Use this space to cheer the creator along, and talk to your fellow backers.
Have a question?
"Generally when people say liquor, they are referring to "hard" alcohol, not beer, but we digress."
Another utterly wrong assumption/generalization on your part. Sorry, that's as far as I got. Your nonsense is just too much for me.
Generally when people say liquor, they are referring to "hard" alcohol, not beer, but we digress.
You seem to be missing the point that my assumptions are no more wild than yours. There is no more reason to believe that the average backer prefers the original vision than there is reason to believe the average backer prefers the changed vision. We simply don't have the necessary data to make that judgement.
My initial point was to simply express skepticism that a significant number of people could honestly think the original vision presented a quality aesthetic. A "good enough" aesthetic to put up with in order to get a game from the Coles, sure, but actual quality? It really did look like something you would buy for a dollar and play on your phone, whereas the revised vision actually looks like something that belongs on a PC.
Zac, well, good thing you are free to make whatever wild assumptions you want regardless of how wrong they are. You stick with liquor? Beer is liquor so...what?
I'm pretty sure 99.98% is how many backers care more about it being a game from the Coles than about how fast it arrives or whether it is totally in line with the original vision. And I stick with liquor.
Ok Zac...99.98%. Did you have that beer yet?
Actually, we don't know for a fact that every single backer would have been happy with the original concept. I am obviously a backer, and I wasn't remotely happy with the graphical presentation in the original concept. I just wanted more of the Coles' narrative design, and I was willing to accept the horrible, low-rent mobile game interface if that was all they could put together the funding to give us. As for timing, if my options are a terrible game fast or a great game slow, great is more important than fast. YMMV.
I make it a rule to only give more than a few dollars to a project when I like the physical rewards from whichever tier I back to be okay with it if the product itself fails to deliver. If anything, I should be more irritated than others, since they decided not to deliver most of the physical stuff until the game boxes ship. But I'm not, because like I said, the destination being worthwhile is more important than how long we spend on the trip.
And they still have games on consoles? I thought consoles were for streaming videos and playing blu-rays...
@Linda. I agree with you somewhat, but I'm actually happy they changed the looks of the game. I'm in the same boat as you with leisure time. But I somehow manage to take time and do the things I want to do.
It's like keeping that book you really want to read on the nightstand and then finally pick it up and start reading it. I honestly don't mind having something to look forward to, even if it means that it is weeks, months or years ahead.
Quest for Glory 1-5 fan and I did indeed enjoy number 5. It felt like closure. I admire the Coles that they've kept on going. It cannot have been easy.
We know for a fact that every single backer would have been happy with the original concept after all that is when we opened our wallet.
I'm more skeptical of the claim that everyone likes the increased scope and the longer waiting times. I think a lot of people just gave up on the game.
I certainly would have preferred what I was promised years ago over this eternal wait. Mid June was the last update that they were moving towards Alpha.
I backed this when I still did a lot of gaming on PC before the birth of my son and before taking a more intensive job. I do most of my gaming on consoles now and at this point I'm not even sure I will put much time into the game if it ever releases.
It's all going to be ok Zac. Go have a beer and enjoy today.
What inquiry? I wasn't asking a question, I was expressing skepticism. A handful of people in a comment thread is not sufficient evidence to make me believe that a substantial percentage of the game's thousands of backers were motivated more by really loving the mock-ups of game screens that looked like they belonged on a tablet than by QfG nostalgia and confidence in the Coles. As for "four years late," so what? I don't know if you noticed, but pretty much every adventure game project on Kickstarter gave estimates that turned out to be wildly off base. Hero U probably won't even end up being the one that takes the longest, but it very easily could end up being the one that is most worth the wait.
Won't be long now until the final "final home stretch" kickstarter to get this into beta. Just a few more months. Just you wait.
Cool story but none of that has anything to do with the reality of the project or your initial inquiry into why people backed. Like I said, read the comments and find the discussions. You are literally arguing why people backed based on future visuals that weren't available at the time. Utterly pointless and ultimately none of it has to do with the project being 4 years late because of said change.
Let's be fair though; the 3D in QfG5 wasn't horrible because 3D is inherently bad, it was horrible because the technology at the time simply wasn't ready yet. It's a mature technology at this point, and the only reason to categorically reject the third dimension in 2017 is blind nostalgia.
Also, 5 was not a garbage game, it was a good game with garbage graphics. Which, if we're taking off the rose-colored nostalgia glasses, would also be true of the first two games. The only ones in the series where the technology was available (and well utilized) to create a quality aesthetic were III and IV.
Would I prefer a higher quality QfG III/IV style of graphics to what we are getting? Of course I would. But that was never one of the options presented in this project. Whether you prefer 3D or 2D on a conceptual level, the 3D we are getting looks like it has a substantially higher quality of implementation that the particular type of 2D the project originally sold us on.
