Feature Funding

[Skepsiis]

In summary, would people be interested in having the option to fund the development of specific features they want to see in game?

I am talking about some kind of system similar to the way kickstarter works with the crowd sourced micro funding but without a timer.

There could be a list of features in a 'Feature Funding' tab in the store from the 5 year plan and you could select one and choose to make a donation. Once that particular option reaches its target goal for development funding, it is slotted into a queue and work begins after the current project and others earlier in the queue are completed.

Say I want them to work on adding entry/exit animations for vehicles so I find it in the list (assuming it is there) and can see an empty to full bar showing the funding progress is at 87% of its target of £50k or whatever and can click a donate button to chip in another £10 towards the cost. Perhaps give the people who donate a pat on the back with some exclusive cosmetic item to show their devotion or open up access to some private discussion forum where they can talk about the feature to make them feel special and even more involved with the process.

It would be up to the devs what is available in the list of course so they have overall control and it wouldn't just be a list of everything but what they themselves want to nudge forward in the short term.

This list could be public and include rough estimates on the time they would take so that people can see at a glance the direction the game is taking with a lose idea of when. Maybe tie-in a dev blog to keep the really interested people updated, and so people can see their donation in action, and include all the usual social networking links to drum up some awareness or spread the word.

This would be a good way for the players that want to get directly involved with helping to support the dev team (instead of buying random stuff from the store you may not really want just to put money into the game) and you get the choice of what your money is actually going towards.

Depending on the success, it may need some regular trickle funding from SOE to make sure things the developers really want are eventually implemented (or would it? maybe this would show up a particularly disliked planned feature). If the system proved popular it also has scope to expand into other areas like funding expensive elaborate game events for example.

What do you think? I am sure the general concept could use some refinement, but would the core idea be something that you would want to be involved with?

[Poser]

There sure are a lot of polls today.

[kaffis]

It's an interesting idea, and certainly one smaller, more independent developers are (seemingly; most video game developers have yet to deliver product based on crowd sourced funding models since the movement is still so young) making good use of.

However, my guess is that the 5 year plan is laid out with lots of features that build on one another, for one, or that are intended to take advantage of parallel engine development with EQ Next. That probably pares down the list of available features a lot.

In addition, I think you'll find that people are a lot less gracious, overall, about the notion of "donating" to established publishers' teams. There's a reason the crowdfunding movement is dominated by the indie scene, or rogue/freelancing developers with name recognition.

Furthermore, it's not as sensible a model for a large team of developers, since work can (and does) get divided amongst several smaller teams within the project. This means that the optimal flow will ensure that several features are being worked on in parallel, and those get finished when they get finished.

Finally, the model you cite works MUCH better when you're collecting funding prior to release (otherwise, you end up releasing, opening up the crowdfunding, and then "waiting" for a feature to hit its funding goal or vote total or whatever before anybody can go to work on stuff). I don't think that's the image the developers want to project as they emphasize the game's free to play nature.


Don't get me wrong; I'm a Kickstarter nut and my wallet dreads links to that site. But I don't think it's a sensible match for PS2.

[Pyreal]

I prefer a Steam Workshop type system but with a twist, as game play additions would be coming from the Devs rather than the community.

I would work similarly to Workshop: Features or additions are voted on and then they are completed and added.

I don't see why cosmetic things couldn't be created and voted on for inclusion into the game just as Steam Workshop does.

Heck, PS2 may release on Steam with Workshop support for all we know! Now wouldn't that be a kicker! Get to design your own camo patterns and if enough players like it it would be added and you might get some shiny ribbon for your contribution!

[Sifer2]

It's a very interesting idea, and potentially a great use of Station Cash. Though I would be worried it might compromise their vision of the game. Especially since as we know the casual masses some times have really bad opinions of how a game should play. Call of Duty derp. But I guess so long as SOE is the one picking the possible features it might not be a problem.

I do think they should have an ingame poll asking for community opinions on certain issues or what we think about their next planned feature updates either way.

[Skepsiis]

I am not proposing this is the only source of funding for the game, it could just supplement it and help push forward really popular features that might have otherwise been discarded due to budgeting constraints (like entry.exit animations). They were going to develop the game close to the community anyway so why not let people join in like this.

It is something that can easily sit out of view if you as an individual are not interested for whatever reason and do not want to take part, same with the store in general i guess with a f2p game.

[Unforgiven]

it sounds like a good idea, but most players dont know what they really want in a game, so we would end up getting a bunch of garbage into the game instead of the stuff that would really work and improve the game.

[Sirisian]

Here's an identical thread.

It's been brought up a few times so I made a thread in the idea forum a while back.

[Wayside]

So...Planetside kickstarter. Planetstarter. Kicksider?

>_>
<_<

Dig the idea. Truly. If the devs placed features or expansions in a list, and let customers commit $5, $10, or whatever towards that feature...then worked on features and projects in the order that they were funded...I think that'd be an incredibly interesting experiment. No idea whether that'd actually work in the long run though o_o

What do you say SOE. Feeling adventurous?

[Sirisian]

oh, I should mention this. That when talking to Higby on IRC he mentioned interest in a petition type system for ideas similar to the whitehouse petition system where players could sign an idea. That's as much as he discussed. This was after I brought up the GetSatisfaction software and someone brought up UserVoice which are community relation software for submitting bugs and upvoting ideas.

Not sure if they'll start on such an idea though.

[Ragefighter]

yes for some kind of feedback system with signing options to show what we all want...

NO to a Kickstarter-esque style, 'if you pay X amount you get X!'--'But if nobody pays than nothing new happens!'(even if everyone gets it regardless of payment).

[zomg]

I like this idea but I must say it's hard for me to imagine it actually working very well. I did vote for Yes, I'd Use It though since you never know

[Arcticus]

I'm open to the idea, however kickstarter is best for discrete projects. Due to the fungibility of money, one can imagine a development company using kickstarter to get additional funding for a popular aspect that was needed anyway and would have been developed anyhow...and now the new money contributed is really being used to subsidize lesser aspects.

It also creates problems for SOE even if they're doing things on the up and up. Imagine if a kickstarter project meets funding requirements only a week before employee bonuses are announced.

Edit: I might need to correct myself after looking at another post (a poll). Maybe kickstarter should be used to fund stuff that a sizable portion of the playerbase desires but that SOE considers of low importance (but not game breaking). In other words, what better way to help a company reprioritize. I think an example of something that players seem to want, is not game breaking and is of low importance to SOE is vehicle entry/exit animations.

If SOE specced it out the additional temporary resource cost and put it on kickstarter, people can vote with their dollars.