KSP Making History

[Sirad]

13 hours ago, KSK said:

Computer games have moved on a lot in 30 years. The cost of making computer games has moved on a lot too. Comparatively speaking, computer game prices haven't moved on much at all - and I'm talking about the first day, get it without a discount, prices, not the 'no way am I paying for this.

 

added:

1. 30 Years ago how many People statistically bought a Specific Game ? 100,000 ? 200,000 ? Hom many People buy Games Today ? 1.000.000-2.000.000 and up. (if the title is quite good)

2. The work in old time's was more of a work than today because in old times [look at my signature] Developers were expensive.

3. Coding got easier the last 30 Years. one single experienced Person can easily stuff together a Civilisation One in 2 Weeks with modern Tools. Sid Meyer took longer on that

4. Added: A specific description lacks seriousness if you leave out that the revenue of a game if you compare it with 'old times' if far than 100 times bigger, because the first 3 Points

The game only has to be written once. and then can be sold a endless amount of time. without additional costs, except of maintaining Server structures for downloading. Jou dont even have costs for Tapes/Disk and packaging. ZERO cost. in old times that stuff physically existed in Boxes whatever.

DLC was invented to harvest Whales (so those are called who buy everything, in Germany the Term 'Sheep' fits too) DLC was invented to maximize income without having any additional worth. DLC is never ever anything that could be consideren 'fair' or 'good business' This is the outcome of soul and mindless greedy and wheesly Business decisions. So are Netherland Tax models with Mexican Ghost Owners too. Its all about maximizing revenue. Nothing more. Its about grabbing the biggest possible amount of money without creating any equivalent worth of work for it.

The New(tm) Investor wants at least 10 Dollars back for every dollar invested. Maybe more. Selling a 'rocket part' 1 Million times at a price of 2$ seams quite fair if editing and releasing that single part maybe cost 2 Grand this is what its all about. Nothin more. No problem, if stuff like this works, its fine, but no one should try to excuse Business behavior with 'oh this game costs so much in coding' If all of it got already covered by 8 to 9 digit Dollar Sales it already got. We more or less guess how many copies got sold and there IS a reason why you can not see how many copies are sold.

So please line all up, its whaling time. Currently those Oceans are full of white one's and Captain Ahab stands Aboard and selling you some ingame stuff a million times again and again while pretending it was specially made for *you* because he whipped the hell out of the workers that coded it for the 2$ you spent on it. (who knows ? that maybe happened because there were enough ramblings upon working conditions :-))))

So Now there is a Investor. Investors tend to want 'MOAR' Dollars.

The differece between 'gotten Product' and 'money Spent for it' is more shifting to the Investors side.

This is all anyone need to know about investments.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Sirad
forgotten something

[LoSBoL]

1 hour ago, Sirad said:

 

So please line all up, its whaling time. Currently those Oceans are full of white one's and Captain Ahab stands Aboard and selling you some ingame stuff a million times again and again while pretending it was specially made for *you* because he whipped the hell out of the workers that coded it for the 2$ you spent on it. 

So...  Which game(s)... and how much....? 

[Sirad]

3 minutes ago, LoSBoL said:

So...  Which game(s)... and how much....? 

Can someone quickly create a 'White Whale Model' as DLC for Kerbin ? Got one Customer already! The Moby Dick for only for 0,99$, Harpunes cost 1$ each (Single Use)

[LoSBoL]

16 minutes ago, Sirad said:

Can someone quickly create a 'White Whale Model' as DLC for Kerbin ? Got one Customer already! The Moby Dick for only for 0,99$, Harpunes cost 1$ each (Single Use)

I replied with the wrong quote, didn't come across that way, stupid me 
The way you keep ranting made me wonder what personal experiences you might have. 

But in all seriousness, the wahleing that some people are unfortunately prone for spending hundreds or even thousands of dollars, and companies that keep accepting those 'payments' do have moral issues.  The people that fall for that, in that way, and don't learn from experiences probably have even bigger issues.

[Sirad]

On 6/5/2017 at 0:34 AM, LoSBoL said:

The people that fall for that, in that way, and don't learn from experiences probably have even bigger issues.

