Jump to content
IGNORED

Sociable Soccer - Jon Hare - Kickstarter


Clipper
 Share

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, angel said:

Equal on the field would be preferable as far as I'm concerned for Sensi, pardon me, Soci.  You really need to shout "bigger pitch" at the devs too, I said it quite low key but there is no way that current scale is remotely useful to anyone, please pass that on.

We do have the "all teams are equal" option. And I'll feed that size ratio back again, a lot of people have been saying this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SociableSoccer said:

We do have the "all teams are equal" option. And I'll feed that size ratio back again, a lot of people have been saying this. 

 

Good, please do. The XBLA sensi release was utterly ruined by superhuman goalkeepers and codies ignored it, dont let yours come out with some bonkers decision like making the pitch half size.   Its simple stuff, make the players man size and the pitch be pitch size. All the slick videos in the world mean nothing if the basic dimensions are wrong.

 

By the way, "all teams are equal" is not the same, all players should be equal, if a defender gets in front of goal I dont want him fluffing his shot because of some hidden stat. The skill should be in player control always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lorfarius said:

It's not that they ignored it, there was a huge bug found on release and they had to patch it like that just to get it working.

 

I thought there was something about how they were happy with it internally and wouldnt change it. Either way though the end result is the same. A port of amiga sensi to XBLA, how hard is it to fuck that up? Apparantly not all that hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, angel said:

 

Good, please do. The XBLA sensi release was utterly ruined by superhuman goalkeepers and codies ignored it, dont let yours come out with some bonkers decision like making the pitch half size.   Its simple stuff, make the players man size and the pitch be pitch size. All the slick videos in the world mean nothing if the basic dimensions are wrong.

 

By the way, "all teams are equal" is not the same, all players should be equal, if a defender gets in front of goal I dont want him fluffing his shot because of some hidden stat. The skill should be in player control always.

The players will have stats just like in Sensible. The same kind of attributes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, angel said:

 

I thought there was something about how they were happy with it internally and wouldnt change it. Either way though the end result is the same. A port of amiga sensi to XBLA, how hard is it to fuck that up? Apparantly not all that hard.

Jon said it at an event last year.He wasn't happy with it thanks to time pressures and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lorfarius said:

It's not that they ignored it, there was a huge bug found on release and they had to patch it like that just to get it working.

 

I thought that was Sensi 2006. It had the demo where the keepers were fine, then the release version where they had magic hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SociableSoccer said:

When the basics are in place we will release a demo. We haven't inserted difference between stats yet so everyone is equal on the field.

P.S. Sorry about the bump. Not my intention to spam around even though I'm flattered by people thinking I'm a PR mastermind with an agenda. :P 

 

No-one said "Mastermind" ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

I think it's a fair question.

 

They did a kickstarter for money to develop the game. Now they're developing the game without it.  If they could do that, they didn't need the kickstarter.

 

And if they can't complete the game without investment then there's little sense any of us getting excited (or indeed them employing non-essentials like a community manager for a game that essentially doesn't exist) until they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't answer the question anyhow. The financial part is not my cup of tea. The kickstarter didn't work out. None of the original team wanted to abandon the project so there was eventually after a few months a place to fill for me. I've got a part time month per month deal like many other in my business and it's a cool project. We're having a show right now at the Science Museum in London 22nd-7th August and we're going to Gamescom in August and to something called Sensidays in Holland. That's the current future with a release date Q1 2017.

Edited by SociableSoccer
Q1 January was too specific.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dudley said:

I think it's a fair question.

 

They did a kickstarter for money to develop the game. Now they're developing the game without it.  If they could do that, they didn't need the kickstarter.

 

And if they can't complete the game without investment then there's little sense any of us getting excited (or indeed them employing non-essentials like a community manager for a game that essentially doesn't exist) until they do.

 

 

 

Kickstarter was their first chosen method of funding. It wasn't proving to be successful so they pulled out and got investment from elsewhere. What exactly are you not understanding? Kickstarter is an attractive method of investment because you can get more than you need which can be invested into that or another project (or even pocketed if you so wish). Getting investment from another party could be more troublesome as depending on the agreement, you might have certain criteria to meet and may even mean less freedom.

 

You're making it sound like they always had all the money they needed but they were trying to get extra money on top of that from Kickstarter, which isn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dudley said:

I think it's a fair question.

 

They did a kickstarter for money to develop the game. Now they're developing the game without it.  If they could do that, they didn't need the kickstarter.

 

And if they can't complete the game without investment then there's little sense any of us getting excited (or indeed them employing non-essentials like a community manager for a game that essentially doesn't exist) until they do.

 

Doesn't that kind of assume that the only reason you'd do a Kickstarter is because you couldn't get funding from any other source? There are plenty of reasons why you'd go with KS, even if you could potentially get funding from a more traditional investor: you might be able to get investment on better terms; you wouldn't have to give away equity; you'd be able to build publicity; you might be able to retain more control of the project, etc etc.

 

I don't think KS is necessarily the funder of last resort, it's just another way of raising funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dudley said:

I think it's a fair question.

 

They did a kickstarter for money to develop the game. Now they're developing the game without it.  If they could do that, they didn't need the kickstarter.

 

And if they can't complete the game without investment then there's little sense any of us getting excited (or indeed them employing non-essentials like a community manager for a game that essentially doesn't exist) until they do.

 

Eg. You get a loan for 10% or you spend 5% on Kickstarter perks. Which do you choose? If one fails, do you ignore the other? If so, why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people still have a weird hangup about Kickstarter, the strange idea that it's only for projects that couldn't be made any other way, rather than treating it as simply another funding model.

 

If you don't approve, you don't back. That's about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, robotattack said:

 

You're making it sound like they always had all the money they needed but they were trying to get extra money on top of that from Kickstarter, which isn't the case.

 

I'm actually saying the exact opposite.

 

I'm more concerned that if they didn't get the KS and so far, apparently don't have any other investment the game will never see a release because they won't be able to finish it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dudley said:

I'm more concerned that if they didn't get the KS and so far, apparently don't have any other investment the game will never see a release because they won't be able to finish it.

 

19 hours ago, SociableSoccer said:

We never got it. We just decided we'd try and find an investor through classic channels.

 

 

Doesn't this initial response to your question imply that they have managed to secure some investment but it just wasn't the 300k upfront that they were looking for on Kickstarter though? I know it doesn't explicitly say their efforts were successful and there's no detail on the precise terms of the investment model, but this seems like some high level pedantry even for this place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.