Gabe Newell : "Let gamers finance the development themselfs"

[ADP VDP 101]

Gabe Newell from Valve said that developer, if it would be his choice, should no longer finance the development of games themselfs. He is saying:"Gamers can invest money in the development of titles the look forward to."

Gabe Newell is also saying that the investors could see a profit of some sort in the long run, also would they recieve a copy of the game.

He wants to have the gamers voice in the development. Newell: " Gamers know better what should and should not be in a game. They know that better then any of the employers at the development company".

SOURCE (http://www.nu.nl/games/2045604/gabe-newell-laat-gamers-de-ontwikkeling-van-games-maar-financieren.html)

[Ben Sharpe]

Okay Gabe has finally disapeared up his own ass

[Iregore]

Is Gabe ill at the moment? I mean this statement shows a clear lack of thought on his part, maybe he isn't well.

I assume by this statement he means we invest an amount in the game like the retail price of the game while it is still in development and then we get a say in its development, but that is just unrealistic, who would get priority? 10000 people invest and 6000 want one thing in the story, 4000 do not want it, have 4000 people now wasted their investment? 40% no longer want this game they have invested in because they would get a say in development and then were ignored.

I know, very simplistic and biased argument here, but you see how this could all go wrong very, very quickly.

[KNIGHTOFSERA]

stupidest idea ever, yes lets pay some 60 bucks or more on a project that we wouldnt have any say in (cause there would be 10000 investors)...when we can let them make whatever they were making with their publisher and then buy it if we like it

why change things, I know publishers suck half the time..but its better than what he proposed

[vv uk garf vv]

i think no matter how you tried to work this it would just FAIL fullstop

[Domantos]

Can't they just have a poll on their website and an 'idea' e-mail inbox? =p

[ADP VDP 101]

Can't they just have a poll on their website and an 'idea' e-mail inbox? =p


Something like that would maybe be better.

He is saying that the risk they have to take in the development of a project is to big in some occasions.
I would say," Don't do the project then. If you do not believe in it, you maybe working in the wrong business Gabe!"

[Lemon Of Life]

Christ Gabe, what have you been smoking?

[ghosty2478]

we already help out with financing by paying 40 fucking quid for the finished piece

[Dr Merk]

I think he was being sarcastic, atleast I would hope so. Otherwise game developers at Valve should be riding the short bus to work.

[Bearded Bugs]

"Gamers know better what should and should not be in a game. They know that better then any of the employers at the development company" I agree with what he said in that part.

But financing our own development? How would that even work?

[DigitalFury]

I'm not completely opposed to this idea.

Example:

Let's say FFXIII is being developed by SE, but published by EA. FFXIII has been in development for like 4 or 5 years now, with I'm sure millions and millions of dollars being spent on it. Ea steps and says, "This game needs to be finished next week, regardless of how the game is. We're not giving you anymore money." With that scenario having been set up, let me pose this question: How many times have you REALLY REALLY been looking forward to a game only to have it killed mid-production due to rising costs and the publisher pulling out?

Also, how many times have you bought a complete pile of shit?

Well, with the idea proposed by Gabe Newell, only games that have created enough buzz with the public would even begin production. It would not only reduce the number of games killed due to publishers pulling out of the project, but the number of shit games released by shit developers just hoping to profit a quick buck would be reduced by so much.

Instead of going to GameStop and paying $60 for a game after it's released, you send your $60 to the developer to help get the game created and receive your copy when it's done.

[Tatanko]

Honestly it sounds like he just wants more money for his business. Gamers can have input without having to fund anything. Infinity Ward has proven that, and anybody that's been active in their community preparing for Modern Warfare 2 knows it very well. Hey Valve, call up Infinity Ward, they've got some tips for you :p

[Iregore]

I'm not completely opposed to this idea.