Good alternative point. Note that all those 'Pay to Advance' is behind any game sheme is in 95% of all cases strictly dedicated to the weakest, the youngest of available Users. Those who doesnt have the mind to see behind that sort of sheme. Well when i was young there was nothing like that around, but when i look around along my Son's friend's there are Plenty, who spend their 'monthly bag's money' for stuff like that. This is what those companies live upon.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Vanamonde
Edited for politeness.

[LoSBoL]

 

Quote

The people that fall for that, in that way, and don't learn from experiences probably have even bigger issues.

On 05/06/2017 at 5:12 AM, Sirad said:

Good alternative point. Note that all those 'Pay to Advance' is behind any game sheme is in 95% of all cases strictly dedicated to the weakest, the youngest of available Users. Those who doesnt have the mind to see behind that sort of sheme. Well when i was young there was nothing like that around, but when i look around along my Son's friend's there are Plenty, who spend their 'monthly bag's money' for stuff like that. This is what those companies live upon.

Seems like you have some quoting issues as well by leaving out my first sentence.

The youngest will also have to live and learn, usually their parents give some guidance with that.

Edited December 15, 2017 by monstah
Quoted post has been edited, this was missed.

[Eskandare]

1 hour ago, Sirad said:

Can someone quickly create a 'White Whale Model' as DLC for Kerbin ? Got one Customer already! The Moby Dick for only for 0,99$, Harpunes cost 1$ each (Single Use)

I may make an easter egg in my Top Secret! mod just to reference this post.

For reference, Top Secret! adds a bunch of easter eggs and discoverable objects to the Kerbol System to promote exploration. Most of it refers to myths and sci-fi references, memes and NASA references.

A white whale would definitely be a good reference to this thread and the TT , Squad procurement thread.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Eskandare

[Sirad]

24 minutes ago, Eskandare said:

I may make an easter egg in my Top Secret! mod just to reference this post.

For reference, Top Secret! adds a bunch of easter eggs and discoverable objects to the Kerbol System to promote exploration. Most of it refers to myths and sci-fi references, memes and NASA references.

A white whale would definitely be a good reference to this thread and the TT , Squad procurement thread.

Great! i would sell my AAA Grade chips (both shoulders) for that!

Edited June 5, 2017 by Sirad

[KSK]

6 hours ago, Sirad said:

added:

1. 30 Years ago how many People statistically bought a Specific Game ? 100,000 ? 200,000 ? Hom many People buy Games Today ? 1.000.000-2.000.000 and up. (if the title is quite good)

2. The work in old time's was more of a work than today because in old times [look at my signature] Developers were expensive.

3. Coding got easier the last 30 Years. one single experienced Person can easily stuff together a Civilisation One in 2 Weeks with modern Tools. Sid Meyer took longer on that

4. Added: A specific description lacks seriousness if you leave out that the revenue of a game if you compare it with 'old times' if far than 100 times bigger, because the first 3 Points

5. The game only has to be written once. and then can be sold a endless amount of time. without additional costs, except of maintaining Server structures for downloading. Jou dont even have costs for Tapes/Disk and packaging. ZERO cost. in old times that stuff physically existed in Boxes whatever.

*snip*

1.  Older games - about 100-200K apparently (source) with a couple of outliers in the single digit millions. For modern games you can (approximately) scale that up by a factor of 10. So yes - your numbers look about right.

2.  Rather depressingly, that doesn't seem to be the case. If you read the article I linked to, that programmer got paid £3000, for his eight months work. In today's money, using the same calculator that I used previously, that comes to about £5,600. I really hope that he's an outlier because that's... not generous.

3. Programming may have gotten easier (I'm not a programmer so I'm not qualified to say) but the size of modern games programs and all the project management, bug hunting etc. that goes with that larger codebase, has increased enormously. Do better tools and easier programming make up for that? I have no idea.

Besides, coding may have gotten easier but graphics, sound design, level design and all the other 'gameplay' factors that go into a really successful game - they haven't gotten any easier at all. To use your example, one experienced person may well be able to knock out a Civ1 clone in a couple of weeks. They'd be hard pressed to knock out a CivVI clone though. And that's for a clone. Imagine that Civ (any version) hadn't been written and our experienced person was designing and writing it from scratch. That would take substantially more than two weeks - because coding is only part of the job.

