Comments

1. 1. 

      Creator S.D. on June 8, 2012

      Linux users pledge higher. In many ways, Kickstarter has a "charity" feel to it (especially when comment thread denizens and project founders start asking for MOREMOREMOREMORE as the end nears), so the Humble Bundle phenomenon is relevant here. And, boy did pledges rise after this! It was a sight to behold...

   2. 

      Creator Xyem on June 2, 2012

      All the people who are all "Linux/Mac is a waste of money!".. perhaps you should realise that the total amount of sales are going to be in the low millions... out of *7 billion*. The game being made in the first place is a "waste of money" to all those billions of people who could live on your pledge for a week, month or year.

      The world does not revolve around you - you are not even in the majority.

   3. 

      Creator Adrian on May 31, 2012

      I also pledged $25. I pledged because of the Linux version. I would not have pledged if it was Windows only. In fact the last time I bought any game for Windows was about 5 years ago.

      If more titles came out for Linux, these software companies would get my money.

   4. 

      Creator Craig Fowler on May 29, 2012

      *native Linux version, not Linux-only. I can't brain today, I have the dumb :(

   5. 

      Creator Craig Fowler on May 29, 2012

      That's another $50 they got that they wouldn't if they hadn't planned a Linux-only version ;)
      I actually don't keep any Windows machines around anymore but Carmageddon was one of my favourite games back in the day and "the only racing game I ever liked".

   6. 

      Creator Yitzchak Schwarz on May 29, 2012

      OMGUbuntu.co.uk have a post about this, so that's how I got here. I liked what I saw, so I pledged $30. That's $30 I wouldn't have pledged if this game wasn't coming to Linux. I rarely spend any money on Windows-only stuff because I prefer spending my time in Ubuntu, but I have bought over 40 Linux games, most, but not all, from the HumbleBundle.com. I simply keep my eyes peeled for Linux games, and if they look good and I feel like I can afford them, I buy them.

   7. 

      Creator OrbitalBliss on May 28, 2012

      Well, set your stretch goals foolishly if you must... its your prerogative. But you must know that I have absolutely no incentive to increase my pledge because the single stretch goal you have set it not only too high, but also of no use to 75%+ of your potential market. However, assuming you can find enough of those minority consumers that will come up with the other 200k (without our help), I will be watching to see if you come up with any "relevant" stretch goals I may be interested in pledging more to achieve.

   8. 

      Creator Remco Sonnema on May 28, 2012

      Do a mac version and then port it to iOS.. ipads and iphones.. now that would sell!

   9. 

      Creator Robbert on May 28, 2012

      Just pleged, hope we will reach that 600,000 to get this beast on Linux :)

   10. 

       Creator Leshy on May 27, 2012

       Linux version? You've got another backer :)

   11. 

       Creator Michael van Staveren on May 27, 2012

       Just pledges an additional 15 dollars, really hoping for the mac version :D

   12. 

       Creator Michael van Staveren on May 27, 2012

       Cant wait for the mac version!

   13. 

       Creator Paul Haworth on May 26, 2012

       Love the way half these posts are suggesting its a colossal waste of resources. Citing that Stainless Games shouldn't bother due to lack of interest on Mac/Linux for gaming in general. Or that it shouldn't cost as much as they are stating.

       I for one think Stainless Games just believe that they know what they are doing. They brought us Carmaggedon which has yet to be proved to be a decision. They believe it's worth bring it to both the Mac and Linux for $200,000. I doubt that they are wrong in this decision. And if they have over-budgeted for it, think of all the goodies they could add with the extra money.

       And before anyone call me a fanboy of Mac or Linux for suggesting that I'm in favour of this... I really don't get along very well with either operating system for reasons I'd rather not get into right now because well this is about Carmaggedon not operating systems.

       Thank you.
       Kind Regards
       Paul Haworth

   14. 

       Creator Andre Gerstmann on May 26, 2012

       Linux Port would be awesome... Hope Valve brings Steam soon to Linux cause more and more people change their Systems to Ubuntu. I only still habe windows on Partition 2 cause of the games....

   15. 

       Creator Anders Jenbo on May 25, 2012

       Here is 15$ more hoping for a grate game and a Linux port :)

   16. 

       Creator Tiago Morelli on May 25, 2012

       *it would probably be much harder

   17. 

