James Pond Kickstarter!
James Pond is back! Or at least, he will be, if they get the funding for the game!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...d-pond-is-back
They've gotten the rights for the title, and they've got the original creator behind the series involved. It will apparently be a classic James Pond game, continuing the story from James Pond 2: Robocod.
Thought I'd let you guys know, since there was no topic about it.
Odd. I don't recall those being very good games, much less memorable enough to warrant a reboot :/
I'm gonna pass on this one. While Robocod had its moments, the rest of the series was pretty mediocre and the fact that the creator being actively involved is a stretch goal is ridiculous.
What's the stupid pun title going to be for this one?
I've honestly just played the first game, and just a little. But what little I played of it, I thought was good.Originally Posted by wiggyx
I agree that it being a stretch goal to get the creator actively involved, as you say, isn't exactly awesome. But if you think about it, the man does need to be paid. £30k is one year's worth of wages. If he's going to be actively working on the title, and not just helping out a little bit here and there, he'd need to stop doing what he's currently working on to do this. The other option would be to have the initial funding goal £30k higher, which would make it less likely to succeed at all.
I guess it is James Pond: Terror Fin. Not sure if that's just a working title, though. And I don't know how many will get it, either. (And it's more of a non funny word play, anyway.)
STEP 1: License mediocre retro gaming franchise
STEP 2: Get someone to draw up some concept art
STEP 3: Put up a KickStarter
STEP 4: ...
STEP 5: Profit
+1
This
Pretty much my first thought after reading the thread title.
Obviously we need to do reboot some crappy games to help fund the site.
Who wouldn't want to take free money from people? Then charge em again once the game is made? Hmmm Yea let's reboot bubsy.
Somebody needs to get a Wacky Wheels kickstarter going
What? Who's charging anyone twice?
I dunno dlc who knows? Its a joke
Oh boy, a James Pond Kickstarter!
Next, Bubsy the Cat! And then Aero the Acrobat! And hell, while we're at it, get another Blinx game funded!
Just because you can Kickstart something doesn't mean you should.
It's not really charging twice, but it is asking people to pay for the development process and then once that's done, the developer gets to sell the game again for a profit, so it's charging the greater community twice in a sense.
Lmao! Have we?20 years ago we saw Pond complete his final mission and for many of us we've been waiting for the next installment to come along.
Find me on here http://www.soundcloud.com/lee-w-1
See he knows what I'm talking about
Complain all you want, this is only the beginning. It's next to impossible to get venture capital for a video game like these. Plus paying for licenses only add to the costs. This is the only way these kinds of remakes will ever get made now.
The Paunch Stevenson Show free Internet podcast - www.paunchstevenson.com - DP FEEDBACK
Maybe, but if these don't meet there goals it may also be the end. Either that or we will start seeing them with a lower goals, which would make them even more suspicious in my mind. KickStarter fatigue will set in eventually, if it hasn't already.
There's a reason for that.
Maybe, but probably not. We have no idea what a James Pond license cost. The license fee may be conditional. i.e. Owner gets a % of sales. Its really a no lose situation of the owner of such a license because otherwise it will be sitting there doing nothing anyways. He was probably shocked to see any interest in the property. Lets be honest here. The only reason someone would waste their time with a River City Ransom or James Pond license is to get more people to bite on the Kickstarter and to get more hype for the project. It gets the nostalgia juices flowing. There is nothing about putting James Pond in the game's titles that will actually make it a better game. There have been so many great indie platformers that have come out in the last 5 years and most of them did not need to be propped up by some mediocre retro gaming franchise. Many of those also didn't ask for KickStarter money.
No its not. It may be the nail on the coffin for James Pond remakes, but not the nail in the coffin for more desirable franchises. My problem really isn't someone making a James Pond game. My problem is the method at going about making the game I do not think its conducive to making any game, let alone a good game. When people are just gifted something they very rarely spend the money wisely and that's why so many of these projects fail or do not live up to what they originally claimed. That $150K will dry up quickly. In the end though people can spend there money on what they want and if it meets its goal, the public has spoken.
Last edited by StoneAgeGamer; 09-29-2013 at 09:46 PM.
I'm not really able to see the logic there. The first people who pay, gets to choose how much to pay, and they get the game - and possibly some limited edition stuff, depending on how much they pay. Do you think that it should be free afterwards? To all the people who didn't pay in the first place? Is selling for profit a bad thing? And what is this "greater community" you mention? Is it the group of consumers interested in this product?
Honestly, I really don't see the logic. Please, enlighten me.
Because it's really no different than a company making a game available for preorder, and then selling the game to people who didn't preorder, too. The only difference is that the money from the preorder goes into developing the game - and for most games on Kickstarter, it's the only possible way for them to be made in the first place. So I really don't see that as a negative thing.
It has for me, now. The Mighty No. 9 is okay, but when every internet "celebrity" asks for money (at least a couple like AVGN had actual goals), and every random person wants to remake any old game, it's being ran into the ground.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
