eunichron said:justdrop said:Edit: In case I haven't been clear enough, we didn't fund an extraction fantasy game and the fact that ANY resources are being spent on that and not the game we're meant to be discussing here is unacceptable. Attempts to sugar-coat it are unacceptable. Attempts to defend the attitude of those sugar-coating it are unacceptable. This is what's known as holding them accountable. Try it. You want to make accusations about me? My stance has been laid out plainly for all to see. Lay down and let them walk on you if you wish, I will call you and them out for it.
Maybe you should have read the terms of your pledge:
- VR offers no guarantees or warranties of performance, service, Pantheon Rise of the Fallen (“PRotF”) completion or delivery of Pledge Package items.
- While VR will make a best faith effort to complete, release and support PRotF, game development is a high risk endeavor. For any number of reasons, VR may not be able to complete PRotF, offer access to the game, or may not be able to deliver some or all items listed in the Pledge Packages.
This may be a good time to remind people that crowdfunding is not an investment, it is a donation. VR owes you nothing, and is beholden to no one but the people who have given them funding as legally binding investments.
So what are you an undercover VR member? or just a thristy fanboy, either way you white knighting on their behalf gains you nothing.... Stop.
Savanja said:Yeah, we need to keep it civil. No name calling, no personal attacks.
It's cowardly for a company to hide from people who ensured bills got paid and use spokespeople to muzzle dissent under the guise of rule enforcement. Send that up the pipeline for me.
There is a difference between airing criticisms (which I have done on a regular basis) and personal attacks. Civility is the core to community. Lose that and its literally game over. I have been told to calm it down, and when I look back, it was the right call. In no way do I feel I have been censored.
Now, I type what I want to say, taking a 5-minute break, re-read the post, take out anything which I think is inappropriate, then, and only then, do I post the text. I have never experienced any muzzling regarding my overall opinion, only about how that is portrayed. Be logical and forthright, sure. Personal comments? Nah.. not needed and rightly removed.
Not everything VR have done has been bad. IMHO, they were going the right way before the comms shut down. IMHO VR should have handled this way better than they did. I personally don’t like the direction taken and I certainly don’t think it was the only "intelligent" way to bring Pantheon to Alpha. I have been vocal, I have even made demands (as much as I can). But, I havent experienced any censorship regarding criticisms or "muzzling" of content. I have been told to calm it when I crossed a line, and that is absolutely correct. This is VR's site. We are using it and VR are graciously allowing us to vent when we need to. There is a difference between constructive criticism and allowing rage to cloud thought processes.
It is not a freedom of speech to attack someone. Simple as. It is not muzzling, VR are simply keeping this forum open without letting it decend into anarchy.
eunichron said:Maybe you should have read the terms of your pledge:
- VR offers no guarantees or warranties of performance, service, Pantheon Rise of the Fallen (“PRotF”) completion or delivery of Pledge Package items.
- While VR will make a best faith effort to complete, release and support PRotF, game development is a high risk endeavor. For any number of reasons, VR may not be able to complete PRotF, offer access to the game, or may not be able to deliver some or all items listed in the Pledge Packages.
This is a rediculous argument. Because like the person you're repling to, I too, would not have pledge any money, if I knew it was going to something like this.
Kittik said:This is a rediculous argument. Because like the person you're repling to, I too, would not have pledge any money, if I knew it was going to something like this.
Would you have pledged if you knew they would use your money to spend nearly 10 years theorizing and building out proofs of concept rather than making an actual game for market?
eunichron said:Kittik said:This is a rediculous argument. Because like the person you're repling to, I too, would not have pledge any money, if I knew it was going to something like this.
Would you have pledged if you knew they would use your money to spend nearly 10 years theorizing and building out proofs of concept rather than making an actual game for market?
People have grumbled in the past about it, but there's a difference in working on the thing you said you would work on and working on a completely different project. It was a noble strawman attempt though.
justdrop said:People have grumbled in the past about it, but there's a difference in working on the thing you said you would work on and working on a completely different project. It was a noble strawman attempt though.
There's two very wrong assumptions in that sentence. I'll let you figure out which ones they are.
eunichron said:justdrop said:People have grumbled in the past about it, but there's a difference in working on the thing you said you would work on and working on a completely different project. It was a noble strawman attempt though.
There's two very wrong assumptions in that sentence. I'll let you figure out which ones they are.
You can pretend that it's the same because it uses the same artwork, but it's an extraction game. That's not what we signed up for. Also it wasn't a noble attempt, it was terrible. Thank you for holding me accountable.
justdrop said:You can pretend that it's the same because it uses the same artwork, but it's an extraction game. That's not what we signed up for. Also it wasn't a noble attempt, it was terrible. Thank you for holding me accountable.
Interesting that those were your choices.
I have to agree that my (small) monetary investment in the game was based on the assumption that the proceeds would be solely put to the development of Pantheon, Rise of the Fallen MMO RPG. If it was ever stated that the investment might be used elsewhere, I would not be a pledger now. To me, personally, it really doesnt matter about guarantees or warranties, the implication (without exception) was that Pantheon was the game that was going to be made and this was stated over and over.
It is down to trust in VR, and I feel let down because of this. Because this direction change was hidden. Because it was only addressed as a result of the backlash on multiple platforms. Because we were not in anyway informed until after the fact.
Yes MMO RPG creation is high risk. Yes I knew what I was signing up to (along with the risk to the investment amount). But this is not what I signed up to! There were no caveats saying a change in game genre might happen, just as there was no promise of a game at all. But there was never an implied assumption that some other game would come before Pantheon!
It is correct to say that from a legl position, VR doesn't owe us anything. From a moral one, by heavens, yes it does.
After all, a very smart man (Charles Dickens) once wrote:
...Hence, "The law is an ass" as it is frequently both stupid and stubborn.
I would add that hiding behind the law is often reprehensible and is often covering moral short comings and is always unequal, giving an advantage to those with money over those without. It might be lawful. It doesnt mean it is right.
eunichron said:justdrop said:You can pretend that it's the same because it uses the same artwork, but it's an extraction game. That's not what we signed up for. Also it wasn't a noble attempt, it was terrible. Thank you for holding me accountable.
Interesting that those were your choices.
Interesting that you're still attempting to deflect from the fact that we didn't sign up for an extraction game.
eunichron said:justdrop said:Interesting that you're still attempting to deflect from the fact that we didn't sign up for an extraction game.
I'm not deflecting anything. I know what I signed up for.
I think/hope everyone understands your point about crowdfunding. Nobody can sue anybody or present some claim that they were wronged somehow as a result of a kickstarted game not coming out or changing course. What they can do, however, is complain on the forums and give feedback to try to change things. I'm sure that when VR originally decided to crowdfund this game, they wanted to treat the backers fairly and have them be a core part of development. When things don't go well, this is what that looks like. Recognizing you have no legal claim against the company doesn't mean it's not worth being vocal. In fact -- it's all they have.
At the risk of redundancy - this has all been said already in these threads - doesn't it all depend on *why* VR did what it did?
If they decided there was more money in an extraction game and they would switch objectives because the pot at the end of the rainbow was so appealing - there are a few negative things that people have said above that I still would not agree with. But not all that many. That would have been a truly rotten thing to do.
If they faced the choice between a "hail Mary"minigame or abandoning development entirely that is a horse of a somewhat different colour. Whether or not they can teach the poor beast to sing. Disbanding VR and giving up would have been no better for the hope of Pantheon or for our pledge money than what they are doing. Maybe no worse either but assuredly no better.
I do not know they faced the end without this desperation move. If they say they did I am as likely as not to disbelieve them. There isn't all that much trust left. But at least in my mind this remains a very credible scenario so I am slower than some - far slower - to attack their motives.
No. It doesn't take ten years to understand something needs to be done. It doesn't take a leak to inform your community that you're moving in a different direction (temporarily, or otherwise) and it doesn't require you to go against what you've stated was the mission to accomplish. They chose this path.
dorotea said:At the risk of redundancy - this has all been said already in these threads - doesn't it all depend on *why* VR did what it did?
I think we know why they have pushed out this effort to monetize this extraction game: VR needs money..desperately. Why else would they attempt to monetize it if the money it might bring in isn't absolutely necessary. VR has only twice (maybe three times) made an effort to announce they secured some significant funding. Beyond that they are relying upon pledges. Someone ponying up $1k for PA access doesn't go very far, really. But if an extraction game that sells for, say, $24.99, and sells 100,000 copies gives them an instant influx of $2.49M. That would allow for hiring of a few people at least.
So the why is simple..money.
justdrop said:No. It doesn't take ten years to understand something needs to be done. It doesn't take a leak to inform your community that you're moving in a different direction (temporarily, or otherwise) and it doesn't require you to go against what you've stated was the mission to accomplish. They chose this path.
One more response to you then I'm done feeding.
The leak came from a VIP. VR has been very clear that VIPs have always been privy to information before the general public, but they are not flies on the wall of VR's board meetings so to speak.So before you continue to hurl insults and ire at VR and the VIPs, ask yourself a few simple questions;
- Would you still be upset if you learned this information at the same time as the VIPs?
- Do you think the possible backlash wasn't discussed at those board meetings where they decided to move ahead with 247?
- Do you think VR would have chosen that path if they felt like they had any other option?
It's easy to sit there and bloviate and point fingers without a complete understanding of what's going on behind the curtain, let alone what's going on backstage (a side which none of us pledges get to see). Maybe instead of raging pointlessly on an Internet forum you should take some time and reflect on why you have such an emotional investment in this project.
Eunichron, im sure they discussed the backlash in board meetings, that makes it all the more disappointing that they pulled what they did.
For months they were touting the 24/7 Pre Alpha testing that was on the horizon. They purposefully let the impression be that you could log in and play the Pantheon Pre Alpha MMO at any time.
This no doubt brought in new pledges and convinced current supporters to up their pledges to a Pre Alpha tier to get access to 24/7 testing. Knowing all along that instead of anytime access to the MMO, it was unlimited rounds of some mini extraction game they were making.
This was blatant deception. They type of thing you would expect from a mega corporation or a used car dealership.
So if you’re honestly wondering why people are having such a negative emotional reaction to this, its very simple. People don’t like being lied to and cheated.
I have tried to mix criticism with defense. Perhaps in the spirit of being universally unpopular.
But if they were hyping 24/7 testing of Pantheon after they decided to switch to an extraction game, and knew people upgrading their pledges would not be getting Pantheon - yes those people might well have a valid claim for fraud and deception. I don't know how many upgraded but I am sure there were some and the cost to upgrade was not trivial.
lotuss79 said:So if you’re honestly wondering why people are having such a negative emotional reaction to this, its very simple. People don’t like being lied to and cheated.
I can understand having a negative reaction to the news, I can even understand being emotionally tied up in the project. What I can't rationalize is chastising VR and anyone else that may accept the news on 247 as if there is some kind of moral high ground here. It's a video game, an entertainment medium. There's no morality in how they approach making their video games.
At the end of the day we (including VR) are here because we want to play an MMO such as VR has proposed. VR believes moving ahead with 247 is the best way for them to accomplish that. Until we get information otherwise, that's all we can trust at the moment.