No need to be skeptical. It's rather simple. People loved QFG1-4. QFG5 was garbage. The average person that disliked it, did so because of the horrible 3D direction they took. They were glad to have another story but struggled through the horrible representation. It's very safe to say that many people here were looking forward to them getting back to something more simplistic. So yes, the tile aspect was in fact a key decision making feature. Just read through the comments and you'll find lots of discussion about it. Sometimes people don't want C.O.D., they want a side scrolling Mario
But now we've crossed the line into arguing about people's opinion, which is a major waste of time.
I'm skeptical that anyone could look at the mock-ups of what the actual game screen would look like from the original campaign and honestly believe that looks like a superior visual experience as compared to the revised direction.
The original campaign's success was, in my opinion, due almost entirely to trust in the Coles based on QfG nostalgia. It likely had nothing, or next to to nothing, to do with a deep love for the presented design process or the tile system. The only real problem with the new direction they took is that they didn't start with it, and that's not really a problem they could address without a flux capacitor. I'd much rather have a (potentially) great game to play that takes five years to hit alpha than a forgettable diversion that is churned out in one or two. We get plenty of that already from the corporate gaming industry.
I still have faith that the Coles will deliver! I know that if I were making a game for thousands of backers, I would love to see some positivity on the comments wall. So, go Coles! The release is in sight! (I hope.)
Exactly. I never asked for changing the design, which in turn prompted a second kickstarter. I supported the Coles' original game design. It was a humble 2D design, but I was only too happy to support them that time. I paid whatever I can then. It may not break your bank, but for some of us, even the basic tier is a substantial amount.
"the Coles have mortgaged their house to bring this game out"
Yeah, because they didn't stick to the original plan and changed it into something they had zero experience in. No tears here. That was a horrible choice. They should have stuck to the original plan. Now we're all getting something we didn't even back. That might be ok for you but it's not for many of us. Now we sit, wait and see what they dump in our laps. Good? Bad? I guess we'll find out, some day.
@Pedasn That's fair, but I'll have optimism regardless. A few dollars spent five years ago isn't breaking my bank but the Coles have mortgaged their house to bring this game out... who do you think has more invested in this game coming out and it being good?
@ James Paten: So far, we have only their word that the game will be good, polished and deep. I don't think their word is worth a lot by now. Even if it comes out, it could still end up being an empty mess.
Malik, same here. I still have all my maxed out characters including Paladin. I played the heck out of those games. But this will be on the bottom of my list. I'll probably play SpaceVenture before this....even if it comes out years later.
And this is coming from a veteran Quest for Glory player. I'm not some newbie who decided to support this as a random gaming interest.
I was there when QFG was released as Hero's Quest in EGA and I first played it in my 286.
I supported this game solely based on the names of Coles. And since this, I never supported another kickstarter ever, looking at how even legendary names fail to keep up the release.
It's not even in Beta yet. I fail to see how some are still even excited over this project.
With a change of design from original proposal to backers, and almost un-ending delays of release and postponements, and still an unclear completion status, it's more frustrating than exciting.
"We will be out in far less time than Duke Nukem Forever..."
I should hope so. DNF was originally announced in 1997 and wasn't released until 2011.
Seriously, saying you'll be done before a game notorious for being in "development hell" and took 14 years to see the light of day doesn't exactly fill me with a lot of confidence (or hope).
Just gotta say... still very excited for this project!
I've waited almost two decades for a new QFG game... to see it come so close is a dream come true! It's great to see you all take your time and make sure the game is what you want it to be, not something that was only as good as the project plan timeline allowed.
"On request, I will also provide keys to other sites - likely steam, humble, and gog - to backers"
I would hope so. Us backers aren't just wanting the game through your site. We will want it on either steam or gog, to be sure. I think that goes without saying.
I plan to use a web-based bug-reporting database. I think that will be easier to handle than an Excel sheet, given that we'll have dozens (or more) of testers in all sorts of areas at once.
Exciting update! Thanks for sharing! A quick suggestion for Alpha and Beta testing: if you create an excel spreadsheet for reporting bugs, comments, and features (with pre-filled column headings, e.g., "Date", "Time", "Location", and "Issue") it will make your bug squashing much easier. You could even have dialogue ID numbers displayed in the game for testers, to really help narrow things down. Best of luck!
@Jeremy: New update is up. It takes me a week or two to write and illustrate an update, so it's hard for me to post them much more often. This one has specifics on our planned test release dates.
Looking forward to it whenever it comes. I'm just glad the Coles are making another game, big thanks to them and all the team!!
Any new updates on the project, trying to be patient and let the updates speak for themselves but haven't seen much in terms of updates recentally
ok thanks. fine if it is a few months after release; as long as the option exist.