4. You're right - my apologies. Here - have some numbers. Now lets have a look at them. GTA V. A very popular, AAA game. Apparently it made £80 million of sales. Actually it seems to be a bit of an outlier for AAA games - £30-40 million of sales seems to be more typical, but lets roll with that. I'm going with costs in UK sterling too, rather than dollars, just to err on the side of generosity. Compare that with my earlier R-Type example. No idea how many copies it sold - but lets go for 200,000, as the high end of my estimate for point 1. So, 200,000 copies at £10 per copy - £2 million in total sales.

So, with my totally accurate and thoroughly researched back of the envelope calculation, I figure that a top flight, modern AAA game makes about 40 times as much as a top-flight game from 1988. Not even a hundred times as much, let alone 'far more than 100 times bigger'.

5. Of course - and be happy that it can, otherwise mass market computer games probably wouldn't be a thing at all. Oh - and first you're (correctly) pointing out server costs for modern game distribution and then claiming zero cost compared to old style box copies. Which is it?

4 hours ago, Sirad said:

Good alternative point. So the drug dealer is not guilty, the consumer is. Note that all those 'Pay to Advance' or 'what kind of wank' is behind any game sheme is in 95% of all cases strictly dedicated to the weakest, the youngest of available Users. Those who doesnt have the mind to see behind that sort of sheme. Well when i was young there was nothing like that around, but when i look around along my Son's friend's there are Plenty, who spend their 'monthly bag's money' for stuff like that. This is what those companies live upon.

Really? When you were young, you didn't have football stickers, bubblegum cards, Top Trumps (or other collectable card games), the latest and greatest collectable Japanese plastic toy sensation (with attendant cartoon series for added marketing) or anything like that?

Selling collectable junk to kids has been a staple of the toy industry at least since I was a kid. That doesn't excuse it of course but in my opinion it makes your outrage about selling DLC to kids look just a little bit shallow.

Edited June 5, 2017 by KSK

[Just Jim]

On 5/31/2017 at 5:01 AM, Sirad said:

Wrong. DLC dont pay the Bills. DLC was invented some years ago, as a way to press out more Money from da Kids, without enhancing Quality by just selling each bit separately. The Quality of the games would not enhance if 100 billion People buy the DLC. only the Wallets of the Shareholder will get better. A complete Game that once could have been purchased for 50$ now costs 500$ because it is sliced into 100 Pieces. Most People are just not enough enhanced in their mind to add all that together to realise that some games cost more than the Computer they are played on. Humans are dumb and the Developers just found out. The Game itself wont be any Better.

Seriously??? I'm about to turn 55, and will gladly give squad a few $$$ for the DLC in exchange for the thousands of hours of fun they've given me.....

So in your opinion, I'm just a dumb kid that's not "enhanced" enough to know better???

With all due respect, I find your comment somewhat..... offensive.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Just Jim

[adsii1970]

10 hours ago, Just Jim said:

Seriously??? I'm about to turn 55, and will gladly give squad a few $$$ for the DLC....

So in your opinion, I'm just a dumb kid that's not "enhanced" enough to know better???

With all due respect, I find your comment extremely offensive.

And to add to what @Just Jim has said, today's gaming generation is like microwave popcorn... they want it on demand. They don't like reading reviews for a game that will be out in two years. This is places tremendous pressure on the game development team of any software company to come up with some sort of demo to get the hype train going, then release a initial release about a year or so after that. All the time, the demand from the customer goes up - so there's a rush to release an initial product. The extra DLC normally contains other features of the game but were not essential for the core release since the game's core was essentially playable when it was initially released.

If one thinks of it logically, why should a company offer DLC for free? In the example given by @Sirad of the drug dealer, the drug dealer would not be in business if there were no demand for the product. The same is driving the gaming industry. To be very blunt, we were lucky that Squad didn't quit development of KSP with the release of 1.0 or even 1.2. Everything that's been done since then could have been resold as KSP 2.0 or even an expansion pack. Think of the Sims franchise, SimCity, or any of the other games from the '90s that did just that. I think I even have two copies of Zoo Tycoon around here, somewhere... (1.0 and 2.0) and both with all the expansion packs. So why should a company release a finished product and never do anything else to it? As long as people will buy expansion packs, then the game will be further developed. It is a win-win for the consumer and the software company.

