@slayerSS-3 @amaneuvering I trusted him in the past aswell, big mistake.
Strike three, or 4, or 5 maybe 6 whatever .
@miser_cz I paid for a $20 game.
I got one.
I think that the point BlackaliciousX was trying to make is that there is a distinction between those that use Kickstarter to genuinely kick-start their project, and those large companies that view it as an easy source of quick cash from fans.
Small independent devs working on their 1st / 2nd game fit the idea of what Kickstarter was intended for - without that funding they would have no alternative means to get their ideas turned into reality.
But when for instance Elite came back asking for crowd-funding - a long established company employing hundreds of staff already, making games across multiple platforms - comes onto Kickstarter, it is all too easy to see it is a cynical cash grab on the goodwill people have towards their past games. They already have all the industry contacts they need to secure funding for a game - a failed Kickstarter drive doesn't mean the game won't get made for them.