Flump: All backers are on BackerKit (including ones from our web site, which I've had to add to BackerKit one at a time), which makes it easy to get digital downloads there. On request, I will also provide keys on other sites - likely Steam, Humble, and GoG - to backers. I'm not spending any time working out those details until after the game is in Beta.
Are you saying we won't be getting a gog key but rather have to use a different site for download ?
I think we're way past the point of sticking to deadlines...
So I don't suppose this comment from two updates ago is still valid, is it?
"I’m shooting for 'feature complete' and alpha testing in January, with Beta testing in February or early March and release 2nd quarter 2017. It’s been a long, stressful journey, but the end is in sight."
LOL! That's the kindest way I've ever heard someone telling people to shut up.
Let's return to silence until the next update shall we? Everything that needs to be said has been said. Everyone can read all the opinions posted here, and there is no delete button.
"I don't understand this anger."
Then I don't understand your comment. All I see are people expressing they are upset.
call for their heads
What on Earth are you talking about?
I neither said nor implied that. I already acknowledged that this project has had multiple severe management issues over its entire lifetime, starting with changing the scope almost as soon as it was funded because some people didn't seem to know what they were backing. I 100% agree with taking the developers to task for these failures. What I don't find worthwhile or reasonable is some of the more heated angst, handwringing, and personal attacks. These, I feel, are just a bit out of proportion to the actual situation.
All I'm saying is, let's keep things in perspective. If you feel that you already have things in perspective, well, carry on. I'm not going to argue about it.
SXF, read ALL the comments here and ALL the comments for every update. It's pretty blatantly clear why people are upset and it has little do with the project being late.
This is nothing. I was trying to gauge the hype for InXile's Tides of Numenera since they've released an official release date. So I go to their KS comment section and surprisingly, it is highly toxic. Kickstarter can really be cruel sometimes.
I'm actually a little glad that the Coles didn't have to deal with that kind of animosity. They don't deserve it. They're throwing F bombs left and right in that place.
I don't understand this anger. Yes, there have been serious issues getting this thing done and delivered, starting pretty much the minute the Kickstarter ended, but the team is communicating in good faith and the project is pretty clearly still moving. It is what it is. I don't see any need to call for their heads.
I backed Worlds of Magic. Compared to the blatant disregard and lack of respect from the team behind that heinous aborted disaster, waiting for the Coles to dig themselves out doesn't even rate for me.
@Gamehoarder, I think we're sadly way past the point of potential refunds for a broken promise. I wish we could, as I would happily take my money and put those money into another project, but I just can't see it happening.
I also doubt we'll get the game in 2017.
I backed this at 250 ... Along with Space Venture ... Another 250 and still waiting. I also still own physical copies of almost every Sierra game made ... In other words Huge Fan, like many here . With that said , I'd like the game this year ... Or a refund
This is probably a stepping stone at this point. Once this game is done and shipped then they'll have the foundation for another game then another, that wouldn't take as long.
how can this possibly turn a net profit!?
Yes, I've made mistakes along the way, particularly in not knowing when to advertise for more programmers. Or I should have dropped my design role and jumped into programming the game. The good news is that extra time has made a huge difference in the quality and quantity of art and animation. It's also given Lori the time she needed to complete all the dialogue - more than in a Harry Potter novel, because novels don't branch. We will be out in far less time than Duke Nukem Forever, and in about the time it took Sierra to make Quest for Glory V (or less than half the time, if you include the first time we started it up, then management cancelled it). The game will be unique, and we hope our fans will love it.
Quest for Infamy was what I expected from the Coles. That project was respectable...... and it delivered.
I'm sure you superbackers must be feeling really frustrated, for as a person who just managed to support at the basic tier itself, I feel so empty and hollow..... not just disappointed... with this project.
Goes to show that even renowned designers are simply no guarantee to place a hope on.
I didn't feel the need to give during the second kickstarter round, since, I already feel cheated, when they decided to change the whole game design from the first initiative. Did any of us backers asked for it? Not me.
No matter what, excuses after excuses just paint a bad picture when the project is not being delivered on time.
Focus should have been on delivering the game, instead of delivering t-shirts and toys and what not...
Despite my effort to refrain from commenting, I feel I need to let out my frustrations.... because my money has been lost in this unfortunate endeavor. Maybe my nostalgia towards Quest for Glory series and the Sierra's Coles made me pledge for this.... But Sierra's no more....so there's no focus anymore...
After all this, it will be a herculean effort to really enjoy this game anymore... if it's finished somehow.... I'll leave the "IF" to be a positive outcome, to all the die hard Coles' supporters, even now.
Yup, blew through 2 kickstarters worth of money and now into their retirement. Poor choices after poor choices after poor choices. Should have just stuck with the original damn game. Would have been done years ago and hopefully making money by now.
Remember all those "NO's" Ken always gave you? This is why.