       Creator Tiago Morelli on May 25, 2012

       @Tom B. Zombie Like I said before, Stainless obviously feels like it's worth it. It's up to them, not up to you. You don't own a piece of the developers. You're not buying shares or anything. They don't HAVE to do what we ask. They CONSIDER what we ask and are nice enough to actually do any of it. When you pledge on Kickstarter you become a BACKER and not an INVESTOR (big difference). So, if you're not happy that the game will come out on the system you want AND other systems, too bad. At least you still get to play it.
       Also, about porting to Mac/Linux vs. consoles:
       1. Mac/Linux will play the same, so the port won't have to change anything in the game (controls, UI, whatever)
       2. The new generation of consoles is probably coming out some time soon, which means the game probably wouldn't run on them or not be up to standard. Especially since Stainless has mentioned their focus is smooth gameplay, as opposed to great graphics.

       I'm not against a console port, but I would probably be much harder to do than the Mac/Linux one.
       I don't understand why people are so upset about this. You guys are already getting what you paid for.

   18. 

       Creator Tom B. Zømbie on May 25, 2012

       @SXX "So, we’ve been doing the work here to assess how much it would cost us to port our technology and then the games to these OS’s’s. We’ve rounded down the resulting figure a bit (because it would look strange and untidy otherwise), and today we’re announcing our first STRETCH GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAL, based on that figure" indeed it is 1/3 of the budget. It's stated here on this very post that that's how they calculated the new target.

       I know they can't release on Xbox without a bit of legal work, but it takes work to port to any system. Putting so many resources into something that will benefit so few seems entirely redundant. The 200k budget and later release date obviously account for the cost/hours involved in creating the port! It will add 6 months development time.

   19. 

       Creator matthias sweertvaegher on May 25, 2012

       woohoo! although I won't insist on a linux version, it IS my primary platform, so any support for it is welcomed :) saves me a reboot

   20. 

       Creator SXX on May 25, 2012

       @Tom B. Zømbie
       As well read my other comments here, there is NO "spending 1/3 of the budget to Mac/Linux porting".
       First game will be released for Windows and only after more than 4-6 months it's will be available on other platforms.
       So it's obvious all porting will be funded from Windows release profit.

   21. 

       Creator SXX on May 25, 2012

       @Tom B. Zømbie
       I sure Stainless want to confirm console version.
       But there are different situation with consoles because they are proprietary.
       They can't release game on Xbox360 or PS3/Vita without approval from Sony or Microsoft.
       And you can understand that is original Carmageddon had some things which is unacceptable for consoles.
       They can remove all of these things, but it will be NOT Carmageddon anymore. :(

       I'll be happy if console players get game without high censorship, but I realistic about that.

   22. 

       Creator Tom B. Zømbie on May 25, 2012

       @Tiago Morelli "i just hate seeing complaints about more people being able to play. that's what the port is for." Then your argument is the same as mine: Xbox 360 should be the first platform to port to. Give more people the opportunity to play this awesome game.
       For the record, I don't own a single console and have no intention to. I have a PC running windows and linux. However, many, many more gamers own an Xbox360 than a mac. This is indisputable. Spending 1/3 of the budget so 4% more people can play? Silly. Spending 1/3 of the budget so 400% more people can play? Totally worth it!

   23. 

       Creator SXX on May 25, 2012

       @Tiago Morelli
       Yep, This idea "I don't want to pay money for platform XXX" actual for some other Kickstarter projects, but not for C:R which have different release dates, that's all.

   24. 

       Creator SXX on May 25, 2012

       @GUANTANAMO
       There is no statement like "Porting cost $200,000 for us".
       Some projects like Legends of Eisenwald had very stong stretch goals because they already exhausted own resources and they just can't finish some functions without extra funding.

       But for Stainless (who already put big amount of money it this development) it's only assessment of project success.
       I sure all money which Stainless can collect here will go into shared code and content: music, some artworks, 3d models.
       This update only (!) guarantee some version for people who asking for it and it's help to get extra backers and pledges.

       If game will be successful they will get all money for porting after Windows release.
       If not... It's mean they will need to put their own money in porting, but it's how Kickstarter working.

   25. 

       Creator Tiago Morelli on May 25, 2012

       sorry not to include Linux, i just don't use it. but all i said goes for Linux too!

   26. 

