Development Info South Park: The Stick of Truth delayed

[l3loodAngel]

1) The fact that Obsidian had to go to kickstarter to raise a measly 1 million proves that they don't have any reserves.
False. Even if they have sizable reserves, spending all that money on a project with very uncertain commercial potential is no way to stay in business. Reserves are there to cover for unexpected circumstances, not for risky investments.

Please tell that to J_C and l3loodAngel - who continue to insist that Obsidian's reserves should be spent on getting P:E out the door, when they run out of cash.

Now make up your mind, will you? First you said that Obsidian has no reservers, and now you say they have. I only said that they could use a few hundred thousand, which could help them a lot. This is a 3,5 million budget game, even 100-200K could mean much.

Don't argue with touched people who can't even get the basics of accounting and management right. You see when DU wants to prove that PE is a scam he says that they don't have the money and will be taking money out of PE fund, but in next paragraph when he wants to prove that we are wrong he says that they have reserves should not be used one PE. He stopped making sense after the first paragraph in this thread. He still thinks that if he will go "Iron man" in this debate he will start making sense eventually and that is retarded idea to begin with.

Not even mentioning the fact that they got "free" money from KS and putting few hundred K on a 4.15 million project is not a risky investment or that running out of funds to finish the project is an UNEXPECTED CIRCUMSTANCE.

 

[IDtenT]

1) The fact that Obsidian had to go to kickstarter to raise a measly 1 million proves that they don't have any reserves.
False. Even if they have sizable reserves, spending all that money on a project with very uncertain commercial potential is no way to stay in business. Reserves are there to cover for unexpected circumstances, not for risky investments.

Please tell that to J_C and l3loodAngel - who continue to insist that Obsidian's reserves should be spent on getting P:E out the door, when they run out of cash.

Now make up your mind, will you? First you said that Obsidian has no reservers, and now you say they have. I only said that they could use a few hundred thousand, which could help them a lot. This is a 3,5 million budget game, even 100-200K could mean much.

Don't argue with touched people who can't even get the basics of accounting and management right. You see when DU wants to prove that PE is a scam he says that they don't have the money and will be taking money out of PE fund, but in next paragraph when he wants to prove that we are wrong he says that they have reserves should not be used one PE. He stopped making sense after the first paragraph in this thread. He still thinks that if he will go "Iron man" in this debate he will start making sense eventually and that is retarded idea to begin with.

Not even mentioning the fact that they got "free" money from KS and putting few hundred K on a 4.15 million project is not a risky investment or that running out of funds to finish the project is an UNEXPECTED CIRCUMSTANCE.

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

 

[Rake]

DU I agree with most of the things you say except one thing. In the end your theory just comes down to this: DarkUnderlord said: Obsidian need a large number of AAA projects on the go (2 - 3) in order to maintain their space... But they don't have that. They've got South Park - which itself is on shaky ground given THQ's situation. Without another project or 2, they can't afford to keep the space. Not with just South Park's money.

So, they sought another project. That project was P:E
This is just speculation on your part.you could be right, but its just as posible that they had another AAA project and P:E is just their oportunity to use kickstarter to make their own IP and retain the rights to it using the people's money. As a plus in this way they get all the money from the games sales and kickstarter is free marketing in all game sites

OEI designer Matt Festa's LI profile updated

Quote
Lead Technical Designer
Obsidian Entertainment
May 2008 – Present (4 years 6 months)

• Prototype Designer on unannounced project
• Strike Team Lead on Project North Carolina [unannounced, cancelled]
• CTG (Core Technology Group) Tech Designer
• Lead Tech Designer on Dungeon Siege 3: Treasures of the Sun DLC
• Lead Tech Designer on Dungeon Siege 3
• Lead Area Designer on Dungeon Siege 3
• Designer on Aliens: Crucible [cancelled]

This implies that there is an unannounced project

 

[l3loodAngel]

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

He doesn't understand what he is speaking and he is completely out of touch with reality. Misquoting, twisting, rephrasing and taking every side of debate just to prove that Obsidian is evil shows his mental state more than any wrongdoings by Obsidian.

Business consultants don't bear any responsibility for the ideas they bring to the business. So one can only rhetorically ask: If they are so good at business why are they not making money for them selfs? The answer to the question is obvious, they are like people who write books how to become a millionaire.

 

[J_C]

1) The fact that Obsidian had to go to kickstarter to raise a measly 1 million proves that they don't have any reserves.
False. Even if they have sizable reserves, spending all that money on a project with very uncertain commercial potential is no way to stay in business. Reserves are there to cover for unexpected circumstances, not for risky investments.