All this is fueled by our need for instant gratification. In the case of Cities: Skylines, I have gladly paid for the available DLC for myself. Does it mean that I'm a dumb kid that doesn't know any better as Sirad has implied? No. Firstly, he is not the one that controls how I spend my money. I get to decide that. I'm 47 years old; I determine what I spend my money on. As long as I feel the DLC (or game, for that matter) is worth the cost-benefit-analysis, then I buy it. And at least DLC is something that is re-usable, unlike alcohol or tobacco based products. I can get repetitive use out of downloaded content for a game. I only get one time use out of an amusement park ticket, a box of cigars, or a bottle of whatever adult beverage purchased. When it comes to KSP, I will probably pay for DLC, too, as long as the DLC doesn't break all the mods I use. If it does cause mod breakage, then it will not be worth the benefit-cost-analysis...

And the comment about investments - seriously:
 

Quote

So Now there is a Investor. Investors tend to want 'MOAR' Dollars.

The differece between 'gotten Product' and 'money Spent for it' is more shifting to the Investors side.

This is all anyone need to know about investments.

Ugh. No. Investors want a return of their investment. That is what you need to understand about how capitalism works. An investor invests in a company with the hopes of gaining a financial return. They don't invest for philanthropic reasons. And if they do, it is considered charitable giving. The companies they invest in are expected to generate a profit with the money invested. And for you to complain about software companies doing this, what do you think Apple does? They take money and create innovative products. But unlike games, a phone is not easily upgradable through mods.  That's why as soon as any iPhone is released, we are only a few months away from the new model. No one complains that an  iPhone that costs between $167 to $200 (U.S.) to make, yet for the consumer, the cost to purchase the phone is between $649 to $749 (U.S.).¹ No one complains about Apple's profit margin of nearly 325% of the cost of production. So spare me with the fussy and fuzzy economics alluded to. Corporations are in the business of generating revenue. Revenue is what allows for the benefits to the investor, continued product development, payment of salaries and benefits, and marketing. Without profits, corporations die, product development ceases because there is no incentive to continue.

But if the product is making money and the consumer is willing to continue payment for the product, product development and enhancement continue. This is true in the gaming industry (look at all the older titles that are no longer available) and any other free-market industry. The consumer will purchase the product as long as the product has some value, either real or intangible.

And I agree with @Just Jim. [snip]  Under capitalism, you have the right to buy or not buy any given product or service. Since you do not want to buy the DLC, then don't. [snip]  After all, you, as does the other millions of KSP players, have a right to play the game how you want, to mod or not to mod, and to buy or not to buy DLC.

^{1. Lazarus, David. "How Much Does it Really Cost Apple to Make an iPhone 6?" Los Angeles Times, September 17, 2014. Available on-line at: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-laz-iphonecost-20140917-story.html}

[TotallyNotHuman]

On 5/31/2017 at 5:01 PM, Sirad said:

Wrong. DLC dont pay the Bills. DLC was invented some years ago, as a way to press out more Money from da Kids, without enhancing Quality by just selling each bit separately. The Quality of the games would not enhance if 100 billion People buy the DLC. only the Wallets of the Shareholder will get better. A complete Game that once could have been purchased for 50$ now costs 500$ because it is sliced into 100 Pieces.

Most People are just not enough enhanced in their mind to add all that together to realise that some games cost more than the Computer they are played on. Humans are dumb and the Developers just found out. The Game itself wont be any Better.

DLC is not for Funding the Game, its for increasing someones Wallet. Some games even have all functions inside and you have to Buy a DLC to get some Bits switched to acess that function.

 

I respectfully disagree with your comment. 

Yes, I understand that certain companies (*cough* EA *cough*) use DLC as a money-making scheme. But your generalization is grossly misled.

Your quote here:

On 5/31/2017 at 5:01 PM, Sirad said:

Most People are just not enough enhanced in their mind to add all that together to realise that some games cost more than the Computer they are played on.

is also very insulting and exaggerated.

Let me use one of the games in my Steam Library (mods, I hope this doesn't fall under 2.2i, but please tell me if it does) as an example: Hacknet. After a friend recommended it to me, I downloaded it. It was well worth every cent I paid.

Now, recently, an expansion (or DLC, if you will) was released for Hacknet. Did I buy it? Yes, because I had trust in the developers to produce quality content. Did they live up to their promise? Yes.

I suppose that makes me "not enough enhanced in their mind", using your words, then...

[CjStaal]

On 3/17/2017 at 9:30 AM, Woodstar said:

Why april, why not just 2013, Kinda makes me mad, made my purchase Dec. 2013.