       Creator Tiago Morelli on May 25, 2012

       @benfries yeah, sorry, my info came from memory. didn't realise it had changed so much (time flies).
       @SXX makes a great point. i just hate seeing complaints about more people being able to play. that's what the port is for. i can't wait for the day all games are crossplatform with out needing ports (DirectX for Mac anyone?).

   27. 

       Creator SXX on May 25, 2012

       @all
       Porting doesn't cost $200,000, it's only stretch goal to keep people going and make this project more successful.
       If you read this update text you can see "And, like the DRM free version, the shipping date for these versions will be further out, towards the end of 2013".
       It's mean Stainless Games will probably "pay" for porting from their profits from Windows release.

       So Mac/Linux porting doesn't take money from core development, but help's to get extra pledges from people who want to see native version for their preferred platforms.
       Because money for core gameplay needed right now, and if I give extra 100$ for guaranteed Linux/Mac version this money probably will be used for Windows version too.

   28. 

       Creator Herupa on May 25, 2012

       I won't up my pledge to pay for porting it to linux & mac, you guys can pay for it yourselves.

   29. 

       Creator Bruno V. on May 25, 2012

       @doshu: Good question, since Valve is reportedly working on porting Steam to Linux:
       http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php…

   30. 

       Creator doshu on May 25, 2012

       One question though: the Linux version will obviously not be Steam, so no net mutliplayer, only local, right?

       And same question as before: will the Linux/Mac(/DRM free) versions of the game be updated and extended as the patches and extensions come out, or will they be simply left to die, just having been made for the sole purpose of this campaign (which I doubt, lots of irony here...but still prefer to ask)?

   31. 

       Creator jacobbrett on May 25, 2012

       For consideration: I think Linux ports might have a comfortable future on Linux-/Android-x86- based x86 mobile devices as they become more popular.

   32. 

       Creator frwololo on May 24, 2012

       Anthony Quarm: I don't have numbers, but given the way kickstarter works, I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio of linux/mac/windows users backing video game projects on kickstarter was fairly different from the "worldwide" ratio.
       I've seen much more die-hard Linux owners on kickstarter than on other websites, because crowd-funding is in line with the community philosophy behind open source.

       In other words, this announcement might be the one bringing the extra 200'000. Who are you then to claim this money should be used on other things, when probably the money comes from people who pledge *only* because of the announcement in the first place?

       Personally, this is of interest for me, because lots of my friends don't own windows, so I'd be lost without friends to play multiplayer...

   33. 

       Creator C.S.Strowbridge on May 24, 2012

       Anthony Quarm: "Either way, 50% of the total cost of the kickstarter just to port it to Mac & Linux is a colossal waste of resources."

       The game will cost way more than $400,000 to complete. They've sunk about that much into the project before even coming to KickStarter.

   34. 

       Creator GUANTANAMO on May 24, 2012

       It's a good thing that you want to bring your game to as many platforms as possible. But spending 200.000 $ just for the port in comparison to 400.000 $ to finish the game, doesn't seem reasonable at all.

   35. 

       Creator Ben - Xenon Special Forces on May 24, 2012

       @Tiago Morelli
       Let's be straight: I'm totally fine with the stretch goals, but I can't let that FUD stand:

       E.g. your Mac Steam numbers have been reported by the press about 2 years ago, but look at the current ones (http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey) - down to 4%, less then half of the Vista users.

       Similar, if you look at more established ways to get Linux ports, namely the humble indie bundle, you can see that even they get 1/3 of their income from Linux or Mac. Which from what I seen on Kickstarter feels high - at least if you consider the 'we now announced the Linux version' impact.

       Why I totally don't mind the stretch goals, if I consider the likelihood of Mac and Linux users donating that much about 0%?

       The Kickstarter community, as in the outspoken members at least, have been very inclusive. In particular as Carmaggedon:R is not released on consoles and probably won't be THAT resource hungry, it might have a chance to run on the 'email PC' and get to people that didn't play it before. And THAT can just benefit all of us in the long run. In particular that seems to be the most common combination for American game journalists, so there is a better hope to get some buzz after release.

   36. 

       Creator Mc Fuck-ton on May 24, 2012

       Well, we are over 9000, so everything is fine and dandy

   37. 

       Creator RussianNeuroMancer on May 24, 2012

       No luck with Grim Dawn, so let's try here.