Example:

Let's say FFXIII is being developed by SE, but published by EA. FFXIII has been in development for like 4 or 5 years now, with I'm sure millions and millions of dollars being spent on it. Ea steps and says, "This game needs to be finished next week, regardless of how the game is. We're not giving you anymore money." With that scenario having been set up, let me pose this question: How many times have you REALLY REALLY been looking forward to a game only to have it killed mid-production due to rising costs and the publisher pulling out?

Also, how many times have you bought a complete pile of shit?

Well, with the idea proposed by Gabe Newell, only games that have created enough buzz with the public would even begin production. It would not only reduce the number of games killed due to publishers pulling out of the project, but the number of shit games released by shit developers just hoping to profit a quick buck would be reduced by so much.

Instead of going to GameStop and paying $60 for a game after it's released, you send your $60 to the developer to help get the game created and receive your copy when it's done.

No offence, but just think, what is stopping the buzz from outweighing the product? It happens a lot, and we buy the games to find this out at the moment, or in my case wait for a few reviews to confirm the buzz was worth it. If we are funding up front and then it doesn't meet expectations we are already screwed. Plus I never pay full price for any game, the highest I have paid for any 360 game at the moment is £20 for Infinite Undiscovery just over a month after release, brand new from a store. So yeah, this idea destroys competition and would encourage the developers to create a false buzz on all their games.

[Gackt]

Did he really say "themselfs"? or themselves?

[Lucent Beam]

" Gamers know better what should and should not be in a game. They know that better then any of the employers at the development company".

SOURCE (http://www.nu.nl/games/2045604/gabe-newell-laat-gamers-de-ontwikkeling-van-games-maar-financieren.html)

With all the bitching people are doing about Left 4 Dead 2, I don't think he really believes that gamers know better.

Plus, part of a developer's job is to include things in games that gamers didn't know that they would love. Giving people only exactly 'what they want' kills innovation on the developer side.

[master hec0]

no i wouldn't want to trust a game in the hands of someone like myself.... i think i would produce somethings that sounds totally awesome but really was just a pile of crap crammed on to a disk

[Bearded Bugs]

Giving people only exactly 'what they want' kills innovation on the developer side. Not to mention there wouldn't be any surprise in the game if the gaming community decided everything that goes into a game.

[Fizzmatix]

I think this is more of a dream rather than a reality, i don't know anyone who would pay to have a say in a game. I personally would never pay to have an option or opinion in a game it's just not going to happen.

I think Valve need to finish off some of the started and not finished projects such as the last episode of half life 2 before they even get close to trying to scrounge money for future projects. It would be nice to have an idea put forward and used in a game but that's down to the developers, if the fans know what is going on doesn't that kind of ruin the game?

[Bolt]

I think he's saying it would be a large investment, in the same sense as the stock market and that you would get the game and be allowed to voice your opinion more directly to the developer. As opposed to 10,000 people on a message board their would be a few hundred involved investors

[ostalabibisuka]

honestly from reading the replies on this thread, i think 1 investor would have a LARGE percentage say in things :P

[arbiter4566]

This is dumb, I understand that there is a risk in developing games. But there's a risk everywhere in the entertainment business. Tons of movies have had a high budget but a low revenue. I agree with what some people have said, they should just listen to the fans of the series/game and take in some suggestions, that way they would get more sales, but it would also leave some surprise to it.

[Genesis x360a]

Sounds like Gabe's been hitting that Crack pipe abit to much lately.

[funman]

I think that it should stay how it is, but have the views looked at. For example on the bugie web site, i see all the time some starting a new thread about something that would be cool in the game!

Why is this not used more, as if you want a game that the people want, just read! There is good ideas all over the place.

[Domantos]

Something like this would kill of the game stores as well. If we pay our buckos straight to the developers then 1st, they'd get loads more, as they only get a small amount per game as it is (so good on them, money grabbing **** =P ). 2nd the game stores wouldn't get much at all, as all the serious gamers would invest in what games they were interested in and get them upon completion. So a bad idea, I still say listen to the community via forums and the like.