Edit: nice one on the word change. wouldn't want any of our resident children seeing any curse words. HAHA

 

Because that's right before the spike of purchases. It's appeasement to us "oh they aren't loveing us at least" when in reality it's an extremely small percentage of people who bought before that. I bought in June. June is when it spiked in popularity.

[stibbons]

27 minutes ago, CjStaal said:

Because that's right before the spike of purchases. It's appeasement to us "oh they aren't loveing us at least" when in reality it's an extremely small percentage of people who bought before that. I bought in June. June is when it spiked in popularity.

How was an announcement made in April supposed to predict this alleged popularity spike? 

[Sirad]

7 hours ago, KSK said:

Really? When you were young, you didn't have football stickers, bubblegum cards, Top Trumps (or other collectable card games), the latest and greatest collectable Japanese plastic toy sensation (with attendant cartoon series for added marketing) or anything like that?

Selling collectable junk to kids has been a staple of the toy industry at least since I was a kid. That doesn't excuse it of course but in my opinion it makes your outrage about selling DLC to kids look just a little bit shallow.

We had those but this was something different because the Money Spent was visible in your hands and you have to walk to the shops and you got something REAL. (more or less) Guess how much money you can make today if you have a complete 'Space 1999' sticker Album. There is a fundamental difference if you buy physical items or virtual ones. or not ?

[razark]

1 minute ago, stibbons said:

How was an announcement made in April supposed to predict this alleged popularity spike? 

That really doesn't matter.

The simple fact is that Squad did it, therefore it must have been for bad/nefarious reasons.

[Sirad]

10 hours ago, TotallyNotHuman_ said:

I suppose that makes me "not enough enhanced in their mind", using your words, then...

[snip]   Whenever something is written that doesnt fit everyones behalves its always a problem. If i wanted to get many likes i would have joined the 'everything is fine and the Investor is Mother Theresa Club'

[snip]

Others have their opinion and even if they are opposing mine, i can accept that.

[Snark]

Hi folks,

Sorry, but although heated debate is fine, personal remarks are not.  Some recent posts have gotten a bit too personal and needed some redacting.

Play nice, please, and let's try not to let things get personal.  Arguing about KSP (or DLC, or the state of the game industry) is fine.  Arguing about arguing is not.

I know you folks have been around a while so I don't have to remind you about this-- right?-- but just a quick refresher:

• Address the post, not the poster.  It's fine to say "I take issue with your comment X because <reasons>".  But it's not okay to say that someone's comment reveals <thing> about their character, or similar implications, because that's getting personal.
• If someone says something that you think is directly insulting you as a person, report the post.  Let a moderator make the decision whether it was over the line or not.
• If someone says something that you disagree strongly with, fine!  By all means reply, and lay out the logical reasons for your disagreement.  But remember that you're arguing with the statement, not the person.  And don't let them get under your skin.
• If someone says something that you believe is so patently offensive that it violates the forum guidelines, by all means report it and we'll take a look.
• People have opinions.  Opinions differ, often radically so.  Civil debate = great.  Getting angry, and posting angry = not so much.

Okay, re-opening the thread.  Let's keep things civil, shall we?

Thank you for your understanding.

 

[Sirad]

16 hours ago, KSK said:

4. You're right - my apologies. Here - have some numbers. Now lets have a look at them. GTA V. A very popular, AAA game. Apparently it made £80 million of sales. Actually it seems to be a bit of an outlier for AAA games - £30-40 million of sales seems to be more typical, but lets roll with that. I'm going with costs in UK sterling too, rather than dollars, just to err on the side of generosity. Compare that with my earlier R-Type example. No idea how many copies it sold - but lets go for 200,000, as the high end of my estimate for point 1. So, 200,000 copies at £10 per copy - £2 million in total sales.

So, with my totally accurate and thoroughly researched back of the envelope calculation, I figure that a top flight, modern AAA game makes about 40 times as much as a top-flight game from 1988. Not even a hundred times as much, let alone 'far more than 100 times bigger'.