Please tell that to J_C and l3loodAngel - who continue to insist that Obsidian's reserves should be spent on getting P:E out the door, when they run out of cash.

Now make up your mind, will you? First you said that Obsidian has no reservers, and now you say they have. I only said that they could use a few hundred thousand, which could help them a lot. This is a 3,5 million budget game, even 100-200K could mean much.

Don't argue with touched people who can't even get the basics of accounting and management right. You see when DU wants to prove that PE is a scam he says that they don't have the money and will be taking money out of PE fund, but in next paragraph when he wants to prove that we are wrong he says that they have reserves should not be used one PE. He stopped making sense after the first paragraph in this thread. He still thinks that if he will go "Iron man" in this debate he will start making sense eventually and that is retarded idea to begin with.

Not even mentioning the fact that they got "free" money from KS and putting few hundred K on a 4.15 million project is not a risky investment or that running out of funds to finish the project is an UNEXPECTED CIRCUMSTANCE.

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

And I'm an economist by profession, so this makes us even.

 

[J_C]

1) The fact that Obsidian had to go to kickstarter to raise a measly 1 million proves that they don't have any reserves.
False. Even if they have sizable reserves, spending all that money on a project with very uncertain commercial potential is no way to stay in business. Reserves are there to cover for unexpected circumstances, not for risky investments.

Please tell that to J_C and l3loodAngel - who continue to insist that Obsidian's reserves should be spent on getting P:E out the door, when they run out of cash.

Now make up your mind, will you? First you said that Obsidian has no reservers, and now you say they have. I only said that they could use a few hundred thousand, which could help them a lot. This is a 3,5 million budget game, even 100-200K could mean much.

Don't argue with touched people who can't even get the basics of accounting and management right. You see when DU wants to prove that PE is a scam he says that they don't have the money and will be taking money out of PE fund, but in next paragraph when he wants to prove that we are wrong he says that they have reserves should not be used one PE. He stopped making sense after the first paragraph in this thread. He still thinks that if he will go "Iron man" in this debate he will start making sense eventually and that is retarded idea to begin with.

Not even mentioning the fact that they got "free" money from KS and putting few hundred K on a 4.15 million project is not a risky investment or that running out of funds to finish the project is an UNEXPECTED CIRCUMSTANCE.

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

And I'm an economist by profession, so this makes us even. (Although I'm not working in that area.)

 

[Kz3r0]

And I'm an economist by profession, so this makes us even. (Although I'm not working in that area.)

The key to understand the global economic collapse.

 

[Mrowak]

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

He doesn't understand what he is speaking and he is completely out of touch with reality. Misquoting, twisting, rephrasing and taking every side of debate just to prove that Obsidian is evil shows his mental state more than any wrongdoings by Obsidian.

I want to point out that not in a single instance did he say that Obsidian is evil. He simply kept proving how they do not do a great job. To be honest, I think it's you who just cannot see the obvious and prefer to accuse everyone else of logical fellacy than observe the basic errors in your own reasoning (e.g. taking numbers out of nowhere).

Business consultants don't bear any responsibility for the ideas they bring to the business. So one can only rhetorically ask: If they are so good at business why are they not making money for them selfs? The answer to the question is obvious, they are like people who write books how to become a millionaire.

Here's the example where you go wrong. You pull out a strawman attacking the authority rather than arguments. Eh... That's not very thing to do, you know? If you stoop to that, it is evident you are not interested in the discussion but protecting your ego, because you feel your own authority is in danger. Now the question is: why someone unaffiliated with Obsidian would want to protect their ego?

Marketing has all the answers.

 

[J_C]

To be honest, I think it's you who just cannot see the obvious

That's the point. He talks like everything is obvious for him. He knows Obsidians financial record, he knows Obsidian's project, he knows how their management works. But in fact he doesn't know that and just pulls shit out of his ass and says it as fact.

 

[l3loodAngel]

You do realise that DU is a business consultant? Albeit, from my understanding, more to the legal side of things.

He doesn't understand what he is speaking and he is completely out of touch with reality. Misquoting, twisting, rephrasing and taking every side of debate just to prove that Obsidian is evil shows his mental state more than any wrongdoings by Obsidian.

I want to point out that not in a single instance did he say that Obsidian is evil. He simply kept proving how they do not do a great job. To be honest, I think it's you who just cannot see the obvious and prefer to accuse everyone else of logical fellacy than observe the basic errors in your own reasoning (e.g. taking numbers out of nowhere).

