Would any developers be for crowdfunding of their TSW projects? I don't really see a downside. 1-It generates cash to start a project (especially for smaller developers) 2-It gauges interest in a new project (no funding, then it doesn't get built) 3- Can allow communication between the fundraisers and the project developer as they can provide regular updates and include "stretch goals" to add more content. I don't see a "down" side compared to the current "cross your fingers and hope this sells" model. Yet I never see anyone use this method for TSW. Thoughts?
It won't happen for a number of reasons. For starters, the developer would have breached the DTG NDA before they have even started. There are also too many other factors that can see a route get pulled before its finished. Licencing for example.
An NDA only exists after it's signed with DTG (if it is.) You don't generally sign one when asking "what route should I build?" It's only AFTER you've made one and want to sell it.
If I was a multimillionaire I’d March myself to Paris and drop three million in cash at Focus HQ. I’d request that the whole of the ECML mainline be completed. Then I woke up…
That's a fair point but DTG and Licensors usually like to keep things quiet and you also said about providing regular updates which may not be possible under the NDA. The problem with crowdfunding is that it is very public. I very much suspect that your view that DTG and 3rd Party Developers "Cross their fingers and hope it sells" is way off the mark. A positive from it could be that it could open the door to developers to do dlc that we might not otherwise see.
Yeah ... NO. Crowdfunding is not the way to bring anything into TSW. The "crowd" is just not big enough to gain any pace in creating content. It would rather slow it down and/or even let the project eventually disappear completely.
I wonder, though, because exactly what licenses DTG has is kept under wraps as proprietary business info. So is there NDA involved in simply learning what licenses are available to work with in order to propose a route? Also, in general it seems counterintuitive to think that more people would be willing to pay upfront for a route to be made than to buy it afterward.
This is definitely something that would interest me. Currently I try to support any developers who develop content that I like by purchasing at full price on day one. I would definitely be interested in diverting a little of that money to support grassroots/ independent developers
It wouldn't work because not enough people want the same things, there's enough salty tears and attitude already on here just by having a different opinion, put cold hard cash in the mix, it would devolve into a full on riot and deathmatch........
No, if my experience of Trainz A New Era is anything to go by. That was crowd funded and at least on release a huge hardware melting mess. And to get the complimentary copy of the game, you had to put in more than the retail cost. As we have seen with the Class 104 and Tadami Line, announced projects don't always materialise so it would potentially be money down the drain. And the initial costs involved in building the route are probably proportionally not that much - most mapping information is online these days so you don't even need to go out and buy paper maps. Maybe a few reference books and a trip to check out the prototype. But the developer and artist time is traditionally rewarded on completion, with royalties from the sales not paid upfront when anything could happen (take the money and run).
Whilst new developers do need lots of support, they have to work for their money, not rely on crowdfunding
Anyhow I don’t think DTG or their associates problem is they are cash strapped, seems to be a talent issue - getting people to work for them who can produce what’s needed. Obviously there’s some there as testified by the excellent HSP46 loco just released for the MBTA routes. But they seem to be struggling for route builders, as the access issue for US railroads only cuts so far and the awful sawn off little runt which was Cardiff Network outsourced to Rivet demonstrates. Unless of course the talent they do have is fully engaged on the late summer/TSW6 stuff. So rather than crowd funding, what DTG should be doing is a big recruitment drive to get people on board with the necessary skills and knowledge. Sadly while there is a great deal of the latter in the wider community, unlike MSTS or TSC choosing UE has created a system that is very difficult to work with. Old hands like me who go back before MSTS took one look at the undocumented, incomprehensible editor and just said no thank you. With no, or very few, people cutting their teeth on freeware (and no officially supported distribution channel for any emergent work), then no one is honing their skills until they feel confident enough to say to DTG, “Anything I can do?” Or form a group with other like minded people to create an independent project. That’s the real issue they need to tackle, IMHO.
Kinda off topic but on the theme of the community helping out instead of money they should allow us to help with making remasters of old routes so stuff like new scenery and new lighting etc while taking the work load off the main dev but this just random idea
I don't think that crowd funding like this will work until there are a lot more fully experienced 3rd party devs out there. Unless you're *really* disciplined, almost every project will either see extended timelines or cuts to scope, either of which would go down legendarily badly amongst the crowd funders who would no doubt begin to chant "scam!" after a while. I think there is maybe the option for developers to go down the Patreon route perhaps - a monthly sub gets you in progress builds as it goes, ability to influence how the route is built through direct feedback with the developers etc. Overall, you end up paying a lot more, but you're fully part of that dev process. This would only really work with a dev team that could do it in their spare time (with something else paying the bills) and on the hope that it grew to a point that people could be sure enough of it eventually allowing them to leave their full time jobs to do the route dev full time - which is what would then bring time schedules into something sensible. Otherwise than that, I think all you're left with is the normal model - the developer making the large investment up front in the development costs and time, and hoping they can continue the project to completion and then see the return on it. Once you have a third party that's got a built up reputation and a team that has a good velocity and quality level, you could then look at crowd funding options to pre-fund the route creation, particularly if you don't start the project until you hit the goal required to fully fund its creation (and if not, refund people who backed). Kinda like kickstarter. Not aware of anyone looking at any such options though. Matt.
The other thing that crowd funding produced for TANE was a rather insidious “them and us” mindset between those who splashed out for the high level participation and those of us who just put a few £’s in. That even extended to the N3V forum where it was publicly displayed who was a Kickstarter backer and who wasn’t.
Crowdfunding would be better suited to help support people like Liam, on the GWE remaster, or the modders who can drastically change a route that already exists. Crowdfunding to get modders work brought over into console versions, or for developers happy to provide continued updates to scenery, infrastructure, layers and ai etc would surely make sense? There’s a fair few of us on here that would probably have sent Liam a few quid, especially before the HST farewell dlc pack he announced. Aftercare, via crowdfunding?
But as Matt said, it's not about money. With the people doing the remasters it's about time. They'd doing it on their own time off and their regular day is full of company projects. It would have to be someone who needs the money and has the time. I'm thinking it makes more sense as an add on like a loco or gameplay pack since it's not time sensitive or crucial to other pieces like a route is.