 

A sharp look on the List offers that the 'invested money' for GTA V is somewhat around 265 million Dollars. So lets come to 'the right numbers' with me trying to not be insulting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop#cite_note-3

Not only the numbers count it also count what the numbers SAY and one needs to read the complete text to understand what the numbers mean. in the article you are referring to it was written (referring to the top-seller Tetris) ' it was later popularised upon its release for the Game Boy in 1989.^[1] The game has been ported to a wide range of platforms and sold in excess of 495 million units'

GTA5 actually was SOLD 80 million TIMES. 80 millions multiplied by 59.99 (actual Steam sale) gives ehhh, no offense meant this is only a marginal error no businessman would ever care upon....

somewhat around 4.500.000.000$ (four point five billions)  How much is this in Pounds?.Great i succeeded calculating that. Dont mind the ingame DLC and Shark cards. App. one can add 1 Billion$ top of that. so we have already passed 5 Billions.

Besides that, Boxing a game and creating Media/Manual (they actually did print a paper manual) overall (once) costed around 2$ up to 5$ per Box. Costs for maintaining servers: lets say 1% of the costs for boxing it.

So i was underestimating my assumption. it is 1000 times. ? 2000 times ?

So there is absolutely nothing wrong with me if i say it is more than 100 times. you can only say to me 'you are wrong because it is even more than that' (if you still mind the numbers)

 

 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Sirad
counted numbers

[sibrit]

Far more important than whether you get the DLC for free, or the value of paid DLC in KSP, or the state of KSP as a game; do we have any update on the expected release date?

[TheRagingIrishman]

5 minutes ago, sibrit said:

Far more important than whether you get the DLC for free, or the value of paid DLC in KSP, or the state of KSP as a game; do we have any update on the expected release date?

no

[KSK]

1 hour ago, Sirad said:

A sharp look on the List offers that the 'invested money' for GTA V is somewhat around 265 million Dollars. So lets come to 'the right numbers' with me trying to not be insulting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop#cite_note-3

Not only the numbers count it also count what the numbers SAY and one needs to read the complete text to understand what the numbers mean. in the article you are referring to it was written (referring to the top-seller Tetris) ' it was later popularised upon its release for the Game Boy in 1989.^[1] The game has been ported to a wide range of platforms and sold in excess of 495 million units'

GTA5 actually was SOLD 80 million TIMES. 80 millions multiplied by 59.99 (actual Steam sale) gives ehhh, no offense meant this is only a marginal error no businessman would ever care upon....

somewhat around 4.500.000.000$ (four point five billions)  How much is this in Pounds?.Great i succeeded calculating that. Dont mind the ingame DLC and Shark cards. App. one can add 1 Billion$ top of that. so we have already passed 5 Billions.

Besides that, Boxing a game and creating Media/Manual (they actually did print a paper manual) overall (once) costed around 2$ up to 5$ per Box. Costs for maintaining servers: lets say 1% of the costs for boxing it.

So i was underestimating my assumption. it is 1000 times. ? 2000 times ?

So there is absolutely nothing wrong with me if i say it is more than 100 times. you can only say to me 'you are wrong because it is even more than that' (if you still mind the numbers)

I stand corrected - thanks. The total is probably a little less than that - the linked article from that table I cited says that "It was announced during in the release the game had shipped 75 million units." (whatever that means), so I'm not sure we can assume that all 80 million copies shipped sold at full price but whatever - your point still stands. Interestingly, that same article says that 75 percent of sales were physical copies rather than digital, so there's still some pretty hefty distribution costs involved.

[Sirad]

11 minutes ago, KSK said:

so there's still some pretty hefty distribution costs involved.

I can not actually confirm the today's costs of physical 'Boxed games' i just know what it's costs were in the late 90's. Lets say, the investment on that 'GTA' was the mentioned 265 million and the total revenue is (lets say to have easier numbers)  2.65 billion dollars (to cover taxes, hookers, beer, Steam shares what ever, it still grows)

The interesting thing upon that all is, the remaining 90% of the incoming GTA funds is pure revenue cash for the investors pocket, in that case (gta5) a legal fair share to cover the risk of the 265 million dollar vaporizing.

Back to KSP So.... .... uh ..... oh. wait.... i nearly forgot. KSP was 'Early Access' okay this was a bad example.... Customer took nearly all risks.

What should i say ? 'okay i'm fine because all the money they got from million's and millions of customers around the World vaporized without the game gotten completed at all, long promised stuff (according to the wiki) like 'redrawing parts and assets' got dropped 'indefinetly' ?

come on, no problem i give you MOAR money because this time, for sure, (reaaaaaaally) you promised and will use it for development.... really ? The more money you push into something thats not completed yet, the less work is being done because if the key to MOAR is delaying and delaying, one can endlessly ask for more money pointing at the missing gaps and ends, unless its not finished. 