       @ all who complain about Linux market share:
       1st: there is 40 million users in Steam. Looks like big number, right? Let's compare it with Ubuntu/Kubuntu numbers - 20 million users. This big enough number too. More 50% potential target audience.
       2nd: Desktop market share of OS X and Linux maybe is much smaller than Windows market share, but we talk here about gamers and Kickstarters. Market share of desktop OS is different for people who pledge projects on Kickstarter - there is much more Linux and OS X users, so Stainless Games doing right thing, when they choice this goal.
       3rd: Keep in mind: all this game developers on Kickstarter here because of stupid publishers decisions and "effective" management. Anthony Quarm logic is brillian example of such "efficiency". People like Anthony Quarm almost kill PC game market. So, don't don't let him deceive you!

   38. 

       Creator Tiago Morelli on May 24, 2012

       i was going to wait to see if they hit the stretch mark but i had to pledge so i could say that @Anthony Quarm is a ginormous wanker.

       you should be thankful these guys are actually making the game, not complain about how they choose to spend their extra money. remember, you're giving money for whatever is in the tier you chose. everything they add is a bonus, and they are already adding stuff just because people have suggested things in comments, forums, reddit, etc. BECAUSE THEY ARE COOL (they haven't even hit $400,00 yet). so just stfu with your windows fanboy bs. if you like facts, you should know that games have been on mac for a long time, but are just not as popular. similar to how more pop music gets made than jazz music, and has a bigger market. it doesn't mean it's better though. also, the percentage of Mac users that are gamers is higher than that of Windows users that are gamers (can't remember where i read this, but i did), which means that most Mac users like to play games. yes, more people use Windows in total, but that's just because it's a more popular, like Justin Bieber. plus Macs are quickly rising in popularity (%11 of Steam users game on Mac) and now have a much better capacity to run games. yes, i kind of agree that $200,000 is a lot to port a game, which is why i think using APIs like OpenGL can save a lot of time and money, (companies like Blizzard and Valve are well aware of this and create their games crossplatform from the get go), however, if you think about it, the guys at Stainless probably decided it was worth porting the game because the demand was there. so for all you saying like "a very small percentage of (potential) customers will ever see any benefit", think of it this way: me actually being able to play the game, as opposed to not at all, is a way bigger improvement than you Windows guys getting more features. so screw you all. i want to play this game and not have to buy a new system. that's what i gave money for, NOT for speculative additions to the game. so shut up, you whiners.

   39. 

       Creator Peter D Ryan on May 24, 2012

       I agree with Tom B Z0mbie and Bruno V... spending 1/3 of your stretch goal on porting to a niche platform really doesn't make sense. Put that money into making more content or even towards porting to 360 or PS3.

   40. 

       Creator AltimaNEO on May 24, 2012

       13 days to go, 300k more.... thats definitely a bit of a stretch. Im still sweating bullets that they might not make it to 400k.

       Best of luck, Stainless. Im looking forward to Carmageddon!

   41. 

       Creator Tom B. Zømbie on May 24, 2012

       @ThomasN That's not the point though, the point is it's going to cost $200,000 for something a very small percentage of (potential) customers will ever see any benefit from. Imagine if they spent that creating more tracks, bigger levels, more cars, more peds, funnier powerups, etc. Everyone who had the game would benefit. Even if they spent the time developing for Xbox360 instead that would open up a much larger target audience than even Windows PC. The net result of that would be increased sales and the potential for further development of addon packs. Should they only develop for Xbox 360? I don't know. Possibly but they'd lose their core audience of loyal PC fans so probably not!

       From a business perspective I fail to see how developing for niche platforms is in any way a step forward. Target the largest platforms first then worry about the smaller ones. If it was a matter of a small amount of money rather than 1/3 of the raised money I wouldn't have a problem with it.

       In reality, most gamers run windows because that's what games use. A catch 22? Would you really suggest spending a third of the budget on something which will benefit probably well under ten percent of the customers? It just doesn't make financial sense at all.

       I applaud Stainless for wanting to meet the needs of fans, but I don't think this is a sensible step forward. If it was me, I'd have a long list of features prior to niche platform support.

   42. 

