329
330

RPS Interview with Peter Molyneux is like beating up a bank teller when you're mad at Wall Street (self.truegaming)

CaptPic4rd が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Khanstant 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (32子コメント)

I wish they'd apply this hawkish approach on some malevolent entity, rather than just inept dreamer Molyneux. I don't think people should be entitled to Kickstarter refunds in this case and I think the whole pledge system is antithetical to the whole point of kickstarter, at least once the rewards stop being the very product youre backing.

[–]neonoodle 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I think Molyneux gets a lot of slack for representing himself as just an inept dreamer, but I do think he's a pathological liar. He admitted to lying to a company at the beginning of his career, it worked for him then, and he's continued to do it for 30 years. I'd feel bad for him if he doesn't throw everyone else under the bus with him.

He lied to the players of Curiosity, hasn't and probably never will deliver on his promise to Bryan, the Curiosity winner, and in this interview is lying his ass off in trying to make it seem like everyone is working round the clock to finish Godus when he already admitted in the video a few days ago that most of the studio is on the next project and Godus has a smaller crew tasked to finish the game. The lead designer is even claiming that the stuff Molyneux is STILL promising is on shaky ground (namely multiplayer and thus Bryan's involvement at all).

The fact that people keep coming to defend this lying piece of crap is a testament to how great of a job he does at looking like a kicked puppy, which he does every time this happens.

No, Molyneux isn't an inept dreamer. He's an expert manipulator, and even today he is fooling people for their dollars and sympathy.

I really hope everyone at 22Cans is prepping and sending out their resumes. That company isn't going to last the year, and even if it does I can't imagine it's an environment that is pleasant to work in, on a project doomed to fail.

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (3子コメント)

Expert manipulator? Horseshit. If what he dies is expert manipulation, then this dump I'm taking is expert evacuation.

[–]neonoodle [非表示スコア]  (2子コメント)

I can't vouch for your bowel movement's skill level, but when you've been a known liar for over 20 years and still convince thousands of people to give you millions of dollars, I think you've reached expert level in manipulation.

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (1子コメント)

I just don't think manipulation is very hard I guess

[–]neonoodle [非表示スコア]  (0子コメント)

Hardest part is getting rid of your morality. If that's already gone, then manipulate away, buddy

[–]RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The idea of refunds if the product doesn't pan out strikes me as idiotic. At that point you have to just have all the money set aside anyway, because otherwise you can work through all the money, then be required to return it because the end product didn't pan out.

[–]Khanstant -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Then don't back a kickstarter.

[–]RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, I never have, so I don't know all the rules. But if I were to back one, I wouldn't expect to see my money again regardless of the outcome, is what I'm saying. And short of the guy just running off with the money or something that's the way it should be.

[–]deten 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (23子コメント)

I don't think people should be entitled to Kickstarter refunds

Just out of curiosity, if we step back from this case, and talk about "how we want the world to be". I would say, developers should be accountable for the delivery of kickstarter rewards. You would say, they should not (if I understand correctly)...

Why do you wish that?

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (8子コメント)

I say that because kick starter is for donating to a project you want to see realized. You aren't investing, you aren't buying, you aren't preordering. Granted, videogame KS have cornered themselves into expectations of lavish rewards in addition to getting a copy of the finished product. When you donate, you're donating. If you want a money back guarantee, wait and buy the product t at a retail store with a return policy.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (7子コメント)

You are neither donating nor investing. You are paying for a product.

Now sure you can define it however you want, and we can disagree on that definition... but if we cant agree on that then our conversation goes to a quick end.

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (6子コメント)

You aren't paying for a product. You're kick starting one, helping it get made. Not every pledge even nets you a reward. When you give 100 bucks to NPR, you aren't buying a 100 dollar tote bag.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (5子コメント)

No, you are paying to receive something. That something will come in the future, often the developers give a delivery date.

If you pledge to get a reward you should get that reward because that is what you are paying for.

The idea that you aren't paying for a product is insanity. That is like saying, paying for food at a drive through, which you then drive forward to pick up, is not paying for a product. Just because it comes in the future does not mean it is "not a product"

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (4子コメント)

You can contribute and get no reward. It isn't buying something. That's what a store is, that's what a purchase. Contributing to a kick starter is different and your analogy doesn't apply. Its more like someone saying "I have this great idea for a crazy hamburger, do y'all wanna help me get the shit to do it?" Then you either want to help or don't. Sometimes that enterprising burgerteer might offer incentives at different pledge levels. At no point are you paying money in exchange for a product, there isn't even one in a kick starter yet. You're giving money to someone with an idea and a need. Its crowd funding-- a new, wonky, exploitable, risky way to raise capital for ideas. Its not a fucking store. If you want to buy something, do it in a shop. Its insane to participate in something if you don't understand or agree to the terms of participation.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (3子コメント)

do y'all wanna help me get the shit to do it?

But they are promising to deliver a burger in the end, with certain toppings.

If they dont deliver, then the people should get their money back, if they deliver but only have, tomatoes and none of the other toppings they promised, then they should get a portion of the money back.

[–]Khanstant [非表示スコア]  (2子コメント)

They promise to make a burger in the end, you aren't always entitled to one for free afterwards. Either way a promise is a promise. Which is not much. Kickstarter is a risky way to use your money.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (1子コメント)

You aren't getting a free one, you are literally paying for it.

FFS, why do people abandon all logic here.

[–]Ayjayz 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Because if they might have to hand back all of the money at some point, that means that they can't spend any of the money, which means there is no point in raising the money.

[–]deten -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Just out of curiosity, if we step back from this case

I was specifically talking about in general. There are definetly projects which collapse or cease development, or rush to release without ever delivering their list of kickstarter funded goals.

I think, in general, companies should be required to fulfill the goals OR return the funds. Within reason. In most industries this is called a good faith effort.

They have to do their best, but if they grossly fuck up, they should be responsible for it.

[–]Ayjayz 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

But how could you ever spend the raised money on development whilst also keeping enough money to pay everyone back in full?

[–]RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS [非表示スコア]  (10子コメント)

In most industries this is called a good faith effort.

Uh, no, a "good faith effort" is not returning all the funds when it doesn't work out because why would you be raising funds if you didn't need them to operate? Think a little harder here.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (9子コメント)

I don't see the need to return all the funds, but it should be proportional to the funding goals that were achieved, yet now implemented.

Maybe you should think a little...

[–]RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS [非表示スコア]  (8子コメント)

If funds are left over and they give up, sure, they should return them. But the fact remains that, even if the work is unsuccessful, that's what the funds are paying for, so by the time the project is declared a failure it is unlikely that there will be much in the way of funding.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (7子コメント)

I don't think you really follow the conversation.

We are talking about clear goals achieved during funding. Which do not get delivered, the developers say they have no plans to finish these goals, and players are left without the game that was achieved from funding.

I get it, if developers do their best and supply something that is not fun, that's one thing, but completely reneging on claims made during goal funding is not a trend we want to reward.

[–]RICHUNCLEPENNYBAGS [非表示スコア]  (6子コメント)

I don't think you're following what I'm saying. They're using the funds to operate, and, therefore, even if they don't achieve their stated goals, there are no funds to return. If it didn't work that way, you'd have to already have the same amount of money on hand in the event that you had to issue refunds, and in that case, the Kickstarter is pointless in the first place.

[–]deten [非表示スコア]  (5子コメント)

there are no funds to return

Lack of funds is not an excuse, don't you think? If you take out a loan to start a business and fail, the loan doesn't disappear. Now I am not saying we are loaning the company money, I am saying we are buying a product. If the product is not delivered in full, then that company is responsible for making up the difference.

You sound like a child.

"But but, where is the money???!??" For fucks sake, you don't know what any given company has in the bank. Do we just ASSUME they have nothing?

This is boring, I am done here.