And if Obsidian think it's "okay" to use South Park money to pork-barrel their office space, in the event they lost SP, why wouldn't they then think "Well, we've got all this KickStarter money... We could just use that! And I'm sure we'll get another AAA title later!"

That's a direct accusation of KS fraud with 0 basis for this statement. Happy now? Just one question to you. How can you read it and think that it's normal?
Don't even try to defend it as the same with SP as rent costs are directly tied to making SP game and not PE.

Business consultants don't bear any responsibility for the ideas they bring to the business. So one can only rhetorically ask: If they are so good at business why are they not making money for them selfs? The answer to the question is obvious, they are like people who write books how to become a millionaire.

Here's the example where you go wrong. You pull out a strawman attacking the authority rather than arguments. Eh... That's not very thing to do, you know? If you stoop to that, it is evident you are not interested in the discussion but protecting your ego, because you feel your own authority is in danger. Now the question is: why someone unaffiliated with Obsidian would want to protect their ego?

Marketing has all the answers.

I did not attack him, to be clear I said what I think about business consultants in general. I don't know if he is one, but he surely sounds like one.

You pull out a strawman attacking the authority rather than arguments. Eh... That's not very thing to do, you know?

1. You're an idiot.
I know you're only in High School right now - but please take up a basic "Business Studies" lesson at least.


Prosper? Is that you?
I really think your problem here is English: You don't fucking speak it - and you sure as hell don't understand it.
You can't explain anyting in detail. Please don't try. You'd garble the English language too much "to do the justice".

And that's from one reply. Are you really that blind or just biased?

 

[Mrowak]

To be honest, I think it's you who just cannot see the obvious

That's the point. He talks like everything is obvious for him. He knows Obsidians financial record, he knows Obsidian's project, he knows how their management works. But in fact he doesn't know that and just pulls shit out of his ass and says it as fact.

He talks about indications and signs we can observe. What he keeps telling you is "because of this, that, and that Obsidian is for a hard time". That's called circumstantial evidence. As an economist you should know what are sure signs of risky ventures, and why you should not get involved in some, in spite of having little access to info. Well, here they are! Enjoy!

You guys go the other way stating "all the problems Obsidian is facing mean nothing - they *may* have extra money, they *may* not mismanage them". And you guys do not have anything to back that up - there's no indication whatsoever what you are claiming may be true - quite the opposite. We have lots of signals you struggle very hard to disprove, but you do not have a single one.

Even worse, when someone actually demands to be given those signals, you keep repeating how nonsensic it is to expect such essential info (it is not, sorry; it's just common sense).

 

[J_C]

You guys go the other way stating "all the problems Obsidian is facing mean nothing - they *may* have extra money, they *may* not mismanage them". And you guys do not have anything to back that up

While you say that that "they *don't* have extra money, they *will* mismanage them". And you also do not have anything to back that up.

Even worse, when someone actually demands to be given those signals, you keep repeating how nonsensic it is to expect such essential info (it is not, sorry; it's just common sense).

Because the things you demand are never public except the investors, the authorities and the owners of the company. And no, KS backers are not investors.

 

[l3loodAngel]

1. He talks about indications and signs we can observe. What he keeps telling you is "because of this, that, and that Obsidian is for a hard time". 2. That's called circumstantial evidence. 3. As an economist you should know what are sure signs of risky ventures, 4. and why you should not get involved in some, in spite of having little access to info. 5. Well, here they are! Enjoy!

1. No, he makes accusations, while failing to understand that what Obsidian does make sense from business perspective. It does not make their situation any better or worse.
2. No, that's called pulling stuff out of your ass. There are facts and then there are opinions. If you present opinion as a fact it does not become one.
3. Do you know that there are no risk free ventures?
4. I am sure that he is not participating as a share holder and I could assume that he would keep his living standards if Obsidian goes bust, despite his lost pledge.
5. I am not sure what was your destination, but you ended up in ditch.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Even worse, when someone actually demands to be given those signals, you keep repeating how nonsensic it is to expect such essential info (it is not, sorry; it's just common sense).

Because the things you demand are never public except the investors, the authorities and the owners of the company. And no, KS backers are not investors.

He does not understand the difference between stake holders and share holders.

 

[Mrowak]

You pull out a strawman attacking the authority rather than arguments. Eh... That's not very thing to do, you know?

1. You're an idiot.
I know you're only in High School right now - but please take up a basic "Business Studies" lesson at least.


Prosper? Is that you?
I really think your problem here is English: You don't fucking speak it - and you sure as hell don't understand it.
You can't explain anyting in detail. Please don't try. You'd garble the English language too much "to do the justice".

And that's from one reply. Are you really that blind or just biased?

I do stand corrected. This is DU being DU, and it's obvious his been fed up with it. You made a serious mistake allowing yourself to indulge in it i.e. letting it go down to this level.

And to be honest, your theories do sound very unprofessional, as if coming from a person who heard what a project is and what maintenance costs are but have not been hold accountable for any of them and now makes up how you imagine stuff works, when it cannot and will not work that way, for various reasons enumerated above.

 

[Mrowak]

You guys go the other way stating "all the problems Obsidian is facing mean nothing - they *may* have extra money, they *may* not mismanage them". And you guys do not have anything to back that up

While you say that that "they *don't* have extra money, they *will* mismanage them". And you also do not have anything to back that up.

I did not say that they will - but based on the history of their projects, the unfinished or half-finished games, their dubious financial situation and the employment policies they do not inspire trust. I am sure they will produce something, but will it be up to standard? Or will it be broken due to the mismanagement factors I mentioned above?

So what signals do you have there won't be mismanagement? Their good word? Hope?

Even worse, when someone actually demands to be given those signals, you keep repeating how nonsensic it is to expect such essential info (it is not, sorry; it's just common sense).

Because the things you demand are never public except the investors, the authorities and the owners of the company. And no, KS backers are not investors.

Which is a fucking huge problem. You see, they burden of proof falls on the proposing party - which is Obsidian. What I was interested in, is whether this time around they really thought this through, contrary to the previous game. I did not really expect a business plan, but at least some document, some vision statement showing that they had something in place, other than just random ideas. Apparently they did not, and all of it was a marketing stunt with keywords and little else. Again the lack of professional approach really worries me, and it does not bode well for the project.

What also concerns me is your agreement to just roll with it and do not ask questions that do matter, claiming that "it's not your business". It is, sorry, it is. And it should be yours as well.

Who knows - I maybe wrong. Maybe they really have a great plan they are realising with great care (but we know they did not have - Josh admitted it). However "the burden of proof" was not fulfilled and this is in itself an evidence against their agenda, which we can add to the list above. Until it is realised, I will remain sceptical.

 

[Spectacle]

DU is usually a man of sound reason, so I don't understand why he's gone off the deep end here. Both DarkUnderlord and Mrowak are guilty of exaggerating every possible problem regarding PE and Obsidian while ignoring anything positive.

Obsidian has been in business for nearly 10 years and have released many games in that time. Why is it so hard for you to accept that Obsidian knows how to make games and how to stay solvent in an unstable industry?

 

[Mrowak]

DU is usually a man of sound reason, so I don't understand why he's gone off the deep end here. Both DarkUnderlord and Mrowak are guilty of exaggerating every possible problem regarding PE and Obsidian while ignoring anything positive.

Ok, so what are the positives?

Obsidian has been in business for nearly 10 years and have released many games in that time. Why is it so hard for you to accept that Obsidian knows how to make games and how to stay solvent in an unstable industry?

That's nothing substantial. For all we know it may be due to publishers themselves. It may be because they are good at marketing. It cannot be that this is because their games are so awesome - which is the part that interests us most.

 

[J_C]

I did not say that they will - but based on the history of their projects, the unfinished or half-finished games, their dubious financial situation and the employment policies they do not inspire trust. I am sure they will produce something, but will it be up to standard? Or will it be broken due to the mismanagement factors I mentioned above?

That's the problem. Their buggy games have nothing to do with bad financial management. They had a bad QA team, that's certain. They admitted this themselves when they sad in an interview that they had a very small QA team. But they also said recently that they improved on that (and Dungeon Siege III was free of bugs).

Employment policies? Like what? They had to lay off 2 dozen people when one of their projects was cancelled. Standard behaviour in the industry.

I have faith in them producing an RPG up to standard, like they always did. I don't care about bugs. I can live with bugs, if the content and gameplay is good. And for me, their previous games were good in this regard. Why wouldn't I believe in them? Because for once they can produce something without a publisher telling them what to do?

Obsidian has been in business for nearly 10 years and have released many games in that time. Why is it so hard for you to accept that Obsidian knows how to make games and how to stay solvent in an unstable industry?

That's nothing substantial. For all we know it may be due to publishers themselves. It may be because they are good at marketing. It cannot be that this is because their games are so awesome - which is the part that interests us most.

Well if that is not substantial, I don't know what is. The publishers saved them? ROFL! They screwed them over several times! They are good at marketing? How, marketing is the publisher's work.
Yes, it is because the publishers and their marketing. It is not because their games, God no! You must really hate Obsidian's games, but lots of people on the Codex loves New Vegas, Mask of the betrayer, and some of us even liked Alpha Protocol and Dungeon Siege III.

 

[Spectacle]

DU is usually a man of sound reason, so I don't understand why he's gone off the deep end here. Both DarkUnderlord and Mrowak are guilty of exaggerating every possible problem regarding PE and Obsidian while ignoring anything positive.

Ok, so what are the positives?

Here's a couple, far from an exhaustive list:
They have people working on the game who are also behind several beloved classics.
Their previous game, Dungeon Siege 3, was rock solid, with none of the bugginess that has plagued many of their previous efforts.
There's no publisher involved to make a mess of the design.

 

[Mrowak]

I did not say that they will - but based on the history of their projects, the unfinished or half-finished games, their dubious financial situation and the employment policies they do not inspire trust. I am sure they will produce something, but will it be up to standard? Or will it be broken due to the mismanagement factors I mentioned above?

That's the problem. Their buggy games have nothing to do with bad financial management. They had a bad QA team, that's certain.

So it's bad planning and human resource management. We cannot rule out that QA was so poor because simply there wasn't time for it - with from my experience is a sure indication of mismanaged project.

They admitted this themselves when they sad in an interview that they had a very small QA team. But they also said recently that they improved on that (and Dungeon Siege III was free of bugs).

And yet it was a poor, bad game. Why make bad games when you can make good ones. Was it Obsidian's intention to make a boring game? Or was it because they had to rush it stick the whole thing together with duct-tape and pray it somehow sells.

Employment policies? Like what? They had to lay off 2 dozen people when one of their projects was cancelled. Standard behaviour in the industry.

That's true. But it's a sign of mismanagement when one of the guys was employed a day before he got iaid off, and another worked just one week? The left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Mismamangement.

I have faith in them producing an RPG up to standard, like they always did.

Unfortunatelly I cannot say I hold them in such high esteem. Their products have always had major flaws

I don't care about bugs. I can live with bugs, if the content and gameplay is good.

DS3, Alpha Protocol and NWN2 OC want to have a word with you. Those games were not broken because of bugs. They were just bad-to-mediocre. Sorry but I take Bioware's polished, content-rich DA:O over Obsidian's pearl in a steaming pile of... duct-tape.

And for me, their previous games were good in this regard. Why wouldn't I believe in them? Because for once they can produce something without a publisher telling them what to do?

Unfortunatelly this is not enough for me. As you said yourself, you are really a fan. To be honset I used to share your sentiment. But somehow I cannot anymore.

 

[Mrowak]

DU is usually a man of sound reason, so I don't understand why he's gone off the deep end here. Both DarkUnderlord and Mrowak are guilty of exaggerating every possible problem regarding PE and Obsidian while ignoring anything positive.

Ok, so what are the positives?

Here's a couple, far from an exhaustive list:
They have people working on the game who are also behind several beloved classics.

That's good, but it didn't help them in previous projects.

Their previous game, Dungeon Siege 3, was rock solid, with none of the bugginess that has plagued many of their previous efforts.

And still it was a pretty boring game with a very poor gameplay design.

There's no publisher involved to make a mess of the design.

That would be cool if they showed some design to the people. Not for them to alter it in any way, but just tp prove they had something concrete in mind. Yes, this is what I begrudge them most. As it is, it seems to me that because Obsidian operated without the design, the publisher stepped in and made their own vision manifest.

 

[J_C]

As it is, it seems to me that because Obsidian operated without the design, the publisher stepped in and made their own vision manifest.

You can't really think that! Without a design, no publisher would hire Obsidian for work.

 

[Mrowak]

As it is, it seems to me that because Obsidian operated without the design, the publisher stepped in and made their own vision manifest.

You can't really think that! Without a design, no publisher would hire Obsidian for work.

And yet, we "hired" them without a single damn thing, and they didn't feel a single inclination to provide us with a fraction of what publishers expect. We - their fans, who actually buy their games - were treated worse than their publishers. And we agreed to that. We are supposed to be happy about that. Typical sheeple marketing, methinks.

 

[Spectacle]

Mrowak, let me ask you a question, why do you even care about this? You don't like Obsidian's games and you have no faith in their ability to produce games in the first place. Why are you even remotely interested in this project?