       Creator Bruno V. on May 24, 2012

       To be honest I'd be glad to have a Linux client but 200k really is a lot of dosh and I can only agree that investing that money into more/better content would be more beneficial to the masses. Maybe rather than developing a whole new client, Stainless could work with Wine and Bootcamp developers to tweak the Windows client and make it run smoothly on the other OSes? Surely that would be less costly. Of course I don't know what the prospect of virtualising the game looks like with their engine to begin with. Some games run without even a patch, others are totally unusable or won't even launch.

   43. 

       Creator Stephen Watson on May 24, 2012

       haha awesome, I hope you do get 600k and more

   44. 

       Creator ThomasN on May 24, 2012

       @Anthony Quarm: If every software developer would think like you ("always go with the masses because that's obviously cheapest"), there would be NO MORE creative niche games funded, because, let's face it, Carmageddon is not for the whole family (I like it to be true, but in reality, it isn't... Hint: try selling it in Walmart).

   45. 

       Creator P. van Gaans on May 24, 2012

       @Bruno V. "I was surprised that only 1 in 6 of my gaming friends knew what Carmageddon was."

       That means 5 out of 6 of your gaming friends are not gamers! And Farmville does not acount as a a "game"!

   46. 

       Creator eXoScoriae on May 24, 2012

       @headphonehalo - yes, I am a fanboy of facts. Each OS has it's uses and it's market share. If I were to take a windows machine and start demanding that Landmark software create openworks suite for me simply because I want to use windows, that would be audacious.

       The market share facts I posted above speak for themselves. You develop software that speaks to the greatest market share. When windows has 75% of that share, you program it for them.

       You seem to be arguing that while Mac and Linux users *could* play the games, it is better to spend 200k on porting it so they can play it natively.

       Games should be using open standards in the first place? Sure, lets spend tons of resources making games run on every platform. Then we can halfass games, but at least everyone can play them. Or you can focus your budget on the segment that is most able to use it and spend all that money polishing the product.

       Other kickstarters add entire new cities for 50k, customizable heros/units for 100k, ie: GAME ENHANCEMENTS. I am simply saying I'd rather see that then a stretch goal that costs 200k to cater to such a small percentage of the market place.

   47. 

       Creator eXoScoriae on May 24, 2012

       @Treewyrm: And why would it have to be toned down considerably? Have you seen or played either Armageddon Rider's or Blood Drive? Both are downloadable games on PSN and XBLive. AR allows you to install spinning blades on your rims, saws that suck people into your grill and spit flesh/blood out the back, etc... Why would you pretend to know about these restrictions when you clearly don't?

   48. 

       Creator headphonehalo on May 24, 2012

       @Anthony Quarm

       Based on your responses here, you seem kind of like a fanboy yourself. Some would argue that games in general are a colossal waste of resources, in general.

       As to how good of an investment it is, and whether they should have focused on consoles or not, see my post above. While OSX users can use bootcamp and Linux users can use WINE, it's more about wanting to be able to game on an OS you actually like. I wish I didn't have to have use Windows 7 for gaming, and games should be using open standards in the first place, so what's the issue? I don't think either OSX or Linux users "expect" to be catered to, but as you can see here, they are.

   49. 

       Creator eXoScoriae on May 24, 2012

       Humble bumble sales stats are FAR from useful. Rather than looking at the same amount of profit, try looking at the total number of bundles sold on each platform. If one guy drops 10k and happens to get the linux version, then that could be the same as 10,000 people downloading the pc version. So when selling the game for a set price, who would be the better market? 1 guy at $15, or some ratio of the 10k of pc users at $15?

       As of April 2012 MacOS has a 9% market share and Linux has a 1.66% market share.Windows has a 73% market share. So how in the hell does that make it "not worth releasing for windows"?

       The shit people make up to defend their OS's is ridiculous.

   50. 

       Creator Treewyrm on May 24, 2012

       Those people who ask for console version have to keep in mind that it's not the same as developing and publishing for Windows/Mac/Linux (basically PC platforms). Beside purely technical matters there are many costs involving certification procedures, consoles are walled gardens with a lot of restrictions, not just technical limitations. It costs a lot to publish a full game on those, unless you go with XBLA/PSN, both of which I believe aren't fit for C:R due to lot of restrictions imposed on such releases. Besides it would have to be toned down considerably to pass certifications and by that time it will get released there it ain't going to be Carmageddon as we know it but merely a gimmick reminiscent of the old classic. I prefer C:R to be uncensored pure carnage and mayhem.