Quoting: ToddLThis is one of the several reasons why I despise Kickstarter projects like this because they try to promise something but cancel it at the last minute due to reasons. In the case of this project, the developer should've known that macOS and Linux don't have larger player bases like Windows and shouldn't have offered those versions if they've never done it before.

the whole point of kickstarter supose to be "do something you never done before"
if an company made games in the past, then they can use the money from the same to do another game.
i know we had some star projects like might n9 (cough cough) , blood stained and yooka layle, but those were the exception, the rule should be give power to the indies to do their first game...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MothWavesA lot of people say they don't like Linux because they can't play their games. Then devs do this stuff and nobody complains. Game development is hard work and I sympathize with any dev who needs to make a full experience from the ground up. But come on. You make a promise to get money and then break it because you will lose money is just pure wrong. Also, developers have been making cross-platform software for decades, if you're making a promise like this keep cross-platform practices in mind and maybe you won't have to worry so much about "market share".

they probably cant do that because nowadays developers dont control the full software stack, they rely on game engines to do the job for then, and more often than not those are proprietary and dont have proper linux support.

you dont need to be an good programer to be a good game designer, who knows maybe they are great game designers but suck at code, at least with modern engines they can do something.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: SilverCode

QuoteI can organize a refund for you out of pocket.

Out of pocket? I had to check the definition of this to make sure it meant what I thought it meant, and it does - "having lost money in a transaction"

They aren't losing money in this transaction, they are just returning it to the person who gave it to them in return for a Linux version.

the issue is that, probably they already spend some money trying to port to linux, then gave up when they come to the conclusion it would be more expensive than they thought, and now they are refunding it, so all the money they spent on it was for nothing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

QuoteIf you were an original Kickstarter backer who was expecting a Mac or Linux version, feel free to reach out to me via Kickstarter DM and I can organize a refund for you out of pocket.

we have to respect this one.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

i'm laughing at doge banana and this:

QuotePeople are going Bananas over it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: elmapulmaking an game is hard enough, supporting other platforms is a bit harder

That's true, but that's why it's a stretch goal, where they promised to do it if they got extra money. And they got to define how much extra money it would require before they were willing to support other platforms. They could have not promised it, they could have made it a bigger stretch goal--the whole thing was totally their decision. Then they went back on their word.
Mind you, Kickstarter as a whole really pushes away from the philosophy of "underpromise, overdeliver".

if they earned enough money to have a profit, but porting was way more expensive thean they antecipated, at least they should try to refund people who purchased the non existent linux port

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pleasereadthemanual

Quoting: elmapulthe issue is that dont benefit anyone.
an linux version will earn about 4% of the income for the game, and they either will spend more than that, or have to quit supporting windows sooner to keep their promisse of treating every platform equally.

only platform owners care about an specific platform ecosystem, nintendo do with their consoles, microsoft with windows and xbox, and now valve with linux, the main difference is that valve isnt the only linux provider but they have nothing to lose with it growing even if its not their distro, they have everything to lose with microsoft gaining ground on the other hand.

I don't know whether this analysis is still very accurate, but Linux customers can represent significant revenue if you do it in the right way: http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/The-state-of-Mac-and-Linux-gaming

Regardless, the point I was making was that having a stretch goal for "we'll make it work on Linux!" is not a selling point anymore. Back when all we could do was beg for a port, we'd be grateful if the developer did anything at all. Linux customers have higher standards now that most of these Kickstarter campaigns will fall short of. Proton has become so good and the bar is now so high that only a vanishingly small subset of developers have created a Linux version that beats Proton because it's hard. And they're almost all indie games, like Factorio. The fact is you get better support with Proton than most native games today, it will work better for longer, and you'll always receive updates at the same cadence as Windows customers.

The feature that killed OS/2 is the feature that set Linux gamers free.

What a world.

i remember seeing that linux represented 20% of the first humble bundles, sure we had an small marketshare , but we didnt had any games back then, we were hungry for games, so we were willing to accept anything, high demand for low supply made us an good target.

nowadays this is not a problem anymore.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: elmapulthe issue is that every investiment is a risk

And that would be fine if Kickstarter was open and honest about your "investment" garnering zero reward. But as I've already pointed out, they don't. You pledge at a level, you get a reward, according to their platform. Stretch goals are promised, frequently broken.

And you know what? If an ACTUAL startup took money from an investor based on promises they had no intention of keeping - that's actually illegal, and is called "fraud". So it doesn't fly with me. Kickstarter want their cake, and to eat it.

Once I realised that, over ten years ago, they never got another penny from me.

making an game is hard enough, supporting other platforms is a bit harder, at least they delivered some product, but yeah its a shame they didnt suport us, but in the cases where an game isnt finished at least they should relase all the code and assets.

if nothing else, at least this proves they made something

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pleasereadthemanualtive ports are still better if they are well-maintained and tested, and built in an engine that cares about high performance on Linux. Factorio comes to mind.

the issue is that dont benefit anyone.
an linux version will earn about 4% of the income for the game, and they either will spend more than that, or have to quit supporting windows sooner to keep their promisse of treating every platform equally.

only platform owners care about an specific platform ecosystem, nintendo do with their consoles, microsoft with windows and xbox, and now valve with linux, the main difference is that valve isnt the only linux provider but they have nothing to lose with it growing even if its not their distro, they have everything to lose with microsoft gaining ground on the other hand.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

[quote=scaine][quote=EagleDelta]

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: EagleDeltaNever go into Crowdfunding of any kind thinking you're money is related to being a customer. It's NOT, you're an investor that doesn't get any stake in the company or payout. Instead you get exclusive content and (usually for physical products) earlier access to the product than the rest of the public.

Okay, but I'm not arguing the definition of crowdfunding. I'm noting that KS doesn't look, or encourage a crowdfunding engagement mentality. KS encourages engagement through awards and promises. But they have no accountability when their platform is used to blatantly break those promises.

the issue is that every investiment is a risk.
when someone decide to open an company , the person has no way to tell if the money they are investing, the time, the effort will be enough to make the product they want to make, and they will be able to recoup the investment.
kickstarter was an way to try to transfer the risks to the end user.

we can do that, we promisse, just trust us bro!
then the company have the guarantee they have the money to invest, but we have no guarantee they will actually try to develop such product, even when they try we dont know how much they invest and even if they are honest and put every single cent into the promissed features, there is no guarantee they didnt under estimated the problem and charged too litle.
hell some people promissed impossible things all the time.

kickstarter changed their policies and now you need to show at least an prototype, indiegogo? not even that.

another big issue is that some companies promissed things under an impossible low budget, because their real goals was to attract investors that would put more money into it, and as an result, even when they did delivred the procut as promissed, they did more harm than good, they proved to the public that its possible to develop such an product under such an low budget and the public started to belive even more in impossible promisses and to think that everyone else was over charging then.


honestly i can understand that some companies arent able to fulfil their promisses, but at least we should gain something.
couldnt finish the game? open source it, distribute every asset and stuff you made under copyleft/creative commons or public domain, give the fans something and let then decide what to do with it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments