Kickstarter Project from the makers of Ghost Recon/Rogue Spear/Rainbow Six

[Stealhead]

Well in 24 hours they have only gained about $1,000.A comment I read in the comments section by kickstarter says that it has been up for 18 days that means that it will be up for 30 days one month most of that month is gone and not even $100,000 yet.

I think a factor could easily be that people have heard promises about how good this or that game will be over and over and are just skeptical when they hear any thing come from any game developer anymore.Most gamers have heard such promises such claims before and have been let down to the point where they become skeptical of such claims.

To be honest I have not purchased a game on launch in several years because I do not want to waste my money.The only exception would have been Fallout New Vegas and that was a calculated risk then.

[Arclight]

This thing has been around for years, since 2007 I think. Followed it with interest for a long time, but at this point I'm not that confident anymore that it will ever see the light of day.

[Stealhead]

According to the story posted about John Sonedecker he says that he has had this idea since 2002 10 years.If you read the front page they sound a bit desperate to be honest like this is the last gasp for air.

Also I read on the Ground Branch website there it says; link http://groundbranch.com/questions-and-answers/

"If our Kickstarter can generate a bit more than our target goal then we will also be doing a Mac version. Linux has been looked at and unless funding far exceeds our goal it would just be too much of a burden for our small team to support."

And as to what elements will be included in the game:

"This is somewhat dependent on how the Kickstarter turns out. Ground Branch will eventually have Singleplayer, Multiplayer and a Co-op component to it. Although, we are currently only working on the Multiplayer component (SP campaign is designed), but if a specific secondary funding goal is met then we will be able to include Co-op and/or a full SP experience.

If those secondary goals are not met then the plan is to release just the adversarial MP portion first as it is the most cost effective solution for a small independently funded team. There will then be a follow on release of a Singleplayer/Co-op campaign with revenue generated from sales of the first release. The MP release will include a preview of the Co-op experience though."

Why does it not say this information on the Kickstarter page? That seems just a little deceptive to me why does it not clearly say over at kickstarter what the goal money will actually cover?

In effect they are saying that for the game to have more than multiplayer and have a single player and Co-op mode they will need to run another fund raising campaign for that.

In other words the $425,000 will only be enough to cover what they need to make the multiplayer end of the PC version.

Sorry to say but at this point I would give them any money they have a good concept but right now that is all they have.It sounds to me that in order to make the project truly complete they need more or less 1 million bucks.

[Arclight]

It does say specifically it is an "online multiplayer shooter". Might be their failing actually; a lot of people just aren't interested in MP-only games.


And to the earlier question of why they didn't sign on with a publisher: it's because no one is interested in funding it. Rainbow Six went from 1st-person tactical squad-based shooter to 3rd person cover-based shooter, complete with regenerating health. It's what the majority wants, it is what sells the most.

Sadly, that situation is reflected in the funding status... I'd fund it if I had a creditcard but they'd still fall far short of their target.

It's a bit odd though: Arma is doing well enough to warrant constant support and sequels. There's definitely a market for something like Ground Branch.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by Arclight

It does say specifically it is an "online multiplayer shooter". Might be their failing actually; a lot of people just aren't interested in MP-only games.


And to the earlier question of why they didn't sign on with a publisher: it's because no one is interested in funding it. Rainbow Six went from 1st-person tactical squad-based shooter to 3rd person cover-based shooter, complete with regenerating health. It's what the majority wants, it is what sells the most.

Sadly, that situation is reflected in the funding status... I'd fund it if I had a creditcard but they'd still fall far short of their target.

It's a bit odd though: Arma is doing well enough to warrant constant support and sequels. There's definitely a market for something like Ground Branch.

You hit the nail on the head this has been in the back of my mind as well there are games like Arma II that some what fill the void left behind from the "good old days" and the fact that they want to bring back the good days of tactical shooters" is some what wishful thinking those games where the main stream of PC gaming when PC was not really main stream.

Things have changed a lot since those days back in the late 90's early 2000's now gaming is a very bug business for better or worse and the market for a very specific game just is not there for a reasonable price.You need to make money which means that you are forced pretty much with any game even for PC to make it attract a large audience if you are going to make any money on it.

I think honestly people see Ground Branch and they think "This seems like great concept but I already have X game that with mods is pretty darn well satisfying my itch." The other issue is simply that times are tight right now and many people just are much less willing to splurge on things let alone something that is not even a sure thing yet.And honestly though not near the potential caliber of Ground Branch the market is saturated with similar (vaguely)games and even if they do get the money they will still need many people buy the game when it comes out most of the possible market let me be brutally honest will find Ground Branch simply too hard these folks playing COD BF3 (which some you would have to attract) just wont be drawn in and if they did they will toss the game in a week because the play style is so different or they'd force a more action style.We that played in the olden days we played that way becuase that was the way you played this mind set is not there anymore.I recall even back then Many guys in the barracks that had PC owned RB6 and GR but for some even back them before the trend of fast past passed fps they just found the game play too hard.The market for a true tactical shooter just is not there in large enough numbers given the cost that such a game costs to make now if it where some niche war game like TOAW or the like or the Combat mission series those are very niche but they also do not cost that much to make either.

Bottom line it is just bad timing I am not trying to be negative merely realistic.What happens also if they do get the money then they make the game then they are going to see the dollar signs and make changes here and there to make more attractive to a larger crowd.On the Ground Branch webpage it even implies that they might make a console version at some point.

I will watch the numbers at kickstarter see what happens if gets the to right place by my next pay check which is a few days before the deadline I will give a Triple A title MSRP to them.I just hope that no Bronies end up giving 2,500+ and then has a some stupid bronie deal put on an in game billboard Yuo know my younger sister had My Little Pony toys and i used to melt them in the microwave.

[Arclight]

I like the show well enough but you wouldn't see me sticking it in a game. Or buying anything related to it for that matter.


I think the timing might be part of it, yeah. Currently Arma is going strong and Red Orchestra 2 is fairly recent. Also, there's another project that's very similar: TAKEDOWN

I think there's another one floating around, though I might be thinking of Takedown.

If Ground Branch would have popped up on Kickstarter before Takedown, the situation may well have been reversed. As it stands now, the tactical FPS crowd keeping track of Kickstarter likely already send their money to this other project.


There's another thing though: the disparity between the goals of those 2. GB is asking more than twice as much. Difference is Takedown has financial backing lined up, using the Kickstarter funding as proof that the product is viable. Meanwhile GB seems to want to do everything themselfs.

If GB got funded, I'd still have more confidence in Takedown actually making it to market.

[Stealhead]

Doing some reading on the Ground Breaker website and going through the vids they have made I think they are over doing it.I saw in one video about the sound effects that they plan to make something like 20 different magazine dropping to the ground on different surfaces.Really?that is a bit too much yes just one or two sounds for the same thing is boring but 20 or more that is putting too much detail into something that is not going to really get noticed all that much in the heat of in game battle you are not going to really be listening for mag drops.

There is such a thing as too much detail if you put too much into a project it is either going to cost too much money to be reasonable or the project will fail because no one wants to compromise.the reality with anything mass market is that it must have some compromise in it somewhere.

I honestly knew nothing about Takedown until you mentioned it Arclight doing some research I have to agree with your opinion. Interesting to note that it seems the folks that worked for Redstrom on the classic tactical shooters are not all seeing eye to eye project wise.

I like what they did with Takedown serious investors will have raised eyebrows when they see that fans of the genre gave $200,000 of their own money.

I think for a true tactical shooter indy is the way to go no doubt about it.The big companies are making money hand over foot with their crap and they have no reason to change their ways if the hard core boycott a given game no message is even received by the big time publisher.Part of this trend I blame on multiplayer the reason it is addictive people get caught up in powning other players and the unlocks all that stuff and a crappy game can hide in plain sight on top of that the pure consumerism of the main stream titles people will by those games and like them because they are pretty much programmed to enjoy it and if they want to play with everyone else they have no other option.People are busy trying have good stats or unlock something they do not sit down and say "that is the same M4 model that they used in 2007 they just added a new sight to unlock."