I personally rather tend to say '[insert actual owner here] go into your golden Hall, sit yourself on your golden, diamond encrusted chair use your Emerald Keyboard and complete the ###### game.' Some holes wont fill up, regardless how much money is thrown in.

 

[Human Person]

This is the 11.111 th post in the announcements forum:

 

I CAN'T WAIT FOR THE DLC! 

 

*musik starting to play*

 

I'm so excited, and I just can't hide it
I'm about to lose control and I think I like it
I'm so excited, and I just can't hide it
And I know, I know, I know, I know
I know I want you

We shouldn't even think about tomorrow
Sweet memories will last a long, long time

We'll have a good time baby, don't you worry

And if we're still playing 'round, boy that's just fine
Let's get excited, we just can't hide it
I'm about to lose control and I think I like it
I'm so excited, and I just can't hide it
And I know, I know, I know, I know

I know I want you, I want you

 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Physics Student

[KSK]

2 hours ago, Sirad said:

I can not actually confirm the today's costs of physical 'Boxed games' i just know what it's costs were in the late 90's. Lets say, the investment on that 'GTA' was the mentioned 265 million and the total revenue is (lets say to have easier numbers)  2.65 billion dollars (to cover taxes, hookers, beer, Steam shares what ever, it still grows)

The interesting thing upon that all is, the remaining 90% of the incoming GTA funds is pure revenue cash for the investors pocket, in that case (gta5) a legal fair share to cover the risk of the 265 million dollar vaporizing.

Back to KSP So.... .... uh ..... oh. wait.... i nearly forgot. KSP was 'Early Access' okay this was a bad example.... Customer took nearly all risks.

What should i say ? 'okay i'm fine because all the money they got from million's and millions of customers around the World vaporized without the game gotten completed at all, long promised stuff (according to the wiki) like 'redrawing parts and assets' got dropped 'indefinetly' ?

come on, no problem i give you MOAR money because this time, for sure, (reaaaaaaally) you promised and will use it for development.... really ? The more money you push into something thats not completed yet, the less work is being done because if the key to MOAR is delaying and delaying, one can endlessly ask for more money pointing at the missing gaps and ends, unless its not finished. 

I personally rather tend to say '[insert actual owner here] go into your golden Hall, sit yourself on your golden, diamond encrusted chair use your Emerald Keyboard and complete the ###### game.' Some holes wont fill up, regardless how much money is thrown in.

 

Well I don't know how TakeTwo are structured as a business, so I can't say where that money is going. I would hope that a good chunk of it is being kept in reserve somehow to keep the company afloat if their next few releases end up losing money.

That's not terribly unusual in any creative industries - the big successes covering the costs of the... less successful products. 

We also know that some of the money has been spent in buying up a certain small developer that we all know, and I would hope that this is merely one example of TakeTwo using their mighty GTA cash cow to diversify into more speculative or niche games. But again - I simply don't know.

Regarding KSP, that's a difficult question. I bought the game back in 2013 - honestly can't remember exactly when, so I may or may not be eligible for free DLC but that's not important.

 I think it's fair to say that KSP hasn't turned out the way I hoped it would but I liked the demo and I figured that even if all the full game (such as it was at the time) offered was a few more parts - which I knew it did from reading up on it - then it was worth the money. 

It was. I haven't played the game for ages but I feel I got my money's worth. On a very personal note, KSP inspired me to start writing, which is not something I thought I'd ever take up, so for that alone I'll always have fond memories of it.

If I'd only heard about KSP when it was officially released then things might have been different. I would certainly have taken a closer look at it before plunking down my money.

If in doubt I would say buy a game for what it is when you buy it. No game is perfect - the question is, are the good bits worth the money and are they good enough that you can overlook the bad bits? 

In my case I probably would have bought the full price version of KSP - the core gameplay probably would have been enough to make up for its other deficiencies - as I see them.

If you're buying a game for what it might become then you're always taking a risk and have to be comfortable taking that risk. Whatever your personal view of developers, there are all sorts of reasons - not all of them reprehensible - why game development doesn't go according to plan and why you might not get what you hoped for.

Not sure how much that answers your question? Anyway - here endeth the wall of text.