4 replies to this topic

[Kaemon]

(Man I really wanted that acronym to be FUCUP...lol).

Just a post discussing if crowdfunding/sourcing (explained here and here) would be a viable option for some of the community's wants in regards to MW:O.

As Bryan and Russ have stated, MW:O on launch will be a MVP product (thread). That does not mean additional features/concepts will not be added later (they will), it means they will make sure the game will be as polished as possible for Go-Live (which is a very good thing).

Crowdsourcing - We have some very talented community members (examples here, here, 443 examples here) and it seems a bit of a waste not to put them to work (why do I hear Paul laughing evilly in the background? nm...) on some of these tangential but consistently requested 'features'. I know some will argue it's best to keep these 100% community (i.e. outside game assets) and I agree with some of that, however any dev interaction for these projects (or inclusion even in some small way) pays for itself time and time again (community investment, marketing, player retention, etc...)

Crowdfunding - We also have people chomping at the bit to hurl currency at this game, and possibly a slighly more narrow micro-transaction model (since the dev team is not looking to put baby albino seal skin seats on their solid gold ferraris by selling power, unlike some games) than some other recent titles that have come out. Crowdfunding could be as simple as setting up a fund to buy FD a new Wacom tablet (doh!), or paying for a developer's time to get some sort of real time in game audio for NGNG/HyperPulse radio (these are just examples). But direct funding (while not optimal for main game assets/functions) might be viable for some of these 'side' projects.

Example of application:
So applying this to 2 current 'request' threads (Helmer's , Aegis'):

- Dev time/cost to implement feature
- Community interest
- ROI (return on investment of dev time) (analytics)
- financial gain/loss (TCO - total cost of ownership)
- Community involvement (possibly deferring some Dev time/TCO)

I'll edit this a bit more once I vet through some of the process stuff (and the baby stops crying) but I'm curious what people think of these options.

Discuss.

Edited by Kaemon, 20 March 2012 - 07:29 AM.

[Hangfire]

Couldn't possibly agree more. Props to that man

[Mason Grimm]

Fan Funding can be a very powerful tool if used properly (and responsibly). MechSpecs did it and within 3 weeks we had enough to renew our hosting + domain for another year. We are almost at the level where we can upgrade our bandwidth package in anticipation of the game release (and heavier usage of the site).

Purchasing new toys for the Devs seems out there (sorry FD, no cookie for you) but pooling resources and applying them to something that is directly tangible by the consumer (us) is something that has been around for awhile and works quite well.

For all of you metal crack addicts (like me) you will know what I am talking about. Classic Battletech site usually has Group Funds where people chip in money to have a professional sculpt a new mini pose or a new mech that wasn't previously available from IWM etc. etc.

I'd chip in to get my Marauder in the garage by launch

[Helmer]

Kickstarter has abundently shown recently that people are willing to chip in on things they are passionate about ( Quick kickstarter game plug http://www.kickstart...the-banner-saga )

I'm curious how it will work with a project that is already funded by PGI and IGP. Legality wise.

It's one thing to say we're all chipping in on repairs to the Bridge of our favorite .. one of the Devs. Or we are buying FD a new laptop. As fans, we'd be fine sending in gifts if we wanted to. Gifts, Alcohol, food, cash offerings for beta.......
I'd imagine it's another thing to add funds to a project that is already in production and has agreements in place.
If i remember correctly there are cases where it can be seen as money laundering, if not done properly. ( I'd need to research legal precident)

Either way, I think it's a GREAT idea, and would be willing to donate to it. Or if PGI was able to get a store up and running <cough> <cough> http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1
We could all buy products to give PGI more money.

Edited by Helmer, 20 March 2012 - 07:11 AM.

[Kaemon]

Helmer, on 20 March 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

Kickstarter has abundently shown recently that people are willing to chip in on things they are passionate about ( Quick kickstarter game plug http://www.kickstart...the-banner-saga )

I'm curious how it will work with a project that is already funded by PGI and IGP. Legality wise.

It's one thing to say we're all chipping in on repairs to the Bridge of our favorite .. one of the Devs. Or we are buying FD a new laptop. As fans, we'd be fine sending in gifts if we wanted to. Gifts, Alcohol, food, cash offerings for beta.......
I'd imagine it's another thing to add funds to a project that is already in production and has agreements in place.

Either way, I think it's a GREAT idea, and would be willing to donate to it. Or if PGI was able to get a store up and running <cough> <cough> http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1
We could all buy products to give PGI more money.

100% on the store, it needs to get up and running pronto.

Let's clarify that I don't think PGI/IGP needs any help in developing the game, this would be more to add ancillary elements and possibly a macro element to the micro-transaction model.

It would be a complicated transaction model, but possibly worth getting into more detail about.

***edits***
Anti-money laundering would come into play if tangible assets/payments were received (in excess of $10,000 in the U.S I believe, not sure in Canada). If they were getting those type of single donations, they might need to look at a 'founders' option and start putting people's names on bricks outside of the Pit of something.

Not a bad problem to have, I suppose.

Edited by Kaemon, 20 March 2012 - 07:35 AM.